Joan M. Gero

Engendering Archaeology Women and Prehistory

Preface. Part I: Considerations for an Archaeology of Gender: . 1. Tensions, Pluralities, and Engendering Archaeology: An Introduction to Women and Prehistory: Margaret W. Conkey and Joan M. Gero (University of California at Berkeley and University of South Carolina). 2. Gender Theory and the Archaeological Record: Why is There No Archaeology of Gender?: Alison Wylie (University of Western Ontario). Part II: Space and Gender Relations: . 3. Contexts of Action, Contexts for Power: Material Culture and Gender in the Magdalenian: Margaret W. Conkey (University of California at Berkeley). 4. Households with Faces: The Challenge of Gender in Prehistoric Architectural Remains: Ruth E. Tringham (University of California at Berkeley). 5. Gender, Space and Food in Prehistory: Christine A. Hastorf (University of Minnesota). Part III: Material Aspects of Gender Production:. 6. Genderlithics: Womena s Role in Stone Tool Production: Joan M. Gero (University of South Carolina). 7. Womena s Labor and Pottery Production in Prehistory: Rita P. Wright (University of New York). 8. Weaving and Cooking: Womena s Production in Aztec Mexico: Elizabeth Brumfiel (Albion College). Part IV: Gender and Food Systems:. 9. The Development of Horticulture in the Eastern Woodlands of North America: Womena s Role: Patty Jo Watson and Mary C. Kennedy (Washington University). 10. Shellfishing and the Shell Mound Archaic: Cheryl P. Claassen (Appalachian State University). 11. Pounding Acorn: Womena s Production as Social and Economic Focus: Thomas Jackson (Biosystems Analysis, Inc.). Part V: Images of Gender: . 12. Whose Art was Found at Lepenski Vir? Gender Relations and Power in Prehistory: Russell G. Handsman (American Indian Archaeological Institute). 13. Women in a Mena s World: Images of Sumerian Women: Susan Pollock (State University of New York at Binghamton). 14. What this All Means: Towards a Feminist Archaeology: Janet D. Spector (University of Minnesota). Epilogue: Henrietta L. Moore (London School of Economics and University of London).

Socio-Politics and the Woman-at-Home Ideology

Archaeologists, as explorers and discoverers, have maintained the myth of objective research far longer than have researchers in other social science disciplines. Focused on action, the “cowboys of science” (Alaskan bumper sticker 1981) have dabbled little in self-reflective criticism. Now at 50, however, the discipline is becoming aware that our notions of the past, our epistemologies, our research emphases, the methods we employ in our research, and the interpretations we bring to and distill from our investigations, are far from value-neutral.

Engendering Tomb 7 at Monte Alban: Respinning an Old Yarn [and Comments and Reply]

A contextual analysis of material culture recovered from Tomb 7 at Monte Alban suggests a radical reinterpretation f the gender identification of the tombs principal individual. Spinning and weaving implements found with the burial, previously interpreted as a male, indicate the strong possibility that the individual was gender-female. A reinterpretation fthe skeletal remains as presented in the published accounts further indicates that the osteological evidence is ambiguous at best and the skeleton may have been of a biological female. Finally, the total assemblage is considered in reference to the religious and gender ideologies of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica to suggest that Tomb 7 may have been an important shrine to Lady 9 Grass, a principal member of the Mixtec Mother Goddess complex. This paper points up the necessity of periodic reevaluations of accepted wisdom that may have been developed under theoretical paradigms that minimized cultural diversity.