DOCSLIB.ORG

Reassessing Bioarchaeological Sex Determination and Research Into Gender at the Early Anglo-Saxon Worthy Park Burial Ground in Hampshire, England

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reassessing Bioarchaeological Sex Determination and Research Into Gender at the Early Anglo-Saxon Worthy Park Burial Ground in Hampshire, England REASSESSING BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL SEX DETERMINATION AND RESEARCH INTO GENDER AT THE EARLY ANGLO-SAXON WORTHY PARK BURIAL GROUND IN HAMPSHIRE, ENGLAND A Thesis submitted to the Committee on Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Arts and Science TRENT UNIVERSITY Peterborough, Ontario © Copyright by Abigail C. Górkiewicz Downer Anthropology M.A. Graduate Program May 2015 Abstract REASSESSING BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL SEX DETERMINATION AND RESEARCH INTO GENDER AT THE EARLY ANGLO-SAXON WORTHY PARK BURIAL GROUND IN HAMPSHIRE, ENGLAND Abigail C. Górkiewicz Downer When bioarchaeologists investigate past gender identity, they typically place skeletal remains into one of six sex assessment categories: male, female, possible male, possible female, ambiguous, and indeterminate. However, the study samples are often reduced to male/female reproducing a male/female gender/sex binary prevalent in the “Western” cultural milieu and bioarchaeology when inferences are made about gender in the past. In order to allow for the existence of non-binary cultural genders/biological sexes, this thesis: 1) demonstrates the multitude of ethnographic, ethnohistoric, historic, and medical evidence relating to non-binary sex/gender expression; 2) tests a method inspired by Whelan (1991) that looks at gender as an identity not fully inspired by biological sex; 3) keeps all sex assessment categories used by bioarchaeologists separate in analysis and interpretation; and 4) analyses patterns relating to all available material culture and biological attributes in a mortuary sample to investigate gender identity. This thesis used the Early Anglo-Saxon (470-600 AD) burial ground at Worthy Park, Hampshire to achieve these objectives. This thesis found that when examining all sex assessment categories among all mortuary variables, only the male sex was clearly defined by its mortuary assemblage. This suggests a one gender structure corresponding to linguistic evidence for one gender in Old English. Keywords: Bioarchaeology, Gender identity, Third gender, Anglo-Saxon, Sex assessment ii Acknowledgements I would like to give a special thanks to my supervisor, Dr. Jocelyn Williams, for her continued guidance, encouragement, and support with research design, as well as her perseverance in revising my many drafts. I thank my committee members: Dr. Marit Munson, Dr. James Conolly (first year), and Dr. Anne Keenleyside (second year) for their support, patience, and guidance in this journey. I give acknowledgement and thanks to Dr. James Conolly for aiding me with correspondence and hierarchical cluster analysis in archaeological research, and his time and aid with Canoco 5 (on his own laptop) and Trent University’s WebStatistica statistics software in my analysis. I would also not have been able to beautify the final draft’s Appendices tables without the help of the “Excel Guru” Elmer Horst at Hewlitt-Packard who helped me master Microsoft Excel’s many functions, and Debbie Harriet at Hewlitt-Packard who reviewed my Appendices’ tables, and Daniel Martin at Microsoft who aided me in formatting the final product. I also thank Dana Capell for reviewing parts of this thesis. I would not be where I am today without the care and support of my parents, Wayne and Debbie Downer, and family who encouraged me financially and emotionally to pursue my passion in Anthropology. And I would not be where I am without the guidance of Jesus Christ, and the support of my friends and colleagues at Trent University’s Anthropology Department and beyond. I would finally like to thank that steamy-hot beverage, tea, which has kept me invigorated during Grad school. iii Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................................. 13 2.1 Pre-feminist Understandings of Gender ................................................................... 15 2.2 Feminism .................................................................................................................. 17 2.3 Queer Theory ............................................................................................................ 19 2.4 Contributions of Feminism and Queer theory to Archaeology and Bioarchaeology ........................................................................................................................................ 23 2.5 Evidence Challenging the Cultural Gender Binary .................................................. 29 2.6 Performance Theory and Marxism and their Importance in Understanding Gender ........................................................................................................................................ 34 Chapter 3: Assessing Sex in Bioarchaeology .................................................................... 38 3.1 Historical Development of Sexing in Bioarchaeology ............................................. 39 3.2 Skeletal Sex Assessment in Bioarchaeology ............................................................ 42 3.2.1 Osteological Sexing Categories ......................................................................... 43 3.3 Contemporary Bioarchaeological Research Patterns in dealing with Sex ............... 44 3.4 Whelan’s (1991) Research on the Santee Siouan Blackdog burial ground .............. 48 Chapter 4: Research Design, Sample, and Methods .......................................................... 53 4.1 Mortuary analysis ..................................................................................................... 54 4.2 Research Design ....................................................................................................... 56 4.3 The Anglo-Saxon burial ground at Worthy Park, Hampshire .................................. 57 4.5 Worthy Park Sample ................................................................................................ 61 4.5 Correspondence Analysis, De-trended Correspondence Analysis, and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis ............................................................................................................. 64 4.7 Summary .................................................................................................................. 73 Chapter 5: Analysis and Discussion .................................................................................. 74 5.1 Analysis 1: All Variables Intact ............................................................................... 74 iv 5.2 Analysis 2: Sexing categories removed.................................................................... 78 5.3 Analysis 3: All biological variables removed .......................................................... 82 5.4 Analysis 4: Material Culture variables only ............................................................. 86 5.5 Analysis 5: Age variables removed .......................................................................... 90 5.6 Discussion ................................................................................................................ 94 Chapter 6: Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 105 References Cited .............................................................................................................. 112 Appendix A ...................................................................................................................... 143 A.1 Grave description .................................................................................................. 143 A.2 Biological description ............................................................................................ 146 A.3 Artefact classes ...................................................................................................... 148 Appendix B ...................................................................................................................... 150 Appendix C ...................................................................................................................... 161 v List of Figures Figure 1 Location of Hampshire County in England ........................................................ 58 Figure 2 Location of Kingsworthy within Hampshire ...................................................... 59 Figure 3 Map of the Worthy Park burial ground............................................................... 60 Figure 4 CA scatterplot graph of Table 1 ......................................................................... 66 Figure 5 Example of unmodified DCA scatterplot ........................................................... 70 Figure 6 Example of modified DCA scatterplot ............................................................... 71 Figure 7 DCA with all variables
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Postclassic Aztec Figurines and Domestic Ritual
    Copyright by Maribel Rodriguez 2010 The Thesis Committee for Maribel Rodriguez Certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: Postclassic Aztec Figurines and Domestic Ritual APPROVED BY SUPERVISING COMMITTEE: Supervisor: Julia Guernsey David Stuart Postclassic Aztec Figurines and Domestic Ritual by Maribel Rodriguez, B.A. Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts The University of Texas at Austin December 2010 Dedication Esto esta dedicado en especial para mi familia. Acknowledgements There are my academicians and friends I would like to extend my sincere gratitude. This research began thanks to Steve Bourget who encouraged and listened to my initial ideas and early stages of brainstorming. To Mariah Wade and Enrique Rodriguez-Alegria I am grateful for all their help, advice, and direction to numerous vital resources. Aztec scholars Michael Smith, Jeffrey and Mary Parsons, Susan T. Evans, and Salvador Guilliem Arroyo who provided assistance in the initial process of my research and offered scholarly resources and material. A special thank you to my second reader David Stuart for agreeing to be part of this project. This research project was made possible from a generous contribution from the Art and Art History Department Traveling grant that allowed me the opportunity to travel and complete archival research at the National American Indian History Museum. I would also like to thank Fausto Reyes Zataray for proofreading multiple copies of this draft; Phana Phang for going above and beyond to assist and support in any way possible; and Lizbeth Rodriguez Dimas and Rosalia Rodriguez Dimas for their encouragement and never ending support.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Ethnicity and the Dynamics of Ethnic Change in Multiethnic Societies Richard E
    SPECIAL FEATURE: PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE SPECIAL FEATURE: Theories of ethnicity and the dynamics of ethnic change in multiethnic societies Richard E. Blanton1 Department of Anthropology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907 Edited by Linda R. Manzanilla, Universidad Nacional Autonóma de México, Mexico, D.F., Mexico, and approved February 13, 2015 (received for review November 7, 2014) I modify Fredrik Barth’s approach, which sees ethnic group building as a signaling system, to place it within a framework that draws from collective action and costly signaling theories. From these perspectives, ethnic signaling, although representing a costly penalty to group members, is one effective form of communication that facilitates collective management of resources. I then identify three contexts in which the benefits of ethnic group building are likely to outweigh its signaling costs: in politically chaotic refuge and periphery zones; in the context of long-distance specialist trading groups; and within the territorial scope of failed states. I point to selected data from the Mughal and Aztec polities to illustrate how a combination of effective public goods management, in highly collective states, and the growth of highly integrated commercial economies will render ethnic group building superfluous. ethnicity | collective action | costly signaling Early in the 20th century, anthropologists tures or regions are understood to reflect to such evolution” (ref.8,p.108).Thekey turned to a focus on culture as a challenge to the distribution of a people and thus are problem, Geertz argues, is found in the fact thebiologicallyreductionistracethinkingof ethnically labeled, for example, as “Sumerian” that, within the boundaries of the new states, 19th century evolutionists.
    [Show full text]
  • A Latin American^, Sm
    A LATIN AMERICAN^, ANTIQUITY VOLUME 10 NUMBER 2 JUNE 1999 SM Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.226, on 30 Sep 2021 at 15:47:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104566350001244XSOCIETY FOR AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY EDITORIAL STAFF OF LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY Editor. KATHARINA J. SCHREIBER, Department of Anthropology, University of California at Santa Barbara. CA 93106. Email: [email protected] or [email protected] Telephone (805) 893-4291 Editorial Assistant: CHRISTINA A. CONLEE. Department of Anthropology. University of California at Santa Barbara, CA 93106. Email: [email protected] Telephone (805) 893-5807 Fax: (805) 893-8707 Managing Editor. ELIZABETH FOXWELL. Society for American Archaeology, 900 Second Street, NE, Suite 12, Washington, DC 20002-3557 Email: [email protected] Telephone (202) 789-8200 Associate Editor for Reviews and Book Notes: MICHAEL E. SMITH, Department of Anthropology, Social Science 263, University at Albany (SUNY), Albany, NY, 12222. Email: [email protected] Telephone (518) 442-4709 Fax (518) 442-5710 BOARD OF EDITORS FOR LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY TOM D. DILLEHAY, Department of Anthropology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40504 ROBERT D. DRENNAN, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, 3H FQ, Pittsburgh. PA 15260 JOYCE MARCUS, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, University Museums Building, 1109 Geddes Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1079 ELSA M. REDMOND, Department of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th St., New York, NY 10024 CHARLES STANISH, Department of Anthropology, Hershey Hall, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095 IRMHILD WUST, Universidade Federal de Goias, Av.
    [Show full text]
  • Facing Emergences: Past Traces and New Directions in American Anthropology (Why American Anthropology Needs Semiotics of Culture)
    Sign Systems Studies 37(1/2), 2009 Facing emergences: Past traces and new directions in American anthropology (Why American anthropology needs semiotics of culture) Irene Portis-Winner 986 Memorial Dr, Apt 404 Cambridge MA 02138, USA e-mail: [email protected] View metadata,Abstract. citation This and article similar considers papers at whatcore.ac.uk happened to American anthropology, which brought to you by CORE was initiated by the scientist Franz Boas, who commanded all fields of anthropology, provided by Journals from University of Tartu physical, biological, and cultural. Boas was a brave field worker who explored Eskimo land, and inspired two famous students, Ruth Benedict and Margaret Mead, to cross borders in new kinds of studies. After this florescence, there was a general return to linear descriptive positivism, superficial comparisons of quantitative cultural traits, and false evolutionary schemes, which did not introduce us to the personalities and inner worlds of the tribal peoples studied. The 1953 study by the philosopher David Bidney was a revelation. Bidney enunciated and clarified all my doubts about the paths of anthropology and his work became to some extent a model for a narration of the story of American anthropology. In many ways he envisaged a semiotics of culture formulated by Lotman. I try to illustrate the fallacies listed by Bidney and how they have been partially overcome in some later anthropological studies which have focused on symbolism, artistry, and subjective qualities of the people studied. I then try to give an overview of the school started by Lotman that spans all human behavior, that demonstrates the complexity of meaning and communication, in vast areas of knowledge, from art, literature, science, and philosophy, that abjured strict relativism and closed systems and has become an inspiration for those who want anthropology to encompass the self and the other, and Bahtin’s double meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • Twenty-Five Years of Feminist Anthropology: a History of the Association for Feminist Anthropology
    Twenty-Five Years of Feminist Anthropology: A History of the Association for Feminist Anthropology By Rachel Nuzman, 2013 Summer Intern, American Anthropological Association and Association for Feminist Anthropology With Members of the Association for Feminist Anthropology Boards (Elected and Appointed 1 Members) of 2012 – 2014 1 Ellen Lewin, President, 2013-2015; Jane Henrici, President, 2011-2013; Carla Freeman, President Elect, 2013- 2015; Sandra Faiman-Silva, Treasurer, 2013-2015; Lynn Kwiatkowski, Secretary, 2011-2014; Holly Dygert and Susan Bryn Hyatt, members at large, 2011-2014; Nadine Fernandez and Chelsea Blackmore, members at large, 2012-2015; Isabelle LeBlanc, student representative, 2012-2015; Jennifer Patico, senior program co-chair, 2011- 2013; Debarati Sen, senior program co-chair, 2012-2014; Amy Mortensen, junior program co-chair, 2013-2015; Amy Harper and Beth Uzwiak, Voices editorial board; Jamie Sherman and Nell Haynes, website co-coordinators; Damla Isik and Jessica Rolston, Anthropology News contributing co-editors; Susan Harper, co-Facebook manager/co-book review editor; Rebecca Boucher, co-Facebook manager/Twitter manager; Lauren Fordyce, book review co-editor; R. Sophie Statzel , curricula coordinator. Association for Feminist Anthropology History January 2014 Acknowledgements Although no history can be truly complete nor include every important detail, I have tried to be as accurate and inclusive as possible. I want to take a moment to thank everyone involved in making the AFA 25 th Anniversary History Project happen. To all of those that donated money, and to the AFA members that organized the donation process, thank you. To everyone at the AAA, and especially to my supervisors Edward Liebow, Damon Dozier, and Courtney Dowdall, your mentorship and guidance was invaluable.
    [Show full text]
  • Elizabeth Brumfiel, 1945–2012
    Ancient Mesoamerica, 25 (2014), 1–4 Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2014 doi:10.1017/S0956536114000200 IN MEMORIAM ELIZABETH BRUMFIEL, 1945–2012 Cynthia Robin Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University, 1810 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL 60208, USA Liz Brumfiel was the best friend I ever had in the academic world. investigated, what the roles and capabilities of members of margin- Even before I met her, her work, through her publications, had alized social groups were. inspired mine. When I finally got the chance to meet her as a Imagine what it was like for me when I got my first chance to young assistant professor, followed by the chance to recruit her meet her. I first met Liz at a Society for Economic Anthropology into my department, an intellectual exchange that fostered new conference shortly after starting as an assistant professor at insight into the meaning of inequality in society grew into a Northwestern. Still fresh and green, I couldn’t believe that strong relationship of feminist mentorship and friendship, as it did Elizabeth Brumfiel would want to sit down and have lunch with for so many other of Liz’s friends, colleagues, and students. me and hear about my ideas. In that meeting I realized I had met As a first year graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania a very special person, someone who was open, caring, and an intel- in 1992, like other eager graduate students, I awaited the annual pub- lectual fireball. Anyone who has ever had a conversation with Liz lication in American Anthropologist of the Distinguished Lecture knows exactly what I mean.
    [Show full text]
  • Rodz Aleg CV2019
    Enrique Rodríguez -Alegría CV, August 2019 Department of Anthropology University of Texas 2201 Speedway, C3200 Austin, TX 78712 Office: 512-471-0786 e-mail: [email protected] Education PhD 2002 University of Chicago. Anthropology. Dissertation title: Food, Eating, and Objects of Power: Class Stratification and Ceramic Production and Consumption in Colonial Mexico. M.A. 1997 University of Chicago. Anthropology. B.A. 1994 University of Texas at Austin, with High Honors, Archaeological Studies. Interests archaeology, history, ethnohistory, Mesoamerica, the Spanish empire in Latin America, Mexico, Puerto Rico, archaeometry (INAA and LA-ICP-MS), colonialism, religious conversion, technology Prof essional appointments 2018-present Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas at Austin 2010-2018 Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas at Austin. 2003-2010 Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas at Austin. 2002-2003 Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Archaeometry Laboratory, Research Reactor, and Adjunct Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia. Grants, Fellowships , and Honors Extramural grants and fellowships: 2020 Bard Graduate Center Research Fellowship. February 1st —April 30 th , 2020. (forthcoming) 2016 -20 20 National Science Foundation Collaborative Research Grant : The Role of Ritual and Hierarchical Social Structure in Mediating Culture Change. In collaboration with Kristin De Lucia. Award no.: 1550446. $77,494 for Rodríguez-Alegría. 2016-2017 National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship, “The Material Worlds of 16th-Century Colonial Mexico City.” ($50,400). 2012-2013 Howard Foundation Fellowship ($30,000). 2010-2011 Fellow, Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford. 2006-2010 National Science Foundation Collaborative Proposal: Elite Strategies and Political Change in Xaltocan, Mexico (BCS-0612131), E.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report for 2010
    Annual Report for 2010 “Supporting worldwide research in all branches of Anthropology” Table of Contents Chairman’s Introduction .............................................................................. 3 President’s Report ....................................................................................... 4 Program Highlights ...................................................................................... 6 Institutional Development Grants .......................................................... 6 International Symposia and Workshops ............................................... 9 Wenner-Gren Symposium Publication Series ...................................... 9 Wenner-Gren Symposium Publication Series and Current Anthropology ............................................................... 10 Initiatives Program and Historical Archives Program ....................... 11 International Symposia ........................................................................ 12 Meetings of the Anthropology Section of the New York Academy of Sciences ....................................................................................... 15 Osmundsen Initiative Grantees ........................................................... 16 Hunt Postdoctoral Fellows ................................................................... 19 Wadsworth Fellows .............................................................................. 24 2010 Grantees Dissertation Fieldwork Grants ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • What I Believe About the Useful Diversity of Theory in Southeastern Archaeology
    WHAT I BELIEVE ABOUT THE USEFUL DIVERSITY OF THEORY IN SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY Nancy Marie White1 forced to insert some trendy theory into what they write just to get it accepted for a thesis or a publication. Often the theory is poorly related to the data, as well, tacked on at the end like a faunal-remains appendix. Most theory Theory is crucial but has become boring and unintelligible; it is written by academics, who often make it difficult to is often ignored by most professionals. Archaeology must understand. However, the bulk of the archaeology done include a foundation of culture history, processual science, in this country is through contracts, cultural resources and postprocessual imagination and counteraction of bias. management (CRM), preservation, and heritage-sub­ Further, all archaeology should aim for public aspects and jects still not taught enough in graduate and undergrad­ practical applications. Theoretical writing must be clear and uate archaeology programs. The integral nature of avoid pretension. Gender bias in Southeastern archaeology is theory to all these areas, implicit or explicit, is seldom one of the worst distortions of the prehistoric record for what emphasized and rarely part of standard training. This is were probably matrilineal societies. Diverse humanistic a shame because theory is crucial to all archaeology; after approaches from many (including non-archaeological) view­ all, we are explaining what humans do. We are cultural points can provide worthwhile avenues for investigation with anthropologists; we just use a totally different method new scientific tools. Narrow interpretive frameworks should that is unique among all the social sciences. We can be avoided in favor of the delightful banquet of multiple approach any human problem or issue from a complete­ simultaneous or blended approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Elizabeth M. Brumfiel
    AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST OBITUARY doubtedly influenced her decision to major in anthropology when she entered the University of Michigan in 1962. At Michigan she lived at the Friends Center, where she met her future husband Vincent Brumfiel, a math major. Her first archaeological fieldwork was at the Schultz site near Saginaw Michigan in 1964. Following her graduation, with distinction, from Michi- gan in 1965, a two-year stint in the Peace Corps (1966–67) tookhertoBolivia,wheresheworkedasanassistantinCarlos Ponce’s archaeological laboratory at the Instituto Nacional de Arqueolog´ıa in La Paz. Shortly afterward she and Vince married, and with his strong encouragement Liz decided to pursue graduate studies in anthropology, beginning with two years at UCLA, where she obtained an M.A. with a thesis At the Aztec Culture exhibit, Field Museum, Chicago, 2009 (cour- in biological anthropology (Brumfiel 1969). Vince concur- tesy of Vincent Brumfiel). rently obtained an M.A. in mathematics in preparation for his future career as a high school math teacher. Liz returned to the University of Michigan as a doc- toral student in 1970. While a graduate student, she partic- Elizabeth M. Brumfiel (1945–2012) ipated in Richard Blanton’s survey of urban Monte Alban, Oaxaca, in 1971, and in Jeffrey Parsons’s regional survey With Elizabeth Brumfiel’s death on January 1, 2012, in in the southern Valley of Mexico during 1972—projects Evanston, Illinois, anthropology lost one of its outstand- that exposed Liz to dealing at different levels of intensity ing practitioners, a true generalist who pursued her long, with the surficial study of large and differentiated archaeo- productive, and distinguished career during a period that logical sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Empirical Approaches to Mesoamerican Archaeology
    Contents List of Figures | ix List of Tables | xiii Foreword George R. Milner | xv Preface Nancy Gonlin and Kirk D. French | xxvii Section I: Introduction 1. Empirical Archaeology and Human Adaptation in Mesoamerica Kirk D. French and Nancy Gonlin | 3 Section II: Water and Land 2. Water Temples and Civil Engineering at Teotihuacan, Mexico Susan Toby Evans and Deborah L. Nichols | 25 | vii 3. Measuring the Impact of Land Cover Change at Palenque, Mexico Kirk D. French and Christopher J. Duffy | 53 4. Complementarity and Synergy: Stones, Bones, Soil, and Toil in the Copan Valley, Honduras John D. Wingard | 73 Section III: Population and Settlement Studies 5. Chronology, Construction, and the Abandonment Process: A Case Study from the Classic Maya Kingdom of Copan, Honduras AnnCorinne Freter and Elliot M. Abrams | 97 6. The Map Leads the Way: Archaeology in the Mixteca Alta, Oaxaca, Mexico Stephen L. Whittington and Nancy Gonlin | 125 Section IV: Reconstruction and Burial Analysis 7 The Excavation and Reconstruction of Group 8N-11, Copan, Honduras: The Process of Discovery and Rediscovery Randolph J. Widmer and Rebecca Storey | 155 8. The Maya in the Middle: An Analysis of Sub-Royal Archaeology at Copan, Honduras David M. Reed and W. Scott Zeleznik | 175 Section V: Political Economy 9. Life under the Classic Maya Turtle Dynasty of Piedras Negras, Guatemala: Households and History Zachary Nelson | 211 10. The Production, Exchange, and Consumption of Pottery Vessels during the Classic Period at Tikal, Petén, Guatemala Kirk Damon Straight | 241 Section VI: Reflections and Discussion 11. Forty Years in Petén, Guatemala: A Hagiographic Prosopography Don S.
    [Show full text]
  • LISA OVERHOLTZER Department of Anthropology Mcgill University 7Th Floor, Leacock Building 855 Sherbrooke Street West Montreal, Quebec H3A 2T7
    LISA OVERHOLTZER Department of Anthropology McGill University 7th floor, Leacock Building 855 Sherbrooke Street West Montreal, QueBec H3A 2T7 Email: [email protected] Office Phone: (514) 398-4299 EMPLOYMENT: 2015-present Assistant Professor and William Dawson Chair, Department of Anthropology, McGill University. Parental leaves July-DecemBer 2016 and January-May 2018. 2012-2015 Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, Wichita State University EDUCATION: 2012 Ph.D. in Anthropology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Dissertation: Empires and Everyday Material Practices: A Household Archaeology of Aztec and Spanish Imperialism at Xaltocan, Mexico Committee: Dr. Cynthia RoBin (chair), Dr. Mary Weismantel, Dr. Rosemary A. Joyce, and Dr. ElizaBeth Brumfiel (in memoriam) 2008 M.A. in Anthropology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. 2005 B.A. in anthropology and Spanish, University of California, Berkeley High distinction in general scholarship, high honors in anthropology, Phi Beta Kappa Honors thesis title: The Kneeling Mexica Woman: Evidence for Male Domination or Gender Complementarity? Thesis advisor: Dr. Rosemary A. Joyce FELLOWSHIPS AND AWARDS: 2016-present Willliam DaWson Chair in the Archaeology of Mesoamerican Domestic Life, McGill University 2014 Hunt Postdoctoral FelloWship, Wenner Gren Foundation 2013 Provost’s Exceptional Merit Award for faculty, Wichita State University 2007-2010 National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship PUBLICATIONS: Books: In prep Overholtzer, Lisa. Empires at Home: The Materiality of Household Production and Consumption at Postclassic and Early Colonial Xaltocan. Under contract with the University Press of Colorado. Peer-reviewed journal articles: 2019 Millhauser, John K. and Lisa Overholtzer. Commodity Chains in Archaeological Research: Cotton Cloth in the Aztec Economy. Journal of Archaeological Research. 2018 Overholtzer, Lisa and Juan R.
    [Show full text]