Chelsea Blackmore
University of California, Santa Cruz, Anthropology, Faculty Member
- Archaeology, Anthropology, Indigenous Studies, Historical Archaeology, Archaeology of Gender, Public Archaeology, and 19 moreZooarchaeology, Marxism, Landscape Archaeology, Political Anthropology, Indigenous Archaeololgy, Mesoamerican Archaeology, Social Identity, Archaeology of Colonialisms, Race and Ethnicity, Feminist Theory and Religious Studies, Postmodernism, Political Theory, Queer Theory, Central American Studies, Bioarchaeology, Feminist Theory, Anthropology of Gender, Californian archaeology, and Queer Archaeologyedit
- My scholarly work is situated at the nexus of social archaeology, feminist and queer studies, and Latin American and ... moreMy scholarly work is situated at the nexus of social archaeology, feminist and queer studies, and Latin American and Latino Histories. I bridge these interdisciplinary spaces by foregrounding the connections among archaeological method and practice, teaching and outreach, and our intellectual models. I ground my work in an explicitly postcolonial framework by focusing on the obvious and hidden connections between modern political ideologies and the construction of the past. I apply this framework to archaeological discussions of complexity in ancient Maya society, to my collaborative archaeological and ethnographic project connecting historic and present-day fishing practices and environmental management in Southern Belize, and to the continued invisibility of queer identities in the past and LGBTQ practitioners in the present.edit
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Maya archaeology continues to be defined by a schism between ‘politic/s and state’ and ‘everyday life and ordinary people.’ The purpose of this paper is to deconstruct this dichotomy by considering the intellectual history and theoretical... more
Maya archaeology continues to be defined by a schism between ‘politic/s and state’ and ‘everyday life and ordinary people.’ The purpose of this paper is to deconstruct this dichotomy by considering the intellectual history and theoretical perspectives that continue to reify these boundaries and its connections to modern neoliberal discourses. How we conceive of the state - of what it is, and how it interacts with the rest of society - is at the heart of neo-evolutionary models of state formation; these impact our understanding of how ancient Maya society operated and the ways in which power, politics and class function. Archaeological fascination with elites and rulers, both in scholarly and public circles, creates a narrative focused on individual achievement, a quest for wealth and material access; values lauded by the neoliberal state. Alternative readings of complexity illustrate that everyday life of ordinary people is nuanced, intentional, and inherently political. Such work forces us to reconsider this dichotomy and recognize it as a dialectical and mutually constitutive process.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
A queer archaeology is often equated to looking for ancient homosexuality. As a challenge to heteronormative practice, queer theory, instead, provides a framework for engaging with all aspects of identity formation and the processes and... more
A queer archaeology is often equated to looking for ancient homosexuality. As a challenge to heteronormative practice, queer theory, instead, provides a framework for engaging with all aspects of identity formation and the processes and behaviors that mediate it. This article examines how queer theory can inform discussions of archaeological identity, first with respect to its place in broader feminist and archaeological literature; second in its correspondence to theoretical models of identity formation and the construction of difference; and finally in its applicability to models of ancient Maya social organization and commoner identity.
Research Interests:
For the ancient Maya, social organization remains largely understood as a two class system — that of commoner and elite. While these categories reflect the extreme ends of known social strata, they inadequately characterize the reality... more
For the ancient Maya, social organization remains largely understood as a two class system — that of commoner and elite. While these categories reflect the extreme ends of known social strata, they inadequately characterize the reality of day-to day interactions. This has led to tacit assumptions that commoners did not participate in or comprehend the political and social complexity of the world around them. This paper examines how occupants of a Late Classic Maya neighborhood employed ritual and public practices as a means of social differentiation.
Excavations at the Northeast Group, part of the ancient Maya site of Chan, Belize, identified considerable diversity between households, suggesting that occupants shaped status and identity through the control and centralization of ritual. Understanding how people distinguished themselves within the context of a neighborhood provides direct evidence of class complexity, challenging traditional models of commoner behavior and more importantly the role they played in ancient Maya society as a whole.
Excavations at the Northeast Group, part of the ancient Maya site of Chan, Belize, identified considerable diversity between households, suggesting that occupants shaped status and identity through the control and centralization of ritual. Understanding how people distinguished themselves within the context of a neighborhood provides direct evidence of class complexity, challenging traditional models of commoner behavior and more importantly the role they played in ancient Maya society as a whole.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research at the Northeast Group explores how the malleability of commoner identity is crucial to interpretations of ancient Maya society. The purpose of this dissertation is two-fold: first to demonstrate how residents of the Northeast... more
Research at the Northeast Group explores how the malleability of commoner identity is crucial to interpretations of ancient Maya society. The purpose of this dissertation is two-fold: first to demonstrate how residents of the Northeast Group used materials and architecture to distinguish themsleves from others in the neighborhood, and second to examine the implications of comomners as agents of history. Fundamental to this is the deconstruction of what archaeologists mean by commoner and the theoretical and methodological assumptions built into these definitions. Regardless of extensive research in settlement and household studies, interpretations of ancient Maya society continued to be framed with reference to elites. As elites are defined as the motor of change within civilization, commoners, in contrast, are characterized as static and passive. As I argue, however, these models do not accurately reflect who commoners were and their impact in the construction of ancient Maya society as a whole.
Evidence from the Northeast Group, one of several neighbrohoods identified at the site of Chan, Belize, illustrates how commoners consciously controlled and manipulated their social staus in much the same way that elites did. The use of ritual, the organization of space, and access to certain goods allowed commoners to create social solidarity while differentiating themselves from their neighbors. Because commoners were unable to amass goods in the same way as elites, the majority of artifacts and materials recovered often reflect functional and economic-types of focus. As I demonstrate, detailed examinations of material culture within even the smallest of commoner settings can and do reflect the diversity of people and identities present.
If social identity and status are malleable, then categories such as commoner and elite cannot adequately capture the variability and complexity inherent in such a dynamic structure. Rather than considering rural settlements as redundant units of economic and social behavior, these areas are better contextualized as fluid social milieus. By exploring the relationships, behaviors, and identities of people living in the Northeast Group, we can begin to refine archaeological interpretations of social identity, and give agency to commoners as active and fully cognizant participants of Maya society.
Evidence from the Northeast Group, one of several neighbrohoods identified at the site of Chan, Belize, illustrates how commoners consciously controlled and manipulated their social staus in much the same way that elites did. The use of ritual, the organization of space, and access to certain goods allowed commoners to create social solidarity while differentiating themselves from their neighbors. Because commoners were unable to amass goods in the same way as elites, the majority of artifacts and materials recovered often reflect functional and economic-types of focus. As I demonstrate, detailed examinations of material culture within even the smallest of commoner settings can and do reflect the diversity of people and identities present.
If social identity and status are malleable, then categories such as commoner and elite cannot adequately capture the variability and complexity inherent in such a dynamic structure. Rather than considering rural settlements as redundant units of economic and social behavior, these areas are better contextualized as fluid social milieus. By exploring the relationships, behaviors, and identities of people living in the Northeast Group, we can begin to refine archaeological interpretations of social identity, and give agency to commoners as active and fully cognizant participants of Maya society.
Research Interests:
We volunteer and engage with the public because we believe that history matters; that visibility of the everyday, of peoples and pasts marginalized and made invisible should be central to what we do. We can use our work, pre- and... more
We volunteer and engage with the public because we believe that history matters; that visibility of the everyday, of peoples and pasts marginalized and made invisible should be central to what we do. We can use our work, pre- and post-contact, as a means for public engagement and to dismantle political discussions rooted in ahistorical notions of human behavior and morality. But in serving the public interest, how do we also serve our membership, both in protecting their rights as human beings and as professionals? What responsibilities do we and the SAA have to our colleagues, students, mentors, and friends? In particular, how do our actions continue to marginalize people of color within our membership as well as minimize the importance of racial justice actions? This paper examines how white privilege and calls for scientific "objectivity" ignore the structural violence that continues to impact our practice as well as our participation in current political and social activism.
Research Interests:
One of the strengths of prehistoric archaeology is its ability to document the full range of human variation. For Latin America, activist archaeology has the potential to inform postcolonial and Third World feminist critiques that... more
One of the strengths of prehistoric archaeology is its ability to document the full range of human variation. For Latin America, activist archaeology has the potential to inform postcolonial and Third World feminist critiques that challenge white supremacist legal systems that marginalize women of color and indigenous peoples. The false universalisms and cultural essentialisms found in human rights debates ignore the diverse experiences of women’s oppression, especially the indigenous, poor, rural, disabled, and queer. Hegemonic models of the Mesoamerican past naturalize the oppression of women by employing colonial narratives regarding sex, gender and sexuality. The advocacy and activism of present day feminist archaeologists focus on decolonizing the discipline by documenting the fluid and contextual nature of pre-Columbian sex/gender systems, and demonstrating the agency and power of indigenous women in politics, religion and reproduction. In this paper, we ask the following questions: how do modern assumptions around sex, gender and sexuality find their ways into archaeological discussions of ancient Mesoamerican states? How do these narratives then become naturalized into discourses that perpetuate homophobic, sexist and racist legal systems? How can activist archaeology in Latin America both transform the discipline and potentially inform modern political debates?
Research Interests:
This paper explores the impact of queer theory in destabilizing heteronormative and other fixed discourses in archaeological method, practice, and interpretation. By challenging the very idea of what constitutes “normal’ in archaeology,... more
This paper explores the impact of queer theory in destabilizing heteronormative and other fixed discourses in archaeological method, practice, and interpretation. By challenging the very idea of what constitutes “normal’ in archaeology, queer theory provides new ways of thinking about and engaging with change, process, and difference. These discussions become important and necessary interventions in political debates around modern queer identities as well as social diversity at a much larger scale. Debates around sexuality, race, gender, and class remain at the forefront of political and social life in the United States. Yet the past, even the recent past, is rarely invoked in these conversations. By understanding the cultural and temporal situatedness of these categories, archaeology can and should contribute to these conversations. How can we incorporate queer theory into our classrooms in such a way that expands archaeological possibilities but also opens the discipline to a more diverse array of voices and identities? By deconstructing the very essence of “normal”, whether we speak of the past or the present, we bridge these spaces and times in very real and substantive ways.
Research Interests:
When we speak of complex societies, archaeologists focus primarily on broad systems of power, socio-political access, and economic control. These discussions, both explicit and implicit, continue to be framed by heteronormative,... more
When we speak of complex societies, archaeologists focus primarily on broad systems of power, socio-political access, and economic control. These discussions, both explicit and implicit, continue to be framed by heteronormative, androcentric and classist assumptions. Elites and men (as conceptual and literal heads of households) remain the primary frame of reference for how states operate and who and what matters in our discussions of complexity. In this paper, I explore how notions of complexity have affected discussions around ancient Mesoamerican everyday life and practice. Using queer and feminist theory, I interrogate the ways in which the normalization and standardization of archaeological evidence ignores social variation and the impact that "queered" identities (whether queered/marginalized by the discipline or by social standards in the past) had in shaping civil society. Interpretations of the ancient Maya state, for example, remain intellectually and materially divided for the most part from discussions of lower status peoples and everyday life. Given the extensive conversations and critiques that have attempted to redress this issue both within and outside of anthropology, why does it persist? And in what ways can queer theory help us unsettle these assumptions?
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Equating a single cultural group to a classificatory scheme has implications for not only how archaeologists develop the concept of cultural “identity” but how we investigate and theorize about internal social dynamics within that same... more
Equating a single cultural group to a classificatory scheme has implications for not only how archaeologists develop the concept of cultural “identity” but how we investigate and theorize about internal social dynamics within that same society. For the ancient Maya, social organization remains largely understood as a two class system—that of commoner and elite. The material remains used to mark these categories are based largely on objects and materials associated with wealth—monumental construction, elaborate burials, polychrome ceramics (particularly fine wares and vases) and long-distance trade items like jade, obsidian, and marine shell. Elite identity is marked by the identification of these things, but also in their quality and diversity. Commoners, on the other hand, have no unique material signature. Rather, they are defined as a material negation of elites—a static representation of social, political, and economic domesticity. Even though gendered and household archaeologies have added significantly to our understanding of commoner daily life, rarely do we contextualize commoners as active political subjects. This paper examines how commoner material culture, even in its most fragmentary form, can be used to reframe discussions of ancient Maya society as an internally diverse and dynamic culture.