5
Situating Power and Locating Knowledge:
A Paleoethnobotanical Perspective on Late
Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
Christopher T. Morehart
Northwestern University
and
Christophe G. B. Helmke
University of Copenhagen
ABSTRACT
Viewing household production in terms of a political economic balance of “give and take” circumvents difficulties
related to gender attribution in archaeology and challenges timeless gender stereotypes. This chapter proposes such
an archaeological approach to gender by examining the charcoal assemblages from two Late Classic period Maya
archaeological sites in the upper Belize Valley of western Belize. These sites occupied distinct positions within a
complex political economic landscape, and their charcoal assemblages reflect heterogeneity in household production.
The type and the intensity of activities, including wood procurement and craft production, were socially contingent.
We propose that household activities and forms of knowledge were conditioned by the positions of households within
broader political economic landscapes, not conforming to the timeless social stereotypes imposed by archaeologists.
Keywords: maya archaeology, paleoethnobotany, political economy, knowledge, gender
onfronting the assumed universality of a gendered division of labor has become one of the central goals of an
engendered archaeology (Conkey and Gero 1991; Conkey
and Spector 1984; Conkey and Tringham 1997; Pyburn
2004; Robin 2002a, 2006). Often positioned within the functional arguments of a social evolutionary framework, this
assumption maintains that certain activities are universally
and more efficiently associated with either males or females
and that evolution affects gender in ways that are transhistorically uniform and, hence, predictable according to a particular evolutionary stage (i.e., Klein 2004). Yet, following
Conkey and Spector, “[a] division of labor between males
and females should not be assumed but rather be considered
a problem or a feature of social structure to be explained”
(Conkey and Spector 1984:19).
C
Confounding the issue of a gendered division of labor,
many archaeological statements about gender are based on
ethnographic information, positioned within either an evolutionary or a particularistic explanatory framework. Drawing
on ethnographic descriptions of the activities of men and
women, archaeologists then attribute particular classes of
artifacts or archaeological features as within the domain of
men or of women. On one level, such an approach can reproduce the often androcentric biases inherent in many ethnographies that excluded both women and gender from ethnographic research design (Conkey and Spector 1984; Stahl
1993). On a more fundamental level, the uncritical and direct application of ethnographic analogies to the archaeological record potentially dehistoricizes social configurations in
both the past and the present. When gender is presented as
ARCHEOLOGICAL PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION, Vol. 18, Issue 1, pp. 60–75, ISSN 1551-823X,
C 2008 by the American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-8248.2008.00005.x.
online ISSN 1551-8248.
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
historically homogeneous, archaeologists promote a static
vision of social relations, unintentionally reinforcing the
conclusion that understanding change and variability is not
a worthwhile endeavor.
Identifying these uncertainties and biases has led several archaeologists to question the entire nature of archaeological research, from design to analysis to interpretation,
as providing both a technology and a discourse of power
(sensu Foucault 1980). While recognizing the significance
of this critique, the perspective taken here is based on the
position that there are historical and material realities that
constrain the range of archaeological interpretation (Wylie
1992) and that the problem with gender bias in archaeology lies not with data but, rather, with the questions that
archaeologists ask and the modes of inference that they then
construct (Brumfiel 1992, 1996:459).
This chapter examines social relations by viewing
household production in terms of a political economic balance of “give and take.” We present an alternative to uncritical, ahistorical gender attribution in archaeology that
challenges timeless stereotypes of a universal gendered division of labor. Productive activities are situated between
broader political economic relationships and the internal
structure of households and communities. Within this matrix, individuals must balance the daily rounds necessary
for social reproduction. Productive activities can be seen as
connected to a political economy that differentiates people’s
activities as well as the scale of their social networks, creating a heterogeneous landscape of knowledge and practice
(Morehart 2006). The practices and systems of knowledge
of household members vary not according to timeless gender roles but according to the material reality of this nested
landscape. We consider this model by examining wood exploitation practices, especially the use of firewood, by the
Late Classic Maya. First, we examine how the ethnographic
record has been used to create static pictures of gender,
particularly how accounts of household activities and cosmology have been used to support a gendered division of
labor. Analogy often is employed in a contradictory manner that subverts variability and distorts historical realities.
Our archaeological perspective is based on the charcoal assemblages from two sites in western Belize, Pook’s Hill and
Chan Nòohol, which occupied distinct positions within the
Late Classic milieu. By analyzing the distribution of wood
charcoal between these sites and articulating these data with
other artifact assemblages, particularly weaving tools, we
attempt to situate household production within a historically flexible political economic landscape and, in the process, challenge static social stereotypes projected onto the
ancient Maya.
61
Paleoethnobotany, Ethnographic Analogy,
and Gender
Little has been written on firewood and social relations,
particularly gender, in Maya prehistory. Maya archaeology’s
focus on “high culture” rarely includes plants. The belief that
organic remains do not preserve in the tropics has created a
gap filled in with observations from disparate ethnographic
sources. Such an approach perpetuates static models that
obscure historically contingent variability in the past and
the present (Robin 2002a).
The lack of concrete research into Maya wood utilization is surprising. Wood charcoal is one of the most abundant
archaeobotanical remains (Hastorf and Johannessen 1991;
Johannessen and Hastorf 1990; Smart and Hoffman 1988).
People burned a lot of wood in the past, every day, and for
many different reasons. The need for domestic firewood has
structured daily routines in many 20th-century Maya communities in the Highlands and Lowlands, and household
hearths commonly are kept lit throughout the day and night
(Redfield and Villa Rojas 1934; Vogt 1969; Wisdom 1940).
The exploitation of wood and tree resources is also central to
models of ancient Maya environmental impact and societal
collapse (Abrams and Rue 1988; Abrams et al. 1996; Culbert
1988; Hansen et al. 2002; Paine and Freter 1996; Rice
1993). Abrams and others have argued that overexploitation
of hardwood and pine populations in the Copan Valley of
western Honduras led to ecological degradation and, eventually, political fragmentation (Abrams and Rue 1988; Abrams
et al. 1996). They calculated that, regardless of the consumption rates employed for analysis, the demand for domestic
fuelwood exceeded other wood demands by several hundred
times. Although based on an experimental approach, this research emphasizes the importance of firewood in household
economies and stresses that the consumption of firewood
was connected systemically to macro-level sociopolitical
processes.
Archaeologists have confronted the paucity of archaeological data on Maya wood utilization by drawing on ethnography. Relying on ethnographic literature, scholars have proposed women and girls collected firewood. For example,
Sharer’s Daily Life in Maya Civilization states, “We can assume that in the past, as today, girls were trained to take
on the traditional roles associated with wife and mother in
the Maya family . . . they undoubtedly played an essential
part in subsistence by collecting firewood, wild foods, and
condiments” (Sharer 1996:120, emphases added). Yet variability in gender roles within and between commonly cited
ethnographic texts rarely is considered. Redfield and Villa
Rojas’s (1934:66, 71) ethnography of the Yukatek Maya, a
62
mainstay in Maya analogy, records that women collected
firewood when young boys aged six to seven were unavailable to perform this task. Wisdom’s ethnography of
the Ch’orti’ states, “The men usually collect it individually for their own kitchens” (Wisdom 1940:85–86, emphasis added). During the late 20th century, many Lakantun
(a.k.a. Lakandon) Maya women incorporated the collection
of firewood into their many daily tasks (McGee 2002:56),
but they often relied on their unmarried male children to collect firewood (Boremanse 1998:40). Furthermore, Lakantun
firewood-collecting often is a joint, family task performed
in tandem with agricultural activities and on the walk back
from the field. Although these accounts associate firewood
collecting with particular groups, the high degree of variability is clear.
Scholars likewise have employed cosmology to reinforce these more economic assessments of a gendered division of labor. A binary division of the world into a domesticated, ordered, social space versus an undomesticated, wild,
dangerous space constitutes a cosmological model discussed
in several contemporary Maya ethnographies. This model
also appears in ethnohistoric texts, and it seems to have correlates observable in the iconographic corpus of the Classic
and the Postclassic Maya. Archaeological applications of
this cosmology often have confined past Maya women to the
domesticated realm, arguing the undomesticated, dangerous
realm could only be navigated by men (e.g., Stone 1995;
Taube 2003). Although this claim is parallel to assumptions
that segregate men’s and women’s worlds into public versus
private spaces, this conclusion evades a more fundamental
and historical contradiction relevant to this chapter.
As the Spanish began to reorganize the social, political,
and economic worlds of the Maya following the conquest,
they began to record data on Maya landholdings and tenure
(Restall 1997). Employing a European model of agricultural practices, they separated Maya land into that of field,
known in Yukatek as kool (“milpa” or “sementera”), and that
of forest, k’áax (“bosque” or “selva”) (Bastarrachea et al.
1992; McAnany 1995). Their basic assumption was that land
not in agricultural production was unused forest. Although
classifying k’áax into unused land certainly had implications
for restructuring and appropriating indigenous landholdings,
their assumption was fundamentally flawed. This is a clear
example of the often vast misunderstandings of colonial
officials—the “uneasy relationship between knowledge and
power” (Dirks 1992:176). Rather than unused, unproductive
land, k’áax was a highly productive source of economic resources (McAnany 1995). Better viewed as either managed
forests or managed fallows (Gómez-Pompa and Kaus 1990;
Peters 2000), k’áax was one of the principal locations for
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
hunting, gathering medicinal plants, collecting fruits from
economically important trees, and collecting firewood.
In other words, the wild and undomesticated space modeled in cosmology would seem to have been also a useful
space. But if this space was the realm of men, how were
women collecting the firewood? On one level, this apparent
contradiction is the product of equating cosmological and
ideological statements to the lived reality of social actors
(Morehart 2006). On another level, the contradiction suggests an interpretive fuzziness—a chaos of disarticulated
inferences and analogies that are not in dialogue with one
another but rather are grounded in the assumption of universal gender roles.
Most approaches to analogy are markedly “continuitycentric” in that they seek to make explicit conditions of enduring continuity between ethnographic and archaeological
cases. The “direct historical approach” (Gould and Watson
1982), common in Maya archaeology, maintains that we can
compare the ancient Maya to the modern Maya because they
are “Maya.”1 Archaeological and ethnographic cases become homogenized in terms of one another, and archaeological narratives are linked by a concern with the “traditional”
over the “modern” (Stahl 1993:243). When stemming from
an unquestioned acceptance of the assumedly invariant
ethnographic record, such “continuity-centric” approaches
lack the historical imagination necessary to adequately explain or to contextualize variability. The tyrannical legacy
(Conkey and Spector 1984:13; Robin 2002a:13; cf. Wobst
1978) of this approach has influenced reconstructions of
almost all aspects of Maya society, including agricultural
systems, iconography, ritual, politics, and gender.
One can examine particular configurations past and
present without making a blanket claim of continuity. Furthermore, archaeologists cannot ignore certain aspects of
the ethnographic record that they feel are “modern” and,
consequently, irrelevant; as Talal Asad observes, “much of
what appears ancient . . . is itself recently invented” (Asad
1991:316). The ethnographic record is not a stagnant data
set to be drawn upon selectively. Archaeologists can view
the ethnographic record critically without disposing of its
potential for elucidating the past. A critical utilization of
the ethnographic record is one that frames ethnographic and
archaeological comparisons within historically situated political and economic contexts. Such an approach flips commonly held notions of continuity on their heads by articulating the past with the present as an ongoing and unfolding
historical process. The present is continuous with the past
not through a compartmentalized vision of the survival of
“traditional” cultural forms but, instead, as a real, material
consequence of History.
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
63
Figure 5.1. Map of the upper Belize Valley showing sites discussed in the text.
Case Examples: Pook’s Hill and Chan Nòohol
This study contrasts wood use by people who occupied different socioeconomic and political positions in the
Maya area. Two major factors influenced the selection of
sites for this study. The most pragmatic consideration involved the availability of data. Collecting archaeobotanical
data still is not a standard component of excavation strategies
at Maya sites, though research has shown that systematic archaeobotanical sampling can yield considerable social, economic, and ecological information (e.g., Lentz 1991, 1999;
McKillop 1994; Miksicek 1991; Morehart 2002, 2003;
Morehart, Wyatt, and Lentz 2004). The second consideration
focused on selecting settlements that represented distinctly
different types of habitations in scale and size. The sites
of Pook’s Hill and Chan Nòohol met these requirements.
First, researchers at both sites systematically collected archaeobotanical remains during excavations. Second, Pook’s
Hill is an affluent plazuela group, while Chan Nòohol is a
cluster of seven commoner farmsteads. Moreover, both sites
are located in the greater upper Belize River watershed of
western Belize, providing a somewhat similar environmental
context (Helmke 2001, 2003, 2006a, 2006b; Helmke et al.
2003; Robin 1999, 2002a, 2002b, 2004) (Figure 5.1).
Pook’s Hill is a medium-sized plazuela group located
in the karstic foothills that form the western perimeter of the
Roaring Creek Valley, overlooking a fertile alluvial valley
below (Figures 5.1). Pook’s Hill lies 4.7 kilometers north of
the major center Cahal Uitz Na and one kilometer northwest of the minor center of Chaac Mool Ha. Cahal Uitz Na
appears to have served as the capital of the local polity during the Classic period (Awe et al. 1998). Chaac Mool Ha
was the principal northern satellite to Cahal Uitz Na, similar
to other satellites in the greater Belize Valley (Driver and
Garber 2004). Pook’s Hill likely was incorporated into the
Cahal Uitz Na polity through Chaac Mool Ha, possibly via
tributary networks.
Investigations at Pook’s Hill have focused on the site’s
terminal occupation, which dates to the Late to Terminal
Classic period (ca. 830–950 C.E.) (Helmke 2001, 2003,
2006a, 2006b; Helmke et al. 2003; Morehart 2001). Primary contexts date back to at least the Middle Classic (ca.
550 C.E.). On the other hand, the earliest ceramic specimens from secondary contexts can be attributed to the Late
64
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
Figure 5.2. Plan map of the plazuela group, Pook’s Hill.
Formative (ca. 300–100 B.C.E.), while the latest belong to
Early Postclassic complexes (later than ca. 950 C.E.). The
site is comprised of the remains of nine masonry building
platforms enclosing a central plaza (Figure 5.2). The architectural group as a whole encompasses an area of approximately 1,106 square meters of which the plaza occupies
just over 430 square meters. The largest building measures
16.5 meters long and is over 2.5 meters high above the plaza
surface. The smallest structure measures 7.1 meters long
and is approximately 0.8 meters high.
Most of Pook’s Hill’s structures are rectangular in plan
and can be categorized as “range structures” (long, linear,
masonry structures delimiting an open patio or plaza). A
dome-vaulted sweatbath or pib’naah has been identified
at the northwest corner of the plazuela (Helmke and Awe
2005), and an ancestor shrine structure is located on the
eastern side (Helmke 2003). The group conforms to the socalled Plaza Plan 2 configuration defined at Tikal by Becker
(1971, 1999:139–147) based on the presence of the ancestor shrine defining the eastern perimeter. As is common,
the largest concentration of funerary and votive deposits at
the site was found in association with this eastern shrine.
Evidence of ritual feasting was associated with the western
range building, which Helmke (2001) has interpreted as a
possible part-time “feasting hall.” The site’s residents also
maintained access to minor quantities of exotic goods (i.e.,
jadeite, marine shell, obsidian, and pyrite). Pook’s Hill’s relative affluence may indicate strategic flexibility based on the
mobilization of social, political, and economic ties.
Chan Nòohol is located along the limestone uplands
in the interfluvial zone between the Mopan and Macal
rivers, the two principal branches of the Belize River
(Figure 5.1). The site contrasts with Pook’s Hill in several
ways (Figure 5.3). Whereas Pook’s Hill consists of a single
affluent plazuela group, perhaps a community node itself,
Chan Nòohol is a cluster of seven commoner farmsteads
and was part of a larger farming community, Chan, during
the Late Classic period (Ashmore et al. 2004; Robin 1999,
2002a, 2002b, 2004). The site is four kilometers southeast of
the civic center of Xunantunich, which was the polity capital
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
65
Figure 5.3. Plan map of Chan Nòohol. Redrawn from Robin 1999:Figure 17.
of the area during the Late Classic period. Although the
farming community of Chan has an occupational history that
spans from the Middle Preclassic to Early Postclassic periods (ca. 1000/800 B.C.E.–1150/1200 C.E.), the Chan Nòohol
farmsteads included in this study date to the late facet of
the Late Classic period (ca. 660–780 C.E.). Moreover, the
establishment of the Chan Nòohol households corresponds
to the Chan community’s maximum settlement expansion
and to the community’s incorporation into the Xunantunich
polity.
The spatial organization of Chan Nòohol’s architecture
is notably distinct from that of Pook’s Hill (Figure 5.3).
Chan Nòohol’s seven farmsteads (CN1–CN7 in Figure 5.3)
were spaced between 50 and 100 meters apart. Each farmstead was composed of one or two main residential structures and in many cases ancillary structures surrounded by
work areas and agricultural terraces. In contrast to Pook’s
Hill, Chan Nòohol’s structures were constructed as small
pole-and-thatch buildings on low rubble platforms between
0.1 and 1.1 meters high. The interior of most residences was
taken up by a low bench for seating or sleeping. The labor
necessary to build these structures easily could have been
accommodated by an individual family. Most daily activities occurred either in outdoor spaces or in the ancillary
structures. Chan Nòohol, thus, is marked by an open organization of space, which may have shaped social behavior by
promoting more complementary and egalitarian interactions
among residents (Robin 2002b).
Artifactual data from Chan Nòohol’s farmsteads suggest a focus on productive practices geared toward local consumption and household reproduction (Robin 1999, 2002a,
2002b, 2004, 2006). Members of each farmstead undertook
common domestic and agricultural tasks. With the exception of prismatic obsidian blades, granite grinding stones,
slate artifacts, and two greenstone artifacts recovered from
two households (CN5 and CN7), the majority of artifacts
66
were made of resources available locally. High numbers of
artifacts and activity areas associated with agricultural production and food processing suggest these were the principal
economic activities at Chan Nòohol. Given the lack of evidence for other forms of specialization, residents at Chan
Nòohol seem to have been tied into the Xunantunich political economy through their labor and agricultural production.
The relatively short occupational depth of the farmsteads,
their very modest size and composition, and their localized
economic orientation suggest the farmers had limited access
to certain resources and sociopolitical ties. Nevertheless, despite the site’s lower economic standing, archaeological research has uncovered evidence of community-based rituals
and feasting (Robin 1999:264, 2002b:259–260).
Paleoethnobotanical investigations were undertaken at
both Pook’s Hill and Chan Nòohol in order to better understand human–plant interactions at the sites (Lentz et al.
2005; Morehart 2001; Robin 1999). A total of 69 archaeobotanical samples have been analyzed from Pook’s Hill to date
(Morehart 2001). Samples were collected for water-assisted
flotation from several contexts, including middens, burials,
caches, floor deposits, and architectural fill and collapse. Archaeobotanical remains from Pook’s Hill indicate residents
relied on multiple domesticated plants, such as maize (Zea
mays), squash (Cucurbita sp.), and chile peppers (Capsicum
annuum). The remains of fruits from economically useful
trees, such as hog plum (Spondias sp.), calabash (Crescentia
cujete), coyol palm (Acrocomia aculeata), avocado (Persea
sp.), and chico sapote (Manilkara sp.), may suggest that the
site’s inhabitants maintained orchards (Morehart 2001).
Paleoethnobotanical efforts at Chan Nòohol focused on
collecting macrofloral remains and soil samples for flotation during the course of excavations (Robin 1999:546).
Seventy-one samples were taken predominantly from household refuse deposits and from agricultural terraces. Like
those from Pook’s Hill, archaeobotanical samples from Chan
Nòohol contained a variety of remains from domesticated
cultigens and fruit trees (Robin 1999:296–305). The distribution of maize at Chan Nòohol provides tentative evidence that farmers processed maize in their fields (Robin
1999:296, 2006); remains of maize glumes were found in terrace excavations, but none were located in domestic refuse
deposits. Similarly, no maize glumes were found at Pook’s
Hill (Morehart 2001), which may suggest an initial stage
of maize processing occurred prior to transport, particularly
the removal of kernels from the cob.
Despite these similarities, the distribution of wood charcoal between the sites differs. Based on charcoal from flotation samples, the residents of Pook’s Hill were burning pine
(Pinus sp.) almost exclusively (Figure 5.4). The residents of
Chan Nòohol, in contrast, were burning mostly hardwoods
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
Figure 5.4. Scanning electron micrograph of pine (Pinus sp.)
charcoal from Pook’s Hill in cross-section.
and little pine. Pine can be distinguished from hardwoods
by the lack of vessel elements (cellular structures that conduct water and solutes) and the presence of resin ducts in
the wood. Moreover, pine can be identified easily from sites
in the Maya Lowlands as it is the only gymnosperm indigenous to the area (see Balick et al. 2000). Eighty-eight percent of all samples from Pook’s Hill contained pine charcoal,
whereas 25 percent contained hardwood taxa and three percent contained charred palm (Figure 5.5a). This disparity is
even more observable when one compares charcoal weights,
though weight measurements may be less reliable due to differential preservation between samples. Ninety-six percent
of Pook’s Hill’s total charcoal weight is pine, versus four
percent of hardwood and 0.2 percent of palm (Figure 5.5b).
Samples from burials, caches, middens, floors, and architectural collapse all contained substantially more pine than
hardwood charcoal. This widespread contextual distribution
of pine at Pook’s Hill suggests that pine was being used for
a variety of tasks, from construction activities to firewood to
ritual.
Almost the exact opposite distribution of wood charcoal characterizes Chan Nòohol (Figure 5.6a, b). Ninetyfour percent of archaeobotanical samples from Chan Nòohol
contained hardwood charcoal. Only 2.8 percent of Chan
Nòohol’s samples yielded pine. Weight measurements of
wood charcoal from Chan Nòohol reinforce this pattern.
Less than one percent (>0.01 grams) of Chan Nòohol’s total charcoal weight is pine, whereas almost 100 percent is
from hardwoods. Clearly, the farmers at Chan Nòohol were
burning very little pine.
The distinction in wood charcoal between the two sites
may be related partially to the environment. Two species of
pine exist in the Maya Lowlands and in Belize specifically
(Balick et al. 2000; Farjon and Styles 1997; Mirov 1967;
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
67
Figure 5.5. Distribution of hardwood and pine charcoal at Pook’s Hill by ubiquity (a) and
weight (b).
Morehart et al. 2005; Standley and Steyermark 1958:
46–51): Pinus caribaea Morelet and P. oocarpa Schiede.
P. caribaea is by far the more common and characterizes
the swampy savanna lands of northern, central, and southern Belize and certain areas of Petén, Guatemala, and the
Mountain Pine Ridge of western Belize. P. oocarpa principally inhabits higher elevations, including Mesoamerican
Highland regions, with a less common distribution in Belize. The Mountain Pine Ridge, located along the northern
fringe of the Maya Mountains and north of both Pook’s
Hill and Chan Nòohol, has populations of both P. caribaea and P. oocarpa.2 Nevertheless, neither species inhabits the semideciduous, subtropical forests in the immediate
environment surrounding Pook’s Hill and Chan Nòohol; both
can be classified as nonlocal resources.
Access to pine was not simply an ecological concern
but likely was mediated by the political economy (Lentz
et al. 2005; Morehart 2002:261–264; see Hastorf and Johannessen 1991 for a similar Andean example). Pine was
a valued item throughout the Lowlands, serving both utilitarian and ritual purposes, though it is locally scarce in
many regions (Lentz 1999; Lentz et al. 2005; Morehart
2002; Morehart et al. 2005; Thompson 1970:146). In the
Roaring Creek Valley, the political center Cahal Uitz Na
may have had developed centralized control over pine and
other resources from the Maya Mountains (e.g., slate and
68
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
Figure 5.6. Distribution of hardwood and pine charcoal at Chan Nòohol by ubiquity (a)
and weight (b).
granite). No archaeobotanical data are available from Cahal
Uitz Na itself. But samples from Actun Nak Beh, a cave
connected to Cahal Uitz Na by a causeway, overwhelmingly
contained pine (Morehart 2002; Morehart et al. 2005). In
this context, the abundant pine charcoal from Pook’s Hill
may indicate political and economic relationships between
the two sites. In contrast, the residents of Chan Nòohol, a site
with fewer political ties, likely had less access to pine and
instead used a range of locally available trees for their wood
needs. That some households procured their own wood supplies from the local environment (i.e., Chan Nòohol) while
other households obtained it through trade, gifts, or tribute
(i.e., Pook’s Hill) would have affected the organization of
household labor. The residents of Chan Nòohol had to integrate the collection of wood for their daily needs as part
of recurring daily practices, and wood collection potentially
involved the entire family—men, women, boys, girls.
The impact of collecting wood on the allocation of
household labor is of particular interest when one examines the evidence for other economic activities. Consider
an activity long stereotyped as essential to Maya womanhood: weaving. Spindle whorls were recovered at both
Pook’s Hill and Chan Nòohol, but as in the case of wood
charcoal, the sites differ (Figure 5.7). At Chan Nòohol a total of eight spindle whorls were found among the site’s seven
farmsteads (Robin 1999:272). This low number in relation
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
69
(attested epigraphically as puutz’ b’aak, “needle bones”),
often bearing the names and titles of their original owners.
Such inscribed needles are known from Altun Ha, Tikal,
and Naranjo, where they record the royal names of men and
women of the court (see Houston and Stuart 2001:64–65;
Trik 1963:10–18). Since needles have been found inscribed
with both male and female names, one cannot make an immediate leap to gender attribution.
Pook’s Hill’s weavers possibly were producing cloth beyond the household level to participate in the political economy via tribute or gifting (Beaudry-Corbett and McCafferty
2002; Brumfiel 1991; Hendon 1997; Inomata 2001) or the
production of ritual offerings (Morehart, Awe, et al. 2004).
In contrast to Chan Nòohol, individuals at Pook’s Hill were
able to reinvest their time into weaving rather than collecting firewood or engaging in other agroforestry practices.
The presence of such a diversity of weaving implements
may indicate technological diversification in this elite craft
(Brumfiel 2006).
Conclusions and Future Implications
Figure 5.7. Sample of spindle whorls from Pook’s Hill (a–o; drawn
by Helmke) and Chan Nòohol (p–r; drawn by Robin 1999): (a–h)
limestone spindle whorls; (i–l) ceramic spindle whorls and reused,
centrally perforated sherds; (m) slate spindle whorl preform;
(n–o) slate pebble spindle whorls; (p) ceramic spindle whorl; (q–r)
limestone spindle whorls.
to households suggests that weavers were producing cloth
for local consumption only. The less time spent on activities such as weaving enabled productive diversification. At
Pook’s Hill eight limestone spindle whorls, one modeled and
incised ceramic spindle whorl, 20 perforated ceramic disks
(both complete and fragmentary) that may have been used
to spin cotton, a charred fragment of a bone sewing needle,
and the remains of at least two additional bone weaving needles were found (see Stanchly 2006). These weaving needles
are similar to other inscribed needles found at Maya sites
Although no simple solution, thinking about wood use
provides a window into complicating notions of gender.
Wood procurement and consumption was part of every
household’s activities, elite and commoner. But the mechanisms of wood acquisition depended on how household
labor was invested in broader processes (Hastorf and Johannessen 1991). The human ecology perspective on household
dynamics (i.e., Netting 1993; Wilk 1983, 1997) would seem
to contain the recipe for breaking down essentialist notions
of gender: if households are adaptive units, they must adapt.
Inflexible production, whether attributed to stagnant subsistence strategies or to gender, would be maladaptive. In
this regard, it is surprising that ecological perspectives on
the past that developed within processual archaeology failed
to break apart the “black box” of the household and avoid
gender stereotypes.
The issue is not whether women, men, boys, or girls collected firewood or performed any task exclusively. Rather,
productive labor is situated in variable political economic
contingencies (Pyburn 2004). The manner in which these
households were articulated to larger networks of political and economic power influenced the tasks that household members did or did not perform. In this historical
context, members of commoner households whose primary
labor for regional political economies was through agricultural production and periodic labor projects differed from
members of elite houses who participated in political economic networks via the production of prestige goods such as
textiles.
70
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
Figure 5.8. Schematic representation of the relationship between wood utilization and the
complexity of knowledge.
Forms of activities and the knowledge derived from
them are part of a broader political economic balance of
give and take. Although weaving may have been a source of
cultural capital for elite houses (Inomata 2001), farming and
agroforestry constituted a complex repertoire of knowledge
that many elites, male and female, young and old, may have
lacked. As elites organized their daily rounds on productive
activities that reproduced long-distance social, political, and
economic networks, they invested proportionately less time
in practices that enhanced knowledge of the local environmental milieu, such as collecting wood (Morehart 2006).
Figure 5.8 presents a schematic model of the relationship between access to woods and access to ecological
knowledge. With more use of locally available hardwoods
at Chan Nòohol and with a focus on agricultural activities, residents potentially would have had wider and more
complex forms of locally based knowledge. With more use
of pine at Pook’s Hill and a greater investment in prestige
good production, residents may have had greater access to
and knowledge of more distant social and political relationships (cf. Helms 1998), but their locally based ecological
knowledge may have been more restricted and less complex. More taxonomically specific identifications of wood
species at both sites will be needed to develop this model
more fully. Nevertheless, the major point is that knowledge is
not a monolithic and normative entity. Social relationships,
productive practices, and systems of knowledge are constituted by one’s position in a historically contingent political
economy (Morehart 2006).
Recognizing the contingency of ecological knowledge
and practice reinforces and promotes a social view of the
past (Hastorf and Johannessen 1991). Archaeological study
of the micro-variability in commoner agro-technologies has
been growing (e.g., Dunning 1996, 2004; Fedick 1996). But
the vast majority of studies on knowledge remain centered
on elite esoterica and ritual life, topics that are consumed
easily by the media and popular audiences. By dehomogenizing the past and embedding knowledge in historically material social realities, archaeologists can address enduring,
romanticized stereotypes of the Maya, both men and women,
such as Ix Chel, the Maya goddess of weaving, medicine,
and childbirth—the essential Maya woman—or the timeless maize farmer and native ecologist—the essential Maya
man (see Ardren 2006; Klein 1988). A paleoethnobotanical approach that examines variation in a seemingly insignificant form of data—wood charcoal—complicates such
stereotypes and may provide an innovative entry into understanding heterogeneity not only in social relationships, such
as gender, but also in the systems of knowledge that pervaded such relationships during the Maya past.
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
Notes
1. It should be noted that the label of “Maya” itself
has been imposed upon modern and, by extension, ancient
speakers of “Mayan” languages. With the exception of the
Yukatek, who term their language Maya’t’aan (from which
the term Maya derives), no evidence exists that other linguistic or ethnic groups placed under the heading of “Maya”
originally recognized this classification.
2. Attempts to make species-level identifications of
pine charcoal specimens by comparing archaeological and
modern materials in transverse, tangential, and longitudinal
sections were unsuccessful given the fragmentary nature of
the archaeobotanical material.
References
Abrams, Elliot M., AnnCorinne Freter, David Rue, and
John Wingard
1996 The Role of Deforestation in the Collapse of
the Late Classic Copan Maya State. In Tropical
Deforestation: The Human Dimension. L. E.
Sponsel, T. N. Headland, and R. C. Bailey, eds. Pp.
55–75. New York: Columbia University Press.
Abrams, Elliot M., and David G. Rue
1988 Causes and Consequences of Deforestation
among the Prehistoric Maya. Human Ecology
16:377–395.
Ardren, Traci
2006 Mending the Past: Ix Chel and the Invention
of a Modern Pop Goddess. Antiquity 80:25–
37.
Asad, Talal
1991 From the History of Colonial Anthropology
to the Anthropology of Western Hegemony. In
Colonial Situations: Essays on the Contextualizations of Ethnographic Knowledge. G. Stocking, ed.
Pp. 314–324. Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press.
Ashmore, Wendy, Jason Yaeger, and Cynthia Robin
2004 Commoner Sense: Late and Terminal Classic
Social Strategies in the Xunantunich Area. In The
Terminal Classic in the Maya Lowlands: Collapse,
Transition, and Transformation. A. A. Demarest,
P. M. Rice, and D. S. Rice, eds. Pp. 302–323.
Boulder: University Press of Colorado.
71
Awe, Jaime J., Christophe G. B. Helmke, and Cameron
Griffith
1998 Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Roaring Creek Valley: Caves, Rockshelters, and
Settlements. In The Western Belize Regional Cave
Project: A Report of the 1997 Field Season. J. J.
Awe, ed. Pp. 223–244. Occasional Paper Series
No. 1, Department of Anthropology. Durham:
Department of Anthropology, University of New
Hampshire.
Balick, Michael J., Michael N. Nee, and Daniel E. Atha
2000 Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Belize
with Common Names and Uses. New York: New
York Botanical Garden Press.
Bastarrachea, Juan R., Ermilio Yah Pech, and Fidencio
Briceño Chel
1992 Diccionario
básico:
Español/Maya/Español.
Mérida, Mexico: Editores Maldonado.
Beaudry-Corbett, Marilyn, and Sharisse McCafferty
2002 Spindle Whorls: Household Specialization at
Ceren. In Ancient Maya Women. T. Ardren, ed.
Pp. 52–67. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
Becker, Marshall J.
1971 The Identification of a Second Plaza Plan at
Tikal, Guatemala, and Its Implications for Ancient
Maya Social Complexity. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University
of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
1999 Excavations in Residential Areas of Tikal:
Groups with Shrines. Tikal Report 21, University Museum Monograph 104. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania.
Boremanse, Didier
1998 Hach Winik: The Lacandon Maya of Chiapas, Southern Mexico.
Albany, NY: Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, University at
Albany.
Brumfiel, Elizabeth M.
1991 Weaving and Cooking: Women’s Production
in Aztec Mexico. In Engendering Archaeology:
Women and Prehistory. J. M. Gero and M. W.
Conkey, eds. Pp. 224–251. Oxford: Blackwell.
1992 Breaking and Entering the Ecosystem: Gender, Class, and Faction Steal the Show. American
Anthropologist 94:551–567.
72
1996 Quality of Tribute Cloth: The Place of Evidence in Archaeological Argument. American
Antiquity 61:453–462.
2006 Cloth, Gender, Continuity, and Change: Fabricating Unity in Anthropology. American
Anthropologist 108:862–877.
Conkey, Margaret W., and Joan M. Gero
1991 Tensions, Pluralities, and Engendering Archaeology: An Introduction to Women and
Prehistory. In Engendering Archaeology: Women
and Prehistory. J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, eds.
Pp. 3–30. Oxford: Blackwell.
Conkey, Margaret W., and Janet D. Spector
1984 Archaeology and the Study of Gender. In
Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory,
vol. 7. M. B. Schiffer, ed. Pp. 1–38. New York:
Academic.
Conkey, Margaret W., and Ruth E. Tringham
1997 Programme to Practice: Gender and Feminism in
Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology
26:411–437.
Culbert, Patrick T.
1988 The Collapse of Classic Maya Civilization.
In The Collapse of Ancient States and Civilizations. N. Yoffee and G. L. Cowgill, eds.
Pp. 69–101. Tucson: University of Arizona
Press.
Dirks, Nicholas B.
1992 From Little King to Landlord: Colonial Discourse and Colonial Rule. In Colonialism and
Culture. N. B. Dirks, ed. Pp. 175–208. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Driver, W. David, and James F. Garber
2004 The Emergence of Minor Centers in the
Zones between Seats of Power. In The Ancient
Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of
Archaeological Research. J. F. Garber, ed. Pp.
287–304. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.
Dunning, Nicholas P.
1996 A Reexamination of Regional Variability in
the Prehistoric Agricultural Landscape. In The
Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya Agriculture and
Resource Use. S. L. Fedick, ed. Pp. 53–68. Salt
Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
2004 Down on the Farm: Classic Maya “Homesteads” as “Farmsteads.” In Ancient Maya
Commoners. J. C. Lohse and F. Valdez, Jr., eds.
Pp. 97–116. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Farjon, Aljos, and Brian T. Styles
1997 Pinus (Pinaceae). Flora Neotropica, Monograph 75. New York: New York Botanical Garden
Press.
Fedick, Scott L., ed.
1996 The Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya Agriculture and Resource Use. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Foucault, Michel
1980 Two Lectures. In Power/Knowledge: Selected
Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. C.
Gordon, ed. Pp. 78–108. New York: Pantheon
Books.
Gómez-Pompa, Arturo, and Andrea Kaus
1990 Traditional Management of Mexican Forests.
In Alternatives to Deforestation. A. B. Anderson,
ed. Pp. 45–64. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Gould, Richard A., and Patty Jo Watson
1982 Dialogue on the Meaning and Use of Analogy in Ethnoarchaeological Reasoning. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 1:355–381.
Hansen, Richard D., Steven Bozarth, John Jacob, David
Wahl, and Thomas Schreiner
2002 Climatic and Environmental Variability in the Rise
of Maya Civilization: A Preliminary Perspective
from Northern Peten. Ancient Mesoamerica
13:273–295.
Hastorf, Christine A., and Sissel Johannessen
1991 Understanding Changing People/Plant Relationships in the Prehistoric Andes. In Processual
and Post-processual Archaeologies: Multiple
Ways of Knowing the Past. R. W. Preucel, ed.
Pp. 140–155. Occasional Papers, 10, Center
for Archaeological Investigations. Carbondale:
Southern Illinois University.
Helmke, Christophe G. B.
2001 The Last Supper: Competitive Feasting and
the Terminal Classic Moulded-Carved Ceramic
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
Tradition in the Central Maya Lowlands.
Unpublished Master’s thesis,
Department
of Archaeology, University College London,
London.
2003 The 2002 Season Investigations at Pook’s Hill,
Belize. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology
14:119–128.
2006a Recent Investigations into Ancient Maya Domestic and Ritual Activities at Pook’s Hill, Belize.
Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 17:77–
85.
2006b A Summary Report of the 1999–2002 Seasons of Archaeological Investigations at Pook’s
Hill, Cayo District, Belize. Research Reports in
Belizean Archaeology 3:173–191.
Helmke, Christophe G. B., and Jaime J. Awe
2005 The Ancient Maya Sweatbath at Pook’s Hill.
Belize Today 5(1):24–26.
Helmke, Christophe G. B., Andrew Bevan, and Jaime Awe
2003 Everyday Maya: Life along the Roaring Creek
Valley. Current World Archaeology 4:10–16.
Helms, Mary W.
1998 Access to Origins: Affines, Ancestors, and
Aristocrats. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Hendon, Julia A.
1997 Women’s Work, Women’s Space, and Women’s
Status among the Classic-Period Maya Elite of the
Copan Valley, Honduras. In Women in Prehistory:
North America and Mesoamerica. C. Claassen
and R. A. Joyce, eds. Pp. 33–46. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Houston, Stephen D., and David Stuart
2001 Peopling the Classic Maya Court. In Royal
Courts of the Ancient Maya, vol. 1: Theory,
Comparison, and Synthesis. T. Inomata and S. D.
Houston, eds. Pp. 54–83. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Inomata, Takeshi
2001 The Power and Ideology of Artistic Creation: Elite
Craft Specialists in Classic Maya Society. Current
Anthropology 42:321–349.
Johannessen, Sissel, and Christine A. Hastorf
1990 A History of Fuel Management (A.D. 500 to
the Present) in the Mantaro Valley, Peru. Journal
of Ethnobiology 10:61–90.
73
Klein, Cecelia F.
1988 Mayamania: The Blood of Kings in Retrospect. Art Journal 47:42–46.
Klein, Laura
2004 Women and Men in World Cultures.
York: McGraw-Hill.
New
Lentz, David L.
1991 Maya Diets of the Rich and Poor: Paleoethnobotanical Evidence from Copan. Latin American
Antiquity 2:269–287.
1999 Plant Resources of the Ancient Maya: The
Paleoethnobotanical Evidence. In Reconstructing Ancient Maya Diet. C. D. White, ed.
Pp. 3–18. Salt Lake City: University of Utah
Press.
Lentz, David L., Jason Yaeger, Cynthia Robin, and Wendy
Ashmore
2005 Pine, Prestige and Politics of the Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize. Antiquity
79:573–585.
McAnany, Patricia A.
1995 Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship
in Ancient Maya Society. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
McGee, R. Jon
2002 Watching Lacandon Maya Lives.
Allyn and Bacon.
Boston:
McKillop, Heather I.
1994 Ancient Maya Tree Cropping: A Viable Subsistence Adaptation for the Island Maya. Ancient
Mesoamerica 5:129–140.
Miksicek, Charles
1991 The Economy and Ecology of Cuello. In
Cuello: An Early Maya Community in Belize.
Norman Hammond, ed. Pp. 70–97. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Mirov, Nicholas T.
1967 The Genus Pinus. New York: Ronald.
Morehart, Christopher T.
2001 Preliminary Analysis of Paleoethnobotanical
Samples from Pook’s Hill, Cayo District, Belize.
In The Western Belize Regional Cave Project: A
74
Report of the 2000 Field Season. R. Ishihara, C.
Griffith, and J. J. Awe, eds. Occasional Paper Series
No. 4, Department of Anthropology. Durham:
Department of Anthropology, University of New
Hampshire.
2002 Ancient Maya Ritual Cave Utilization: A Paleoethnobotanical Perspective. Master’s thesis,
Department of Anthropology, Florida State
University, Tallahassee. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI
Dissertation Services.
2003 Paleoethnobotany at Avila. In Belize Postclassic Project 2002: Investigation of the Shore
Settlements of Progresso Lagoon and San Estevan.
J. M. Ferguson, M. H. Oland, and M. Masson,
eds. Pp. 126–151. Occasional Publication No.
9, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies. Albany:
University at Albany-SUNY.
2006 Landscapes of Knowledge, Power, and Practice: Social Permutations in Plant Practices and
the Late Classic Maya. Paper presented at the
71st Annual Meeting of the Society for American
Archaeology, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Morehart, Christopher T., Jaime J. Awe, Michael J. Mirro,
Vanessa A. Owen, and Christophe G. Helmke
2004 Ancient Textile Remains from Barton Creek
Cave, Cayo District, Belize. Mexicon 26(3):50–56.
Morehart, Christopher T., David L. Lentz, and Keith Prufer
2005 Wood of the Gods: The Ritual Use of Pine
by the Ancient Lowland Maya. Latin American
Antiquity 6:255–274.
Morehart, Christopher T., Andrew R. Wyatt, and David L.
Lentz
2004 Paleoethnobotany in the Upper Belize Valley. Paper presented at the 69th Annual Meeting of
the Society for American Archaeology, Montreal,
Canada.
Netting, Robert
1993 Smallholders, Householders: Farm Families
and the Ecology of Intensive, Sustainable Agriculture.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Paine, Richard R., and AnnCorinne Freter
1996 Environmental Degradation and the Classic
Maya Collapse at Copán, Honduras (A.D. 600–
1250): Evidence from Studies of Household
Survival. Ancient Mesoamerica 7:37–47.
Christopher T. Morehart and Christophe G. B. Helmke
Peters, Charles M.
2000 Pre-Columbian Silviculture and Indigenous
Management of Neotropical Forests. In Imperfect Balance: Landscape Transformations in
the Pre-Columbian Americas. D. L. Lentz, ed.
Pp. 203–224. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Pyburn, K. Anne
2004 Introduction: Rethinking Complex Society.
In Ungendering Civilization. K. A. Pyburn, ed.
Pp. 1–46. London: Routledge.
Redfield, Robert, and Alfonso Villa Rojas
1934 Chan Kom: A Maya Village. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Restall, Matthew B.
1997 Maya World: Yucatec Culture and Society,
1550–1850. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Rice, Don S.
1993 Eighth-Century Physical Geography, Environment, and Natural Resources in the Maya
Lowlands. In Lowland Maya Civilization in the
Eighth Century A.D. J. A. Sabloff and J. S.
Henderson, eds. Pp. 11–64. Washington, DC:
Dumbarton Oaks.
Robin, Cynthia
1999 Towards an Archaeology of Everyday Life: Maya
Farmers of Chan Nòohol and Dos Chombitos
Cik’in, Belize. Ph.D. dissertation, Department
of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation
Services.
2002a Gender and Maya Farming: Chan Nòohol,
Belize. In Ancient Maya Women. T. Ardren, ed.
pp. 12–30. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
2002b Outside of Houses: The Practices of Everyday Life at Chan Nòohol, Belize. Journal of Social
Archaeology 2:245–268.
2004 Social Diversity and Everyday Life within
Classic Maya Settlements. In Mesoamerican
Archaeology: Theory and Practice. J. A. Hendon
and R. A. Joyce, eds. Pp. 148–168. Oxford:
Blackwell.
2006 Gender, Farming, and Long-Term Change:
Maya Historical and Archaeological Perspectives.
Current Anthropology 47(3):409–433.
Late Classic Maya Gender and Social Relations
Sharer, Robert
1996 Daily Life in Maya Civilization.
CT: Greenwood.
75
Westport,
Interface. A. Gomez-Pompa, M. Allen, S. Fedick,
and J. Jiménez-Moreno, eds. Pp. 461–492. New
York: Food Products Press.
Smart, Tristine L., and Ellen S. Hoffman
1988 Environmental Interpretation of Archaeological Charcoal. In Current Paleoethnobotany:
Analytical Methods and Cultural Interpretations of
Archaeological Plant Remains. C. A. Hastorf and
V. Popper, eds. Pp. 167–205. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Thompson, J. Eric S.
1970 Maya History and Religion.
versity of Oklahoma Press.
Stahl, Ann B.
1993 Concepts of Time and Approaches to Analogical Reasoning in Historical Perspective.
American Antiquity 58(2):235–260.
Vogt, Evon Z.
1969 Zinacantan: A Maya Community in the Highlands
of Chiapas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Stanchly, Norbert
2006 A Preliminary Analysis of the Pook’s Hill
Vertebrate Faunal Assemblage. In The Belize Valley Archaeological Reconnaissance
Project: A Report of the 2005 Field Season.
C. G. B. Helmke and J. J. Awe, eds. Pp. 93–
115. Belmopan, Belize: Belize Institute of
Archaeology, National Institute of Culture and
History.
Wilk, Richard R.
1983 Little House in the Jungle: The Causes of
Variation in House Size among Modern Kekchi
Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
2:99–116.
1997 Household Ecology: Economic Change and
Domestic Life among the Kekchı́ Maya of Belize.
Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Standley, Paul C., and Julian A. Steyermark
1958 Flora of Guatemala. Fieldiana: Botany 24(I).
Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History.
Stone, Andrea J.
1995 Images from the Underworld: Naj Tunich
and the Tradition of Maya Cave Painting. Austin:
University of Texas Press.
Taube, Karl A.
2003 Ancient and Contemporary Maya Conceptions about the Field and Forest. In Lowland Maya
Area: Three Millennia and the Human-Wildland
Norman: Uni-
Trik, Aubrey S.
1963 The Splendid Tomb of Temple I at Tikal,
Guatemala. Expedition 6(1):2–18.
Wisdom, Charles
1940 Chorti Indians of Guatemala.
versity of Chicago Press.
Chicago: Uni-
Wobst, H. Martin
1978 The Archaeo-Ethnology of Hunter-Gatherers
or the Tyranny of the Ethnographic Record in
Archaeology. American Antiquity 43:303–309.
Wylie, Alison
1992 The Interplay of Evidential Constraints and
Political Interests: Recent Archaeological
Research on Gender. American Antiquity 57:
15–35.