Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous Women and Colonial Cultures: An Introduction Pamela Scully In the last decade or so, colonial studies have undergone something of a revolution. Inspired by the work of Frantz Fanon and Albert Memmi, and informed by Joan Scott’s work on “gender as a useful category of historical analysis” scholars have analyzed the creation of colonial categories and identities and the psychic and cultural operations of sexuality and race.1 We now have a much better appreciation of how bureaucratic practices and discourses intrinsically shaped and depended upon social and cultural understandings of race, and of the place of white women in the colonial order.2 Rejecting older formulations of domination and resistance, writers have explored the mutually constitutive practices of colonial hierarchies within a wider colonial sphere. The articles that follow are clearly in debt to this literature with its emphasis on comparative colonial cultures, sexuality, and race.3 This special issue also seeks to depart from recent work on colonial cultures that seems implicitly to privilege for analysis the constitution and reproduction of whiteness. Scholars have analyzed the ways in which colonial orders sought to define through cultural practice who counted as European and who did not. Child-rearing techniques, the relationships of servants to children, the changing ideological meanings of concubinage and marriage, all these sites proved indeed powerful nodes at which whiteness was invented and protected, if always imperfectly. The scholarship concentrates in this regard on those individuals and processes, which most clearly threw concepts of “European” or “white” vis a vis “native” into relief. This work has vastly increased our understanding of the nuances and fragile borders of colonial hierarchy. As we know from the vast literature on slave and other societies, however, the dominated rarely shared the mythic beliefs in family and emotion articulated by the dominant.4 We also need to explore how the colonized experienced and helped constitute colonial cultures. As Karen Vieira Powers has pointed out, relatively little focus has been paid to indigenous women except as metaphors for the land or for colonial domination, the latter a key feature of early conquest and travel narratives from the Atlantic to the Pacific.5 The articles in this issue wrestle with the implications of recent authors’ challenge to historiography to try to render more subtly the landscape of women’s experiences of early colonial rule. The articles investigate the meanings of indigeneity and femaleness in emerging colonial cultures. They demonstrate the fluidity and importance of the category “indigenous woman” to colonialism. The articles cover various regions and periods: the earliest colonial encounters in the Atlantic World, the worlds of eighteenth century India and the Ohio Valley, families in nineteenth-century Canada and Britain and the colonial frontier of Queensland, Australia. Authors illuminate the complex lives of indigenous women in an era which witnessed the movement of European explorers and their military entourages, company rule, the more formal establishment of colonialism, and the triumph of settler capitalism. The focus on indigenous women as people in history, rather as metaphors for imperial exploration challenges us to find historical methods that enable us to read women’s experiences of history. We have to avoid rendering women’s lives within the victim/traitor dynamic that has shaped so much of the literature on indigenous women such as Malintzin. The articles that follow begin to outline how we might write histories of indigenous women in ways that work through and beyond the privileged analytical position given historically to sexuality, in order to explore the multifaceted lives of these women in colonial frontiers and colonial orders. Pamela Scully Emory University Endnotes 1. Frantz Fanon, Black Skins White Masks. Original publication 1952. Reissue Edition (New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1991); Albert Memmi, The Colonizer and The Colonized. Original publication 1965 (London: Earthscan, 2003); Joan Scott, “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis” American Historical Review, 91, 5 (Dec 1986): 1053–1073. 2. For excellent work on white women in the colonies see for example, Marilyn Boxer and Jean H. Quartert, eds, Connecting Spheres: European Women in a Globalizing World 1500 to the present (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000); Helen Calloway, Gender, Culture and Empire: European Women in Colonial Nigeria...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".