MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416049820 · doi:10.17615/83y3-k566

Fear the Native woman: Femininity, food, and power in the sixteenth‐century North Carolina Piedmont

2025· article· en· W4416049820 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David G. Moore, Robin A. Beck, Christopher B. Rodning, Rachel V. Briggs

Bibliographic record

VenueUNC Libraries · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonialismPower (physics)Agency (philosophy)MetisResource (disambiguation)Transformative learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Native women in Indigenous‐Western colonial entanglements are often portrayed as passive agents with little transformative social power in an otherwise dynamic landscape. However, Native women throughout the European colonial world many times controlled the most important resource required by European colonists: the knowledge and materials necessary to transform raw materials into “food.” Their control over this invaluable resource provided Native women with avenues of power both within their own societies and in European colonies. Here, we explore constructions and perceptions of Native women's power during the period of sixteenth‐century Spanish expeditions into the Carolina Piedmont and mountains by reviewing documentary data from entradas led by Hernando de Soto and Juan Pardo, as well as archaeological data from the Indigenous town of Joara and the Spanish colonial outpost of Cuenca and Fort San Juan at the Berry site (31BK22), located near Morganton, North Carolina. Employing an Indigenous feminist framework, we argue that the power vested in Native women through their own societies, as well as by Spaniards through their dependence on them for survival, provided Native women with far greater agency and power in entanglements with Spanish colonists, and interactions with European colonists more broadly, than previously recognized. Las mujeres nativas en entrelazamientos coloniales indígeno‐occidentales a menudo son representadas como agentes pasivos con poco poder transformativo en un paisaje por lo demás dinámico. Sin embargo, las mujeres nativas a través del mundo colonial europeo muchas veces controlaron el más importante recurso requerido por los colonos europeos: el conocimiento y los materiales necesarios para transformar las materias primas en “alimentos”. Su control sobre este recurso invaluable les proporcionó a las mujeres nativas avenidas de poder tanto dentro de sus sociedades como en colonias europeas. Aquí, exploramos construcciones y percepciones del poder de las mujeres nativas durante el período de expediciones españolas en el siglo XVI en el Piedemonte y las montañas de Carolina por medio de revisar datos documentarios de las entradas lideradas por Hernando de Soto y Juan Pardo, así como los datos arqueológicos del pueblo indígena de Joara y puesto colonial español de avanzada de Cuenca y Fuerte San Juan en el sitio de Berry (31BK22), localizado cerca de Morganton, Carolina del Norte. Empleando un marco feminista indígena, argumentamos que el poder investido en las mujeres nativas a través de sus propias sociedades, así como por los españoles a través de su dependencia de ellas para su propia sobrevivencia proporcionó a las mujeres nativas mucha más agencia y poder en entrelazamientos con colonos españoles e interacciones con colonos europeos más ampliamente, que los reconocidos anteriormente. [entrelazamientos coloniales indígeno‐europeos, feminismo, género, humoralismo galénico, mujeres indígenas, poder simbólico, provisión de alimentos, suroriente de los Estados Unidos]

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUNC LibrariesSame topicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207