17
Carolyn L. White
Personal Adornment and
Interlaced Identities at the
Sherburne Site, Portsmouth,
New Hampshire
ABSTRACT
Items of personal adornment are an important class of material
culture with great potential for understanding constructions of
identity in the historical period. Archaeologically recoverable
remains of dress—clothing and clothing fasteners, jewelry,
hair accessories, and miscellaneous accessories—are included
in this category of material culture. Performative aspects
of identity construction, the presentation of a person as an
individual and as a member of a socially defined group, and
the centrality of the body in perception and self-perception
are a means for examining the construction of identity along
gender, class, age, and ethnicity lines. Personal adornment
artifacts are the physical remains of the ways people inscribed
the body as reflective of their alignment with individual and
group identities and the performances of identity that were
enacted through mundane daily acts and gestures in the past.
Artifacts recovered at the Sherburne site in Portsmouth, New
Hampshire, manifest these identities.
Introduction
Archaeological studies have treated personal
adornment with interest, but often as a curiosity
more than as data that can contribute to cultural
or historical analysis. Personal adornment consti-
tutes a special category in most archaeological
studies, usually grouped with other “small finds”
or within separate categories such as clothing,
personal, and activities (South 1977). Occasion-
ally such materials are treated as markers of
rank or as symbols of class, particularly when
recovered in burial contexts as grave goods. At
other times, they are taken to be the very same
sorts of personal adornment used by men and
women today, mentioned as interesting yet unex-
plained archaeological finds. To assign meaning
to items of personal adornment, archaeologists
commonly view them through a modern-day
lens, failing to apprehend the significance that
these small artifacts had in the past and the
interpretive potential they hold.
Historical Archaeology, 2008, 42(2):17–37.
Permission to reprint required.
Accepted for publication 10 May 2006.
Elizabeth Scott (1991a:50, 1991b) encouraged
analysis of personal adornment in her study
at Michilimackinac, positing it as a category
of material culture with potential to explore
gendered space. In the last decade or so, per-
sonal adornment as a class of artifacts has been
approached superficially. While particularistic
inquiries on a site-specific basis have been under-
taken occasionally, there are several noteworthy
exceptions (on 19th-century personal adornment,
Ziesing 1989, 1991; Clements 1993; Mrozowski
et al. 1996; on beads [although typological classi-
fication and chronology has superseded functional
and contextual analyses with some exceptions],
Kidd and Kidd 1970; Stone 1974; Bennett 1983;
Bradley 1983; Huey 1983; Karklins 1983, 1985;
Kenyon and Kenyon 1983; Wray 1983; DeVore
1992; Yentsch 1994:190–195, 1996; Stine et al.
1996; Turgeon 2001; Smith 2002; and on buttons,
Olsen 1963; South 1964; White 1977; Hinks
1995; Sprague 2002). Recently, there is increased
recognition of an interest in this category of
artifacts by both historical archaeology and its
prehistoric archaeological counterparts (Heath
1999; Bedell and Scharfenberger 2000; Loren
2000, 2001, 2003; Sørenson 2000; Joyce 2001;
Loren and Beaudry 2006).
Drawing on work on personal adornment and
identity from anthropology, fashion history, soci-
ology, critical theory, philosophy, and material
culture studies, this article explores the utility
of employing personal adornment as a means
for understanding the construction of identi-
ties along multiple lines at the Sherburne site,
an 18th-century residence in Portsmouth, New
Hampshire. People used adornment to create
and negotiate self-identity and group affiliation
along lines of gender, class, age, and ethnicity.
Personal adornment is a potent class of mate-
rial culture for looking at the physicality of
individuals and for understanding the broader
significance of what it is that people wore in
the past. This physical appearance is of particu-
lar interest since it reflects personal and cultural
ideas about interlaced constructions of identity.
Identities define a person as part of a group,
that is, as the same as the rest of the group,
and characterize a person as an individual, as
18 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)

separate and different from some larger grouping. established; and it is the mundane and ritualized form
This paradoxical nature of identity construction of their legitimation … There are temporal and col-
lective dimensions to these actions, and their public
is embodied in clothing and appearance. People character is not inconsequential; indeed, the performance
try to communicate their own individuality is effected with the strategic aim of maintaining gender
through clothing and adornment, but they can, … (Butler 1990:136).
equally if not more so, make it an expression of
the group that the individual is in, according to
The performance of gender is produced as a
costume historian Phillis Cunnington (1964:8).
“stylization of the body and, hence, must be
Following recent trends, personal adornment
understood as the mundane way in which bodily
is used here as a means to explore particular
gestures, movements, and styles of various kinds
issues of gender, class, age, and ethnic identi-
constitute the illusion of an abiding gendered
ties, but one should be aware of the potential
self” (Butler 1990:141). These gestures, move-
to broaden these categories within the context
ments, and styles are seen as the means that
of personal adornment (White 2005).
ultimately produce an internal core of constructed
gender identity. While gender is an ideological
Performance, Inscription, and the Body
and internal construction, it is the performance
of these ideas on the surface of the body that
Archaeologists can ascertain the sorts of cloth-
produces the internal core (Butler 1990:136).
ing and accessories to dress that were worn by
Elizabeth Grosz poses the body as the arena
the inhabitants of the sites under consideration
in which the sociopolitical exteriority produces
by identifying and interpreting personal adorn-
interiority (in the case at hand here, in terms
ment (White 2002, 2005). The process of dress-
of identity construction). One manner of pro-
ing site inhabitants allows archaeologists—in the
ducing interiority via exteriority is through the
tradition of feminist research in archaeology—to
“inscription of the body’s surface [emphasis in
understand what the people looked like in a
original]” (Grosz 1995:33). Bodily inscriptions,
more specific way, putting a “face” on site
as Grosz notes, secure social integration in that
occupants (paraphrasing Tringham 1991). This
they serve to make manifest the ideas held by
sharper focus allows archaeologists to under-
the society as a whole on the surface of the
stand site inhabitants as participants in daily
body. What is inscribed on the surface is a
life in a more active and realistic manner, and
reflection and intensification of the exterior ideas
to comprehend the ways in which individuals
that then move from the surface to the interior.
dressed themselves and marked themselves as
Although these inscriptions lie on the surface of
individuals and as members of different groups.
the body, they create an underlying depth in the
Two central concepts, performance and inscrip-
form of individuality and consciousness (Grosz
tion, illustrate how personal adornment was used
1994). It is in this realm that the physical mani-
by individuals to create, maintain, and demarcate
festations of the surface of the body contribute
boundaries of gender, class, age, and ethnicity.
to the creation of interior ideas about identity
These two concepts are central to the role that
and group affiliation.
personal adornment played in the creation of
Taking this formulation of inscription a step
self and group identity in 18th-century Ports-
further and employing Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s
mouth, New Hampshire.
(1962, 1968) ideas that place the body at the
The idea of performance as put forth by
center of a person’s interaction with and expe-
Judith Butler (1990) describes identity as incor-
rience of the world deepens the potential sig-
porated into the self through acts and gestures
nificance of adornment as a class of material
that occur on the surface of the body. Gender,
culture. The body, then, is the focal point of all
and by extension other forms of identity, is
perception, and adornment is incorporated into
enacted through corporeal signification, a per-
the body and is the remains of this perception
formative set of actions.
and of all sensory experience. Furthermore,
The action of gender requires a performance that is
adornment can be viewed not only as the physi-
repeated. This repetition is at once a re-enactment and cal remains of a person’s interaction with the
re-experiencing of a set of meanings already socially world but also as the remains of the perception
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
of that person by other people. A person sees
and is seen; a person inscribes his or her own
body with adornment in a way that reflects his
or her own perceptions of others. The body is at
the center of this perception of the self and of
the perception of others as group members.
The process of incorporation into and inscrip-
tion onto the body is uncomplicated: “Anything
that comes into contact with the surface of the
body and remains there long enough will be
incorporated into the body image—clothing,
jewelry, other bodies, objects” (Grosz 1994:80).
Merleau-Ponty (1962:143) explores this idea
of incorporation with the example of touching
things with a stick: one holds the stick in the
hand, and touches a few things with it until one
can see what is “within reach or out of reach;”
in this manner, the stick becomes part of the
body just as the hand is part of the body.
What is incorporated into the body is not
fixed; some things are more vitally incorporated
into the body than others, and what is incorpo-
rated into the body differs across cultures and
periods. Artifacts of personal adornment are a
set of items that can be incorporated into or
inscribed onto the body and can vary through
populations, time, and regions. Butler (1990:139)
underscores the constraints on the performance
and the cultural constructions and limited vocabu-
lary for expression of gender in that specific
historic circumstances condition those acts and
gestures. Styles of dress are mediated by other
social factors such as class, gender, ethnicity, age,
occupation, income, and body shape. Furthermore,
factors such as bonds to traditional costume and
social situations are also involved in determining
what people wore (Entwistle 2000:44). These
variables contribute to the resonance of personal
adornment artifacts for engaging with group and
individual identities.
Dress and the Archaeological
Potential of Personal Adornment
Dress conveys group and individual affilia-
tions, a circumstance that has drawn little atten-
tion by archaeologists but is the core of the
substantial field of costume history (Barnes and
Eicher 1992; Eicher 1995; Hendrickson 1995;
Entwistle 2000). Clothing has symbolic com-
municative power and is “a medium of com-
19
munication that can condition and control social
action” (Beaudry et al. 1991:153; also Lurie
1981; Barthes 1983; McCracken 1988; Craik
1994; Rubinstein 1995; Crane 2000; Entwistle
2000). Historically, people have decorated their
bodies and inscribed themselves through clothing
and adornment, and they have defined them-
selves and constructed themselves along lines
of gender, class, age, and ethnicity.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, women and
men had different realms within which to com-
municate their authority and agency. Dress was
one of few dimensions available to women for
personal expression. Historians have explored
the various realms through which women could
communicate identities in varied loci: clothing,
daily tasks, interactions with other women in the
domestic realm, and social contacts in private
and public spaces (Brown 1996:291).
This recognition of the power of clothing
to convey the means and status of a person,
group affiliation, or other messages extended
to all people, although some sectors of society
prioritized it. Men and women of middle and
disadvantaged classes and people of all eth-
nicities manipulated and employed clothing and
personal adornment to physically represent (or
alter) their own group affiliations.
Clothing was recognized in 17th-century
New England as holding considerable power
in terms of its role in signifying prestige and
status. Sumptuary laws were enacted to preserve
the right to wear certain clothing elements for
people of the highest income bracket or of
noble rank. The Massachusetts General Court
expressed in 1651 “utter detestation and dis-
like that men or women of meane condition,
education and calling should take uppon them
the garbe of gentlemen by the wearinge of
gold or silver lace or buttons or poynts at their
knees, to walke in great boots, or women of
the same ranke to weare silke or tiffany hoodes
or scarfes” (Felt 1853). Other sumptuary laws
restricted long hair, sleeve length and dimen-
sions, slashed clothing, and the use of embroi-
dery and needlework as decorative elements
on clothing. Although inventories suggest these
laws were not obeyed (McClellan 1939:108),
the continual refinement of the laws is further
testimony to their ineffectiveness as well as to
the premium placed on appearance. The laws
20
point to the power clothing had to communicate
status and class and to the awareness people
had of this power.
Artifacts of personal adornment constitute a
small proportion of any overall assemblage from
archaeological sites. A host of factors contributes
to the scarcity of such items that, paradoxically,
make them uniquely suitable for learning how
people presented themselves within a variety of
cultural constructs (gender, class, age, ethnic-
ity, etc.). First, personal adornment is a small
subset of personal possessions and, as such,
infrequently finds its way into the archaeologi-
cal record. Second, items of personal adornment
were owned and used by the same person and
thus were associated with an individual (even
when such objects concurrently denoted a group
identity). Third, items of personal adornment
were valuable and thus curated by individuals
over long periods. Fourth, the religious, social,
and even legal prohibitions pertaining to adorn-
ment in colonial America meant that such items
did not proliferate, particularly in the 17th and
early-18th centuries. Finally, preservation adds a
constraint since many of these items are metal
or fragile organic materials and thus degrade
easily in the ground; others are very small and
are doubtless overlooked during excavation.
All these considerations make personal adorn-
ment a strong category of material culture for
understanding how people physically created
and presented themselves within culturally con-
structed groups. When compared to the classes
of material culture that are usually employed to
understand social dynamics—mainly ceramics
and glass (Spencer-Wood 1987)—items of per-
sonal adornment certainly have greater informa-
tion content and interpretive potential because of
the symbolic meanings they once carried. Even
though rare in archaeological contexts, these
personal items retain their power to communi-
cate if the social and cultural contexts that once
rendered them so powerful can be reconstructed.
These artifacts indeed are essences, concentra-
tions of meaning, imbued with significant inter-
pretive potential and resonance.
Dress and the act of getting dressed is a
repetitive ritual and is part of the performance
of identity (Butler 1990). Dress is a visual met-
aphor for identity and, particularly in western
societies, it is a visual representation of one’s
ideas about oneself. It is the presentation of
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
the self that is read by others (Goffman 1959;
Davis 1992). Clothes and other items of per-
sonal adornment become part of the body, and
this clothing is part of the body as the center
of perception, part of the body that sees and
part of the body that is seen (Merleau-Ponty
1962, 1968). In attempting to recover elements
of identity construction in the archaeological
record, personal adornment is the physically
recoverable remnant of mundane acts and
gestures—the remains of what was worn on
the surface of the body. When archaeologists
recover artifacts of personal adornment, they
recover tools used to incorporate identities into
the body. They find the remains of mundane
and repeated acts.
Personal Adornment:
A Category of Artifacts
The class of artifacts termed personal adorn-
ment covers a broad expanse of articles worn by
men and women and can be divided into four
basic categories: clothing and clothing fasten-
ers, jewelry, hair accessories, and miscellaneous
accessories (Table 1). The first category of
personal adornment artifacts, clothing and cloth-
ing fasteners, includes aglets, buckles, buttons,
hooks and eyes, pins, and textiles. In general,
these are the most frequently encountered kinds
of personal adornment artifacts, with buttons and
buckles being the most commonly recovered
adornment artifacts on archaeological sites. This
group most directly reflects the kind of clothing
people wore.
Jewelry, the second group of artifacts, is
recovered occasionally on archaeological sites,
but the finds are usually small fragments of
what were larger pieces (White 2003). Beads,
bracelets, brooches, clasps, earrings, necklaces,
miniatures, pendants, rings, and gems (precious,
semiprecious, and imitation) comprise this cat-
egory of personal adornment.
The third category of personal adornment is
hair accessories. Hair must be considered as
an entire class of dress in itself, particularly in
the mid- to late-18th century when wigs and
very elaborate hairstyles were fashionable. Hair
accessories are often either difficult to identify
or do not preserve well. Artifacts included in
this category are combs, bodkins, hair orna-
ments, and wig curlers.
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
TABLE 1
CATEGORIES OF PERSONAL ADORNMENT ARTIFACTS
Clothing fasteners Jewelry
Aglets Beads
Buckles Bracelets
Buttons Brooches
Fasteners Clasps
Hooks and eyes Earrings
Pins Necklaces
Textiles Miniatures
Pendants
Rings
Stones and gems
The fourth and final category, miscellaneous
accessories, envelops any remaining artifacts
of personal adornment that were accessories of
dress. Chains, cosmetic tools, fans, spurs, waist-
hung appendages, watches, watch keys, and
watch seals all belong to this classification.
Sherburne Site
The Sherburne House is the oldest surviving
structure within the boundaries of Strawbery
Banke Museum (Figure 1). The house sits on
a lot that was once part of a very large parcel
owned by one of the original Portsmouth patent
holders. This large parcel was subdivided into
long, narrow lots (40–50 ft. wide)—in order to
create as many lots as possible with waterfront
access and to maximize profits in the land’s
subdivision and dispersal (Pendery 1978:30;
Wheeler 1992:94). Although the lots were small,
they were in high demand and were settled by
wealthy Portsmouth residents. Table 2 summa-
rizes the site occupants.
Captain John Sherburne purchased the lot in
1694 and purchased another lot that adjoined
the original parcel in 1697 (Harrington and
Pendery 1983:4). He erected a small building
on the lot that served as a warehouse, but
he continued to reside in Little Harbor, New
Hampshire (Harrington 1989:3). Sherburne died
in 1698 and willed his estate to his wife Mary.
In 1703–04 the house was mentioned for the
first time in a document wherein Mary’s son
Joseph Sherburne quitclaimed his right to the
property and contracted with Mary to take legal
title to the property. She reserved a portion
21
Hair Accessories Miscellaneous Accessories
Combs Chains
Bodkins Cosmetic tools
Hair ornaments Fans
Wig curlers Metallic textiles
Spurs
Waist-hung appendages
Watches
Watch chains
Watch keys
Watch seals
of the house for herself (Rockingham County
Registry of Deeds [1703/04]).
Joseph Sherburne married Mary Lovell in
1706, and it is presumed that they lived in the
house after this date (Harrrington and Pend-
ery 1983:5). They had five children. In 1728
Joseph added a room to the rear of the house,
which was probably used as a shop (Harrington
1989:5), from which he sold textiles, building
materials, and grains (Durel 1985). He also
purchased a small parcel at the rear of the prop-
erty to straighten a jog in his back fence line,
an action supported by archaeological evidence
(Harrington 1989:5). In the 1730s, Joseph’s
wealth increased along with his social status,
and he became a prominent figure in Portsmouth
(Harrington and Pendery 1983:10). He held
several political offices: selectman and tax asses-
sor, military colonel, King’s Council member,
and justice of the Supreme Court (Noyes et al.
1983). He was also a slave owner—a man and
woman are listed among his property inventory
items (New Hampshire Records and Archives
Center 1754). Architectural and archaeological
evidence suggests that Joseph remodeled his
house in a Georgian style in the mid-1730s
(Candee 1968, 1976; Pendery and Harrington
1983:10; Harrington 1989:5).
In 1744 Joseph Sherburne and his mother
died; Sherburne’s wife, Mary, died in 1745.
Joseph Sherburne’s inventory was prepared
in 1754, and it reveals a high level of afflu-
ence (the estate was valued at £2,700), con-
sistent with Portsmouth’s merchant elite (New
Hampshire Records and Archives Center 1754;
Harrington and Pendery 1983:10; Harrington
22
FIGURE 1. Sherburne house; camera faces north. (Photo by author, 1998.)
1989:4). The land was deeded to Joseph Sher-
burne’s son, Joseph, Jr., who by then was a
Boston merchant (Figure 2).
Joseph Sherburne, Jr., maintained his Boston
residence and his brother, Nathaniel Sherburne,
became the landlord of the Sherburne House.
Nathaniel, a shipmaster and shopkeeper, lived
in the house with his wife, Mehitable, and his
nephew Nathaniel Sherburne. In 1756 Nathaniel
(nephew) petitioned for a new settlement of his
grandfather’s (Joseph Sr.) estate, claiming that
Joseph, Jr., (his uncle) had not lawfully distrib-
uted the estate and that it had more than doubled
in value. The nephew demanded two-fifths of
the value of the estate (Harrington and Pendery
1983:7). Joseph, Jr., accounted for his adminis-
tration of the estate in 1757. In this same year
Nathaniel (the uncle in residence) died.
By 1759 Nathaniel (nephew) was awarded a
double share of real estate, £100, as well as the
Sherburne House, by a new administration of the
estate (he paid the other heirs £40). He married
Elizabeth Lear, and they lived in the house with
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
their six children. Nathaniel died in 1768, and his
wife lived in the house until her death in 1814.
In 1826 Elizabeth Lear Sherburne’s son, John,
purchased the rights of the other heirs.
Excavations
Portions of the front and back yards of the
Sherburne site were excavated over three field
seasons in 1977, 1982, and 1983 (Figure 3). In
addition to the artifactual evidence that provides
insight into the lives of the Sherburne House
residents (Harrington and Pendery 1983; Pend-
ery 1984; Harrington 1989), the excavations
revealed a variety of landscape features: the
foundations for two ells, fence post holes, a
ca. 1734 hearth, foundation and floor joists, the
remains of a rear addition to the main house, a
series of postholes delineating the 18th-century
fence line, and 18th-century sheet refuse. The
items of personal adornment discussed here were
recovered mainly from the center of the site in
18th-century strata.
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site 23

TABLE 2
OCCUPANTS OF THE SHERBURNE HOUSE

Years of occupancy Occupant Occupation

–1681 John Cutt

1681–1694 Mary Cutt Penhallow

Samuel Cutt

1694–1698 Captain John Sherburne (not in residence) Mariner

Mary Sherburne

1698–1703 Mary Sherburne

1703–1706 Mary Sherburne Mariner, shopkeeper,

Joseph Sherburne merchant

1706–1744 Mary Sherburne

Joseph Sherburne Mariner, shopkeeper,
Mary Lovell Sherburne merchant
five children

1744–1754 tenants?
Joseph Sherburne Jr.?

1754–1757 Joseph Sherburne, Jr. (owner, not in residence) Merchant

Nathaniel Sherburne Shipmaster and shopkeeper
Mehitable Sherburne
Nathaniel Sherburne (nephew)

1757–1759 Nathaniel Sherburne

1759–1768 Nathaniel Sherburne (nephew)

Elizabeth Lear Sherburne

1768–1814 Elizabeth Lear Sherburne

1814–1826 Estate in probate

John Sherburne

1826 sold out of Sherburne family

Sherburne Site Assemblage
The personal adornment assemblage from the
Sherburne excavations is, on the one hand, rep-
resentative of the kinds of personal adornment
that were commonly worn in the 18th century
and, on the other hand, extraordinary in its
composition because it includes items that are
known to be used in the 18th century but are
infrequently recovered on archaeological sites.
Thirty-eight personal adornment artifacts were
recovered that date to the period of 1702 to
1820. The assemblage comprises an aglet, buck-
les, buttons, beads, sleeve buttons, a paste gem,
two brooches, a chain fragment, a cosmetic
tool, and a spur rowel. The assemblage reflects
the ways that Sherburne residents physically
presented themselves as individuals through the
way that they dressed and the ways that pre-
sentation marked them as members of groups.
Many of the artifacts are strong markers of the
elite status of the Sherburne residents, and the
artifacts can be used as a means to understand
the physical construction and performance of
identities by gender and age. Overall, the assem-
blage provides insight on an individual scale in
regard to the kinds of choices Sherburne house
residents made as they clothed themselves and
wore accessories to suit and emphasize their
status.
24
FIGURE 2. Portrait of Joseph Sherburne, Jr., by John Singleton
Copley, ca. 1767–70. (Courtesy, The Metropolitan Museum
of Art, Amelia B. Lazarus Fund, 1923 [23.143]; photograph,
all rights reserved, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York, NY.)
Clothing Fasteners
Clothing fasteners comprise the largest num-
bers of personal adornment artifacts from the
Sherburne site. An aglet, buckles, and buttons,
identified in this category, provide insight into
the kinds of clothing worn and the negotiation
of identities.
Aglet
A single copper alloy aglet was recovered at
the Sherburne site (Figure 4). Used at the end
of a lace or tie as a decorative element and
as an aid to threading through eyelets, to keep
it from fraying and unraveling, this aglet may
have been used on a man’s cloak or woman’s
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
gown. It is impossible to know with any speci-
ficity what kind of lacing it was. This particular
aglet is a common sort, made of base metal
and undecorated, and probably would have been
worn for regular dress.
Buckles
Six shoe buckles were recovered at the Sher-
burne site. Of the six, three are shoe buckle
frames and three are chapes, which fastened the
buckle frame to the shoe. One of the buckles
is particularly useful for exploring the way that
these artifacts were used in the performance
and inscription of identity (Figure 5). This shoe
buckle is a very elaborate frame fragment that
was recovered in a late-18th-century context,
a period when Elizabeth Lear Sherburne occu-
pied the Sherburne House. The outer register
is decorated with chevrons, squares, and oval
motifs, bordered by fine beading; while the
inner register shows regularly spaced circles in
low relief. This buckle would have been gilded
when it was worn. The fine decoration would
have reflected the light, and the buckles would
have sparkled. It is a very fancy buckle.
This single buckle, then, represents the physi-
cal presence of the shoe—although no shoes
were recovered on the site, the presence of
the shoe buckle on the most basic interpretive
level allows researchers to begin to visualize
the clothing worn by the Sherburne House resi-
dents. The elaborate form of the shoe buckle,
however, conveys more. There was a great
amount of choice involved in selecting shoe
buckles; they came in many different forms.
In a study of 10 sites in Portsmouth, there are
no duplicates (White 2002). The decoration was
used by the wearer to visually set himself or
herself apart, marking oneself as an individual.
At the same time, the selection of a particular
buckle also marked a person as part of a larger
social grouping, particularly along class lines.
This buckle, then, a very elaborately decorated
buckle, is representative of the wearer’s elite
status. It was part of the inscription of class
that was worn on the exterior of the body and
of the performance of the elite class enacted
by the Sherburne House resident. Its presence
in a late-18th-century context also suggests
an interest or awareness of current fashions,
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site 25

FIGURE 3. Plan of excavations undertaken at the Sherburne site; shading indicates excavated areas. (Drawing by author,
2001.)

which adds to its function as an elite status
marker. Large shoe buckles were fashionable
between 1760 and 1780, and this particular
buckle was deposited not long after that date.
While it is not possible to link this particular
artifact with a particular resident, it may have
been worn by Elizabeth Sherburne, a wealthy
woman, or, it may have been worn by one of
her family members or peers of high socioeco-
nomic status.
Buckle chapes are less informative in terms of
identity construction, but as part of the larger
assemblage, they suggest that Sherburne house
residents had access to a variety of shoe buckles
since chapes themselves come in a wide variety
of subtly different forms (Figure 6). Buckle
chapes follow a defined typological progression
through time and confirm that Sherburne resi-
dents kept up with the latest fashions (White
2005:41–43).
Knee Buckles
Knee buckles were worn on breeches’ knee
bands and were used to hold breeches tightly
below or above the knee. Knee buckles were
placed so that the long axis of the buckle was
oriented vertically, not only holding the breeches
tightly at the knee but also holding up the
stockings (Wright 1990:83).
26 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)

act that created the visual image of the wearer

and was part of male-gendered costume (White
[2009]). Although these buckles are not very
elaborate, knee buckles were an uncommon
accessory in Portsmouth (archaeological evidence
suggests that buttons or laces were more com-
monly used, even in consideration of discard
patterns) (White 2002). These particular buckles
reflect elite or middle-class status, male gender,
and are an indicator of individuality.

Hat Buckle

FIGURE 4. Copper alloy aglet. (Photo by author, 2001.) One hat buckle frame was recovered at the
Sherburne site, found in a deposit dating to 1800,

FIGURE 5. Shoe buckle frame. (Photo by author, 2001.)

FIGURE 6. Copper alloy knee buckle frame. (Photo by
author, 2001.)

Two knee buckles were recovered at the

Sherburne site. One buckle is a complete knee
buckle with the frame and chape intact (Figure
6). The buckle is made of copper alloy and
was likely plated, although none of the plating
remains today. It has a characteristic anchor
chape and pitchfork tongue on the chape (White
2005:43). The second knee buckle is a small,
brass frame fragment (Figure 7) with three
oblique transverse notches on either side of the
frame and a slight flare on the interior of the
side of the frame.
The presence of these simple knee buckles
suggests that breeches were worn, further adding
to the visualization of Sherburne residents. Only
men wore breeches; knee buckles are identifi-
ably gendered artifacts. The act of wearing these FIGURE 7. Brass knee-buckle frame. (Photo by author,
buckles was a mundane and stylized repeated 2001.)
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
again to the period of Elizabeth Lear Sherburne
(Figure 8). Made of pewter with molded grooves
along the outside edge that result in a scalloped
effect, this buckle would have been worn on
a tall brimmed hat with a ribbon. This buckle
contributes further to the images of the Sherburne
House residents’ clothing and is a marker of elite
status by its relative rarity. It is not possible,
however, to attribute this buckle by gender, since
both men and women in the 18th century wore
this hat style.
Buttons
Seventeen buttons were recovered at the
Sherburne site. Buttons were worn almost exclu-
sively on men’s clothing, and they are a strong
marker of masculine identity––objects used in
the negotiation of individual appearance and
identity (White 2002, 2005). Simply by putting
on garments and fastening them with buttons,
a man was enacting his gender and inscribing
FIGURE 8. Pewter hat buckle. (Photo by author, 2001.)
27
this identity on his body’s surface, which in turn
encompassed individual identity. Buttons are the
physical remains of these actions.
Buttons were purchased separately from the
textile used to make a garment, and the con-
sumer had a wide choice in terms of style and
expense. There is a strong connection between
the artifact, personal choice, the way that a
person presented him or herself, and the con-
struction of individual identity. Buttons were
an integral part of garments that served to
demarcate class boundaries and are particularly
revealing as a subgroup of personal adornment
artifacts. Portrait and documentary evidence, in
particular newspaper advertisements, suggest that
buttons were a locus for class grouping and
individual identification (White 2002, 2005).
Coat Buttons
Eight coat buttons were recovered at the Sher-
burne site, and they provide evidence of the ways
in which individuals’ garb formed and maintained
class identity as well as gender identity. The
most dramatic example is a large, sew-though,
shell coat button engraved with a geometric
pattern (Figure 9). Stylistically, this button is
similar to other 18th-century fancy shell buttons,
although the four-hole sew-through attachment is
less common (White 1977:71). Its size is typi-
cal of the large fashionable coat buttons of the
third quarter of the 18th century. Shell buttons
FIGURE 9. Shell coat button. (Photo by author, 2001.)
28
were among the most expensive buttons available
during this time. Pure white shell such as this
was costly since much of the raw material was
wasted during production (White 1977:71). When
this button was worn, it would have been noticed
because of its size, decoration, and uncommon
material. Wearing this particular button (and other
large coat buttons) was a gesture that established
its wearer as elite, both to others and to the
wearer, by the material and fashionability of the
button through its incorporation into the body
and inscription of status on the body.
Waistcoat Buttons
Buttons were prominently displayed on men’s
waistcoats. Men wore waistcoats with coats
beginning in the late-17th century (and continu-
ing to the present day). Waistcoat buttons were
smaller than coat buttons and generally coordi-
nated with coat buttons, either by complement
FIGURE 10. Waistcoat buttons: (A) bone waistcoat buttonmold, (B) pewter waistcoat button, (C) pewter waistcoat button,
(D) pewter waistcoat button, (E) bone waistcoat button. (Photo by author, 2001.)
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
or contrast (White 2005:59). In the archaeologi-
cal record, size is the most certain way to iden-
tify these buttons, and they generally measure
14.5 to 19.5 mm (Hinks 1995).
The Sherburne assemblage contains five waist-
coat buttons, which are a standard and common
sampling of the types of waistcoat buttons that
are found archaeologically. In order to assess
the way that the wearer would view these but-
tons, one relies on the material and form of
the button. Like all buttons, waistcoat buttons
were almost exclusively worn by men and are
indicative of male-gendered costume. The Sher-
burne waistcoat buttons reflect an assortment
of expense: crude sew-through bone buttons,
fashionable high-grade pewter, and bone but-
tonmolds that would have been covered with
embroidered fabric and were the most expensive
sort of waistcoat button one could buy (Figure
10). Each type carried messages about the status
of the wearer.
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
Sleeve Buttons
Two pairs of sleeve buttons provide examples
of fancy sleeve links and crude, more com-
monplace sleeve buttons (Figure 11). A set of
elaborate round sleeve buttons has a floral motif
etched into the surface of the button. The other
set is in better condition and is complete. These
are octagonal pewter sleeve buttons with a crude
engraved four-square foliate design in the center
of each button and zigzagged engraving between
the leaves on four sides. Since these were worn
on shirts, they fall within the domain of male
clothing.
Jewelry
A confluence of factors makes jewelry a rela-
tively rare find on archaeological sites (White
2003). Portraits show that jewelry was worn
only occasionally in the 18th century, with
textiles expressing material wealth more typi-
cally in such depictions. Inventories list plain
gold rings, silver clasps, and pearl necklaces as
the most common forms of jewelry (Andresen
1982:127). The Sherburne site yielded beads,
FIGURE 11. Sleeve buttons: (A) copper alloy sleeve buttons,
(B) pewter sleeve buttons. (Photo by author, 2001.)
29
brooches, and a paste gem––an unusual array of
jewelry artifacts (White 2003).
Beads
The Sherburne site contained two glass beads
and a metal bead (Figure 12). The glass beads
were both blue in color; the first is a large bead
that was probably worn on a piece of jewelry or
other accessory. The second bead is also a glass
bead and, based on its size, may have been
strung on a necklace or watch chain, although
it also could have been used for a variety of
additional decorative purposes. Blue glass beads
are found in higher numbers on sites known
to have been inhabited by African Americans;
these beads were chosen for their symbolic
properties, worn for good luck or for their
amuletic qualities, and were more commonly
associated with women and infants in mortu-
ary contexts (Stine et al. 1996). Although two
enslaved people resided at the Sherburne house
in the 1730s (Table 2), and perhaps others
resided there throughout the 18th century, there
is no way to connect these blue beads with a
particular African American presence. One pos-
sible reading of these beads could be as items
used to mark individuals as affiliated with an
ethnic group. Alternatively, such an interpreta-
tion must be regarded as tenuous at best. While
these blue beads may be read as elements of
FIGURE 12. Beads: (A) wound blue glass bead, (B) wound
blue glass bead, (C) cast gold bead. (Photo by author,
2001.)
30
ethnic identity, the context does not provide
enough evidence in this instance to take this
interpretative stance. Nonetheless, these artifacts
would have formed an important element of the
individual’s appearance and functioned as part of
it. Although the role that these artifacts played
in the construction of identity is unknown,
they nevertheless played some role—one that is
unknowable.
An unusual bead recovered on the Sherburne
site (Figure 12C) is made of cast gold found
in a late-18th-century context. During the 18th
century, necklaces made of gold beads were
worn in New England (Wright 1990:19). Women
wore gold bead necklaces, which were typically
strung on thread and tied around the neck (Fales
1995:58). Necklace length varied, and the pur-
chaser’s socioeconomic status dictated the length
more than fashion did (Wright 1990:19).
On occasion, women wear gold bead neck-
laces in 18th-century portraits. These portraits
typically depict older women, and they con-
tribute to an overall impression of the sitter
as mature and wealthy (White 2005:82–83).
This single, small artifact reflects multivalent
FIGURE 13. Brass brooches. (Photo by author, 2001.)
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
identities. As an aid to fashionable dress, the
gold necklace would have been employed by
a woman to enhance her appearance, which
would either uphold or emphasize her status and
embody ideas of age and maturity. The bead
reflects the intertwined identities of a mature,
elite woman, at once reflecting aspects of age,
class, and gender.
Brooches
In the late-17th to early-19th centuries,
brooches often had functional purposes to
accompany their decorative qualities, and often
function eclipsed decoration. Brooches were
used sometimes to close shawls or fasten draped
articles of clothing to the body (Morris et al.
1940; Cunnington and Cunnington 1972:310). As
with all forms of personal adornment, brooches
were made with both expensive and common
inexpensive materials.
The two brooches recovered at the Sherburne
site are simple and prioritize function over form
(Figure 13). The first is a circle brooch, which
is crudely made from cast brass with traces of
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
two attachments on one side that would have
held a pin and a clasp. The second brooch is
similar to the first. Although the fragment is
quite small, it retains evidence of an attachment
on one side. The brooches are crude, and the
frames were probably covered by cloth or by
some kind of additional decorative component.
The brooches are excellent examples of less-
expensive forms of personal adornment. These
are simple brooches that could be pinned to gar-
ments and were probably used to fasten neckwear
worn by women. They are excellent examples of
one of the more mundane kinds of jewelry worn
by women in Portsmouth and evidence of simple
gestures that formed a person’s appearance.
Paste Gem
An oval paste gem was recovered in an
early-18th-century context at the Sherburne site
(Figure 14). The rich as well as those of more
modest means wore pastes. Their use assuaged
fears of genuine stones being stolen or lost
(Bradford 1961:28) and allowed greater flexibil-
ity and fewer constraints for the jeweler. Pastes
FIGURE 14. Faceted paste gem with engraved cipher.
(Photo by author, 2001.)
were available in a wide range of sizes, shapes,
and colors and were easily cut, polished, and
shaped (Mould 1979:3).
The Sherburne paste is faceted on both sides
and engraved with a cipher of two interlocking
C’s surrounded by a chain border that probably
was lined with gold wire. This gem could have
31
been set in a ring, brooch, seal, or another piece
of jewelry; it is impossible to associate it with
a particular item. When set, such an elaborately
engraved paste would be a marker of high
socioeconomic status for the person who wore
it, although it is not possible to assign gender.
Miscellaneous Accessories
Three miscellaneous artifacts were recovered
at the Sherburne site: a chatelaine, a spur rowel,
and a cosmetic spoon (Figure 15). A short
length of copper alloy chain was recovered (Fig.
15A). When chains are recovered in archaeo-
logical contexts, it is difficult to associate them
with their original use. They were used on all
manner of adornment, and unless a large section
of the chain is present, it can be very difficult
to discern the sort of object it suspended. Based
on the form of the chain, this artifact was prob-
ably part of a chatelaine or, more accurately, a
waist-hung appendage. The term chatelaine was
not used until the 19th century. The chain would
attach a small tool to a hook, which would
attach to a woman’s gown. Women wore the
chatelaine, and the tools worn on a chatelaine,
such as sewing tools, keys, or perfume bottles,
were strong physical representations of feminine
cultural ideas and the construction of female
gender identity. Chatelaines are strong markers
of class; the price varied greatly according to
the materials used and the kind and number of
trinkets and accessories attached.
A crudely made hand-wrought brass spur
rowel was recovered in a late-18th-century
context (Figure 15B). Spurs were a fashionable
accessory, especially in the 17th century, and
would have been worn with boots. The spur
suggests the construction of a fashionable man,
worn in all likelihood as a functional emblem of
fashionability. Since these are male-only items,
wearing spurs were part of the way in which
gender was inscribed and incorporated into the
identity of this individual.
The final artifact from the Sherburne assem-
blage is a cosmetic tool (Figure 15C). Both men
and women of fashion who could afford the
expense wore cosmetics. Certain tools were used
to apply powders and ointments to the face and
body. Others were used to maintain and modify
the face or body by means of removal (unwanted
32
FIGURE 15. (A) copper alloy chain, (B) brass spur rowel, (C) copper alloy cosmetic spoon. (Photo by author, 2001.)
detritus and hair) and cleaning (brows, nails,
teeth, ears). Cosmetic tools convey an interest in
and attention to physical appearance.
This implement is made out of a single piece
of copper alloy twisted so that there are alter-
nating decorated and plain bands of metal along
the shaft. The broad end with the concave sur-
face was probably used to hold small amounts
of ointments, powders, or other cosmetics and
could also have been used as an ear spoon,
an implement used to scoop wax out of one’s
ears to lubricate the thread used in sewing. The
narrower oblique end was probably used as a
manicuring tool.
Noting the cosmetic tool artifact points to the
importance of attending to all personal adornment
artifacts when considering identity and personal
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
adornment, not just to those that occur in the
greatest quantities. The cosmetic tool provides
deeper insight into the material manifestations
of the construction of gender for women, as
this object was utilized for both grooming and
sewing. The tool reveals an attention to particu-
lar grooming tasks, such as the application and
removal of ointments and powders, cleaning one’s
nails to make one’s hands appear clean and neat,
as well as cleaning the ear. Notably, the tool may
have served another function: to provide earwax
for the task of sewing—a feminine enterprise and
one in which women established their self-worth
to the household and to others. The tool has
multiple purposes and addresses the construction
of the feminine gender in different ways through
each function.
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
Sherburne Site Personal Adornment
Artifacts of personal adornment from the
Sherburne site exhibit broad variety in terms of
the classes of artifacts represented and in the
forms they take. An assorted range of forms
is represented in the classes of artifacts that
dominate the assemblage (namely, the buttons
and buckles). Buckles represent a wide range of
clothing types (shoes, boots, breeches, and hats)
and the buttons represent coats, shirts, trousers,
and waistcoats. Although some of the artifacts
are very common items, in particular some of
the buckles and buttons, many of the artifacts
are high-style accessories to dress, such as the
large shell button and the carved paste gem.
The fancy forms are mixed with others that
are more common. The site inhabitants were
wealthy, and this understanding of the kinds
of clothing that these inhabitants wore paints
a more vivid picture of their appearance, even
though it is not possible to link these items to
particular people with confidence.
A number of the Sherburne artifacts are
unusual and rare finds—the cosmetic spoon,
spur rowel, paste gem, gold bead, and brooches
(White 2002 provides comparanda). The site
inhabitants were wealthy, and it is not surpris-
ing to find that the clothing and accessories
worn by the residents were different in form as
well as character from those of many of their
neighbors.
The assemblage can be used to understand
the construction of class, gender, and age iden-
tities. The assemblage is a strong indicator of
class identity. It is composed mainly of fairly
expensive artifacts that would have communi-
cated socioeconomic status when the individual
wore the item as part of a set of clothing that
similarly communicated elite class status. The
assemblage is also useful as a means for under-
standing the construction of gender identities,
as many of the artifacts can be associated with
men and women, based on the kinds of cloth-
ing that the artifacts suggest. Further, some of
the other artifacts were part of fashionable and
stylish attire that also communicated ideas about
femininity and masculinity. They were culturally
constructed in this era, in particular the bead,
chatelaine chain, and cosmetic tool as mark-
ers of feminine identity. The bead also reflects
cultural constructions of age and maturity at
33
the same time. Although at least two enslaved
people resided at the Sherburne house, the arti-
facts do not provide any information specifically
on an African American presence. As markers
of ethnicity, however, the artifacts are mainly
European imports and suggest interest in and
association with European clothing, and, hence,
a maintenance of European or English ethnic
identity (White 2005).
The Sherburne artifacts point to the ways in
which individuals physically constructed their
appearance as affiliated with different kinds
of identities, aligning themselves with differ-
ent groupings while concurrently establishing
themselves as individuals through their deci-
sions about dress and appearance. Many of the
artifacts employed here to make associations
between individuals and personal and group
identities are multivalent; they were used to
express affiliations with multiple lines of iden-
tity. These artifacts are the physical remnants
of the tools used by individuals to enact the
identities; they were part of the mundane and
repeated acts that constituted the performance
and incorporation of identity and were the
means used to inscribe the identities on the
body. Personal adornment was a means used
by all people for communicating who they were
in terms of gender, age, rank, and ethnicity, as
well as according to other defining subgroups.
While the choices varied according to the very
divisions that these identities reflected, personal
appearance was a potent tool for men and
women. The artifacts that survive as evidence
are the material remains of symbols used by
men and women to communicate something
about who they were and who they wished to
be seen to be.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to Strawbery Banke Museum for
the opportunity to work with the Sherburne
collections. The Archaeology Division and par-
ticularly Martha E. Pinello and Sandra Dechard
have provided support and access to the col-
lections. I also thank Faith Harrington for her
work in the initial excavation of these materials.
Mary C. Beaudry, Clemency C. Coggins, Rich-
ard Candee, Ricardo J. Elia, and Linda Welters
provided comments on an early draft. A Faculty
34
Research Associate appointment in Boston Uni-
versity’s Department of Archaeology supported
the completion of the manuscript. A portion of
this research was supported by a McNeil Disser-
tation Fellowship at Winterthur Museum, Garden,
and Library, and a version of this article was
presented at the Society for American Archaeol-
ogy meetings in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 2003.
I sincerely thank Rod Mather, Tammy Stone, and
three anonymous reviewers for the helpful and
cogent comments that helped to reshape my ideas
and presentation.
References
ANDRESEN, KAREN
1982 The Layered Society: Material Life in Portsmouth,
New Hampshire, 1680–1740. Doctoral dissertation,
University of New Hampshire, Durham. University
Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI.
BARNES, RUTH, AND JOANNE EICHER
1992 Dress and Gender: Making and Meaning in Cultural
Contexts. Berg, Oxford, England, UK.
BARTHES, ROLAND
1983 The Fashion System. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
BEAUDRY, MARY C., LAUREN J. COOK, AND STEPHEN A.
MROZOWSKI
1991 Artifacts and Active Voices: Material Culture as Social
Discourse. In The Archaeology of Inequality, Randall
H. McGuire and Robert Paynter, editors, pp. 150–191.
Basil Blackwell, Oxford, England, UK.
BEDELL, JOHN, AND GERALD P. SCHARFENBERGER
2000 Ordinary and Poor People in Eighteenth-Century
Delaware. Northeast Historical Archaeology
29:23–48.
BENNETT, MONTE
1983 Glass Trade Beads from Central New York. In
Proceedings of the 1982 Glass Trade Bead Conference,
Charles F. Hayes, editor, pp. 51–58. Rochester Museum
and Science Center, Rochester, NY.
BRADFORD, ERNLE
1961 English Paste Jewellery: Substitutes for Gemstones.
The Antique Dealer and Collectors’ Guide
(January):27–29.
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
BRADLEY, JAMES W.
1983 Blue Crystals and Other Trinkets: Glass Beads from
Sixteenth and Early-Seventeenth Century New
England. In Proceedings of the 1982 Glass Trade
Bead Conference, Charles F. Hayes, editor, pp. 29–40.
Rochester Museum and Science Center, Rochester,
NY.
BROWN, KATHLEEN M.
1996 Good Wives, Nasty Wenches, and Anxious Patriarchs:
Gender, Race, and Power in Colonial Virginia.
University of North Carolina Press for The Institute
of Early American History and Culture, Chapel Hill.
BUTLER, JUDITH
1990 Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of
Identity. Routledge, New York, NY.
CANDEE, RICHARD M.
1968 The John Sherburne House. Manuscript, Strawbery
Banke Museum, Portsmouth, NH.
1976 Wooden Buildings in Early Maine and New Hampshire:
A Technological and Cultural History 1600–1720.
Doctoral dissertation, Department of American
Studies, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI.
CLEMENTS, JOYCE M.
1993 The Cultural Creation of the Feminine Gender:
An Example from Nineteenth-Century Military
Households at Fort Independence, Boston. Historical
Archaeology 27(4):39–64.
CRAIK, JENNIFER
1994 The Face of Fashion: Cultural Studies in Fashion.
Routledge, London, England, UK.
CRANE, DIANA
2000 Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Class, Gender, and
Identity in Clothing. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL.
CUNNINGTON, C. WILLETT, AND PHILLIS CUNNINGTON
1972 Handbook of English Costume in the Eighteenth
Century. Faber and Faber Limited, London, England,
UK.
CUNNINGTON, PHILLIS
1964 Costume in Pictures. Studio Vista Limited, London,
England, UK.
DAVIS, FRED
1992 Fashion, Culture, and Identity. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, IL.
DEVORE, STEPHEN LEROY
1992 Beads of the Bison Robe Trade: The Fort Union Trading
Post Collection. Friends of Fort Union Trading Post,
Williston, ND.
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
DUREL, JOHN
1985 From Strawbery Banke to Puddle Dock: The Evolution
of a Neighborhood, 1630–1850. Doctoral dissertation,
Department of History, University of New Hampshire,
Durham. University Microfilms International, Ann
Arbor, MI.
EICHER, JOANNE B. (EDITOR)
1995 Dress and Ethnicity: Change across Space and Time.
Berg, Oxford, England, UK.
ENTWISTLE, JOANNE
2000 The Fashioned Body: Fashion, Dress, and Modern
Social Theory. Polity Press, Cambridge, England,
UK.
FALES, MARTHA GANDY
1995 Jewelry in America 1600–1900. Antique Collectors
Club, Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, UK.
FELT, JOSEPH BARLOW
1853 The Customs of New England. T. R. Marvin, Boston,
MA.
GOFFMAN, ERVING
1959 The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
GROSZ, ELIZABETH
1994 Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism. Indiana
University Press, Bloomington.
1995 Space, Time, and Perversion: Essays on the Politics
of Bodies. Routledge, New York, NY.
HARRINGTON, FAITH
1989 The Emergent Elite in Early-Eighteenth-Century
Portsmouth Society: The Archaeology of the
Joseph Sherburne Houselot. Historical Archaeology
23(1):2–18.
HARRINGTON, FAITH, AND STEVEN PENDERY
1983 Preliminary Report on the Sherburne House Site
at Strawbery Banke. Manuscript, Strawbery Banke
Museum, Inc., Portsmouth, NH.
HEATH, BARBARA J.
1999 Buttons, Beads, and Buckles: Contextualizing
Adornment within the Bounds of Slavery. In Historical
Archaeology, Identity Formation, and the Interpretation
of Identity, Maria Franklin and Garrett Fesler, editors,
pp. 47–70. Colonial Williamsburg Foundation,
Richmond, VA.
HENDRICKSON, HILDI (EDITOR)
1995 Clothing and Difference: Embodied Identities in
Colonial and Post-Colonial Africa. Duke University
Press, Durham, NC.
35
HINKS, STEPHEN
1995 A Structural and Functional Analysis of Eighteenth-
Century Buttons. Volumes in Historical Archaeology,
Vol. 32. The South Carolina Institute of Archaeology
and Anthropology, The University of South Carolina,
Columbia. Reprint of author’s 1988 master’s thesis,
Department of Anthropology, College of William and
Mary, Williamsburg, VA.
HUEY, PAUL
1983 Glass Trade Beads from Fort Orange, Albany, New
York c. A.D. 1624–1676. In Proceedings of the 1982
Glass Trade Bead Conference, Charles F. Hayes, editor,
pp. 83–110. Rochester Museum and Science Center,
Rochester, NY.
JOYCE, ROSEMARY
2001 Gender and Power in Prehispanic Mesoamerica.
University of Texas Press, Austin.
KARKLINS, KARLIS
1983 Dutch Trade Beads in North America. In Proceedings
of the 1982 Glass Trade Bead Conference, Charles F.
Hayes, editor, pp. 111–126. Rochester Museum and
Science Center, Rochester, NY.
1985 Glass Beads: The Nineteenth-Century Levin Catalogue
and Venetian Bead Book and Guide to Description of
Glass Beads. Studies in Archaeology, Architecture,
and History. Environment Canada-Parks, Ottawa,
Ontario.
KENYON, IAN T., AND THOMAS KENYON
1983 Comments on Seventeenth-Century Glass Trade Beads
from Ontario. In Proceedings of the 1982 Glass Trade
Bead Conference, Charles F. Hayes, editor, pp. 59–74.
Rochester Museum and Science Center, Rochester,
NY.
KIDD, KENNETH A., AND MARTHA A. KIDD
1970 A Classification System for Glass Beads for the Use
of Field Archaeologists. Canadian Historic Sites:
Occasional Papers in Archaeology and History
1:45–89.
LOREN, DIANA DIPAOLO
2000 The Intersection of Colonial Policy and Colonial
Practice: Creolization on the Eighteenth-Century
Louisiana/Texas Frontier. Historical Archaeology
34(3):85–98.
2001 Social Skins: Orthodoxies and Practices of Dressing in
the Early Colonial Lower Mississippi Valley. Journal
of Social Archaeology 1(2):172–189.
2003 Refashioning a Body Politic in Colonial Louisiana.
Cambridge Archaeological Journal 12(2):231–237.
LOREN, DIANA DIPAOLO, AND MARY C. BEAUDRY
2006 Becoming American: Small Things Remembered. In
Historical Archaeology, Martin Hall and Stephen W.
Silliman, editors, pp. 251–271. Blackwell Studies in
Global Archaeology. Blackwell, Oxford, England,
UK.
36
LURIE, ALISON
1981 The Language of Clothes, with new introduction.
Reprinted in 2000 by Henry Holt and Company, New
York, NY.
MCCLELLAN, ELISABETH
1939 Historic Dress in America, 1607–1870, Volume 1.
Reprinted in 1977 by Arno Press, New York, NY.
MCCRACKEN, GRANT
1988 Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the
Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities.
Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
MERLEAU-PONTY, MAURICE
1962 The Phenomenology of Perception, Colin Smith,
translator. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, England,
UK.
1968 The Visible and the Invisible, Alphonso Lingis,
translator. Northwestern University Press, Evanston,
IL.
MORRIS, KATHERINE, LESTER DERKE, AND BESS VIOLA
DERKE
1940 Accessories of Dress. The Manual Arts Press, Peoria,
IL.
MOULD, PHILIP
1979 The English Shoe Buckle. Leemans Seel House, Neston,
England, UK.
MROZOWSKI, STEPHEN A., GRACE H. ZIESING, AND MARY C.
BEAUDRY
1996 Living on the Boot: Historical Archaeology at the
Boot Mills Boardinghouses, Lowell, Massachusetts.
University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst.
NEW HAMPSHIRE RECORDS AND ARCHIVES CENTER
1754 Joseph Sherburne inventory. New Hampshire Probate
Record 1214, New Hampshire Records and Archives
Center, Concord, NH.
NOYES, SYBIL, CHARLES LIBBY, AND WALTER DAVIS
1983 Genealogical Dictionary of Maine and New Hampshire.
Genealogical Publishing Co., Baltimore, MD.
OLSEN, STANLEY J.
1963 Dating Early Plain Buttons by Their Form. American
Antiquity 28(4):551–554.
PENDERY, STEVEN
1978 Urban Process in Portsmouth, New Hampshire: An
Archaeological Perspective. In New England Historical
Archaeology 1977 Proceedings of the Dublin Seminar
for New England Folklife, Peter Benes, editor, pp.
24–35. Boston University, Boston, MA.
1984 Final Report: Archaeological Research at the Sherburne
House Site, 1977–1983 Field Seasons, Strawbery
Banke, Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Manuscript,
Strawbery Banke Museum, Portsmouth, NH.
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 42(2)
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY REGISTRY OF DEEDS
1703/04 Joseph Sherburne deed. New Hampshire Deed 7:46,
Rockingham County Registry of Deeds, Brentwood,
NH.
RUBINSTEIN, RUTH P.
1995 Dress Codes: Meanings and Messages in American
Culture. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
SCOTT, ELIZABETH M.
1991a A Feminist Approach to Historical Archaeology:
Eighteenth-Century Fur Trade Society at Michili-
mackinac. Historical Archaeology 25(4):42–53.
1991b Gender in Complex Colonial Society: The Material
Goods of Everyday Life in a Late-Eighteenth-Century
Fur Trading Community. In The Archaeology of
Gender: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Chacmool
Conference, Dale Walde and Noreen D. Willows,
editors, pp. 490–495. The Archaeological Association
of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
SMITH, MARVIN T.
2002 Eighteenth-Century Glass Beads in the French Colonial
Trade. Historical Archaeology 36(1):55–61.
SØRENSON, MARIE LOUISE
2000 Gender Archaeology. Polity Press, Cambridge, England,
UK.
SOUTH, STANLEY
1964 Analysis of the Buttons from Brunswick Town and
Fort Fisher. Florida Anthropologist 17(2):113–133.
1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology.
Academic Press, New York, NY.
SPENCER-WOOD, SUZANNE (EDITOR)
1987 Consumer Choice in Historical Archaeology. Plenum
Press, New York, NY.
SPRAGUE, RODERICK
2002 China or Prosser Button Identification and Dating.
Historical Archaeology 36(2):111–127.
STINE, LINDA FRANCE, MELANIE CABAK, AND MARK D.
GROOVER
1996 Blue Beads as African-American Cultural Symbols.
Historical Archaeology 30(3):49–75.
STONE, LYLE M.
1974 Fort Michilimackinac 1715–1781: An Archaeological
Perspective on the Revolutionary Frontier. Publications
of the Museum, Anthropological Series Vol. 2. Michigan
State University, East Lansing.
TRINGHAM, RUTH E.
1991 Households with Faces: The Challenge of Gender in
Prehistoric Architectural Remains. In Engendering
Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Joan Gero
and Margaret W. Conkey, editors, pp. 93–131. Basil
Blackwell, Oxford, England, UK.
CAROLYN L. WHITE—Personal Adornment and Interlaced Identies at the Sherburne Site
TURGEON, LAURIER
2001 French Beads in France and Northeastern North
America during the Sixteenth Century. Historical
Archaeology 35(4):58–82.
WHEELER, KATHLEEN
1992 The Characterization and Measurement of
Archaeological Depositional Units: Patterns from
Nineteenth-Century Urban Sites in Portsmouth,
New Hampshire. Doctoral dissertation, Department
of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.
University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI.
WHITE, CAROLYN L.
2002 Constructing Identities: Personal Adornment from
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 1680–1820. Doctoral
dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Boston
University, Boston, MA.
2003 Identifying Jewelry in the Archaeological Record:
Possibilities, Problems, and Examples. Paper presented
at the Annual Meeting of the Council for Northeast
Historical Archaeology, Lowell, MA.
2005 American Artifacts of Personal Adornment, 1680–1820:
A Guide to Identification and Interpretation. AltaMira
Press, Lanham, MD.
[2009] Knee, Garter, Girdle, Hat, Stock, and Spur/Strap
Buckles from Seven Sites in Portsmouth, New
Hampshire. International Journal of Historical
Archaeology 13, forthcoming.
WHITE, D. P.
1977 The Birmingham Button Industry. Post-Medieval
Archaeology 11:67–79.
WRAY, CHARLES F.
1983 Seneca Glass Trade Beads, c. A.D. 1550–1820. In
Proceedings of the 1982 Glass Trade Bead Conference,
Charles F. Hayes, editor, pp. 41–50. Rochester Museum
and Science Center, Rochester, NY.
37
WRIGHT, MEREDITH
1990 Put on Thy Beautiful Garments: Rural New England
Clothing, 1783–1800. The Clothes Press, East
Montpelier, VT.
YENTSCH, ANNE
1994 A Chesapeake Family and Their Slaves: A Study in
Historical Archaeology. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, England, UK.
1996 Beads as Silent Witnesses of an African-American
Past: Social Identity and the Artifacts of Slavery in
Annapolis, Maryland. In The Written and the Wrought:
Complementary Sources in Historical Anthropology,
Mary Ellen D’Agostino, Elizabeth Prine, Eleanor
Casella, and Margot Winer, editors, pp. 45–60. Kroeber
Anthropological Society Papers, No. 79. Department
of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.
ZIESING, GRACE H.
1989 Analysis of Personal Effects from Excavations of
the Boot Mills Boardinghouse Backlots in Lowell,
Massachusetts. In Interdisciplinary Investigations of
the Boott Mills, Lowell, Massachusetts, Vol. 3, The
Boardinghouse as a Way of Life, Mary C. Beaudry and
Stephen A. Mrozowski, editors, pp. 40–75. Cultural
Resources Management Study, No. 21. National Park
Service, North Atlantic Regional Office, Boston,
MA.
1991 Personal Effects from the Backlots of Boott Mills
Corporate Housing in Lowell, Massachusetts: A
Gender Study in Historical Archaeology. Master’s
thesis, Department of Archaeology, Boston University,
Boston, MA.
CAROLYN L. WHITE
DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO
MAIL STOP 096
RENO, NV 89557