Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:16:10.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Stones to Gendered Bodies: Regional Differences in the Production of the Body and Gender on the Copper Age Statue-Menhirs of Northern Italy and the Swiss Valais

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Susanna Harris  and
Kerstin P. Hofmann
Susanna Harris
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, University College London, UK
Kerstin P. Hofmann
Affiliation:
Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Much research has been carried out on identifying gendered iconography on statue-menhirs. This paper seeks to develop this perspective by considering the broader body concepts. Body concepts are of interest to archaeologists because they are closely connected to issues of sex, gender, and age. By investigating stone sculptures, however, we are looking at an ideological view of the body that was produced by reducing the stone from its natural form into a statue-menhir. The presence of bodily features on the statue-menhirs suggests that it was important to construct a body, and that certain aspects of the body were chosen to be represented, either through the size and shape of the stone or iconography, while others were neglected. We propose this is a significant means by which stones were made into bodies and gendered beings. To investigate body concepts, we pose two questions: how was a statue-menhir body made, and how was it gendered? By following the reduction sequence of the stone as the technique of production, we investigate which bodily features were important in constructing a body and in gendering it. We do this through analysing and comparing three regional examples of anthropomorphic statue-menhirs: (1) The Lunigiana groups A and B in northwestern Tuscany and eastern-most Liguria, (2) the Atesino group in Trentino-Alto Adige, and (3) the Sion Type A in the Swiss Valais and the Aosta Style I in northern Italy. Although there is a shared statue-menhir tradition in the three regions and beyond, the observations in this paper suggest that the bodily gender categories were negotiated regionally.

L'identification de l'iconographie sexuée des statues-menhirs a fait l'objet de quantité de recherche, et on essaie ici de développer cette perspective en considérant des concepts corporels plus larges. Les archéologues s'intéressent à ces concepts parce qu'ils sont étroitement liés à des questions de sexe, de genre et d'âge. Toutefois, en examinant des sculptures en pierre, nous découvrons une vision idéologique du corps résultant de la réduction de la forme naturelle de la pierre en statue-menhir. La présence de caractéristiques physiques sur les statues-menhirs suggère qu'il était important de construire un corps, et que certains aspects de ce corps étaient choisis pour être représentés soit par la taille et la forme de la pierre ou de l'iconographie, tandis que d'autres aspects furent négligés. Ceci nous semble essentiel dans le procès de transformation des pierres en corps et êtres humains sexués. Afin d'examiner les concepts du corps, nous posons deux questions: Comment est fait le corps d'une statue-menhir? Comment est exprimé le sexe? En suivant la progression de la réduction de la pierre—donc la technique de fabrication—nous étudions quelles caractéristiques physiques étaient importantes pour la construction d'un corps et pour le sexe attribué. C'est dans ce but que nous analysons et comparons trois exemples régionaux de statues-menhirs anthropomorphes: (1) Lunigiana groupe A et B en Toscane du nord-ouest et à l'extrême est de la Ligurie, (2) groupe d'Atesino à Trentino-Alto Adige et (3) type A à Sion dans le Valais suisse et style I d'Aoste à Aoste, Italie du Nord. Bien qu'il existait dans ces trois régions et au-delà une tradition partagée de statues-menhirs, les observations formulées dans cet article indiquent que les catégories physiques du sexe étaient traitées régionalement. Translation by Isabelle Gerges.

Zusammenfassung

Zusammenfassung

Die bereits umfangreichen Forschungen zur geschlechterspezifischen Ikonographie von Menhirstatuen sollen in diesem Beitrag durch die Berücksichtigung der Körperlichkeit um eine weitere Perspektive bereichert werden. Körperkonzepte sind für ArchäologInnen von großem Interesse, da sie auf das Engste mit Fragen des biologischen, des sozialen Geschlechts und des Alters verbunden sind. Bei der Analyse von Steinskulpturen beschäftigen wir uns mit der ideologischen Sicht auf den Körper, welche durch die Reduktion des Steins von seiner natürlich gegebenen Form hin zur Menhirstatue seine Materialisierung fand. Die bei den Menhirstatuen auftretenden Körpermerkmale lassen vermuten, dass diese für die Konstruktion eines anthropomorphen Körpers relevant waren. Hierbei wurden jedoch nur bestimmte Aspekte des Körpers entweder durch die Größe und Form des Steines oder durch die Ikonographie für die Darstellung ausgewählt, während man andere vernachlässigte. Wir mutmaßen, dass es hierdurch möglich wurde, Steine in Körper und geschlechterdifferenzierte Figuren zu verwandeln. Um die Körperkonzepte zu untersuchen, werfen wir zwei Fragen auf: Wie ist der Körper einer Menhirstatue angefertigt worden? Wie wurde dieser geschlechterdifferenziert? Durch das Nachvollziehen der Reduktionssequenz des Steines als Teil der Produktionstechnik untersuchen wir, welche Merkmale für die Konstruktion eines Körpers und für seine Vergeschlechtlichung bedeutend waren. Dies geschieht durch die Analyse und den Vergleich anthropomorpher Menhirstatuen dreier Fundregionen: (1) der Lunigiana-Gruppe A und B in der Nordwesttoskana und dem östlichsten Ligurien, (2) der Atesino-Gruppe im Trentino-Südtirol sowie (3) dem Sion-Typ A im Schweizer Wallis und dem Aosta-Stil I im Aosta-Tal in Norditalien. Obwohl es eine gemeinsame Tradition von Menhirstatuen in diesen Regionen und darüber hinaus gab, deuten die in diesem Beitrag präsentierten Beobachtungen darauf hin, dass die verkörperten Gender-Kategorien regional unterschiedlich ausgehandelt wurden. Translation by Heiner Schwarzberg and Kerstin P. Hofmann.

Keywords

Statue-menhirgenderbodyCopper Agenorthern ItalySwitzerlandstatue-menhirsexecorpsÂge du CuivreItalie du NordSuisseMenhirstatueGenderKörperKupferzeitNorditalienSchweiz
Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Archaeology , Volume 17 , Issue 2: Special Issue—Body Practices and Concepts in Later Prehistoric Europe , 2014 , pp. 264 - 285
Copyright
Copyright © European Association of Archaeologists 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ambrosi, A.C. 1972. Corpus delle statue-stele lunigianesi. Bordighera: Istituto Internazionale di Studi Liguri.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. 1975. Il museo delle statue-stele Lunigianese. Castelló del Piagnoro Pontremoli. Massa: Istituto Lunigianese dei Castelli.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. 1975/76. La nuova statue stele n.50 ‘Falcinello’ e alcuni appunti sulla tipologia delle statue-stele della Lunigiana e della Corsica. Giornale Storico della Lunigiana, 24–27 (1–4): 206–18.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. 1984. Su la statua stele n. 59 ‘Venelia II’. Archivio Storico per le Province Parmensi, 36 (4): 47–60.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. 1988. Statue Stele Lunigianesi: il museo nel castello del Piagnaro. Genova: Sagep Editrice.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. & Cavalli, G. 1975. Sopra una nuova statua-stele scoperta a Filetto. Studi Lunigianesi, 5: 11–15.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. & Cavalli, G. 1978/79. Sulla nuova statue-stele n. 52 (Mocrone). Studi Lunigianesi, 6–7: 141–45.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. & Cavalli, G. 1982/83. Sulle nuove statue-stele della Lunigiana. Studi Lunigianesi, 12–13: 143–51.Google Scholar
Ambrosi, A.C. & Perazzi, P. 1995/96. Due nuovi frammenti die statue stele rinvenuti in Lunigiana. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche, 47: 411–22.Google Scholar
Anati, E. 1981. Le statue-stele della Lunigiana. I testimoni dell'ultima rivoluzione culturale della preistoria. Milano: Jaca Book.Google Scholar
Asher-Greve, J.A. 1997. The Essential Body: Mesopotamian Conceptions of the Gendered Body. Gender & History, 9(3): 432–61.Google Scholar
Augstein, M. 2009. Der Körper als Zeichen? Deutungsmöglichkeiten von Körperinszenierungen im hallstattzeitlichen Bestattungsritual. In: Raimund, K. & Leskovar, J., eds. Interpretierte Eisenzeiten. Fallstudien, Methoden, Theorie. Tagungsbeiträge der 3. Linzer Gespräche zur Interpretativen Eisenzeitarchäologie. Studien zur Kulturgeschichte von Oberösterreich, 22. Linz: Land Oberösterreich/Oberösterreichisches Landesmuseum, pp. 11–25.Google Scholar
Barfield, L.H. 1995. The Context of Statue-Menhirs. Notizie Archaeologiche Bergomensi, 3: 11–36.Google Scholar
Barfield, L.H. 1998. Gender Issues in North Italian Prehistory. In: Whitehouse, R., ed. Gender and Italian Stereotypes: Challenging the Stereotypes. London: Accordia Research Institute, pp. 143–56.Google Scholar
Barfield, L.H. 2007. Beads and Other Necklace Elements. In: Barfield, L.H., ed. Excavations in the Riparo Valtenesi, Manerba, 1976–1994. Florence: Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, pp. 296–331.Google Scholar
Birdwhistell, R. 1970. Kinesics and Context. Essays on Body Motion Communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bolger, D. 2013. Introduction: Gender Prehstory—The Story So Far. In: Bolger, D., ed. A Companion to Gender Prehistory. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
Breuss, S. 2000/2001. Aus der Leiblichkeit fließt alles in Leben und Kultur der Menschen. Volkskundliche Blicke auf den weiblichen Körper. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 130/ 31: 193–202.Google Scholar
Budin, S.L. 2013. Review: A Companion to Gender Prehistory, Edited by Bolger, D. R. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell 2013. American Journal of Archaeology, 117(4), [accessed 3 December 2013]. DOI:10.3764/ajaonline1174.Budin. Available at: <http://www.ajaonline.org/online-review-book/1667>.Google Scholar
Bulger, T.D. & Joyce, R.A. 2013. Archaeology of Embodied Subjectivities. In: Bolger, D., ed. A Companion to Gender Prehistory. Chichester: Wily Blackwell, pp. 68–85.Google Scholar
Butler, J.P. 1990. Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Casini, S. & Fossati, A.E. 2013. Immagini di dei, guerrieri e donne. Stele, massi incisi e arte rupestre dell'età del Rame in Valcamonica e Valtellina. In: De Marinis, R.C., ed. L'Età del Rame. La pianura padana e le Alpi al tempo di Ötzi. Brescia: Massetti Rodella Editori, pp. 161–96.Google Scholar
Corboud, P. 2009. Les stèles anthropomorphes de la nécropole du Petit-Chasseur à Sion (Valais, Suisse). Bulletin d'Etudes Prehistoriques et Archeologiques Alpines, 20: 9–97.Google Scholar
Dal Rí, L. & Tecchiati, U. 1995. Zur Vor-und Frühgeschichte des mittleren und unteren Vinschgaues. In: Dal Rí, L., Tecchiati, U. & Bassetti, P., eds. Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte von Kastelbell-Tschars und Umgebung. Tschar: Raiffeisenkasse Tschar, pp. 1–143.Google Scholar
D'Anna, A. 2002. Statues-menhirs? Stèles? Dalles anthropomorphes? Ou simplement sculptures préhistorique? In: Philippon, A., ed. Statues-menhirs: des énigmes de pierre venues du fond des âges. Rodez: Éditions du Rouergue, pp. 52–53.Google Scholar
De Marinis, R.C. 1994a. Il fenomeno delle statue-stele e stele antropomorfe dell'età del Rame in Europa. In: Casini, S., ed. Le pietre degli dei: menhir e stele dell'età del rame in Valcamonica e Valtellina. Gorle: Centro Culturale Nicolò Rezzara, pp. 31–58.Google Scholar
De Marinis, R.C. 1994b. La datazione dello stile III A. In: Casini, S., ed. Le pietre degli dei: menhir e stele dell'età del rame in Valcamonica e Valtellina. Gorle: Centro Culturale Nicolò Rezzara, pp. 69–88.Google Scholar
Eicher, J.B. & Roach-Higgins, M. 1993. Definition and Classification of Dress. In: Barnes, R. & Eicher, J.B., eds. Dress and Gender. Making and Meaning in Cultural Contexts. Volume 2. Oxford: Berg Providence, pp. 8–28.Google Scholar
Ellis, H. 1894. Man and Woman: A Study of Secondary and Tertiary Sexual Characters. London: The Walter Scott Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Fausto-Sterlin, A. 2000. Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fedele, F.G. 2011: Origini dell'ideologia cerimoniale centroalpina dell'età del Rame: una “fase zero” di IV millennio? Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 19: 77–100.Google Scholar
Fedele, F.G. 2013a. Origini dell'ideologia cerimoniale centroalpina dell'età del Rame. Una ‘fase zero’ di IV millennio? Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 19: 77–100.Google Scholar
Fedele, F.G. 2013b. La società dell'età del Rame nell'area alpina e prealpina. In: de Marinis, R.C., ed. L'età del Rame. La Pianura Padana e le Alpi al tempo di Ötzi. Roccafranca (Brescia): La compagnia della stampa Massetti Rodella, pp. 45–67.Google Scholar
Ferrando Cabona, I. & Crusi, E. 1980. Storia dell'insediamento in Lunigiana. Genova: Sagep.Google Scholar
Fisher, G. & Loren, D.D. 2003. Embodying Identity in Archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 13 (2): 225–30.Google Scholar
Fossati, A.E., Pedrotti, A. & Nothdurfter, H. 2004. La statue-stele di Laces nel contesto delle statue-stele ‘atesine’. Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 12: 253–64.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1975. Surveiller et punir. La naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1976. Histoire de la sexualite’ 1. La volonte’ de savoir. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Gallay, A. 1995. Les stèles anthropomorphes du site mégalithique du Petit-Chausseur à Sion (Valais, Suisse). Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 3: 167–94.Google Scholar
Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gilchrist, R. 2000. Archaeological Biographies: Realizing Human Lifecycles, -Courses and -Histories. World Archaeology, 31: 325–28.Google Scholar
Haeberle, E.J. 1978. The Sex Atlas. A New Illustrated Guide. New York: The Seabury Press.Google Scholar
Haeberle, E.J. 1983. Die Sexualität des Menschen. Handbuch und Atals. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hansen, S. 2002. ‘Überausstattungen’ in Gräbern und Horten der Frühbronzezeit. In: Müller, J., ed. Vom Endneolithikum zur Frühbronzezeit: Muster sozialen Wandels? (Tagung Bamberg 14.–16. Juni 2001). Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, 90. Bonn: Habelt, pp. 151–73.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 1997. Commentary: The Gender Screen. In: Moore, J. & Scott, E., eds. Invisible People and Processes. Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology. London: Leicester University Press, pp. 75–78.Google Scholar
Hofmann, K.P. 2009. Grabbefunde zwischen sex und gender. In: Rambuscheck, U., ed. Zwischen Diskursanalyse und Isotopenforschung. Methoden der archäologischen Geschlechterforschung. Bericht der 3. Sitzung der AG Geschlechterforschung auf der 78. Tagung des Nordwestdeutschen Verbandes für Altertumsforschung e.V. in Schleswig 2007. Frauen—Forschung—Archäologie, 8. Berlin: Waxmann, pp. 133–61.Google Scholar
Iardella, R., Paribeni, E. & Tosatti, A.M. 2004. Nuovi rinvenimenti in Lunigiana: le statue-stele di Groppoli e Sorano. Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 12: 127–42.Google Scholar
Iardella, R., Landi, S., Paribeni, E. & Tiscornia, I. 2005. Groppoli, un sito con statue stele nella media valle della Magra. Notiziario della Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana, 1: 20–24.Google Scholar
Jäger, U. 2004. Der Körper, der Leib und die Soziologie. Entwurf einer Theorie der Inkorporierung. Königstein: Helmer.Google Scholar
Joyce, R.A. 2005. Archaeology of the Body. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34: 139–58.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, G. 2012. Figuren der Vergangenheit. Die kupferzeitlichen Menhirstatuen aus dem Südalpenraum. Südtirol in Wort und Bild, 1: 16–23.Google Scholar
Knappett, C. & Malafouris, L. 2008. Material Agency. Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Approach. New York: Springer Science & Business Media LLC.Google Scholar
Kuper, H. 1973. Costume and Identity. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 15 (3): 348–67.Google Scholar
Ladurner-Parthanes, M. 1952. Die Algunder Menhire. Fundberichte und Fundgebiet. Der Schlern , 26 (7/8): 310–44.Google Scholar
Larsen, S.L. 2003. Equality for the Sexes in Human Evolution? Early Hominid Sexual Dimorphism and Implications for Mating Systems and Social Behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100 (5): 9103–04.Google Scholar
Lorber, J. 2000. Night to His Day: The Social Construction of Gender. In: Rothenberg, P.S., ed. Race, Class, and Gender in the United States. An Integrated Study, 5th ed. New York: Worth Publishers, pp. 54–65.Google Scholar
Lunz, R. 1973. Ur- und Frühgeschichte Südtirols: Rätsel und Deutung. Bozen: Athesia.Google Scholar
Lunz, R. 1981. Archäologie Südtirols 1: Von den Jägern des Mesolithikums (um 7000 v. Chr.) bis zum Ende des Weströmischen Reiches (476 n. Chr.). Archäologisch-historische Forschung in Tirol, 7. Trento: Manfrini.Google Scholar
Maggiani, A. 1976. Contributo alla statuaria megalitica dell'area lunigianese. Prospettiva, 5: 47–50.Google Scholar
Mannoni, T. 1994. Materiali e tecniche di lavorazione. In: Ratti, M., ed. Antenati di pietra. Statue stele della Lunigiana e archeologia del territorio. Genova: Sagep, pp. 61–68.Google Scholar
Mauss, M. 1936. Les techniques du corps. Journal de Psychologie, 32 (3/4): 271–93.Google Scholar
Meskell, L. 1998. The Irresistible Body and the Seduction of Archaeology. In: Monsterrat, D., ed. Changing Bodies, Changing Meanings. Studies of the Body in Antiquity. London: Routledge, pp. 139–61.Google Scholar
Mezzena, F. 1998a. Le stele antropomorfe nell'area megalitica di Aosta. In: Ambrosio, F., ed. Dei di pietra: La grande statuaria antropomorfa nell'Europa del III millennio a.C./Dieux de pierre: La grande statuaire anthropomophe in Europe au III millènaire avant J. C. Milano: Skira editore & Regione Autonoma Valle d'Aosta, pp. 90–121.Google Scholar
Mezzena, F. 1998b. Le stele antropomorfe in Europa. In: Ambrosio, F., ed. Dei di pietra: La grande statuaria antropomorfa nell'Europa del III millennio a.C. / Dieux de pierre: La grande statuaire anthropomophe in Europe au III millènaire avant J. C. Milano: Skira editore & Regione Autonoma Valle d'Aosta, pp. 14–89.Google Scholar
Moitra, S. 2002. Feminist Thought. Androcentrism, Communication, and Objectivity. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.Google Scholar
Moore, H.L. 1994. A Passion for Difference. Essays in Anthropology and Gender. Cambridge: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Müller-Scheeßel, N. 2008. Auffälligkeiten bei Armhaltungen hallstattzeitlicher Körperbestattungen: Postdeponale Eingriffe, funktionale Notwendigkeiten oder kulturelle Zeichen? In: Kümmel, C., Schweizer, B. & Veit, U., eds. Körperinszenierung—Objektsammlung—Monumentalisierung. Totenritual und Grabkult in frühen Gesellschaften. Archäologische Quellen in kulturwissenschaftlicher Perspektive. Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher, 6. Münster: Waxmann, pp. 517–35.Google Scholar
Museo Archeologico di Aosta 1998. Dei di pietra: La grande statuaria antropomorfa nell'Europa del III millennio a.C./Dieux de pierre: La grande statuaire anthropomophe in Europe au III millènaire avant J. C. Milano: Skira editore & Regione Autonoma Valle d'Aosta.Google Scholar
Museo Delle Statue Stele Lunigianesi Pontremoli. Classificazione. Museo delle Statue Stele Lunigianesi—Castello del Piagnaro Pontremoli. [online] [accessed 1 April 2013]. Available at: <http://www.statuestele.org/ita/122/1/classificazione.htm>>Google Scholar
Nordbladh, J. & Yates, T. 1990. This Perfect Body, This Virigin Test. In: Bapty, I. & Yates, T., eds. Archaeology After Structuralism. Post-Structuralism and the Practice of Archaeology. London: Routledge, pp. 222–37.Google Scholar
Paribeni, E. 2004. Necropoli della Quartareccia (Filattiera, Massa Carrara). In: De Marinis, R.C. & Spadea, G., eds. I Liguri. Un antico popolo europeo tra Alpi e Mediterraneo. Milano: Skira, pp. 399–443.Google Scholar
Paribeni, E., Iardella, R., Tiscornia, I. & Tosatti, A.M. 2012. Lo scavo delle statue-stele di Groppoli ed altre ricerche nel territorio di Mulazzo (MS). Preistoria Alpina, 46 (2): 235–44.Google Scholar
Pedrotti, A. 1993. Uomini di pietra. I ritrovamenti di Arco e il fenomeno delle statue stele nell'arco alpino. Trento: Provincia autonoma di Trento, Servizio Beni Culturali.Google Scholar
Pedrotti, A. 1995a. Le statue-stele e le stele anthropomorfe del Trentino Alto-Adige e del Veneto occidentale. Gruppo atesino, gruppo Brentonico, gruppo della Lessinia. Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 3: 259–80.Google Scholar
Pedrotti, A. 1995b. La statuaria anthropomorfa dell'età del Rame nell'arco alpino. In: Pedrotti, A., ed. Le Statue Stele di Arco: La statuaria antropomorfa alpina nel III millennio a.C.:abbigliamento, fibre tessili e colore. Trento: Museo Civico di Riva del Garda, Ufficio Beni Archologici della Provincia Autonoma di Trento, pp. 11–39.Google Scholar
Pedrotti, A. 1995c. Le statue stele di Arco nel constesto dell'età del Rame nella Piana Benacense. In: Pedrotti, A., ed. Le Statue Stele di Arco: La statuaria antropomorfa alpina nel III millennio a.C.:abbigliamento, fibre tessili e colore. Trento: Museo Civico di Riva del Garda, Ufficio Beni Archologici della Provincia Autonoma di Trento, pp. 41–69.Google Scholar
Pedrotti, A. 1998. Gli elementi d'abbigliamento e d'ornamento nelle statue stele dell'arco alpino. Archéologie en Languedoc, 22: 299–315.Google Scholar
Pedrotti, A. & Tecchiati, U. 2013. Iconografia e simbologia delle statue-stele dell'area atesina e lessinica. In: De Marinis, R.C., ed. L'Età del Rame. La pianura padana e le Alpi al tempo di Ötzi. Brescia: Massetti Rodella Editori, pp. 221–31.Google Scholar
Piccioli, R. 1982. Il frammento di statua stele n.53 ‘Arcola’ del Museo Civico della Spezia. Giornale Storico della Lunigiana e del Territorio Lucense, 33: 91–95.Google Scholar
Rautman, A.E. & Talalay, L.E. 2000. Introduction: Diverse Approaches to the Study of Gender in Archaeology. In: Rautman, A.E., ed. Reading the Body. Representations and Remains in the Archaeological Record. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvannia Press, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Robb, J. 1994. Gender Contraditions, Moral Coalitions, and Inequality in Prehistoric Italy. Journal of European Archaeology, 2 (1): 20–49.Google Scholar
Robb, J. 1997. Female Beauty and Male Violence in Early Italian Society. In: Koloski-Ostrow, A. & Lyons, C., eds. Naked Truths: Women, Sexuality, and Gender in Classical Art and Archaeology. London: Routledge, pp. 42–66.Google Scholar
Robb, J. 2009. People of Stone. Stelae, Personhood, and Society in Prehistoric Europe. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 16 (3): 162–83.Google Scholar
Sax, L. 2002. How Common is Intersex? A Response to Anne Fausto-Sterling. The Journal of Sex Research, 39 (3): 174–78.Google Scholar
Scott, E. 1997. Introduction: On the Incompleteness of Archaeological Narrarives. In: Moore, J. & Scott, E., eds. Invisible People and Processes. Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology. London: Leicester University Press, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Sofaer Derevenski, J. 1997: Linking age and gender as social variables. Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift, 38: 485–93.Google Scholar
Sofaer Derevenski, J. 2007. Engendering Children, Engendering Archaeology. In: Moore, J. & Scott, E., eds. Invisible People and Processes. Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology. London: Leicester University Press, pp. 192–202.Google Scholar
Sørensen, M.L.S. 2000. Gender Archaeology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Stinson, S. 2012. Growth Variation: Biological and Cultural Factors. In: Stinson, S., Bogin, B. & O'Rourke, D., eds. Human Biology. An Evolutionary and Biocultural Perspective, 2nd ed. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 587–636.Google Scholar
Tecchiati, U. 2004. Luoghi di culto e assetti territoriali nell'età del Rame della regione atesina. Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi, 12: 15–30.Google Scholar
Trautner, H.M. 1991. Lehrbuch der Entwicklungspsychologie 2. Theorien und Befunde. Zürich: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, R.D. 1992. Tools the Manmaker: The Cultural Construction of Gender in Italian Prehistory. Accordia Research Papers, 3: 41–53.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, R.D. 2007. Gender Archaeology in Europe. In: Milledge Nelson, S., ed. Worlds of Gender: The Archaeology of Women's Lives around the Globe. Plymouth: AltaMira Press, pp. 139–89.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, R.D. 2013. Gender in Central Mediterranean Prehistory. In: Bolger, D., ed. A Companion to Gender Prehistory. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 480–501.Google Scholar
Zidda, G. 1997. Aspetti iconografici delle stele antropomorfe di Aosta. In: Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, La valle d'Aosta nel quadro della preistoria e protostoria dell'arco alpino centro-occidental, Atti della XXXI Riunione Scientifica. Istituto italiano di preistoria e protostoria, Courmayeur, 2–5 juin 1994, pp. 225–43.Google Scholar