This article was downloaded by: [Dalhousie University]On: 05 October 2014, At: 15:08Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of theHistory of SportPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fhsp20

Lacrosse History, a History of One Sportor Two? A Comparative Analysis ofMen's Lacrosse and Women's Lacrossein the United StatesMelissa C. Wisera

a Department of Human Sciences, The Ohio State University,Columbus, OH, USAPublished online: 07 Jul 2014.

To cite this article: Melissa C. Wiser (2014) Lacrosse History, a History of One Sportor Two? A Comparative Analysis of Men's Lacrosse and Women's Lacrosse in the UnitedStates, The International Journal of the History of Sport, 31:13, 1656-1676, DOI:10.1080/09523367.2014.930709

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2014.930709

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

Lacrosse History, a History of One Sport or Two? A ComparativeAnalysis of Men’s Lacrosse andWomen’s Lacrosse in the United States

Melissa C. Wiser*

Department of Human Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

Men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse share a name, but their histories differ. Bothsports developed and became organised in close concert with the race, class and genderexpectations of the eras. As a result, the sports began with rules that reflected thosenorms. Over time, the sports developed separately and generated unique forms, even asthey sustained moments of interaction. Therefore, men’s lacrosse and women’slacrosse are different sports. Using comparisons as the mode through which to view thesports, this article explores the organised beginnings of men’s lacrosse and women’slacrosse to establish that the sports began and continued within identity-based norms.Through the discussion of the practical distinctions and critical understandings of thedifferences between the games, the author poses that these dissimilarities are relevantin considerations of the separate sports as they continue to change in the larger USsporting context. As sports such as basketball demonstrate, these arguments matterbecause broad-scale comparisons of women’s sports to men’s frequently renderwomen’s sport participants, and the sports they play, inferior. Notably, women’slacrosse participants also employed comparisons to distinguish and claim their historyas unique from that of men’s lacrosse. A comparative analysis highlights points ofdisjuncture between the sports and contextualises the importance of gender in thearticulations of difference.

Keywords: men’s lacrosse; women’s lacrosse; tewaarathon; sport rules; sportcomparisons

Usage of the term lacrosse to refer to men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse in the USA

generates confusion. Those who are not familiar with the two sports frequently assume that

they are the same sport played by different sexes. In actuality, men’s lacrosse and

women’s lacrosse are different sports in terms of the history, the rules and course of play.

Nevertheless, the sports share a singular name. An understanding of the historical

relationship between the sports clarifies how two sports with one name can be so disparate.

In 1994, sport scholars Susan Forbes and Lori Livingston published a similar project and

declared that ‘any connection between women’s field lacrosse, the aboriginal game and/or

men’s field lacrosse is circuitous at best’.1 Despite the two decades since this claim,

presumptions regarding the related nature of the sports continue. Thus, this article brings

together academic and popular histories of men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse to trace

the convergent and divergent beginnings and expansion of the sports. Through the usage of

comparisons, it demonstrates why the sports are distinct games, while it also highlights the

complex relationship between them. Regarding the future of the sports, women’s lacrosse

is the focal point, as its longevity of existence is more so in question.

q 2014 Taylor & Francis

*Email: wiser.13@osu.edu

The International Journal of the History of Sport, 2014

Vol. 31, No. 13, 1656–1676, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2014.930709

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

In order to establish the sports as distinct, this paper is separated into sections. First, the

role of comparisons is discussed to review how comparisons between men’s and women’s

sports impact views of women’s sports in particular. Second, the academic treatments of

the lacrosses are assessed. Third, the historical trajectories of the sports are traced using

academic and popular texts. Fourth, participants’ perceptions, as collected from interviews

with contemporary figures and coaching and rules guides, are viewed to see how, over

time, comparisons were used to affirm differences. Finally, the concrete differences

between men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse in relation to rules and course of play in

1993 are charted in order to establish a baseline of the two sports for considerations of the

future. These numerous steps function collectively to declare the sports as different and to

shift how the reader, particularly one who is unfamiliar with the lacrosses, understands

how the two sports have correlated over time. This work matters because it contextualises

and challenges perceptions of women’s lacrosse as inferior to men’s lacrosse, and it

emphasises the need to recall these issues as women’s lacrosse continues in the future.

Comparisons between Men’s and Women’s Sports

Comparisons and articulations of differences between men’s and women’s sports are not

new or unique to men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse.2 Repeatedly, leaders in the USA

within organised women’s sports and physical activity have modified, adjusted or aligned

rules in women’s sports to correspond with the men’s. Basketball is perhaps the most

extensively researched women’s sport and serves as a productive example to consider

what is at stake when sport rules align. After a century of modified rules, women’s

basketball came to resemble men’s in order to challenge the social hierarchy in sports and

dominant ideas on the capabilities of women’s bodies.3 According to historian Mary Jo

Festle, eventually in the 1990s ‘women’s basketball discarded the differing rules and

adopted men’s practices, seeking legitimation through sameness.’4 Despite this move,

women’s basketball remained marked as inferior in broader society. Sociologist Michael

Messner claimed that the remaining differences between men’s and women’s basketball,

as well as the minimal media attention given to women’s basketball, ghettoised the sport in

relation to the dominant, masculine centre of the sporting culture at large.5 Even though

changes to women’s basketball were implemented for the women’s game to appear to be

more similar to that of the men’s, female athletes have continued to be considered inferior

basketball players in relation to the male. This move towards sameness may be instructive

for considerations of men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse within a broader sport context.

Ice hockey is another example of a popular sport for both men and women and is

particularly instructive in regards to rules related to physical contact. Both sport

sociologist Nancy Theberge and communications scholar Kelly Poniatowski demonstrated

the importance of sport rules and the perception of these rules in relation to athletes’ and

spectators’ understandings of gender in ice hockey. Theberge showed that men’s

and women’s ice hockey largely follow the same rules, depending on the league and age of

participants, with the exception of body checking. Many women’s leagues, although not

all, prohibit this form of contact. Through her ethnographic work, Theberge established

that the similar, yet different, rules serve to situate women’s ice hockey as an alternative,

and adaptation, of the more popular men’s game; ‘the construction of women’s hockey

exists in an uneasy tension with the dominant model of the men’s game’.6 Even when

women’s leagues permitted body checking, many of the women she interviewed felt that

the game was more dangerous because some of the players had not been properly taught

how to check or they simply had less experience checking. They located checking as a skill

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1657

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

that women can learn, but they also claimed that men are inherently superior at checking

because of their strength. Importantly, Theberge identified a paradox here; women and

their accomplishments in ice hockey ‘provide dramatic refutation of the myth of female

frailty, they also offer apparent confirmation of the categorical differences between the

sexes: women may play hockey and do so very well – but not as well as men’.7 Here, rule

differences and participants’ interpretation of these differences intersect with gendered

notions of the body. The creation, perception and implementation of sport rules are located

in complex social interactions.

In addition to participants, how others interpret the rules impact broader perceptions of

the sport and its athletes. Poniatowski found that commentators during the 2006 Winter

Olympic Games made frequent references to the illegal body checking in women’s ice

hockey and the greater amount of protective equipment that the women athletes wore in

comparison with the men, despite the lack of checking. This amount of equipment and the

limited contact promoted the idea that women needed to be more protected in a collision

sport. Nevertheless, women were acceptably participating in ice hockey. Therefore, she

argued that there is an increased allowance for women to be physically active and

feminine, yet women continued to be considered inferior to men. Then, the presence of

rule differences and the perception thereof serve to uphold hegemonic masculinity and sex

differences.8 Both Theberge’s and Poniatowski’s works highlight that societal

construction of rules, and rules concerning physical contact specifically, serve to reify

the notion of gender differences. Significantly, the examples above show that similar rules

do not decrease the perceptions of male dominance in sport.

Through these examples, it becomes evident that the historical relationship between

men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse is crucial to an understanding of how the women’s

sport should continue and how that continuation correlates with societal gender relations.

Within a male-dominated mainstream sport setting that is also engaging with

considerations of gender equity, a common perception among sport activists is that

women’s sports should strive to be identical in rules to the men’s. This structural similarity

of a women’s sport to a men’s would illustrate women’s advancement in sport, because the

under-represented group would then participate in the same manner as the dominant

group. However, such a path presumes that men’s sports are and should be the standard

against which women’s sports are compared. And remaining alterations to the rules are

utilised to highlight men’s athletic superiority. In reference to men’s lacrosse and women’s

lacrosse specifically, a consideration is whether the sports have been similar enough even

to be entered on a path towards them being presented as the same sport.

Academic Treatments of Men’s Lacrosse and Women’s Lacrosse

As exemplified by the works referenced in the previous section, many sport forms with

men’s and women’s versions have scholarly pieces devoted to their study. Men’s lacrosse

and women’s lacrosse, however, have received such attention only minimally. There are

numerous coaching guides that serve as valuable primary sources, but there is little

secondary literature on either sport.9 Notable exceptions to this claim are Colonel

Alexander M. Weyand and former men’s lacrosse player and coach Milton R. Roberts’s

The Lacrosse Story, historian Donald M. Fisher’s Lacrosse: A History of the Game and

former Lacrosse Scotland President and coach Jane Claydon’s St. Leonards: Cradle of

Lacrosse.10 The first two books address women’s lacrosse rather tangentially. Fisher

openly acknowledged that his work focused on men’s field lacrosse and relations between

native and non-native communities.11 Thus, he dedicated only a few pages to the women’s

1658 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

game. Weyand and Roberts included a chapter titled ‘Distaff Lacrosse’ in their book.12

This archaic term, derived from an implement used to spin wool, refers to the domestic

sphere; the association of women with the domestic sphere in relation to a competitive

sport was at least problematic, if not indicative of marginalisation of the women’s game.

Although these works are sweeping histories of lacrosse in name, the authors dedicated

few pages to and barely analysed the state of women in women’s lacrosse. Evidently,

women’s lacrosse was not the authors’ priority.

Pieces that focus primarily or exclusively on women’s lacrosse are also few. Claydon’s

work is a notable exception. She compiled a descriptive history which included invaluable

archival documents and photos of the beginnings of women’s lacrosse in Scotland. It also

introduces how women’s lacrosse travelled to the USA. Few theses and dissertations centre

on women’s lacrosse as well, and many that do are quantitative studies that consider the

biomechanics or psychological components of women’s lacrosse.13 An exception is former

Ohio University women’s lacrosse coach Catherine Brown’s dissertation on fair play in the

sport. Although still quantitative, a measure of the spirit of the game inherently has some

qualitative assessments, and the purpose of her study was to gauge to what extent and in

what manner a women’s sport controlled by women supported principles of fair play, as the

sport expanded to and within the Midwestern USA in regards to participant numbers and

organisational affiliation.14 Certainly there were historical evaluations contained within such

a piece. Clearly, women’s lacrosse has received little focused, scholarly attention.

In addition to women’s lacrosse-specific works, academic treatments of women’s sport

history overlook women’s lacrosse as well. Prominent broad-based women’s sport texts

contain minimal reference to the sport. Historian Susan Cahn’s widely respected book

Coming on Strong: Gender and Sexuality in Twentieth-Century Women’s Sports includes a

passing reference to the sport, and Festle’s work Playing Nice: Politics and Apologies in

Women’s Sports has minimal reference to it.15 Sport historian Allen Guttmann discussed

its beginnings at schools in Great Britain but did not extend his analysis beyond this initial

development.16 Expansive and comprehensive texts do not meaningfully include the sport.

In contrast to Cahn’s, Festle’s and Guttmann’s texts, there are two notable exceptions.

One of the earliest academic accounts of women’s sports history in the USA included the

most information regarding women’s lacrosse in sociocultural and historical studies of

sport. The American Woman in Sport, co-authored by historian Ellen Gerber, sociocultural

scholar Jan Felshin, psychologist Pearl Berlin and physiologist Waneen Wyrick, is a text

that addresses the female athlete through multi-disciplinary frameworks. This work

includes women’s lacrosse in three of the four listed sections.17 Although the inclusion of

women’s lacrosse in the historical and sociocultural sections is largely descriptive in

approach, the sheer number of pages dedicated to the sport is impressive when compared

to other texts. Another prominent example is historian Kathleen McCrone’s work on

English women at the turn of the twentieth century. She analysed the development of

women’s lacrosse as a sport and its relationship to field hockey.18 With only a few

exceptions, women’s lacrosse in particular is under-represented in the literature.

Likely due, in part, to the limited literature, even scholars in sport history and

sociocultural studies of sport lack a foundational understanding of the development of

men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse. As a result, it is imperative to piece together the

existing works to assess how the sports relate. Such efforts demonstrate in what manner

men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse have progressed with respect to each other. Notably,

the relationship is complex. This grounding fosters understandings of what is at stake in

how women’s lacrosse will change in the future and whether the sport will remain a

distinct one.

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1659

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

History of Multiple Lacrosses

Spiritual Meanings

Much of what is known academically of ‘lacrosse’ prior to the publication of the first rule

book is that which was recorded by missionaries and other European settlers in North

America. The first written record of lacrosse was from Huron Country in the 1630s.19 Prior

to white intervention, traditional Native American lacrosse represented numerous

meanings for its participants and their tribes. The game served as both a training ground

for combat and a tool of diplomacy among tribes.20 Men were the only participants in the

matches; women were spectators. According to Fisher, the game also ‘reinforced each

[native] nation’s unique relationship with the Creator and embodied Man’s relationship

with Nature’, and thus maintained a strong spiritual connotation.21

This focus on written history has been challenged. In 1978, during a period of public

identity-based activism, as evidenced by the Red Power and American Indian

Movement,22 the North American Indian Traveling College (NAITC) published a

counter-narrative and reclaimed this absence of written accounts and praised the tradition

of oral history.23 The members argued that history, as recorded by white men, was based

on their cultural values and not those of the native peoples. The introduction explained:

Much has been written in the record books about the accomplishment of our White brotherswho admired, learned and helped develop the game into its present forms, field and boxlacrosse. We appreciate their contributions, but feel that we have been pushed out of the wayof recognition. We will be pushed no longer.24

The publication of the text was an act of resistance against the dominant historical

narrative.

According to the NAITC, tewaarathon was a gift from the Creator and its practice

served numerous purposes. It was played to bring the Creator amusement, to recognise

those on Earth who had brought honor to the Nation, and to thank the Creator for allowing

the medicine people to continue to stay with the Nation to aid those who were younger. In

addition, tewaarathon was a means to demonstrate the Nation’s remembrance of the gift of

tewaarathon when a member was ill; the hope was that the Creator would look favourably

on this recognition and spare the individual.25 Tewaarathon demonstrated spiritual

significance, but it also acted as a medium with which to settle disputes between feuding

parties. Even then a spiritual connection was maintained, as the Creator determined the

outcome.26 Between 1700 and 1800 the connection of tewaarathon to the Creator waned

when someMohawks converted to Christianity and tewaarathon was played more for sport

than for spiritual purposes.27 It is important to review both historical narratives to consider

how the sports developed.

Beginnings of ‘Organised’ Men’s Lacrosse

Once men’s lacrosse entered the process of institutionalisation in the mid-1800s, its

construction shifted from that of a spiritual practice to that of an organised contest. Sport

scholar Don Morrow explained institutionalisation as a process through which ‘a way of

playing lacrosse has become the way of playing the sport’.28 Men’s lacrosse developed

from the Canadian dentist William George Beers’ interpretation and modifications to the

Mohawk ball game tewaarathon in the latter half of the nineteenth century.29 The name

lacrosse, however, preceded Beers’ involvement. French settlers used the term la crosse

(game of the crozier) to describe Native American stick and ball games in general, and

thereafter the term remained.30 Many Native American and First Nations peoples have had

1660 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

versions of a stick and ball game, but Beers’ understanding of the game developed from

the Mohawk’s specifically.31 The sport now known as men’s lacrosse is an appropriated

form of these practices.32

AlthoughBeerswas not the firstwhiteman to play lacrosse, he is frequently referred to as

the ‘father ofmodern lacrosse’ for creating awritten record of the rules that first standardised

men’s lacrosse in 1860.33 In 1867, Beers published a second rule book that dictated there

would be 12 teammembers on the field per side, officialswould regulate play, and in order to

win, a team had to be the first to score three goals. The year 1867 also saw the creation of the

first national governing body for the sport in Canada, the National Lacrosse Association

(NLA).34 In 1869, he published a complete rule book for lacrosse.35 Morrow identified

Beers’ rules, advocating for those rules in regards to Canadian nationalism, and the NLA’s

creation of a league structure as significant features in determining the how of the game.36

These alterations were racially charged. Through such changes to the Native American

game, Beers hoped to turn the Native American version into a rationalised sport that would

distinguish the white Canadian participants from the native ones. Fisher stated that

‘according to Beers, lacrosse should be viewed as a symbolic torch passed from the noble

savages of primitive Canada to modern progressive gentlemen of a nation-state’.37 Canada

became federated in the year 1867 and men’s lacrosse functioned as a vehicle for that

nationalism. Through participation in Canada’s supposed national game, male players

would learn masculinity, character and pride of country. This participation specifically

utilised First Nations peoples’ practices as means to distinguish a Canadian identity from a

US American one. Sport scholar Michael Robidoux explained that this claiming of

customs ‘is not to say that Canadian nationalists aligned themselves with First Nations

peoples, but rather claimed mastery over these traditions which produced a uniquely

Canadian character’.38 Native endeavours were utilised as a means to establish racial and

national superiority for white, middle-class, male Canadians.

In fact, through rules, men’s lacrosse would highlight white superiority. Beers justified

the standardisation of the field length as shorter than that which the Native Americans

typically used because

whites have only ever beaten the Indians because they played on smaller fields than the latterare accustomed to; and there is no doubt but that if the red skins had goals half a mile apart, thewhites would seldom, if ever, get a chance to touch the ball.39

Increased regulations and order were understood as a means for whites to demonstrate

supremacy in a controlled environment; a field with limitless distance, or a lack of

confinement, was seen to be to the Native Americans’ advantage. Superiority would be

demonstrated through control. In Native American contests, the field size could vary

substantially, even up to a mile-and-a-half long. In 1869, Beers explained that field size

and the number of players should be proportionate. ‘The distance from one goal to the

other should be proportioned by the number of players; two hundred yards is a fair length

for twelve players a side.’40 His decision to standardise the field length was intended to

change the game from that which Native Americans were accustomed to in order to claim

dominance, not only of the white race but of a civil society.

In the USA, men’s lacrosse developed differently than in Canada, but there were

similarities in the notions of race and class conflict, although they expressed themselves in

manners unique to the differing nationalities and political environments. At the turn of

the century, white, middle-class, protestant men experienced a crisis in masculinity.

The church had become increasingly populated by supposedly effeminate men whose

interests focused on scholarly pursuits more so than physical endeavours; middle-

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1661

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

management-level positions in corporations required less physical than mental engagement.

As a result of these overlapping factors, several movements rooted in ideals of muscular

Christianity and the strenuous life (promoted by former President Theodore Roosevelt)

advocated for artificial physical pursuits, such as camping and sport participation. Such

engagement through schools and organisations, for instance the YMCA and the Boy Scouts

of America, fostered boys and men to build character rooted in physical activity and self-

reliance. Sports were a vehicle to challenge the effeminacy of men.41

Similarly, Fisher acknowledged the impact of social control in determining who

participated in men’s lacrosse. The sport thrived among educationally and socio-economically

elite institutions, such as the Ivy League schools and John Hopkins University, and

preparatory high schools served as feeder programmes to the institutions of higher education.

Schools advocated for men’s lacrosse as an invented activity through which men of class

could learn school spirit and develop a classed, masculine character.42 Fisher claimed that

because American society regarded American Indians as savages . . . lacrosse enthusiasts’public celebration of their game as native probably undermined any potential for multiclasssupport. After all, only well-to-do sportsmen felt secure enough about the alleged superiorityof their race and class to associate themselves with Native Americans in any way.43

Through the public depiction of Native Americans as primitive and their game as

romantic, those whose own social worth was in question largely avoided the game. Those

in the upper class whose social superiority was already confirmed had more flexibility in

their sport affiliations. Thus, men’s lacrosse’s participants consisted either of the ‘savages’

themselves or those who were far superior and in no way in danger of slipping into

savagery. Men’s lacrosse was unabashedly a sport for the social elite.

On-field competitions, Fisher suggested, were representative of broader racial

conflicts. He stated that the men’s lacrosse field, for Native Americans, ‘furnished an

opportunity to prevent total racial subordination’.44 Through participating in the

modernised version of their heritage’s game, Native Americans sought to reclaim social

status. The sport offered Native Americans a unique venue in colonial relations to exhibit

superiority to the whites, the colonisers. The white competitors, however, interpreted such

contests differently. According to Fisher, ‘lacrosse men tolerated [Native Americans] so

long as [they] knew [their] inferior status’.45 Regardless of which squad reigned supreme,

the men’s lacrosse field served as a contested territory that re-inscribed racial hierarchy

through contests between Native Americans and whites.

Although unique to differing social dynamics of the nations, men’s lacrosse in Canada

and in the USA shared similarities in that the sport’s progression correlated with race,

gender and class expectations of the region. After the early decades of the twentieth

century, the sport embodied various iterations. Men’s box lacrosse, a mostly indoor

adaptation of the sport, developed in the 1920s as a means to utilise ice hockey facilities in

the summer months and became the primary version of lacrosse played by men in

Canada.46 Field lacrosse dominated for men in the USA.

Women’s Lacrosse Beginnings

Similar to men’s sports, the development of women’s sports and physical activities were

rooted in social expectations of the times. In the first third of the twentieth century,

educators in the USA balanced a desire for women to be physically active with an

expectation to conform to white, middle-class, heterosexual femininity. In addition,

scientific notions that women were ill equipped for rigorous bodily endeavours remained.

For instance, women would have less energy to exert and they were to be mindful of their

1662 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

energy expenditure during their menstrual cycle for fears of endangering the body.47

Women’s lacrosse grew in this tradition of women’s physical education.

Women’s lacrosse was first popular in Scotland and then was imported to and

expanded within the USA. There is no exact event that sparked the beginning of women’s

lacrosse, but there are records of physical educators at St Leonards School in Scotland

attending men’s games in Montreal, Canada, in 1884, and then they taught the game to

their students.48 According to Claydon’s book, a diary account by Clara, Lady Rayleigh of

a match of ‘the Indian game of La Crosse played between twelve Montrealists and twelve

Indians’ stated: ‘It is pretty and exciting, something between lawn tennis and football – I

could have watched it for hours!’49 Miss Lumsden, a former Headmistress at St Leonards,

described it as ‘a wonderful game, beautiful and graceful. (I was so charmed with it that I

introduced it at St. Leonards.)’50 Both Claydon and McCrone referenced this letter in their

respective works. They explained that Lumsden had already left St Leonards by the year

of this match, but they assumed that Lumsden shared her appreciation of the sport with

Miss Dove, her successor, who then likely started women’s lacrosse at St Leonards.51 In

1890, women’s lacrosse was officially added to the school’s programme.52 After the turn

of the century, women’s lacrosse spread to other colleges and universities in Britain.53

Women’s lacrosse was then a recognised game.

Although earlier attempts were made to encourage participation among women,

women’s lacrosse did not become popular in the USA until the late 1920s and the 1930s

when physical educators who studied in Europe transported the game to their places of

employment.54 Rosabelle Sinclair, whom Claydon referred to as the ‘Grand Dame

of Lacrosse’, was born in Hughesofca, South Russia. She grew up in the USA and then

attended St. Leonards School. Upon completing her education, Sinclair moved to the USA

again and in 1925 was appointed as the Athletic Director at Bryn Mawr School in

Baltimore. Shortly thereafter, she introduced women’s lacrosse to the school and formed

what is considered to be the oldest team in the country.55

Contemporaneously with Sinclair, Joyce Cran, originally from Scotland, undertook

efforts to include women’s lacrosse at her place of employment, Wellesley College. In

1931, Cran, Sinclair and others formed the United States Women’s Lacrosse Association

(USWLA) and Cran served as the first President.56 Women’s lacrosse developed within

physical education curricula at institutions of higher learning, high schools and through

club teams. In addition, the transatlantic exchange of knowledge continued through

touring teams, the first of which travelled from Britain to the USA in 1934.57 Up until the

final decades of the twentieth century, England and the USA maintained a relationship of

exchanging knowledge.

Both in the USA and Britain, women’s lacrosse and field hockey had overlapping

constituencies, especially during the initial years of women’s lacrosse development. In

fact, the USWLA was founded at the Mount Pocono field hockey camp hosted by

Constance Applebee, a key figure in fostering the growth of field hockey in the USA.58

The sports shared not only participants but also organisers’ attempts to meet the ideals of

white, upper-class femininity. Applebee, while director of physical education at Bryn

Mawr College near Philadelphia, promoted women’s physical exertion but in a manner

that maintained a balance with social ideals. Women at elite institutions played field

hockey in kilts and within a single-sex environment; as a result, they were spared some of

the ridicule that women in ‘mannish’ sports experienced, even though they maintained a

high level of competition.59 Women’s lacrosse faced a slightly different situation, as

men’s lacrosse was already established in the USA. Thus, advocates called for restraint

from the participants, so that the women’s lacrosse players would be immediately

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1663

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

distinguishable from their male counterparts. Rules that limited women’s physical contact

in the course of play exemplify a distinction made to uphold classed notions of acceptable

behaviour for women.60

Although the sports appeared to have a positive exchange with each other, there was

tension between the women’s lacrosse and field hockey factions as they fought over

participants. McCrone explained that field hockey supporters in England feared that they

would lose players to women’s lacrosse and thus propagated their game as the safer and

more interesting one. Women’s lacrosse advocates, in contrast, claimed that their sport

enabled women to maintain beautiful movements and upright posture.61 According to

Fisher, in 1929 in the USA at the American Physical Education Association convention,

Cran announced that women’s lacrosse was an ‘ideal game for girls’ and that it was

superior to field hockey because of the posture the athletes maintained during the course of

play.62 Women’s lacrosse strove to be an aerial game, while field hockey was oriented

towards the ground. Thus, there was a potential variance in posture for the participants. For

women’s lacrosse, in particular, field hockey played an important role in defining the sport

in both countries. Notably, the sports’ backers utilised social norms to bolster support for

each game, and the physical requirements of women’s lacrosse specifically promoted and

perpetuated classed, and racialised expectations of femininity.

Perceptions of Women’s Lacrosse History

From these brief descriptions, it is evident that men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse have

some historical similarities. For women’s lacrosse an initial point of contact was women

watching a men’s game and then translating it for their purposes into a school setting. It is

also evident that men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse experienced different points of

origin and then developed separately. Indeed, the forms even took migratory paths through

different nations.

Historians have exhibited varying understandings of how men’s lacrosse and women’s

lacrosse have related to each other over time. According to McCrone, women’s lacrosse

rules in the early 1900s in Britain were intended to be less strenuous than the men’s. For

example, the field was smaller, halves were shorter, body contact and checking were

prohibited, shooting from within the crease was banned and guarding one’s own crosse

was disallowed.63 Fisher also suggested that women’s lacrosse developed through

adaption of the men’s game. He explained the trajectory of women’s lacrosse as follows:

Originated by Iroquois Indians, modernized by Canadian gentlemen, adopted by Englishsportsmen, and feminized for British schoolgirls, women’s lacrosse in Britain andthen America was as much a product of Victorian sporting culture as it was of NativeAmericans.64

Both historians presented the women’s rules as modified versions of the men’s, which

implies the primacy of men’s lacrosse.

Other scholars queried whether women’s lacrosse truly was derivative of men’s.

Gerber expressed both a related and a separate history of the sports.

The modified English game is the basis for the American women’s game, while the AmericanIndian game is the basis for the American men’s game.65

Forbes offered yet another interpretation of the path:

In reality, although it initially bore some similarity to the men’s game (e.g., number of playerson the field, names of playing positions, shape of sticks/crosses), women’s lacrosse isconnected to the men’s game and to the indigenous sport only in roundabout ways.66

1664 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

Indeed, Rosabelle Sinclair understood the sports to be different.

Lacrosse, as girls play it, is an orderly pastime that has little in common with the men’s tribalwarfare version except the long-handled racket or crosse that gives the sport its name. It’s truethat the object in both the men’s and women’s lacrosse is to send a ball through a goal by meansof the racket, but whereas men resort to brute strength the women depend solely on skill.67

Certainly, Sinclair utilised loaded language that pointed to racial stereotypes and socio-

economic class expectations, but she also clearly situated women’s lacrosse as distinct

from men’s lacrosse in her own era.

Participants also interpreted the history of their sport in a myriad of manners. As

exemplified by Theberge’s and Pointowski’s works, perceptions of the sports and how the

sports are compared to each other, whether by participants or by others, reproduce gender

norms that situate the women’s sport as inferior to the men’s. Through the following

examples in this section, it becomes evident that participants employed comparisons in

order to understand the history of their sport or they used comparisons to reject the premise

of comparisons; meaning, they strove to keep men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse on

separate tracks, so that the development of each would remain as such. Importantly,

participants utilised comparisons to understand the sport.

Claydon resisted the notion that women’s lacrosse was a modified version of men’s

lacrosse. In conversation, she explained that ‘the two games, as far as [she knew], were the

same initially’. After reviewing the first rule book for women, which included the laws of

(men’s) lacrosse with the women’s interpretations immediately following in italics, she

determined, ‘I think it was about the 1930s that the men started to change and the women’s

game, I think, is a little bit more close to what was the original game.’68 Claydon’s

description of an early rule book pointed to the idea that men and women shared rules and

not that women’s were modified from men’s. However, the inclusion of separate italics for

women specifically points to noted differences in the rules.

According to her understandings, women’s lacrosse was more similar to organised

men’s lacrosse’s earlier iterations, and then the men’s game changed.

And then the men went to helmets and so on and went off on a tangent, and the women, I think,stayed on the straight and narrow until relatively recently, (i.e., ’70s, ’80s), when things beganto change with their restraining lines and boundaries and so on. I mean otherwise I think it wasquite traditional. I really don’t know, but that’s my understanding.69

Not only did Claydon express related histories, but she also implied that women’s lacrosse

was a purer version of the game. Men’s lacrosse travelled off of a path, while the women

maintained it.

This idea has been expressed elsewhere. A 1989 coaching guide written by former US

Team member and Temple’s head women’s lacrosse coach, Tina Sloan Green, and former

coach and athletic director at Dartmouth, Agnes Bixler Kurtz, explained the relationship as

the following:

The men’s rules have changed drastically, but the game women play is very similar [to Beers’1869 rule book]. Women still play with twelve players and still use the original names for thepositions except for those known as fielders. The original players known as fielders are nameddefense wings, attack wings, and homes. The women still play without boundaries. The ruleabout players stopping on the whistle when a foul occurs is still in effect. Players may movewhen the umpire says ‘play’. All of the original rules about fouls still apply.70

These two examples operate complexly to re-establish the position of women’s

lacrosse. Identifying women’s lacrosse as the purer game, or more true to the original

Native American stick and ball games, utilises an essentialist notion of gender. Women,

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1665

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

and by extension the sport they play, are pure and uncorrupted in these accounts. Here,

participants rely on comparisons to extol the women’s version and to distance themselves

from that of men’s.

Women’s lacrosse participants also lauded their own origin story. Dottie McKnight,

former USWLA Executive Director from 1996 to 1998, responded negatively to a

comment made in an interview about women’s lacrosse being adapted from men’s. She

asserted her view and identified Margaret Boyd as ‘the godmother of it all’ and Boyd’s

book as a critical component of the sport’s expansion. Boyd, former captain of the All-

England team, first president of the International Federation for Women, and teacher and

coach of women’s lacrosse in Britain and the USA, first published her guide Lacrosse:

Playing and Coaching in 1959.71 McKnight continued, ‘My brief understanding, I would

not say that in this country [USA] it originated [as] adapted from the men. I would say it

came from Margaret Boyd and the Brits.’72 Claydon similarly relayed the importance of

Boyd. During the interview she referred to Boyd’s book as ‘the sort of Bible we were

brought up on’.73 Both McKnight and Claydon, each from different sides of the Atlantic

Ocean, understood Boyd not only to be a primary figure in teaching women’s lacrosse but

also in translating it for those who may not have been originally familiar with the sport.

They located a distinct relevant figure that the women’s game did not share with the men’s.

Coaching and rule guides from the 1960s and 1970s demonstrate an increased anxiety

regarding the potential loss of sport due to others’ lack of knowledge of differences and

presumptions of what should be the standard for comparison. For instance, former player

and executive board member of the United States Field Hockey Association and the

USWLA, Anne Lee Delano, began her instructional guide with the following:

‘What’s in a name?’ seems an appropriate question with which to open this book. The namelacrosse has perhaps been detrimental to its growth as a game for girls. Either the sport iscompletely unknown, or, if known, is associated only with men’s participation.74

Delano emphasised sport difference and rejected notions of similarities. In the Division for

Girls and Women’s Sports rule guide, former US National Team and Touring Team

member Nathalie Smith articulated a need to assert differences as well.

I do not object to ‘borrowing’ skills and techniques from the men’s game, or any otherinnovations in skills and strategy – if they lead to greater skill, freedom, and creativity withinwomen’s lacrosse . . . If one wants to play a different game, she should call it by its true name –box lacrosse, mini-lacrosse, 7-a-side lacrosse, men’s lacrosse – but not women’s lacrosse.75

In this example, Smith declared women’s lacrosse to be distinct from other lacrosse-

related sports, while she also acknowledged a value in the other versions.

Consistently over time women’s lacrosse participants have asserted that the sports are

different, which suggests that there was a need to assert it. Frequent comparisons in text

imply that there was a tendency to compare, perhaps which resulted in a tendency to resist

associationswithmen’s lacrosse.Women’s lacrosse advocates actively utilised comparisons

to situate their sport as different from the other sport. Men’s lacrosse plays a critical role in

how women’s lacrosse participants understand women’s lacrosse. Importantly, women’s

lacrosse participants understood their sport as uniqueand separate from themen’s throughout

the century. Simultaneously, they utilised men’s lacrosse as a means to define their own,

struggling to define women’s lacrosse over and against the male version of the game.

These different examples and perceptions demonstrate that men’s lacrosse and

women’s lacrosse have undeniably related histories, but they are not co-linear ones.

Indeed, some aspects of women’s lacrosse existed in men’s lacrosse at an earlier time.

These examples also highlight that participants’ perceptions of the history of the sports

1666 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

vary and actively resist the notion that the women’s game is derived from men’s. Although

there is not an established history of women’s lacrosse that definitively locates its

development in isolation from or in relation to men’s lacrosse in the USA, it is evident that

men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse developed independently even as they shared

moments of influence. Throughout the twentieth century, women’s lacrosse participants

also utilised the distinct paths and differences to justify and explain their sport.

In summary, understanding women’s lacrosse as modified from men’s lacrosse is too

simplistic an interpretation. Certainly the sports had at times similar objectives in play.

They were also rooted in differing race, class and gender dynamics of the times; some

differences may be related to those varying expectations. But the result is a game that

looks and feels different and has experienced a complex development and history.

Through comparisons, whether named as such or not, women’s participants made sense of

women’s lacrosse for themselves and then conveyed their understandings to others

through published works. They actively resisted the centre of men’s sport.

Rules Comparison

One means to visually determine to what extent the sports actually differ in play is through

a discussion of the rules themselves. As exemplified by Theberge and Poniatowski, sports

rules are a relevant area of analysis. They point to the constraints and limits placed on

bodies in a physical contest or activity. To highlight variances in course of play, some

prominent differences between men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse in 1993 in the USA

in regards to equipment, time, personnel, field markings and their subsequent meaning in

relation to play on the fields are displayed in Table 1. In the USA, 1992 marked the

beginning of substantial organisational changes in the governance structure of both sports

that culminated in the creation of US Lacrosse, the national governing body for men’s

lacrosse and women’s lacrosse.76 As the discussions that ultimately led to the structural

union of the sports began in earnest in 1992, 1993 is an appropriate selection to discern

how the rules compared early in the negotiation process. In addition, 1993 is just one year

prior to the publication of Forbes and Livingston’s piece.77

It is evident from a cursory review that the sports were wholly distinct. The fields bore

no visible similarities other than the crease/goal circle. The sports oriented themselves

differently within a similar function. The men’s sticks were expected to have pockets,

whereas the women’s sticks were not permitted to have one. In addition, the status of one

sport represented an earlier version of the other. Women’s lacrosse positions utilised

terminology and conceptualisations articulated in Beers’ early rule books, whereas men’s

lacrosse abandoned those ideas decades earlier. The games had three similarities: the ball,

the goal cage and the circle around the goals. The balls were the same, as were the goal

cages. The circles were similar, but the circles around the goals varied in size and the goals

were situated differently in relation to each other.

In addition to the information included in the chart, it is important to expand upon the

different understandings of physical contact in the sports. Men’s lacrosse was considered a

contact sport; women’s lacrosse was not. That was the simple distinction in contact, but

the differences were far greater than such classifications. In men’s lacrosse, stick-to-body

contact and body-to-body contact may have been considered legal with limitations. In

order for a bodycheck to be legal, the opponent had to either have possession of the ball or

be within five yards of it, and the check had to be above the waist, but below the neck, and

not from behind.90 A crosse check, or a check from ‘that part of the handle of his crosse

that is between his hands, either by thrusting it away from his body or by holding it

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1667

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

Table

1.

Rule

differencesbetweenmen’s

lacrosseandwomen’s

lacrossein

1993.

Men’s

Women’s

Equipment

Crosselength

Shortcrosse:

40–42inches

36–44inches

Longcrosse:

52–72inches

78

Illegal

stickpocket

Entire

ballvisible

below

thesidew

all79

Topofballmustbeeven

withorabovesidew

all81

Protection

Hardhelmet,facemask,chin

pad,mouthpiece,

shoulder

pads,padded

gloves

Mouthpiece.Additional

equipmentpermittedonly

ifotherswould

notbeendangered

82

Goalkeeper

protection

Hardhelmet,facemask,chin

pad,throat

andchestprotection,mouthpiece,padded

gloves.

Shoulder

pads(optional)80

Facem

askand/orhelmet,throat

protection,chest

protection.Hand,arm,leg,shoulder

padding

(optional)83

Tim

eFour15minute

periods8

4Two25minute

halves

Two30minute

halves

(college)

85

Personnel

Number

ofplayers

10

12

Positions

Goalkeeper

Goalkeeper

Defence

Point

Midfield

Coverpoint

Attack86

ThirdMan

Defence

wings

Centre

Attackwings

Thirdhome

Secondhome

Firsthome8

7

Field

construction

Dim

ensions

110£60yardsa

120£70yardsdesirableb

Notable

lines

Endlines/sidelines

(indicates

outofbounds)

Centreline(locationofdraw)

Centresquare(locationofface

off)

8-m

eter

arc

Defense

clearinglines

12-m

eter

fan

Wingareas

Goal

circle

Centreline(determines

offsides)

Nomeasuredboundaries

Crease

Permissible

contact

Contact

sport

Non-contact

sport

aSee

Figure

1.88

bSee

Figure

2.89

1668 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

extended from his body’, was illegal.91 Slashing, which included movement towards or

contact of the stick with the body with ‘deliberate viciousness or reckless abandon’, was

illegal, but not all contact of the stick to the body was illegal.92

In contrast, women’s lacrosse had numerous classifications of illegal body-to-body and

stick-to-body contact. The following summary, though, clarified the primary distinctions.

‘Body to body [sic ] contact will be called either charging or blocking. Crosse to crosse [sic ]

contact is either a legal or illegal check. Body to crosse [sic ] contact will be called either

detaining, blocking, or no call.’ Stick checks were illegal if the opponent reached across the

body if she were level to or behind the ball carrier or if the check caused the stick to hit the

ball carrier.93 These classifications show that the players’ movements were limited in

relation to other players’ movements; that is their movements were not permitted to forcibly

displace or cause them to move into their opponents. Notably, the distinctions highlight that

the players maneuver in relation to each other in space differently. Not just contact as a result

varies, but also how they envision their bodies on the field varies.

The lacrosses also embodied significant dissimilarities, including, but not limited to,

physical contact. A focus on just physical contact ignores the other key distinctions in the

games. Poniatowski’s work exemplifies the importance of the need to discuss differences

beyond contact. In addition to those varying ideologies, the sports also maintained

separate equipment, field designs and terminology. It is vital to understand these baseline

distinctions in the sports themselves in order to conceptualise how and when comparisons

between the sports are appropriate or inappropriate.

Conclusion

Women’s lacrosse is at a critical juncture and as a unique sport, it faces a perilous future.

If sport advocates initiate movements to align men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse to

Figure 1. Men’s Lacrosse Field, 1993.

Figure 2. Women’s Lacrosse Field, 1993.

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1669

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

adhere to contemporary expectations of identity, then the sport of women’s lacrosse,

which had developed independently from men’s lacrosse, may be lost and, at times,

problematic norms likely will not be challenged, as evidenced in the examples of

basketball and ice hockey. Undeniably, men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse both have

histories located within gender, class and race norms. But within and through these

expectations, distinct sports emerged.

This work suggests that the lineage of men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse matters

because the sports began and developed separately from each other, although there were

moments of influence. Too often, in part due to the identical name and similar-appearing

crosse from which the word lacrosse derived, it is assumed that the sports should be

the same or that women’s lacrosse should strive to be like men’s lacrosse. Through the

comparative analysis demonstrated in this article, it becomes evident that modification is

not an appropriate framework through which to consider men’s lacrosse and women’s

lacrosse. Participants have utilised comparisons to make sense of their own sports and to

separate their sport from the other one. Indeed, the relationship between the two sports is

complex. Even with moments of semblance, the sports have been different. Women’s

lacrosse was not simply adapted from men’s lacrosse; promotion of such a relationship

between the two would continue to generate what Forbes and Livingston referred to as

‘erroneous assumptions’,94 which would likely lead to the devaluing of women’s lacrosse

and its participants and potentially even the erasure of the sport as a unique form

completely.

The extent to which the sports of men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse can be

considered different has already been minimised in 2014 in the USA. From 1993 to 2014,

men’s lacrosse had few changes to the basic characteristics of the sport. The changes that

the rule-making body instituted were primarily related to safety, such as requiring arm

pads, redefining legal contact and increasing the amount of personal fouls.95 Certainly,

these additions alter how the game is played, but the basic principles of the sport remain

consistent.

A description of women’s lacrosse wields a different outcome. The most dramatic

change was in the field (see Figure 3).96 Formerly the women’s lacrosse field had no

definite boundary lines. In 2014, the field space was demarcated with a painted line.

In addition, restraining lines extended the width of the field.97 Not only do these lines

illustrate a physical change to the sport, they also represent an alteration in course of play.

In response to safety concerns, all field players were required to wear approved eye wear.98

Figure 3. Women’s Lacrosse Field, 2014.

1670 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

Team personnel changed in reference to terminology. Although the number of players on

the field was the same, the former names of positions were no longer included in the rule

book.99 Finally, the rules relating to contact remain similar, although in practice physical

contact increased significantly during the approximately 20-year span.100 Women’s

lacrosse has experienced numerous alterations.

From this basic comparison, it is evident that women’s lacrosse has changed in very

fundamental manners, while men’s lacrosse has experienced fewer changes in those root

areas. Certainly, sport changes are the result of numerous external and internal factors (i.e.

shifting notions of safety and the body, athletic department budgets and new on-field

plays); however, some of the most apparent alterations to women’s lacrosse in the early

years of the twenty-first century are reminiscent of concepts present in men’s lacrosse. In

addition, those that were removed from women’s lacrosse limited the unique features of

the sport, not just those related to constraining the female body. This similarity points to

greater concerns of whether the two sports will remain different.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Elaine Stowell, another umpire, who generated the field diagrams for this article,and the outside reviewer, whose suggestions without question made this piece a stronger one.Finally, she thanks Susan Bandy, whose patience and compassion saw this work through.

Notes on Contributor

Melissa C. Wiser is a Lecturer in the Department of Human Sciences, Kinesiology-Sport Industryprogram at the Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. She also holds a National Rating as awomen’s lacrosse umpire.

Notes

1. Forbes and Livingston, “From Frances Jane Dove,” 83. Hereafter, all references to the sportsrefer to the field versions unless otherwise noted.

2. The author intentionally refers to the sports as men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse to resistfurther conflating their sameness.

3. Although women’s basketball frequently differed from men’s, the distinctions were rooted insocio-economic class and the varying expectations of femininity. Therefore, multiple versionsof women’s basketball existed. For further discussion, see Cahn, Coming on Strong, 83–109.

4. Festle, Playing Nice, 286.5. Messner, Taking the Field, 140.6. Theberge, Higher Goals, 156.7. Ibid., 154.8. Poniatowski, “You’re Not Allowed,” 44–6.9. Some prominent examples of coaching guides include: Boyd, Lacrosse; Brackenridge,

Women’s Lacrosse; Delano, Lacrosse for Girls; Green and Kurtz,Modern Women’s Lacrosse;Pietramala and Grauer, Lacrosse; Hanna, Lacrosse for Men and Women; Scott, Lacrosse;Trafford and Howarth, Women’s Lacrosse; and Urick, Lacrosse.

10. Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story; Fisher, Lacrosse; and Claydon, St. Leonards.11. Fisher, Lacrosse, 9.12. Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 271–83.13. A ProQuest search of dissertations with women’s lacrosse or female lacrosse in the title

generated only five results. Brown, “Attitudes towards Fair Play”; Chamberlain, “Comparisonof Lower Extremity”; Collins, “An Examination of Factors”; Connelly, “An Investigation”;and Randolph, “Analysis of the Effectiveness.”

14. Brown, “Attitudes towards Fair Play,” 1–14.

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1671

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

15. Cahn, Coming on Strong, 71; and Festle, Playing Nice, 222–3. Cahn listed women’s lacrosseas a sport colleges were adding at the club level in the 1930s, and Festle noted that the NCAAvoted to add women’s lacrosse championships in 1985.

16. Guttmann, Women’s Sports, 107–8.17. Gerber et al., The American Woman.18. McCrone, Playing the Game, 127–53.19. Vennum, American Indian Lacrosse, 9–25; and NAITC, Tewaarathon, 1–4.20. Fisher, Lacrosse, 13–14.21. Ibid., 14–15.22. Edmunds, “Native Americans,” 724. Activist acts included the 1969–1971 occupation of

Alcatraz and the 1973 occupation of Wounded Knee, the site of a massacre of 250 þ NativeAmericans in 1890.

23. NAITC, Tewaarathon, Introduction.24. Ibid.25. Ibid., 8.26. Ibid., 34.27. Ibid., 35.28. Morrow, “The Institutionalization of Sport,” 241.29. Fisher, Lacrosse, 18.30. Boyd, Lacrosse, 15; NAITC, Tewaarathon, Forward; and Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse

Story, 3–4.31. Native American is the term commonly used in the USA to refer to aboriginal populations,

whereas First Nations is that used in Canada. The Mohawk people are a member of theIroquois Nations or Hodenosaunee (People of the Longhouse). Fisher, Lacrosse, 12.

32. Other sources, including Weyand and Roberts, also reference baggataway as a predecessor of‘modern’ lacrosse. Various tribes had different versions of stick and ball games. Boyd alsoreferenced a game knattleikr that had been played in Iceland in 874 that Norseman brought toNorth America and potentially influenced North American stick-and-ball games. No lacrossehistorian has referenced this potential lineage; indeed, Claydon challenged this reference inthe interview. Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 4; Boyd, Lacrosse, 14; and FeffieBarnhill and Jane Claydon (interview with the author, Lewes, DE, September 8–9, 2011).

33. Fisher, Lacrosse, 25; and Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 17–18.34. Fisher, Lacrosse, 29.35. Beers, Lacrosse.36. Morrow, “The Institutionalization of Sport,” 243–5.37. Fisher, Lacrosse, 26.38. Robidoux, “Historical Interpretations,” 276.39. Fisher, Lacrosse, 27–8.40. Beers, Lacrosse, 83–4.41. Putney, Muscular Christianity, 11–72, 99–126.42. Fisher, Lacrosse, 90–1.43. Ibid., 87.44. Ibid., 104.45. Ibid., 108.46. For a more detailed discussion of the development of box lacrosse, see NAITC, Tewaarathon,

149–55, and for the importance of box lacrosse to Canadian identity specifically, see Fisher,“Splendid but Undesirable Isolation.”

47. Verbrugge, Active Bodies, 53–60.48. Claydon, St. Leonards, 16–32.49. Ibid., 16.50. Ibid.51. Claydon, St. Leonards, 16; and McCrone, Playing the Game, 72.52. Claydon, St. Leonards, 20.53. Claydon, St. Leonards, 55–79; and McCrone, Playing the Game, 72.54. Claydon, St. Leonards, 80; Fisher, Lacrosse, 147; Gerber et al., The American Woman, 112–3;

and Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 272–4.55. Claydon, St. Leonards, 80–91.

1672 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

56. Claydon, St. Leonards, 88. The USWLA was the first governing body of women’s lacrosse inthe USA and lasted until 1998 when it joined with men’s lacrosse associations as part of themerger that created US Lacrosse.

57. Richey, “The USWLAExpansion Program,” 135; Pitts, “The 1970 United States Tour,” 144–5;and Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 274.

58. Cahn, Coming on Strong, 97; and Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 273.59. Cahn, Coming on Strong, 97–8; and Verbrugge, Active Bodies, 115–6. In the USA field

hockey was a women’s sport, whereas in England men played field hockey also.60. Fisher, Lacrosse, 148.61. McCrone, Playing the Game, 140.62. Fisher, Lacrosse, 148.63. Ibid., 139. Although the term crease had been used in women’s lacrosse, in 2014 it officially

refers to only the circle around the goal in the men’s game. The women’s game uses the termgoal circle instead. It is not uncommon, though, to hear someone say ‘crease’ in reference tothe goal circle. Crosse refers to the stick used to play men’s lacrosse or women’s lacrosse.Although similar in name, the crosses have variant constructions.

64. Fisher, Lacrosse, 150. This literary trajectory was homage to Weyand and Roberts’sproblematic quotation of men’s lacrosse’s roots. ‘Lacrosse was born of the North AmericanIndian. It was christened by the French, but adopted and raised by the Canadians. In all its fullgrace and beauty it has been wooed by athletes of the United States and the BritishCommonwealth.’ Weyand and Roberts, The Lacrosse Story, 1–2.

65. Gerber et al., The American Woman, 112–3.66. Forbes, “Lacrosse,” 641.67. Claydon, St. Leonards, 80, 90. Quotation in Claydon’s book. The citation merely stated

‘Quote by Rosabelle Sinclair,’ thus the original source is unclear.68. Barnhill and Claydon (interview). Although the author has not seen this source herself, the

quotation is included because it indicated what Claydon understood to be of importance.69. Barnhill and Claydon (interview). Restraining lines refer to lines on the field that restrict

movement. Despite the shared terminology, the lines on the men’s lacrosse field and thewomen’s lacrosse field differ in function and location. The number and the type, as inposition, of players permitted on either side of the line(s) vary. Men’s lacrosse has onerestraining line, while women’s lacrosse has two. The restraining lines were added towomen’s lacrosse in 1998 at the college level and in 2000 at the high school level. Boundarieswere added to the women’s game in 2006. Even though Claydon referred to the 1970s and1980s, the changes she included were added decades later in the USA.

70. Green and Kurtz, Modern Women’s Lacrosse, 5.71. Dottie McKnight (interview with the author, Washington, DC, September 17, 2011); and

Boyd, Lacrosse.72. McKnight (interview).73. Barnhill and Claydon (interview).74. Delano, Lacrosse for Girls, 1.75. Smith, “Women’s Lacrosse,” 142.76. The following organisations merged: United States Club Lacrosse Association, National

Intercollegiate Lacrosse Officials Association, United States Lacrosse Officials Association,United States Lacrosse Officials Association, Lacrosse Foundation, United States Women’sLacrosse Association, Central Atlantic Lacrosse League and National Junior LacrosseAssociation.

77. To compare the rules, the author selected the men’s 1993 National Collegiate AthleticAssociation (NCAA) rule book and the women’s 1993–1994 USWLA rule book. The menused the NCAA rule book for high school contests also, but leagues and state administrativebodies could modify the rules for the corresponding groups. The USWLA rule book was usedfor all levels of competition.

78. NCAA, 1993 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse, 16.79. Ibid., 18.80. Ibid., 18–19.81. USWLA, Official Lacrosse Rules, 2.82. Ibid., 10.83. Ibid., 9.

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1673

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

84. NCAA, 1993 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse, 28.85. USWLA, Official Lacrosse Rules, 10.86. NCAA, 1993 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse, 22.87. USWLA, Official Lacrosse Rules, 7–8. Beers’ original rule book for men’s lacrosse in 1869

uses the terminology point and home to refer to positions. Beers, Lacrosse, 191–6.88. NCAA, 1993 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse, 10–15. Diagrams derived from rule book

measurements.89. USWLA, Official Lacrosse Rules, 4–6. Diagram derived from rule book measurements.

Men’s lacrosse also did not originally have boundary lines, but the sport added them early inthe twentieth century.

90. NCAA, 1993 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse, 50.91. Ibid., 51.92. Ibid., 50.93. USWLA, Official Lacrosse Rules, 17 (emphasis removed).94. Forbes and Livingston, “From Frances Jane Dove,” 83.95. NCAA, NCAA Lacrosse, 16, 36, 45–7. Fouls included targeting the head and neck and

unnecessary roughness.96. NCAA, NCAA Women’s Lacrosse, 9–13. Diagram derived from dimensions supplied in rule

book. The NCAA rule books were used in order to compare similar levels of play. The NCAApublished its first rule book for women’s lacrosse in 2006; thereafter women’s and girls’ hadtwo different rule books, the NCAA versions for intercollegiate play and the US Lacrosseversion for high school and post-collegiate play.

97. NCAA, NCAA Women’s Lacrosse, 9. Out of bounds shifted in relation to who could receivepossession after a ball left the field of play. The newer conceptualisation mirrors the men’sgame change in possession if a ball leaves the field. Field positioning altered, as therestraining lines delineating offsides and how many players of each team were permitted inattacking and defensive areas. The number of players permitted differs between men’slacrosse and women’s lacrosse as do the lines of reference, but there were similarities inconcept.

98. NCAA, NCAA Women’s Lacrosse, 16.99. NCAA, NCAA Women’s Lacrosse.100. Ibid., 36. Notably, cross-check was added as a foul. Its definition is the following: ‘using the

shaft of the crosse to hit, push, or displace an opponent’.

References

Beers, William George. Lacrosse: The Game of Canada. Montreal: Dawson Brothers, 1869.Kessinger Legacy Reprints.

Boyd, Margaret. Lacrosse: Playing and Coaching. New York: A.S. Barnes, 1959.Brackenridge, Celia. Women’s Lacrosse. Woodbury, NY: Barron’s, 1978.Brown, Catherine L. “Attitudes towards Fair Play in Women’s Lacrosse.” PhD diss., Ohio State

University, 1983.Cahn, Susan K. Coming on Strong: Gender and Sexuality in Twentieth-Century Women’s Sport.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994.Chamberlain, Christin R. “Comparison of Lower Extremity Biomechanics between Female Division

I Gymnastic, Lacrosse, and Soccer Athletes.” Master’s thesis, University of North Carolina atChapel Hill, 2006. ProQuest UMI 1435064.

Claydon, Jane. St. Leonards: Cradle of Lacrosse. St. Andrews, Fife, Scotland: West Port Print &Design, 2009.

Collins, Karen E. “An Examination of Factors Influencing Entrapment and Burnout amongCollegiate Female Field Hockey and Lacrosse Coaches.” PhD diss., University of NorthCarolina at Greensboro, 2002. ProQuest UMI 3049154.

Connelly, Deidre. “An Investigation of Assertive Sport Behavior in Female Lacrosse Athletes.” PhDdiss., University of Virginia, 1988.

Delano, Anne Lee. Lacrosse for Girls and Women. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown, 1970.Edmunds, R. David. “Native Americans, New Voices: American Indian History, 1895–1995.” The

American Historical Review 100, no. 3 (1995): 717–740. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2168602

1674 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

Festle, Mary Jo. Playing Nice: Politics and Apologies in Women’s Sports. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1996.

Fisher, Donald M. Lacrosse: A History of the Game. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,2002.

Fisher, Donald M. “‘Splendid But Undesirable Isolation’: Recasting Canada’s National Game asBox Lacrosse, 1931–1932.” Sport History Review 36 (2005): 115–129.

Forbes, Susan L. “Lacrosse.” In International Encyclopedia of Women and Sports, edited by KarenChristensen, Allen Guttmann, and Gertrud Pfister, 641–645. New York: Macmillan Reference,2001.

Forbes, S. L., and L. A. Livingston. “From Frances Jane Dove to Rosabelle Sinclair and Beyond: TheIntroduction of Women’s Field Lacrosse to North America.” In Proceedings for the 10thCommonwealth and International Scientific Congress, 83–86. Victoria, Canada: University ofVictoria, 1994.

Gerber, Ellen W., Jan Felshin, Pearl Berlin, and Waneen Wyrick. The American Woman in Sport.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1974.

Green, Tina Sloan, and Agnes Bixler Kurtz.Modern Women’s Lacrosse. Hanover, NH: ABK, 1989.Guttmann, Allen. Women’s Sports: A History. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.Hanna, Mike. Lacrosse for Men and Women: Skills and Strategies for the Athlete and Coach. With

contributions by Jackie Pitts and Dan White. New York: Hawthorn/Dutton, 1980.McCrone, Kathleen E. Playing the Game: Sport and Physical Emancipation of English Women

1870–1914. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1988.Messner, Michael. Taking the Field: Women, Men, and Sports. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press, 2002.Morrow, Don. “The Institutionalization of Sport: A Case Study of Canadian Lacrosse, 1844-1914.”

The International Journal of the History of Sport 9, no. 2 (1992): 236–251. doi:10.1080/09523369208713792.

National Collegiate Athletic Association. 1993 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Rules. Overland Park, KS:National Collegiate Athletic Association, 1992.

National Collegiate Athletic Association. NCAA Lacrosse 2013 and 2014 Rules and Interpretations.Indianapolis, IN: National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2012.

National Collegiate Athletic Association. NCAA Women’s Lacrosse 2014 and 2015 Rules andInterpretations. Indianapolis, IN: National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2013.

North American Indian Travelling College (NAITC). Tewaarathon (Lacrosse): Akwesasne’s Storyof Our National Game. NAITC, 1978.

Pietramala, David G., and Neil A. Grauer. Lacrosse: Technique and Tradition. 2nd ed. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006.

Pitts, Jackie. “The 1970 United States Tour to Britain.” In Field Hockey-Lacrosse Guide, June1972–June 1974, edited by Mary Lou Thornburg and Jackie Pitts, 144–145. Washington, DC:American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 1972.

Poniatowski, Kelly. “‘You’re Not Allowed Body Checking in Women’s Hockey’: PreservingGendered and Nationalistic Hegemonies in the 2006 Olympic Ice Hockey Tournament.”Womenin Sport and Physical Activity Journal 20, no. 1 (2011): 39–52.

Putney, Clifford. Muscular Christianity: Manhood and Sports in Protestant America, 1880–1920.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001.

Randolph, Aaron Michael. “Analysis of the Effectiveness of a Preseason Strength and ConditioningProgram for Collegiate Men’s and Women’s Lacrosse.” EdD diss., Lindenwood University,2012. ProQuest UMI 3550873.

Richey, Betty. “The USWLA Expansion Program.” InOfficial Field Hockey-Lacrosse Guide, 1948–50, edited by Anne Lee Delano and Betty Richey, 135. New York: A.S. Barnes, 1948.

Robidoux, Michael A. “Historical Interpretations of First Nations Masculinity and Its Influence onCanada’s Sport Heritage.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 23, no. 2 (2006):267–284. doi:10.1080/09523360500478281.

Scott, Bob. Lacrosse: Technique and Tradition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976.Smith, Nathalie. “Women’s Lacrosse: The Name of the Game.” In Field Hockey-Lacrosse Guide,

June 1972–June 1974, edited by Mary Lou Thornburg and Jackie Pitts, 142–143. Washington,DC: American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1972.

Theberge, Nancy. Higher Goals: Women’s Ice Hockey and the Politics of Gender. Albany: StateUniversity of New York Press, 2000.

The International Journal of the History of Sport 1675

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014

Trafford, Bobbie, and Kath Howarth. Women’s Lacrosse: The Skills of the Game. Ramsbury, UK:Crowood Press, 1989.

United States Women’s Lacrosse Association (USWLA). Official Lacrosse Rules, 1993–1994.Hamilton, NY: USWLA, 1993.

Urick, David. Lacrosse: Fundamentals for Winning. New York: Sports Illustrated, 1988.Vennum, Thomas. American Indian Lacrosse: Little Brother of War. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1994.Verbrugge, Martha H. Active Bodies: A History of Women’s Physical Education in Twentieth-

century America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.Weyand, Alexander M., and Milton R. Roberts. The Lacrosse Story. Baltimore: H&AHerman, 1965.

1676 M.C. Wiser

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dal

hous

ie U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

08 0

5 O

ctob

er 2

014