Projecting the present onto the past is a problem that anyone who is studying history may
encounter, whether that be in books or artifacts. Viewing something from a purely objective
standpoint can be difficult in any profession but, in the case of archeology, someone’s opinion
can affect history as we know it.
The practice of archeology has been around for as long as humans have been interested in
the past so, archeology has most likely been around in some form or another as long as humans
have been around. While misogyny hasn’t necessarily been around as long as humans have been,
it has been a significant part of many societies and cultures for centuries. Since misogyny is so
deeply ingrained into our world, it leaks into our understanding of the past as well. This can be
especially seen in the field of archeology.
Similar to many other scientific fields women had a difficult time making a name for
themselves within the archeological field. The professionalization of archeology occurred during
the 19th century. Traditional gender roles still had a strong place in society and women who
attempted to participate in professional fields were generally frowned upon. Over the course of a
century, women managed to carve out a place for themselves within the field but even now they
are a minority. Historically women in archeology have not been taken seriously and many of
their major discoveries have been claimed by men they worked with. Keeping this in mind, it
may not be surprising to learn that men have been making incorrect assumptions about
areological finds for over a century.
In addition to the sexism engrained into the profession itself, male archeologists have
been projecting their views of male and female roles onto archeological finds. This practice is
especially notable when reviewing burials. There have been numerous cases throughout the years
of skeletons being found with traditionally masculine objects such as weapons, armor, tools, or
traditional regalia, and assumed to be male when they were female. One famous case is that of
the Viking warrior woman’s 10th-century Viking tomb found in Birka in southeastern Sweden.
The female warrior was buried with a strategy set, numerous weapons, and two horses. For
nearly 140 years archeologists believed that the tomb belonged to a man until pelvis
measurements and DNA testing proved otherwise. Such assumptions also exclude people who
don’t fit traditional gender roles such as male skeletons buried with jewelry or objects like
pottery that were associated with the home. More recently specific studies have been done on
burial sights of “two-spirited” Indigenous people in an attempt to better understand them.
A male-centric view can also devalue traditionally female-associated jobs in
archeological recordings and writings. Neglecting roles such as weaving, pottery making,
cooking, cleaning, and child-rearing and instead mostly focusing on the occupations of hunter
and warrior. Due to these discrepancies, in most instances, more is known about traditionally
male roles in society rather than roles thought to be assigned to women. Such biased views can
also interfere with the interpretation of statutes and figurines. Many figures depict female
characters rather than male characters. Women within the archeology field have taken this to
represent the value of women in society while some men argue that it shows the objectification
of women from early times.
As time goes on more discrepancies and discoveries will be made within the
archeological field. The archeological process, like all others has improved over time and will
continue to improve with expansions of diversity and knowledge. The biases discussed above are
not limited to the field of archeology. Gender biases can be seen in nearly every field of study
from history to medicine. It is something that must be recognized and corrected over time in
order to create a more equitable society.