The Archaeology of Gender

1
The Archaeology of Gender

• Man the Hunter, Woman the Gatherer?

2
Humans as Primates

• Primates Prosimians, Monkeys, Apes and Humans
• Unique human characteristics
• Habitual Bipedalism
• Brain-culture complex (tools, society and
  language)
• Lack of estrus in females
• Naked-no body hair

3
Homo habilis
4
Man the Hunter

• Theory of human origins, first presented in the
  late 1950s
• Major Points of Argument
• Most primates are omnivores only humans hunt
  animals larger than themselves
• Human traits adaptive for male hunting
• Bipedalism endurance, display
• Brain-culture complex tools to aid male hunting
  Society male bonding behavior
• Language teaching male hunting skills to young,
  communication during hunt
• Lack of estrus/sexual dimorphism women less able
  to hunt full-time pair bond for the female to a
  male provider
• Nakedness related to the importance of sex and
  sexual symbols in male-female relations

5
Critique of Man The Hunter

• Female dependence based on modern biases
• In many societies men are involved in caring for
  the young
• Pregnancy is not a debilitating state modern
  bias
• Ignores womens role in socialization
• Ignores importance of gathering
• No biological reason why men hunt, not women
• Problems with early hunting sites
• Could be evidence of scavenging carnivore kills,
  not hunting

6
Man the Hunter?
7
Woman the Gatherer

• Alternative theory of human evolution
• Bipedalism women had to walk long distances in
  gathering frees hands
• Brain-culture complex tools directly related
  to female gathering Society related from
  female sharing
• Language important for social communication for
  gathering
• caring and sharing model base camps
• Lack of Estrus byproduct of bipedalism
• Nakedness women control sex
• Essentially, basic androcentric arguments of
  the Man the Hunter Model, can all be turned on
  their head

8
Point of Example

• Not to explain human evolution as either due to
  male, or to female, contributions to subsistence
  (probably both equally important)
• Point is to illustrate the pervasive tendency for
  androcentric explanations of the human past
• Up until the critical period in the 1980s, most
  explanations of past human behavior either
  ignored gender, or emphasized male behaviors over
  female
• 1980s increasing trend towards gendered
  archaeology, as well as feminist archaeology

9
Gender in Archaeology

• Sex male vs. female biological differences
• Male larger, stronger, more aggressive (?)
• Female more gracile, child bearing
• Gender social differences based on sex
• Men and Women different social roles
• Not limited to only two genders
• Nature of those roles are largely arbitrary, but
  do take into account biological differences

10
Gender in Archaeology

• Most basic social relations based on
• Gender
• Kinship (itself a result of relations between
  genders)
• Any archaeological reconstruction of past social
  relationships has to take gender into account or
  it is incomplete, or worse, biased and inaccurate
• How to approach gender archaeologically
• Iconography representations of gender
• Material Culture define gender-associated
  artifacts or areas on a site
• Mortuary Analysis identify differential burial
  treatments for different genders

11
Iconography Women in the Neolithic

• Marija Gimbutas (1960s-1970s)
• Focusing on female figurines of Neolithic and
  Copper Age, southeast Europe and Anatolia
• Argued that figurines reflect female status
• Peaceful, feminine values
• Fertility, goddess-based religions
• Example Çatalhöyük evidence of cooperative
  social organization based on female principles
• Peaceful societies of Neolithic replaced by
  male-dominated bronze age societies with
  masculine deities and typical male values
• War, aggression, social repression, hierarchy

12
Neolithic Goddess Figures
13
Critique of Gimbutas

• Gimbutass work an important, early attempt to
  emphasize female contributions to past societies
• But, has been heavily critiqued and is now
  largely discounted
• Ian Hodder (Çatalhöyük) female figurines argues
  that the figurines express the objectification
  and subordination of women
• Images faceless, lack any identity
• Numerous lines of evidence that Neolithic period
  characterized by as much if not more warfare and
  violence as later prehistoric periods
• Fortifications weapons skeletal evidence of
  violent death

14
Critique of Gimbutas

• Gimbutas, a priori logic found goddess religions
  wherever she looked, regardless of evidence
• Bull Hornsvulva, uterine symbolism (turning a
  probable male symbol into a female goddess since
  it fits her theory better that way)
• Lynn Meskell (feminist anthropologist)
• As biased as androcentric recreations of the past
• historical fiction
• Reifies many of the modern biases that a gendered
  archaeology should be criticizing
• Polar dichotomy between male and female
  oversimplified even in our own society

15
Material Culture Women in the Ancient Andes

• Joan Gero (1980s-present)
• Highlands of Peru
• Early Intermediate Period (EIP), ca. 200 BC-AD
  600
• Pre-Inca, contemporary with North American
  Early-Middle Woodland, European Iron Age/Roman
  Period
• Beginnings of social complexity in region (simple
  hierarchy)
• Developing technology (copper, textiles, ceramics)

16
Women in the Ancient Andes

• Queyash Alto (highland Peru)
• Several rooms, courtyards
• Three activity areas, one domestic, two
  non-domestic
• Domestic area high status (exotic artifacts) and
  female oriented
• Copper tupu pins (associated with women in
  later Inca Period)
• Spindle whorls (cloth production traditionally
  female in region)
• Female burials only
• Non-domestic area evidence of feasting practices
  (vessels, food remains) also of beer storage and
  production
• Interpreted as venue for social feasting in
  competitive political climate, where status was
  related to ability to conduct such feasts
• High status males and females both actively
  involved (depicted in equal status on ceramics)

17
Queyash Alto
18
Andean Women
Spindle Whorl
Copper Tupu
19
Women in the Ancient Andes

• Geros interpretation
• Complex gender interactions involved in origins
  of political complexity in pre-Inca Peru
• Female roles especially important as evidence of
  high-status female spaces in EIP structures, and
  importance of female-produced products (cloth,
  beer)

20
Gender and Mortuary Archaeology

• Gender is one major social role that is often
  symbolized in mortuary treatments
• Often only situation where potentially
  gender-specific artifacts are associated with
  individuals of identifiable sex
• Must distinguish what potential burial artifacts
  or treatments are associated with gender, as
  opposed to age, status etc.
• Must beware of potential for bias (applying ones
  own view of gender on past burials)
• Problem for all of gender analysis in archaeology
• Also tendency to misidentify female skeletons as
  male

21
Mortuary Analysis The Princess of Vix

• Iron Age Celtic Burial (roughly contemporary
  with Hochdorf)
• Eastern France, 5th century BC
• Skeletal remains obviously female
• Artifacts in burial typically associated with
  male burials for that period
• Initially interpreted as Transvestite Priest
• Inconceivable that a woman would have had such
  artifacts and such a rich burial
• Bettina Arnold reexamines artifacts, burial
  assemblage, confirms female sex
• Argues that Vix points to potentially high female
  status in what has usually been thought of as a
  masculine culture, pre-Roman Celtic Europe
• Questions whether bipolar gender distinctions
  are appropriate for that period (previous
  interpretations obviously based on modern bias)

22
The Princess of Vix
The Tomb
23
The Princess of Vix
The Artifacts