Search Results

Glossary Antiquarians - The predecessors to modern archaeologists; mostly collectors who maintain no scientific principles or in depth recording systems. Ancient DNA Analysis - The analysis of DNA taken from the bones of ancient human remains to provide details on sex determination. Inhumation - A standard burial with a body lying flat in a rectangular cut grave Sexing - The scientific act of analysing a skeleton and assigning it a binary sex based on bone morphology and characteristics. These are mostly found within the skull and the pelvis. Sex determination within archaeological human remains begins from the moment the grave is uncovered. Grave goods, clothing, burial orientation, and location can all influence the primary informal sex determination. Unfortunately in antiquarian days, the analysis often stopped there and no further work was undertaken to accurately determine sex. There are several key examples of female remains being misgendered, and it poses the question as to whether other powerful figures of the past were actually women, as well as how many other powerful women we are yet to discover. The term ‘sex’ is used in an archaeological setting as opposed to ‘gender’ due to the binary biological markers that are seen on the skeleton and within the DNA, although it is critical to understand that these factors cannot relate to how this person would have identified within themselves during their life. It is entirely feasible that these individuals were buried with these supposedly gendered honours due to them expressing their own gender identity in life that has then been respected by their peers. However, this cannot be seen through the remains and therefore, sex determination remains a binary undertaking. It is incredibly important for us as a modern audience to rethink archaeological sex determination based on informal characteristics such as grave goods. It is imperative that the social structures of the period in which the remains date is considered alongside formal scientific methods to ensure that we are correctly determining sex and providing these individuals with the respect that they deserve. The Birka Burial A detailed archaeological drawing of the Birka Burial to show how the grave would have looked before it was filled in with soil. This is often the most important view as it shows the modern viewers how her contemporaries wanted her to be seen in death. Uncovered in 1878 in Birka, Sweden, these were the remains of an exceptionally highly respected Viking warrior who was elaborately buried in a chamber tomb. These remains were considered to be of a male until new research was undertaken in 2017 (a shocking 139 years after her discovery) proved otherwise. This is especially poignant as during this stretch of time, over 50 papers were published corroborating this mistruth as no one thought or cared to look deeper into the facts. The misgendering of female remains is a critical issue as the lives of powerful women are being disregarded and new insights into the social and cultural structure of the past are being lost due to the modern prejudices and societal systems. The burial was furnished with a multitude of weapons, shields, a chariot, and two horses. She was also dressed in silks with silver threads - a burial of extremely high status. These factors led the primary archaeologist, Hjalmar Stolpe, to determine that the remains were male without any further tests or investigation. Modern conceptions of gender and what it means to be a man or a woman have heavily influenced this prognosis, a flaw that is seen in the reanalysis of many sites. This was not fully called into question until archaeologist Charlotte Hedenstierna-Jonson completed an analysis of the remains themselves and determined them to reveal heavily female characteristics. This was decisively proven in 2017 by Neil Price and his team when they undertook genetic testing. This reanalysis of the Birka Burial has allowed for female success and the idea of an elite female force, such as the Valkyrie, to be admitted as more than just historical fiction; it opens up the discussion for it being historical fact. The infamous Osberg boat burial in Norway also provides some insight into the ideas of women warriors with the tapestry found within the burial depicting female warriors with weapons and shields. Hierarchical systems have been taken from more modern times and transplanted onto the figures of the past, but these systems likely do not reflect the reality and intricacies of life in ancient times. Discovering high status female burials is imperative to understanding women’s history and the development of our modern social systems. The Kazakhstan Burials The Valkyrie are not the only women warriors of legend! The Amazonians are also a well known group of female warriors, however, there has never been any strong evidence found to support their existence… or has there? Recently, a burial area in Kazakhstan was uncovered that dates to the 6th-4th centuries BCE and contains the burials of several women warriors who were laid to rest with arrowheads, swords, daggers, and other militaristic goods. These burials are contemporary to the period it is presumed the Amazonians lived and were active. At an average height of 5 '6", these women were far taller than the average height for the period and were also stockier, lending some credence to the legend of elite female warriors. Interestingly, at least one of the remains shows signs of bowleggedness from horseback riding! Despite this being an incredible find that is revolutionising the way we consider ancient women, for some time these remains were considered to be males based on the first interpretation given from the grave goods analysis. It is imperative that archaeologists’ and historians' opinions on the sexual determination of remains are not influenced by a burial containing militaristic grave goods as a male determination is not always accurate. There is currently limited published work on this site, but hopefully as more work is released we will understand more about these enigmatic ‘Amazonian’ warriors. The Ivory Woman An artist's interpretation of the Ivory Woman and her tribe, where she is a wise figure who teaches those around her. Her beads and body paint show her to be a high status figure. New research (published 6th July 2023!) proved decisively that the highest status individual in Copper Age Iberia was in fact a woman, rather than a man as previously assumed! Archaeologists have determined through contextual markers including other graves, grave goods, and the surrounding archaeological sites, that no man in fact came anywhere close to her level of influence. Her burial was highly elaborate and contained ivory tusks, rock crystal daggers, and ostrich eggshells. To have a single inhumation burial that is so lavishly furnished in this period indicates that she was indeed an extremely high ranked individual. She is now referred to as the ‘incomparable’. At the time of her discovery, her remains were considered to have belonged to a young man between 18 and 25. The remains were marked out as such due to the high status burial, as well as the burial itself being a lone burial as opposed to the multiple burials that characterise the period and area. This new research is fascinating as the only other high status burials in the area of the same period are also all women. Due to this, researchers are calling for the reanalysis of the political and social structure of Copper Age Iberia and how women fit into this system. Modern conceptions of sex and gender are highly rigid and have misguided antiquarians and archaeologists in the past. This call for reanalysis may radically change the narrative that modern society has presented to us and allow for more stories from many different cultures to be told. The Problems with Sexual Determination There are many dangers to informal sex determination that is based on grave goods and perceived societal structure, and they are seen very clearly through the mistakes made at Birka and in Iberia. The misgendering of remains allows for the role of women in the past to be diminished and for the more modern patriarchal narrative of history to be far more prevalent than is likely to be true. It is critical that these burials be carefully examined to allow for the importance of women and the multifaceted role of sex-gender in ancient social systems to be observed. Sexual determination is based on a set of characteristics that are not always diagnostic and have to be interpreted from a selection of factors. Sex estimation is primarily undertaken by studying the morphology of the pelvis and the skull, and these are the bones that reveal the most definitive sexual characteristics. These determinations can nearly never be absolutely certain without additional DNA analysis. Ancient DNA analysis is a relatively new field of study, but it is critical that it develops and is used across more sites as it can decisively prove biological sex and provide further detail regarding lineages and the movement of peoples. Moreover, sexual determination of remains may also undermine a group or societies beliefs regarding gender and how it is expressed in each person. This is particularly pertinent in reference to some Native American burials, where certain tribes follow or followed a system of non-binary gender within their communities. Further historical anthropological work, as well as ethnographic work, should be undertaken to determine how early communities viewed and worked with sex-gender systems to allow for a high degree of cultural respect to be placed on all remains that are uncovered. Moreover, assigning these burials a biological gender may inhibit the living descendants' ability to honour their ancestors and also allows for the removal of traditional cultures and for the cisgender narrative to be the only narrative presented to the public. Further Reading: Blair, Z. (2022). ‘Hail, Ye Givers,’ Sex and Gender in the Viking Age: A Discussion of Sex and Gender in Birka 581 and the Oseberg Burial. University of Chicago. https://doi.org/10.6082/uchicago.4095 Cintas-Peña, M., Luciañez-Triviño, M., Montero Artús, R. et al. (2023) Amelogenin peptide analyses reveal female leadership in Copper Age Iberia (c. 2900–2650 BC). Sci Rep 13, 9594 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36368-x Hedenstierna-Jonson, C. (2020) ‘Warrior identities in Viking-Age Scandinavia’, Vikings Across Boundaries, pp. 179–194. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429346194-12 Price, N., Hedenstierna-Jonson, C., Zachrisson, T., Kjellström, A., Storå, J., Krzewińska, M., Günther, T., Sobrado, V., Jakobsson, M. and Götherström, A. (2019) “Viking warrior women? Reassessing Birka chamber grave Bj.581,” Antiquity. Cambridge University Press, 93(367), pp. 181–198. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2018.258 Wilford, J.N. (1997). Ancient Graves Of Armed Women Hint at Amazons. The New York Times. [online] 25 Feb. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/25/science/ancient-graves-of-armed-women-hint-at-amazons.html [Accessed 15 Jul. 2023]. Yablonsky, L.T. (2010). New Excavations of the Early Nomadic Burial Ground at Filippovka (Southern Ural Region, Russia). American Journal of Archaeology, [online] 114(1), pp.129–143. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20627646

This project aims to highlight women’s histories, that much is probably clear from the term “herstory”. However, “herstory” should also be understood as a critical term, one which suggests that history doesn’t do much for gender equality. The HERstory Project focuses on the question, “hey, where’s ‘she’ though?” because whilst history does tell us an awful lot about men, women tend to be pushed to the side. Even those histories which are about women somehow actually end up being about men, don’t they? When we talk about Henry VIII’s wives we acknowledge them because of the man they married, rather than for being the women that they were: a successful wartime leader, religious patrons, foreign women who made England their home, an abused child, and the first woman published in English under her own name. Truth is, those six women have very little in common other than all being the wife of one man, and the only reason our collective historical consciousness actually cares about them is because of his actions. My point is if you read histories of women they will often tell you about the important and the wealthy, the martyred and the evil, but I want to explore, very plainly, women. The exciting and the mundane. What did they do? Where did they go? What did they achieve? History needs to approach women in the same way that it does men. Now if you just wanted the answer to “what the hell is this about?” you can stop reading here, the first article will be out soon and so will the first of the Into the SPOTLIGHT feature. However, if you want a lovely long discussion of women’s and gender history as researched and understood by me over the past four years of my academic life, as well as a more in-depth explanation of the purpose of this project, then read on… (A short disclaimer: I am not the first historian, nor the first person to broach the subject of women’s histories and attempt to push their experiences into the spotlight of historical or public attention. At the bottom of this article, you will find a list of useful resources which you can and should check out for more information about this topic. This list isn’t exhaustive but they are the pieces and individuals who have informed and encouraged this project thus far.) Why is a focus on women in history necessary? Women’s place in history is often contentious, those whose names we know we often know for bad reasons and those who we don’t know are assumed to have been nothing worth remembering. But that’s not really fair. If women make up approximately 50% of the global population we cannot all have been bad or insignificant. I could list for several pages women who deserve to be remembered, celebrated and studied, but that’s the point of this project, not this article. This article intends to explain a few important points and theories to help you understand this project and the following questions. Why are these histories important to study thematically? What can we learn not just from a successful individual but from the experiences of women generally? What does the ignorance of women's histories teach us about the history of them? It will be useful to break this large topic into smaller bite-sized chunks, this should also serve as a resource, if you need to clarify why something is significant, refer back here first. What is women’s history? Women’s history is the study of women, what they did, who they were and what they achieved throughout history. It is about women in history. Simple. it’s not quite the same as gender history, but there is some overlap which will feature in this project - read on for that. Why is there women’s history but not men’s history? Because just history tends to be men’s history, so there has never been a need for a specific focus on male experiences, women on the other hand often don't seem to exist even when and where they were fundamental to an event. This is an everyday example of the effects of a patriarchal society (and as we will touch on in this project, Western colonialism). It’s complicated but you can think of it like this, in genealogy upon marriage, the wife has typically taken the husband’s name and is thereon known as Mrs-husband’s-name. (This is not the case in all societies but similar trends of the eradication of women’s identities have occurred in most, often due to colonialism). In legal documents, women would cease to exist. History has kind of done the same thing, it has assumed that if there is a woman there is nothing she could do or be other than the wife of x, daughter of x etc. There are exceptions to this, but they are quite rare and until fairly recently, historians didn’t really know how to talk about these histories. Since the second wave of feminism historians have acknowledged these women on a more balanced scale but there’s a lot we still don’t know and there’s quite a lot of latent misogyny in earlier women's histories which has carried through into how we write and think about women, and into the histories available to us. Tell me, have you seen any historians claim that Thomas Cromwell or James VI & I were incapable or dangerous because of their fatherhood or promiscuity? You mentioned gender history isn’t the same as women’s history, what is it then? Gender history has been described as a sort of outgrowth of women's history, whilst the latter looks specifically at women and their experiences, gender history considers the perspective of gender and tries to understand events and occurrences according to this disparity. To simplify this, gender history might provide a comparison of how an event affected men and then how it affected women, as according to gender disparities in societies and cultures they will have had differing effects and thus reactions. This perspective needs to be understood in order to correctly gauge the impact of an event. Gender and women's history are not then the same thing, but they are connected and you will see gender history used throughout work on this project. Okay so, is the history we know about women wrong? Not necessarily, but it might be slightly twisted. Historians (this one included) have a tendency to create villains or heroes of their subjects, let’s consider Anne Boleyn as an example. Historians either love or hate Anne and they write her accordingly. Some place emphasis on the belief that she never wanted the position she got and was the victim of a sociopathic king, yet, she still managed to do good as the king’s wife. Or they focus on the caricature of the scheming bitch, the bad she did in meddling in politics, disrupting the king’s marriage, effectively killing Katherine of Aragon and supposedly wearing yellow to the funeral (on the same day as Anne likely was suffering an 8-month miscarriage). She’s either a villain or heroic victim, feminist or pariah. But Anne Boleyn, like all women, is more complex than that, when in the position that she was faced with (the subject of distrust and disdain) it is likely that she did try to be a good queen, to influence the king to supporting the factions which supported her (she had managed to do so before they were married after all) and she was probably a good mother. But she was also not educated in politics, thus, long-standing beliefs that she meddled in court politics intentionally but dangerously are probably at least partially true. It is impossible to fit any person into a single archetype, historical figures included. If you created a character with as little nuance as some historians have suggested for Anne Boleyn your creative writing tutor would probably tell you that she was too unrealistic. If we think about Anne for a little bit longer, what we know about her is actually extremely slim, so maybe she was as George Bernard has suggested, a mindless feature of Tudor Court Politics, nothing compared to Thomas Cromwell’s majesty, or perhaps she was as Hayley Nolan argues, a victim of the sociopathic Henry VIII. Maybe she was even a feminist ahead of her time, a lot of historical women could be considered this if their efforts to stay alive and achieve some educational variety are considered. But the bottom line is, Anne Boleyn is a key example of how women are both vilified and heroised by historical study. In a way that their male counterparts are not, Cromwell, for example, is the feature of several nuanced histories debating the good and bad of his political efforts, attempting to understand his morality and his actions. Women are rarely given the same complexity, even Elizabeth I is treated like a sort of confused subhuman heroine in both scholarly and popular culture. The point of this rant is to demonstrate that history, especially women’s history rarely gives women the sort of celebration, criticism and attention for their actions in the same way that men are, there is a lack of complexity. Women’s and gender historians have made huge efforts over the past couple of decades in an attempt to address this failure, to redress the balance. We’re still working for that. The HERstory Project intends to contribute by providing a space for resources and discussion about women’s, gender, and sexuality histories, spotlighting individuals whose contributions, lives and experiences have been overlooked. I’m confused, you’re called The HERstory Project but you’re going to look at all types of history? Yes, the focus will be women and gender history, but history is a multidisciplinary area of study. Women have been involved in culture, religion, art, science, politics and war, so we will look at a huge variety of histories and spotlight women who deserve your attention (that’s everyone we can get to). We will also look at anyone who has been overlooked because they were transgressive in their gender or sexuality identities and discuss how queer histories can be understood when individuals might not have had the freedom nor vocabulary to have communicated their identities as we do now - is it fair to call Anne Lister a lesbian when we don’t know if she would have used this identity herself? There are several individuals who are quite elusive and it will be interesting to consider these people too. These individuals just happen to be mostly women… So, are there any women you won’t talk about? I doubt it, we will try not to give you the same discussions of the women who saturate historical study and historical fiction (excusing the use of Anne Boleyn above) but sometimes these women are worth discussing - why are they so popular and is the information we have accurate? How can we get involved? A significant point of this project is to create a space for women's, queer and under-represented histories, we need researchers, writers and editors, no qualifications required, to get involved. If you love history, and want to help us build a meaningful community for these histories, please get in touch! You can fill out the Join Us form at the bottom of the website, or email us at herstoryproj@gmail.com That’s all from me for now, thank you for reading. You can follow The HERstory Project on Insta and Twitter, search for @herstoryproj on both. See you soon! Abby Bibliography/Useful resources: On the value and definitions of women’s and gender as themes for study: Butler, Judith, 'Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomelogy and Feminist Theory', Theatre Journal, Vol.40, No.4 (1988), pp.519-531, < https://doi.org/10.2307/3207893 , [30/12/2022] Butler, Judith, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, (New York: Routledge, 1990) Meyerowitz, Joanne, 'A History of "Gender"', The American Historical Review, Vol.113, No.5, (2008), pp.1346-1356, < https://www.jstor.org/stable/30223445 >, [30/12/2022] Scott, Joan W., ‘Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis’, The American Historical Review, Vol.91, No.5, (1986), pp.1053-1075, < https://www.jstor.org/stable/1864376>, [26/12/2022] Scott, Joan W., Gender and the Politics of History, (New York: Colombia University Press, 1999) On Women's history generally: Amussen, Susan Dwyer, An Ordered Society, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988) Davies, Natalie Zemon, ‘Women in Politics‘ in A History of Women in the West, eds. Davis, Natalie Zemon, and Farge, Arlette (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1993), pp.167-185 Davis, Natalie Zemon, ‘Women on top’, in Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight essays, ed. Davis, Natalie Zemon, (Stanford: Stanford university press, 1975), pp. 124-51 Davis, Natalie Zemon, and Farge, Arlette, ‘Women as Historical actors’ in A History of women in the West, eds. Davis, Natalie Zemon, and Farge, Arlette, (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1993), pp.1-7 Eales, Jacqueline, Women in Early Modern England, 1500-1700, (London: UCL, 1998) Fletcher, Anthony, Gender and Subordination in England, 1500-1800, (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1995) Fraser, Antonia, The Weaker Vessel, (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984) Greer, Germaine, Medoff, Jeslyn, Sansone, Melinda and Hastings, Susan (Eds.) Kissing the Rod, (London: Virago Press, 1988) Hufton, Olwen, The Prospect before her, (London: Harper Collins, 1997) Jay, Nancy, ‘Sacrifice as Remedy for having been born a woman’, in Castelli, E.A. (eds) Women, Gender, Religion: A Reader, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001), pp.174-195, Laurence, Anne, Women in England, 1500-1780, (Great Britain: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1994) Melman, Billie, 'Gender, History and Memory: The Invention of Women's Past in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries', History and Memory, Vol.5, No.1, (1993), < : https://www.jstor.org/stable/25618641>, [30/12/2022] Nguyen, Athena, ‘Patriarchy, Power, and Female Masculinity’, Journal of Homosexuality, Vol.55, no.4, pp. 665-683, [22/11/2020] Paechter, Carrie, ‘Masculine femininities/feminine masculinities: power, identities and gender’, Gender and Education, Volume 18, No. 3, (May 2006), pp. 253-263, [23/11/2020] Sommerville, Margaret R, Sex and Subjection, (London: Arnold, Hodder Headline, 1995) Wiesner, Merry E., Women and gender in early modern Europe, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) Wiesner-Hanks, Merry, ‘Women’s Authority in the state and household in Early Modern Europe’, in Women who Ruled, ed. by Annette Dixon (London: Merrell Publishers LTD, in association with The University of Michigan Museum of Art, 2002), pp. 27-39 On Anne Boleyn, Tudor Politics and the other wives of Henry VIII: Beer, Barrett L., ‘Jane [née Jane Seymour], (1508-1537)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004/2008) < https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/14647 >, [27/12/2022] Bernard, G.W., Anne Boleyn: Fatal Attractions, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010) Davies, C.S.L., ‘Katherine [Catalina, Catherine, Katherine of Aragon], (1485-1536), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004/2011), https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/4891, [27/12/2022] Ives, E. W., ‘Anne Boleyn, (c.1500-1536), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004), < https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/557 >, [27/12/2022] Ives, Eric, The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn: The Most Happy, (London: Wiley-Blackwell, 1986) James, Susan E., ‘Katherine [Kateryn, Catherine] [née Katherine Parr]’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004/2012), < https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/4893>, [27/12/2022] Leithead, Howard, ‘Cromwell, Thomas, earl of Essex, (b. In or before 1485, d.1540), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004/2009), , [27/12/2022] Wernicke, Retha M., ‘Katherine [Catherine] [née Katherine Howard], (1518x1524-1542)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004/2008), , [27/12/2022] On James VI & I: Wormald, Jenny, ‘James VI and I (1566-1625)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (2004/2014), < https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/14592 >, [27/12/2022]