Reflexive Practice and the Archaeological Interpretation of Sex and Gender from Human Remains
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Modern Visions of a Gendered Past: Reflexive practice and the archaeological interpretation of sex and gender from human remains. Wendelin Sara Romer, B. A. Hons. Cantab. Submitted for the qualification of Doctor of Philosophy University of York Department of Archaeology June 2008 Dedicated to my teachers,family, friends, and all thosepeople, living and dead, who have helped me on the Way If learning is not followed by reflecting and practicing, it is not true learning. Thich Nhat Hanh O'X. i -11M;' What a long procession of dead bodiesfollows the wake of a single living person! Chao-chou Ts'ung-shen 2 Contents Page 7 Abstract 8 Acknowledgements 9 Part 1. Bodies as Material Evidence: Introduction to the Thesis 9- Introduction 14 Ch. 1. Contexts and Concepts 14 1.1 Introduction 16 1.2 Context and Meaning 17 - The relevance of mortuary archaeology 20 - Development, approachesand problems 26 1.3 Complex Relations: Theoretical Approaches to Gender and Sex 41 1.4 Cultural and socio-political contexts 43 1.5 Interwoven Stories: Archaeologies of Gender and Sex 53 Ch. 2. Conversations with Archaeologists: Research Methodology 53 2.1 Introduction 54 2.2 Locating the ResearchMethodology 54 - The Scientific Context 59 - Qualitative Approaches 61 2.3 The Reflexive Research Cycle 61 - Case Studies 66 - Sampling strategies 69 - The Interview Cycle 85 - Interview Ethics 88 2.4 The Case Study Interview Process 89 - Reflexivity 90 - Case study selection 91 - Interview Instrumentation 93 - Participant Selection interview 95 - The process as a whole 101 2.5 The Analytical Process 107 Part 2. Bringing the Dead to Life: The Case Studies 107 - Introduction 111 - The ResearchParticipants 3 114 Ch. 3. The Context of the Cases 114 3.1 The Cultural Context 123 3.2 The Institutional Context 127 3.3 The Intellectual Context 133 3.4 The Reflexive Researcher Context 140 Ch. 4. Case A 140 4.1 Context 145 4.2 Analysis 145 i) Interpreting human remains/mortuary context using sex and gender 149 - Reflection 149 ii) Reflexive process 155 - Reflection 156 iii) The relationship and tension between scientific and cultural approaches in osteoarchaeology 159 - Reflection 160 iv) Personal identity, context and values as imperatives 166 - Reflection 167 Ch. 5. Case B 167 5.1 Context 169 5.2 Analysis 169 i) Interpreting human remains/mortuary context using sex and gender 175 - Reflection 176 ii) Reflexive process 180 - Reflection 181 iii) Expressions of religious context and meaning in gender/mortuary archaeology 185 - Reflection 185 iv) The tension between experiencelinsight and scientific/empirical practice in analysis and interpretation 186 - Reflection 187 Ch. 6. Case C 187 6.1 Context 189 6.2 Analysis 4 189 i) Interpreting human remains/mortuary context using sex and gender 196 - Reflection 197 ii) Reflexive process 200 - Reflection 201 iii) A concern with death in the past relating to death in the present - Reflection 204 iv) An interest in death and/or gender linking to lifecycle and change over time 208 - Reflection 209 Ch. 7. Case D 209 7.1 Context 211 7.2 Analysis 211 i) Interpreting human remains/mortuary context using sex and gender 218 - Reflection 218 ii) Reflexive process 223 - Reflection 223 iii) Right and wrong ways of dealing with the excavation, analysis and interpretation of human remains 228 - Reflection 229 iv) Human remains as science not people? 235 - Reflection 235 7.3 Review 236 Part 3. Interpretation and Conclusions 236 - Introduction 239 Ch. 8. Interpretations 239 8.1 Introduction 242 8.2 Individual Case Interpretations Case A 242 - Interpretation of Case B 244 - Interpretation of Case C 247 - Interpretation of Case D 249 - Interpretation of 252 8.3 Full Case Interpretation 5 262 Ch. 9. Conclusions, Lessons and Implications 263 9.1 Conclusions 271 9.2 Lessons 278 9.3 Implications for Implementing the Methodology 283 Bibliography I Appendix A. Further Details of Research IV Appendix B. ResearchParticipant Informed Consent Form 6 Abstract This thesis considers whether a reflexive methodology can provide insights into the interpretation of sex and gender from human remains, and whether it may usefully be applied in practice. A reflexive methodology is employed to undertake the collection of research material. The methodology is used to investigate the central research question through a case study based in Ireland. The innovative approach to this investigation uses a depth interview method which delves into aspectsof how we interpret sex, gender and human remains, and offers a different view of how culture, ideology and personal identity are reflected in the practice of archaeologists and osteoarchaeologists. By looking at the casesof four individuals from Ireland, this thesis makes a study of the particular in order to provide a better understanding of the wider issues and implications. The interpretation of sex and gender, how they relate, how they are conceptualised and what they mean to those who work with human remains are all addressedin the depth analysis of each case narrative. The great potential for using a reflexive methodology to provide us with a different way of viewing the material, as well as ourselves as archaeologists interpreting biological sex and gender is proposed. 7 Acknowledgements I would like to express my particular gratitude to those archaeologists and osteoarchaeologistswho were participants in this research, including those who offered their time to be involved with the pilot interviews. I would also like to thank my supervisor, Steve Roskams for his guidance and debate over the years and Martin Carver for his support. I offer special thanks to Dr. Jake Lyne and Professor Kristine Mason-O'Connor for their involvement, interest and reflections as my `second pairs of eyes'. For their wonderful support and inspiration, editorial assistance and cups of tea, my thanks and love to the Alexander family, Dr. Penny Spikins, Joanne Rothwell and Alastair Morrison. And finally, I would like to give special thanks Ken Jones for his beautiful poetry, Jannie Mead for encouraging me to engagewith dialogue and David Brown, becausehe asked the question. Gate, Gate, Paragate, Parasamgale, Bodhi Svaha. 8 Part 1. Bodies as Material Evidence: Introduction to the Thesis Iambs for the Day of Burial Of all our private parts the heart knows best that love and grieving share the one body and keep a steady iambic tally of this life's syllables, stressed and unstressed. Our pulse divided by our breathing equals pleasure measured in pentameters, pain endured in oddly rhyming pairs: sadness,gladness, sex and death, nuptials, funerals. Love made and love forsaken - each leaves us breathless and beatified, more than the sum of parts that lived and died of love and grief. Both leave the heart broken. Thomas Lynch Still Life in Milford, 1998 Introduction The central, pivotal point of this thesis is where and how theory and practice meet. My primary concern is with the archaeological interpretation of gender and biological sex from human remains and the mortuary context; the thesis will ask whether it is possible to gain a deeper insight into these aspects of the archaeological record by using a reflexive methodology to interpret them. In order to explore this question I will use Ireland as a contextual case study to investigate how interpretations are made by archaeologists, and reflect on the effect their cultural and personal context has on their visions of the past. To do this, I use a reflexive interview methodology as the primary instrument of 9 investigation, interviewing four archaeologists from Ireland whose work involves the interpretation of human skeletal remains or the mortuary context. This is done in order to discover how these archaeologists are conceptualising and understanding the archaeological material and whether a reflexive interpretation methodology may be usefully applied in practice. The practice of excavating, recording and analysing evidence provided by human remains to inform the interpretation of past social structures is effected by cultural and personal understandings of sex and gender, whether they are perceived as `theoretically informed' or not. Currently in mainstream archaeology and osteoarchaeology, this interpretation is made via a process of inductive reasoning based on universal gender and biological sex `truths', a situation which has remained despite an international critique from Feminist and postmodern/postprocessual theorising. I will argue in this thesis that these theories and critiques have had a limited impact on the mainstream archaeological discipline as a whole and specifically on the interpretation of sex and gender as they have yet to develop and apply a unified, theory informed practice, and because within their critiques they are unable to define a workable understanding of the relationship between sex and gender. This thesis goes beyond the postprocessual `hermeneutic' that observations are influenced by theory (Carver, in press), and investigates the personal and cultural perspectives, decisions and ideologies which inform the current practice that results in a dualistic opposition of the categories of sex and gender. Postmodern archaeologies have functioned as a tool for questioning whether a single theory for the interpretation of gender and sex in archaeology across time and culture is possible. However we must now take the awarenessof the problems that this questioning has brought to the fore, and actually do something with them in practice; otherwise it remains an impotent intellectual exercise. It is useful to note at this early stage that throughout this thesis, the term `gender' should not be read as interchangeable with `women' as it often 10 has been in mainstream archaeology and beyond as a result of the Feminist agenda. Nor is it necessarily descriptive of a women/men oppositional dichotomy. Rather,. the possibilities of single or multiple genders should be held in mind and in cases where it is otherwise intended becauseof context, this will be made explicit. Equally, the term `biological sex' should be considered as a `finger pointing at the moon' - in other words, to question what biological sex is, without having an idea of what it is based in ontological categories.