Gender-Critical Archaeology in Sweden. a Review
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
105 Gender-Critical Archaeology in Sweden. A Review Tove Hjgrungdal This paper summarizes feminist, gender-critical Swedish archaeology as well as some Swedish archaeological literature mentioning aspects of gender in general. The literature discussed was published primarily during the last decade or so. Attempts are made to deduce problems and to some extent to enlarge upon certain questions felt to be of urgency. One conclusion is however, that investigations and analyses have to be expanded on and conclusions and statements outlined, in order to understand why Swedish archaeology is depicted as it is by several different authors, seen in a gender-critical perspective. Tove Hjetrungdal, Department of Atchaeology, University of Umeå, S- 90l 87 Umeå, Sweden. In reviewing literature on gender and arch- by male and female archaeologists, many of aeology in Sweden, it feels urgent to try to whom have worked within Swedish discuss it in its social and intellectual con- archaeology for a long time. The conclusion text. I have as such thrown some light on is, however, not a surprise. It corresponds to educational factors as well as on general conclusions from analyses carried out in conditions of gender-critical, feminist per- archaeology (Engelstad et al. 1992; Wylie spectives. As a consequence of this, I have 1992) and in academia at large (Fiirst stressed the Present/Past relationship in my 1988). classification. It is a pleasure to note that I am going to list and briefly summarize the total number of publications on gender- recently published literature on gender-re- critical issues within Swedish archaeology is lated questions in Swedish archaeology. A much larger than I had expected before I review paper is not the medium for a tho- started my compilation of them for a survey. rough outline and explanation of conditions, However, after a systematic read through of statements and facts found in the scholarly this literature, one gets the general impres- publications in question. It will as such only sion that conditions for male and female be possible here to give a superficial im- archaeologists, respectively, still seem to be pression of the importance and necessity of far from equal. Statistical analyses as well gender-critical perspectives in Swedish as outlines of personal experiences reveal archaeology. The conditions of gendered that conditions are not beneficial to women, relations of power comprise the very point rather, they seem to be in favour of men. of departure for gender-critical, or feminist, This conclusion is drawn on the basis of research. If one had the ambitions to get a presentations in Swedish archaeological firm background to the conditions of en- publications during the last decade or so. gendered power in Swedish archaeology, it The critical analyses in question are made would not be sufficient to read the publis- Current Swedish Archoeology. Vot. 3, l 995 106 To&:e Hj prungdal hed literature. There are too many circum- well as Swedish publications on prehistoric stances and facts that have to be taken se- source material from areas outside the riously; and too many points as well as gene- country, are defined as Swedish archaeology. ral conclusions in the literature listed here Another point in this respect is that some of are not enlarged upon. the works on gender are written by scholars In order to explain and discuss why there who have, or earlier had, a foot in Norwe- are unequal possibilities in Swedish archaeo- gian archaeology (Hjgrungdal; Johnsen; logy, and to get a closer look at how these Lundström; Magnus; Welinder). As a con- inequalities are maintained and questioned, sequence of this, it feels natural to start my I would prefer comprehensive analyses from outline with the mid-1980s, at the time of a sociological, current as well as a histori- the foundation of K.A.N. , "Kvinner i Arkeo- cal perspective. To complete a synthesis on logi i Norge" (= Women in Archaeology in gender-related power in archaeology, analy- Norway (1985)).It seems that this had some ses should also be conducted on the new impact on Swedish archaeology as well. university reform with its present changing Although issues like woman's position structures of power on a general level. The and equity were briefly debated in Swedish same kind of analysis should be carried out archaeology some years earlier, in connec- in connection with the so-called HUR-re- tion with the International Women's Year form, which represents aspects of a gene- of 1975, the debate did not immediately lay rally changing power structure within the firm ground for a feminist, gender-critical realms of archaeology in Sweden (cf. Pérez archaeology on a systematical level. The & Browall 1992).I think it is of vital impor- roots of Swedish modern archaeology to a tance to be aware of the fact that in the certain extent have also been characterized archaeologists' reply to the HUR-document, by a strong emancipatory tradition from no equity issues are touched upon. Oscar Montelius and Hanna Rydh (cf. Through the university reform program, Arwill-Nordbladh 1987; 1989;1990a; 1991a). on the contrary, equity issues are stressed. Swedish archaeology can take pride in Another important aspect of the matter is being able to trace its emancipatory roots that universities also have published pro- back to one of the real giants within Euro- grammes aiming at bringing such incon- pean archaeology. However, the tradition venient and shame-laden topics as sexual from Montelius has not been continuous. harassment to the surface — as well as aiming For example, there are not many Swedish at dispelling such ways of extreme and ex- gender-critical archaeological papers, if any, plicit gendered power relations in future. I during the period between the Internatio- am not going to discuss the above men- nal Women' s Year of 1975 and the time of tioned documents. Such an investigation the foundation of the Norwegian K.A.N. in would, in my opinion, be a natural part of a 1985. In Norway conditions were different, larger sociological investigation and would and the first theses were written during the demand extensive research resources with middle of the 1970s (cf. Dommasnes 1992). regard to both economy and time as well During the Women's Year, museums were as personnel. supposed to issue something on the topic of Swedish archaeological literature in the women. At the Museum of National Antiqui- present paper refers to works written by ties in Stockholm an exhibition was pro- archaeologists usually living in Sweden and duced as well as a catalogue on this, made usually employed by Swedish museums, uni- up of papers written by well-known re- versities, antiquity boards, etc. Accordingly, searchers (Thålin-Bergman ed. 1975).At the papers in foreign books or periodicals, as University of Lund, female professors were Current Sw edish Arehaeology, Vol. 3, l995 Gender-Critical Archaeolog& in Sweden 107 asked by the university staff to write paper is vitally important to discuss possible ways on women within their own subject. Profes- of labelling, just as it is important to state sor Berta Stjernquist fulfilled this task on the fact that through this very classification the behalf of archaeology, writing on famous a subdivision is already suggested. If we women in prehistory (Stjernquist 1975). take a look at a recent categorization of Shortly after, a report was written on the Norwegian gender-critical archaeology question of equity issues at the Museum of (Dommasnes 1992), we will instead find National Antiquities (Jämställd 1984/85). that a historical periodization is made. If we However, the report was unfortunately not look back some years we will, however, also published. find within Norwegian gender-critical arch- What gender is supposed to mean, is a aeology a subdivision that is similar in many very complicated matter. In Swedish arch- respects to the one referred to in Sweden. aeology several concepts are accepted, like According to the Norwegian scholar Dom- Women' s studies, Gender archaeology, Gen- masnes, roughly at that time there were der-critical archaeology and Feminist approaches focusing on women as groups archaeology, but there are only a few authors within social systems, approaches focusing who discuss the gender concept thoroughly on gender relations, as well as a more deeply (Nordbladh k Yates 1990; Wennstedt Edvin- rooted "her-story" approach (Dommasnes ger 1993). It is possible to discuss it from 1987). The question that arises then, is several aspects. whether it is too early to write a systemati- cal and analytical research history of Swe- ON SURVEYING THE LITERATURE- dish gender-critical archaeology that would HOW? make it possible to arrange the develop- I will then move to the literature I was asked ment into relatively clear defined phases, the to go through; and as a convenient point of way Dommasnes did in Norwegian archaeo- departure I have chosen K.A.N. No. 12 logy. I do not think it is. (1991), a special issue on gender perspec- To bring up another point of discussion, tive in Swedish archaeology. Here Swedish which is also a personal one, I am not"very archaeology is analysed in a gender-critical happy with the term "Kvinnoarkeologi, sug- light, statistically as well as historically. gested in K.A.N. 12. In English this cer- Some of the papers in this collection were tainly means "Women' s archaeology, "which No- first given at a conference in Uppsala in sounds rather good to my ears," as does the vember 1989, which was initiated by Stig notion of "Women' s history. In Swedish, Welinder. In K.A.N. 12, papers are grouped however, I have the feeling that "Kvinno- into three different themes: arkeologi" sounds very different.