Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2006, Qupperneq 63

Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2006, Qupperneq 63
First steps towards an archaeology of children in Iceland cases recording large numbers of parents exposing their children. Another line of argument which Clover follows concerns polygny. She proposes that early medieval Scandi- navian society practised polygyny and points out the correlation between socie- ties that practise polygyny and those that practise female infanticide (Clover 1988: 170-2). The existence of polygny in early medieval Scandinavia is also is open to question because, again, it is supported by later literary evidence. Certainly for early Icelandic society it is hard to imag- ine that there was a desire to reduce the number of women who might survive to reach child-bearing age and then actually bear children and help sustain the new colony. In this context Clover cites many examples from other cultures where boys are seen as more valuable than girls but this runs counter to the needs of a society only recently having migrated to a new and relatively hostile environment such as Iceland. All healthy workers were surely valuable; and women’s deaths in child- birth should have made them more valu- able not less. It seems possible that in the very earliest decades of Iceland’s coloni- sation there were more men than women but it seems unnecessary to suppose that this imbalance was not rectified by, say, AD 1000. If we turn to the archaeology, adult burial populations have also been used to support the view that selective female infanticide took place in early medieval Scandinavia. In many cemeteries fewer adult females than males have been found. Yet the data ought simply not to be used in this way. There are well-known and continuing difficulties in determin- ing the biological sex of adult skeletons with the problem that the sex of many skeletons cannot be determined. Probably more important is the tendency to overes- timate the number of males where a sex determination is made. Osteologists know and accept that this is the case; techniques are not yet sophisticated enough for us to make better assessments of biological sex for archaeological skeletal material (e.g. Walker 2005). Even the stronger propo- nents of selective female infanticide rec- ognise the limitations for their case based on the archaeological evidence (Wicker 1998: 210-16). The strongest noted imbalance between genders was solely based on an analysis of Norwegian burials accompa- nied by grave goods (rather than of all burials). It assumed that the grave goods associated with the buried individual can be easily and directly related to the bio- logical sex of the person buried (Dom- masnes 1979: 98-103; Clover 1988: 165). Ratios of three male style burials to one female style burial (and indeed much higher) have been detected on this basis. The usefulness of this information for demographic patterns is limited for the reasons already mentioned: it is only a measure of the apparent gender of part of the population and not their biological sex; in reality, gender may have been far more complex than a simple binary divi- sion between all males and all females (Welinder 1998). And, in fact, where oste- ological analysis has taken place, the ratio of males to females can be much closer to 1:1. The classic study of Danish graves gave a male:female figure 1.16:1 and a more recent Swedish one gave exactly 1:1 (Sellevold et al 1984:178; Bolin 2004:176). It might also be argued that cremation burial, a rite which occurs in variable frequencies all over Scandinavia in the early middle ages and in which gen- 61
Qupperneq 1
Qupperneq 2
Qupperneq 3
Qupperneq 4
Qupperneq 5
Qupperneq 6
Qupperneq 7
Qupperneq 8
Qupperneq 9
Qupperneq 10
Qupperneq 11
Qupperneq 12
Qupperneq 13
Qupperneq 14
Qupperneq 15
Qupperneq 16
Qupperneq 17
Qupperneq 18
Qupperneq 19
Qupperneq 20
Qupperneq 21
Qupperneq 22
Qupperneq 23
Qupperneq 24
Qupperneq 25
Qupperneq 26
Qupperneq 27
Qupperneq 28
Qupperneq 29
Qupperneq 30
Qupperneq 31
Qupperneq 32
Qupperneq 33
Qupperneq 34
Qupperneq 35
Qupperneq 36
Qupperneq 37
Qupperneq 38
Qupperneq 39
Qupperneq 40
Qupperneq 41
Qupperneq 42
Qupperneq 43
Qupperneq 44
Qupperneq 45
Qupperneq 46
Qupperneq 47
Qupperneq 48
Qupperneq 49
Qupperneq 50
Qupperneq 51
Qupperneq 52
Qupperneq 53
Qupperneq 54
Qupperneq 55
Qupperneq 56
Qupperneq 57
Qupperneq 58
Qupperneq 59
Qupperneq 60
Qupperneq 61
Qupperneq 62
Qupperneq 63
Qupperneq 64
Qupperneq 65
Qupperneq 66
Qupperneq 67
Qupperneq 68
Qupperneq 69
Qupperneq 70
Qupperneq 71
Qupperneq 72
Qupperneq 73
Qupperneq 74
Qupperneq 75
Qupperneq 76
Qupperneq 77
Qupperneq 78
Qupperneq 79
Qupperneq 80
Qupperneq 81
Qupperneq 82
Qupperneq 83
Qupperneq 84
Qupperneq 85
Qupperneq 86
Qupperneq 87
Qupperneq 88
Qupperneq 89
Qupperneq 90
Qupperneq 91
Qupperneq 92
Qupperneq 93
Qupperneq 94
Qupperneq 95
Qupperneq 96
Qupperneq 97
Qupperneq 98
Qupperneq 99
Qupperneq 100

x

Archaeologia Islandica

Direct Links

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Archaeologia Islandica
https://timarit.is/publication/1160

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.