When we think of Vikings, we tend to imagine large, bearded men in armor bearing swords, raping and pillaging. But where do women factor in this picture? Did they have stations of power in Viking culture, or were they merely domestic figures?
Outside of the common stereotypes, women are essentially invisible to the naked eye of Viking history. However, through interpretation of the archaeological record (especially burial evidence), we can begin to understand how women were perceived in Viking culture, how gender was expressed and defined, and essentially, how women lived and what was important to them. We seek to explore these questions through the lens of Mike Parker Pearson's book, The Archaeology of Death and Burial, and in particular his chapter on gender, gender biases, and reaffirming the equal roles and power of men and women.
ROLE OF WOMEN IN VIKING
SOCIETY
 |
| A sketch of a Viking longhouse |
Viking women, according to the old Norse lawbook Grágás, could not become chieftains, shave their hair short like a man's, wear men's clothing, or carry weapons. Their role was confined to the domestic, the hearth, farm, food, children, and house, and they were under the constant lawful protection of a male relative or spouse. They could not bear witness at court or even speak at village assemblies. (Short, Hurstwic.org). However, how does this explain the role of women in other pursuits, even war?
.jpg) |
| A pg from the Gragas |
Women existed within Viking culture, but they were not considered strictly "Viking." The Old Norse term Vikingar is masculine and refers to those men who joined raiding parties and spread out across Europe to Constantinople. (Jesch, 2011: BBC.com). However, women did participate in trade, travelled with men to create permanent settlements across the world, could wield weapons (as opposed to the Grágás), and were portrayed in Norse myths as powerful, vengeful beings (see the Valkyries and Freya, etc). (Quinn, 2005:20-28). The annals also portray women as strong figures, albeit in domestic conditions. Gudny Bodvarsdottir is one such woman. She was married young, but took control over her husband's house and farm, which she ran even during invasions and wars. (Jochens, 1995: 7-11). Although Gudny seemed like a stereotypical housewife, she was a capable, strong woman who took control of her situation.
The view of Viking culture as "male dominated," with women solely tending the hearth and men solely wielding swords and leadership positions is highly flawed and erases women's agency within Viking history. (Short, 2012: Hurstwic.org). As Marianne Moen states in her work, A Discussion on Gender, Status and Power in the Norwegian Viking Age Landscape, there is no universal gendered experience, but a wide spectrum of stories. (2011: 3-5). We cannot merely accept the power of Viking men whilst ignoring that of Viking women. Parker Pearson discusses O'Shea's concept of associative status, which can be applied to assumptions about women in the Viking age. (1999: 109). Hurstwic.org and other websites take the associative stance when arguing that women had little power, and that the power they did have was determined by men and their laws. Determining whether or not this is true in burial evidence is where the archaeological record is most useful.
HOW THESE ROLES
ARE SUPPORTED AND SOMETIMES CONTESTED IN BURIALS
Although burial evidence shows varied stories of the lives of Viking women, one main problem has surfaced in the sheer lack of graves dating to the Viking Age (1 in every 4 graves is proven female). (Moen, 2011: 6). However, the burials archaeologists have unearthed provide a wealth of knowledge. Of course, one must also note that the grandest Viking grave ever discovered, the Oseberg Shipwreck, was a woman's grave.
Gendered graves are, as Parker Pearson states, highly connected to status. (1999: 109). In Norwegian Viking culture, monumental burial mounds, particularly those that were visible, were used to convey power and status roles. Although many of these are considered male graves, and male expressions of power and prestige, women were interred in secondary positions within these mounds. However, in terms of the grave goods buried with both sexes, there is no discernable difference in shape or wealth. (Moen, 2011: 38). A video showing an example of Viking barrow graves (elevation, manipulation of landscape, etc) in Borre, Norway can be seen below.
Parker Pearson brings up the topic of Viking women burials in his book as well. He discusses the finding of weighing scales in women's graves and how they have been interpreted by the academic community, and the problem of gender identity. (1999:102). These scales have been seen as gifts from marauding husbands, or meaningless tokens of status. However, these goods may go hand in hand with the written Scandinavian sources that tell us women were involved in the market and trade. Anne Starlsberg, quoted in Archaeology of Death, believes that the interpretations of the scales as gifts rather than possessions stems from the cage of tradition archaeology has been locked in for decades. (Parker Pearson, 1999:102). Alluding to the case of the barrows presented above, Parker Pearson argues that although women are rarely seen in primary positions within the barrows, there are twice as many female secondary graves as there are male. (1999:102). Dommasnes, another scholar quoted, analyzed the grave goods placed with women and determined that, as they were interred with a range of production tools, including textile implements, women could have been involved not only in trade, but in cloth production. (Parker Pearson 1999:102). This alone challenges the traditional, purely domestic role of women.
Taking this further, evidence also exists of women buried with weapons. Women were not interred with weapons at the same level as men, but exceptions to the rule exist. Written sources such as the writings of Ibn Fadlan, etc attest to the presence of female warriors, and women warriors exist in both Rus' and Danish Viking writings. (Moen 2011: 41). Goods interred at grave C15214-15218 at Kaupang consisted of a double-edged sword, a knife, hook-shaped implements, and strike-a-lights, all tools associated with Viking warriors. (Moen 2011: 56). Grave C21843, 21960 at Lamoya (a barrow) consists of an implement shaped like Thor's hammer, a knife, fishing hooks, and strap buckles. Another grave at Kaupang also shows the burial of a woman with an axe, and a horse bit and mount. (Moen 2011:50).
The Borre barrows, which were symbols of power and status.
Taking this further, evidence also exists of women buried with weapons. Women were not interred with weapons at the same level as men, but exceptions to the rule exist. Written sources such as the writings of Ibn Fadlan, etc attest to the presence of female warriors, and women warriors exist in both Rus' and Danish Viking writings. (Moen 2011: 41). Goods interred at grave C15214-15218 at Kaupang consisted of a double-edged sword, a knife, hook-shaped implements, and strike-a-lights, all tools associated with Viking warriors. (Moen 2011: 56). Grave C21843, 21960 at Lamoya (a barrow) consists of an implement shaped like Thor's hammer, a knife, fishing hooks, and strap buckles. Another grave at Kaupang also shows the burial of a woman with an axe, and a horse bit and mount. (Moen 2011:50).
EXAMPLES -- OSEBERG, KAUPANG, AND ORKNEY
Three great examples of Viking burials show the variation in the status and power of women. The Oseberg shipwreck, arguably the most famous of the three, is a grand burial of a Viking queen and her female servant. Kaupang is an urban example of women's involvement in trade. Finally, Orkney shows that women travelled and were involved in colonization of new territory.
Three great examples of Viking burials show the variation in the status and power of women. The Oseberg shipwreck, arguably the most famous of the three, is a grand burial of a Viking queen and her female servant. Kaupang is an urban example of women's involvement in trade. Finally, Orkney shows that women travelled and were involved in colonization of new territory.
 |
| The Oseberg Ship |
Although Oseberg is a famous site, it has also been the subject of gender controversy, a topic discussed by Parker Pearson in Archaeology of Death. (1999: 109-113). Rather than giving the Oseberg queen her rightful power and status, archaeologists have interpreted her role as a sacrifice, a princess, a mother of a powerful Viking, or a daughter of some great leader or official. (Moen, 2011: 38-39).
Despite its controversy, Oseberg is an excellent example of a barrow grave designed to convey power and prestige. The external mound had a diameter of 40 meters and was six meters high at the time of its construction. (Moen, 2011:20). In terms of the goods found within the grave, an interesting detail to note is that no jewelry outside of a small, oval brooch was ever found. (Moen, 2011:20). A staff, textile tools, an extensive display of textiles, woodwork, strange rattles (considered to be connected with ritual, music, or equestrian acts), wagons, sleighs, and sails were found. The rattles are interesting because they could imply that the woman buried might have had some sort of everyday involvement in ritual. (Moen, 2011:20-21). Moen makes an interesting point when discussing the ship buried with the queen. According to Viking tradition, a burial ship must be ready for travel before it was interred with the diseased, and this ship had sails, a mast, and full set of oars. (Moen, 2011:21). Could this have implied that the women buried at Oseberg were involved, in some form or another, with travel?
Another interesting topic of note is the positioning of Oseberg, and its connection to the power of those buried there. It was built on a plain, as opposed to the traditional hill, which implies a matter of landscape manipulation and control. (Moen, 2011:24).
Moen's text is fascinating because not only does she go into great detail about Oseberg, but argues against some of the traditional explanations. She does not believe that the two women interred with the ship were of different social status. Instead, she argues that no evidence can be found in their attire that supports the previous hypothesis. (Moen 2011:26). Both women, older and younger, died of horrible diseases (one of cancer, the other might have had a brain tumor), but it is actually difficult to separate them in terms of social class. (Moen 2011:26). A. W. Brogger tried to identify one of the Oseberg women as Queen Asa of the Ynglinga family, but Moen argues (an interesting connection to Parker Pearson) that this is flawed because it depends on a connection with men and male power structures. Moen suggests that the women could have been involved strongly with Viking ritual based on the grave goods (rattles, tapestries, animal heads, etc). (Moen, 2011: 27.). She also argues that they could have gained their prestige through the production of textile goods, independent of male influence. (Moen, 2011:27).
 |
| A Model of Kaupang |
Kaupang was a market place, and therefore a site of economic significance, and this is shown in the goods interred in female graves. Textiles, beads, iron, nails, horse bits, fishing hooks, knives, cauldrons, rods, buckets, sickles, hinges, etc all suggest a connection to economic pursuits. (Moen, 2011: 50-55).
 |
| Burial recreation from Orkney |
Orkney is another example of a grave conveying unique and different conceptions of Viking women. Orkney, or in particular, Westness, is located in Scotland, a far cry from the Norwegian graves above. The presence of a young woman and a newborn infant far from their native country shows us that women travelled with men, and helped to colonize new lands. (Jesch, 1995: 9).
Goods interred with her include a bronze basin, a knife, a pair of shears, a sickle (all outdoor implements), wool combs, brooches, beads, and the most unique and interesting: a Celtic silver-ringed brooch inset with gold filigree panels, which was dated to around the 8th c BCE. This brooch, as Jesch argues, is of a style typically found in Scotland and Ireland, but the woman buried there was Viking in origin. The brooch was also quite worn, showing that the deceased woman was not its original owner. (Jesch, 1995: 9-10).
WOMEN IN RUNES AND MONUMENTS
 |
| The Odendisa Runestone |
In addition to burials, evidence found in runestones (used to commemorate the dead, hence the connection) shows that women were actually celebrated by men. Runestones typically commemorate good Viking men, so finding a stone dedicated to a woman is a very rare. The greatest example of a stone connected to a woman is the Odendisa Runestone, also called the Hassmyra Runestone.
The Odendisa Runestone was dedicated to a woman who shared its name. Her husband, Holmgot, and her brother erected it in her honor after her death. It is notable because in the poem etched into the stone, Odendisa is called "som rader for garden" meaning, "she who runs the farm." (Graslund, 2001:83-84). This is interesting because it can be compared to provincial law at the time (thirteenth century), which states that women actually had the right to inherit a man's possessions after his death (interesting contrast to what we learned above!). (Graslund, 2001:86-87).
Here is the verse inscribed on the stone:
KumbR hifrøya There will come
til Hasvimyra to Hassmyra
æigi bætri, no better housewife,
þan byi raðr. who arranges the estate.
(Upsalla University, 2012)
This runestone, hand in hand with the burial evidence shown above, paints a completely different picture of Viking women than we are traditionally used to.
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE
In conclusion, a purely male-dominant view of Viking society is both flawed and completely untrue. As we have seen, the burial and archaeological evidence suggests that women made their own way in the world, possessed their own power, without the influence of men. They were domestic figures, but not just. They were involved in colonization, trade, religion and ritual, animal husbandry, production, and held positions of power.
The renewed analysis of women in Viking culture is important to this class because it shows that believing and continuing the normative view is unacceptable in the academic world, and taking a step back to question it is absolutely necessary.
Sources:
Graslund, Anne-Sofie, "The Position of Iron Age Scandinavian Women" Gender and the Archaeology of Death. Altamira Press (2001).
Jesch, Judith, "Life and Death - The Evidence of Archaeology" Women in the Viking Age. Boydell Press (1995).
Jesch, J.. "Viking Women." Bbc.co.uk. BBC, Marc. Web. 28 Mar 2012. .
Jochens, Jenny, "Gudny Bodvarsdottir and Gudrun Gjukadotti: Nordic-Germanic Continuity" Women in Old Norse Society. Cornell University Press (1995).
Bianci, Marco, ed. "Scandinavian Runic-text Database."Department of Scandinavian Languages. Upsalla University, 2012. Web. 28 Mar 2012. .
Moen, Marianne, The Gendered Landscape: A Discussion on Gender, Status, and Power in the Norwegian Viking Age Landscape. BAR International Series (2011).
Pearson, Michael. Archaeology of Death and Burial Texas A&M University Press (1999).
Short, W.. "The Role of Women in Norse Society."Hurstwic. N.p., 2012. Web. 28 Mar 2012. .
Vea, Marit Synnøve. "Women in the Viking Age."Viking Kings. The Avaldsnes Project, n.d. Web. 28 Mar 2012.
