Archeaological Artifact Analysis Conducted on Gotland Viking Burials.

1. Jeff Grimm
Anthropology Lab
Final Paper
Gender Distribution Among Gotland Viking Burials
Did the Vikings import their textiles or manufacture them on the isle of Gotland Sweden?
This is the question being asked by Barbra Klessig for her masters thesis on Gotland Viking
textiles. Barbara is a textile archeologist who believes that Gotland was importing the majority
of it’s textiles from abroad during the Viking age. She hypothesizes that though some production
was occurring on the island, it was small and localized. Barbara had asked me to determine based
on certain criteria the gender distribution of the graves from her sample. Specifically I was
asked to document which female graves possessed textile tools and which did not. The
percentage of females with textile tools is important as it could potentially reveal the extent of
textile manufacturing on the island.
Background
Gotland is an island off the coast of Sweden that was once inhabited by the Viking
culture. Burials within the sample that was investigated occured during the Viking age, an era of
European history that fits toward the end of the larger European Dark Age time period. The
European Dark Ages ranged from the slow deterioration of the Western Roman Empire to the
beginning of the first European Crusades, roughly from 400 - 1000 AD. The Viking period
extends roughly from 790 AD to 1100 AD, when Vikings migrated down from the northern part
of Europe, raiding, setting up trade routes, establishing settlements and improving on their own
lands through the import of foreign goods (Edge & Paddock).

2. Method
Because information on Viking burials is more readily available then settlement
information, several burials and graveyards were examined for this project. These graveyards
have been systematically excavated since the 1950's up until the present though some artifacts
were being procured as far back as the 1800s (Klessig). Because the bodies were not included
with their associated artifacts and because the goal of my project was to find textile tools, gender
was to be determined from the artifacts themselves. In addition, I am not aware of whether the
sexes of the individuals are even available translated in English.
I analyzed 397 burials from 93 sites ranging all over Gotland with the goal of
ascertaining the gender of each burial artifact set and locate any textile manufacturing tools
within female burials. I used one of four categories to classify each individual as, male, female
without tools, female with tools and an undetermined category. I worked from a printed roster of
all the sites and burials using four highlighter markers to mark each listed burial artifact set into
one of the four categories.
Each burials artifact set was photographed and published in the book Die Wilkingerzet
Gotlands, a publication of Gotland Viking burial artifact sets. I worked set by set through the
book starting first with male graves as they were the easiest to identify. The first criteria I
examined for male graves was the presence of weapons other then the utilitarian multi-purpose
knives found with both male and female graves. In Viking society warfare was a gender stratified
activity regulated exclusively to men (Klessig). Any presence of weapon grave goods surely
indicates the burial of a male individual. By far the most numerous of the weapons cataloged

3. among the burials was a plethora of axe-heads made of metal. Axes bore a special significance
among the Vikings because of their unique utilitarian nature. A Viking man fought with his axe,
chopped wood with his axe and could even build a ship with just his axe (Cantor). Being so
handy and so vital to the Vikings as a tool and weapon, it is not surprising that so many axe-
heads appear within the grave goods examined.
The second most numerous weapon I noted was the sword. A weapon of special
importance and often a sign of rank within the warrior class (Cantor) many, of the swords had
been denatured. The reason for denaturation could be speculated as a way of keeping grave
robbers from recovering the swords from the burials and keep the coveted weapon out of the
hands of anyone except the intended, deceased, owner. Spear heads were found as a third weapon
category and occurred usually in sets. Spears often held a similar place in Viking society as the
axe though not as important (Cantor). These implements were used for both hunting and combat,
analogous to the modern day shotgun.
Belt decorations and metal belt buckles were another major indicator of a male grave as
men typically always wore leather and women sported woven belts (Klessig). These gender
specific differences in belt construction stems from the speculated utilitarian nature of the
Vikings. Because men within Viking Society often were subjected to more physically taxing
activities and in many instances had to travel great distance it makes sense that they would utilize
leather as a belt material. Additionally leather holds up belt mounted objects, such as swords,
much more readily then woven materials (Klessig).
Male broach cloak pins were identified due to there stylistic bull horn shape, and thick
lines. These broaches were made of a bronze colored metal and sometimes were shaped often
like twined rope. These broach cloak pins were always found with weapons when weapons were

4. present, and often were a major identifier of male graves.
Female burials were often differentiated on the basis of female artifacts present and the
absence of any male artifacts. The major differentiating female artifact used for gender
identification was the animal head broaches. Stylistically exclusive to Gotland these broaches
depict heavily abstract animal heads that would have been worn on the over apron of a Viking
women. Because these animal head broaches are so unique looking and a female exclusive item,
when paired with other female paraphernalia I almost always labeled the burial artifacts as
belonging to a female.
Other female items consisted of an sort of tortoise broaches (named so because they
resemble a tortoise shell) crystal jewelry, keys, chains and intricately beaded jewelry. The
tortoise broaches were standard Viking female apparel found elsewhere throughout Scandinavia
(Klessig). Because they are associated strictly as a female item they operated as a secondary
indicator when animal head broaches were not present. Jewelry with silver/gold chains and/or
crystal also were indicative of a female burial. One female artifact that puzzled me was the
inclusion of keys made of bone, wood and metal. To my recollection these keys did not turn up
in male burials grave goods and purpose within the grave can only be speculated. A possible
connection between women and the keys may involve the fact that keys were domestic items
used to secure items within the house as well as the house itself. This could indicate that women
were seen as a domestic gender, tied intricately to the homestead.
The main focus of my analysis was always the search for recognizable textile tools within
the grave goods. Three particular items I attempted to become familiar identifying were the
spindle whorl, the needle and the pattern card. Spindel Whorls were difficult to visually identify
due to the nature of not actually having the artifact on hand. Spindel whorls look suspiciously

5. like large beads and because the book did not include any scale I attempted to become familiar
with the shape of the tool. Spindel whorls differ in shape from beads in that the spindel whorl
takes on a wide flying saucer shape while beads tend to be more round and orb like. I identified a
few needles which I speculate was made of bone as well as some patterning cards that seem to
have partially bio-degraded. The needles were initially problematic as I confused them with the
cloak pins, which are also needle like objects sans an eye. Upon clarification from Barbara, I
learned that cloak pins are much more decorative and because of the decoration would not
function to pass through any material.
The final undetermined category consisted of all burial grave goods that could not be
placed into the previously discussed groupings. The artifacts I associated with these were often
beads, burial nails (more on these), knives and scraps of metal. The major factor that went into
determining the sorting of artifact sets into this group was the absence of any gender identifying
cultural material.
Several issues arose while working on this project, some of them already mentioned
above. The largest problem I encountered was that I did not have the actual artifacts in my
possession to analyze. Working from a book I relied much on Barbara’s first hand knowledge of
the artifacts and culture surrounding each artifact. The book also did not include basic amenities
of an archaeological publication such as scale and dimension with only one view of each artifact
available. Often artifacts can be grouped based on the materials the artifact consists of. Having
no information regarding material types for the artifacts all I could do was make an educated
guess based on visual texture and color. Finally, artifact sets seldom fell into nice and neat gender
categories. Many artifact sets possessed gender specific items for both genders. Barbara and I
speculated that this may be a condition of bioturbation from farming activity, animals and maybe

6. even grave robbing. When faced with these artifact collections I used a 2:1 ratio counting how
many identifiable gender artifacts were present for both male and female. Upon completing my
count I would compare both the female and male artifacts and whichever group had more
received the designation. While this may inevitably eliminate whole burials by combining two
together changing the outcome of the project, there would be no way for me to separate or
distinguish the two (or more) otherwise.
Conclusion
After tallying up all 397 burials in their respective categories I found that 205 of the
burials were male (51%), 112 were female (28%), 88 of the female burials had no tools, 25 of the
female burials had textile tools (7%), 70 were undetermined (17%), and 9 were missing (3%).
With such a small percentage of textile tools appearing in the sample the data seems to support
Barbara’s Klessig’s hypothesis that the Viking people in Gotland were in fact importing more
textile tools then they were producing during the Viking era.

7. Works Cited
Cantor, Norman F. The Medieval World. 1st ed. New York: Macmillan, 1966. Print.
Edge, David, and John Miles Paddock. Arms & Armor of the Medieval Knight: an Illustrated
History of Weaponry in the Middle Ages. New York: Crescent, 1996. Print.
Klessig, Barbara. Personal interview. 7 Nov. 2011.