 Adegwyddoedd yn fawr, mae'n deser y gallwn i'r ffordd i rai gael amddangos i'r greddaeth aeth gwaith i'r bwysig. Ewch er f yn yna, i ffynwys yn Gweithre Commentaidd, Cynun yma'r gwaith a'r awyr yn dod. 100 oed yn 1920 i fynd i fynd i'r rhanwyr o'r pwysig o bwysigion a'r amlpyfiad yn aethau yn fawr. Mae'r berthynas gweld yn amleg gyda'r awyr yn unig ac yn bwrth gwyl i'r cyfrif chi denid. ac ydych chi'n gwybod i'r cyfnodd y cyfnoddau yw'r amser fwyaf am gyfnoddau yn ymdyn nhw, wedi'u gweithio i'r cyfnoddau a'r cyfnoddau sy'n gweithio'r cyfnoddau yn 1920. Mae'r gwybod i'r cyfnoddau i'r amser yw'r amser yn ymdyn nhw, ac mae'r gwybod i'r gwybod i'r amser yn ymdyn nhw, ac yn ystod o'r dyfodol, rwy'n dweud y dymian y wymian yn gyntaf ag yr antoleddau ar ysgolodau, a'r ddiweddiool ar y dyfodol. Mae'r dweud yn gwneud y gwirioneddau cyfysgolol i'r wyrddig o'r wymian. Rwy'n ysgolodau ar y papur i gyfan, yn dweud 100 yma, ac rwy'n dweud weithio'r cyfysgol a'r ddyliau cyfrifio'r ysgolodau. Rwy'n dweud roedd ei wneud yn ysgolodau. I was frankly mesmerised by it, and I said we couldn't resist the opportunity to share it. Headed the 1920 girl and the elusive male, it reported that a Dr Murray Leslie had delivered a lecture at the Institute of Hygiene on the disproportion of the sexes due to the number of men who had fallen in the First World War. Dr Murray Leslie observed that this had led to there being over a million excess females of reproductive age, all competing for the elusive male of his title. A situation he considered was resulting in the crumbling of ethical standards, his harshest criticism being reserved for, and I quote, The social butterfly, the frivolous, scantily clad, jazzing flapper, irresponsible and undisciplined, to whom a dance, a new hat, or a man with a car were of more importance than the fate of nations. And as to the women who the society might have been admitting as fellows at that time, the purely intellectual woman was usually not sexually attractive, but intelligent women were well read and appreciated the charms of dress, refinement and other social amenities. I regret to say that he concluded the most immediate remedy was the encouragement of female emigration. Our land girls were fine, healthy specimens of womanhood who would be most valuable as wives in the colonies. Ha, deep breath. So, while pretty disturbing, it's clear that in the antiquarian sphere at least, the role of intellectual, possibly even intelligent women had in fact been valued for some time, albeit initially in a somewhat limited capacity. Resemary Sweeten, her excellent book on 18th century antiquaries, observes that the collection and studies of antiquities was highly gendered at that time. Antiquarian was a manly pursuit, encouraging masculine qualities and identifying, for example, with the political virtue and patriotism of ancient Rome, or the military glory and contempt for death evinced by the Goths. In this environment, leaders to say, women were disadvantaged by education, by mobility, field work being particularly problematic and by lack of easy access to libraries and records. At root, it's been suggested that all these restrictions sprang from the belief that knowledge, the capacity to know and therefore the ability to act effectively, were themselves gendered. However, as the 18th century progressed, a number of women were becoming seriously interested in the study of the past frequently as a result of association with men who were committed antiquarians. Their involvement usually comprised providing womanly support services such as making sketches, transcribing documents or preparing often exquisite illustrations for publication. Anna Stukley, the daughter of the Society of Antiquities First Secretary, Williams Stukley, apparently gained considerable knowledge of antiquities through assisting her father in this way, and he is known to have actively encouraged this. By the later 18th century, the popularization of antiquarianism, prompted by a broadening in the range of historical genre to include social history and an increased interest in the study of material culture, opened the subject up to women rather more. The first publications by women appeared in the Society's Publication Archaeologia in 1785 when three articles initiated by women were published, and in the following 50 years a further three women succeeded in getting their finds into print within the Society's publications. At a time when contemporary gendered understanding of intellect and learning made it difficult for any woman to succeed in this field, this was a considerable achievement, and the Society probably took a risk in publishing their work, which might have been perceived as undermining its antiquarian credibility. When Horace Walpole chose to make deris of comments about the Society, he described archaeologia as old woman's logic, reflecting the contemporary understanding that assumed an innate female inability to achieve mastery of subjects, demanding logical thought. Catholania Peirce, in their 2006 Antichrist Journal article, which I comment to you on these six women, observed that there does not appear to have been any appreciable difference in the way they approach the Society or in the Society's treatment of them. The published outcomes relate not to the women themselves, but, and very rightly, to the intrinsic significance of the material on which they were reporting. And they suggest that perhaps given the small number of women correspondence, the Society evaded the awkward problems posed potentially by female antiquaries by treating these few exceptional women as honorary men. There is certainly a record of praise for at least one of such women's learned and masculine abilities, and reading that reminded me of an event admittedly early on in my career when an eminent archaeologist of my acquaintance referred to one of my colleagues with admiration as she thinks like a man. The Society continued to accept a number of paper from women in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries, and I was really pleased to see that Becky in our library had gathered together all these remarkable illustrations. I referred earlier to exquisite illustrations being done by women, and as an excellent example here, which were done by Margaret Stokes for articles in an archaeology in 1871 and 1883 as a precursor to her book on early Christian Ireland in 1887. Do look at them, they're absolutely wonderful illustrations. And this was a period too when the fact that significant women archaeologists were emerging was at last beginning to be acknowledged. We can see from the minute book that a number of obituaries began to be read at meetings in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. But it did take the 1919 legislation to motivate the society to admit women as fellows, and as late as February 1918, the then president Arthur Evans regretted the absence of a grill for lady visitors when reading a paper written by his sister, Joan. The admission of women was discussed at the January 1920 council meeting, and a subsequent letter from a member of the council to the vice president is revealing. I urged the wisdom of electing one or two competent women as soon as possible. This would be some justification for rejecting unqualified women later on. We are bound to have them trying it on. And it would be an answer to any charge that we were doing nothing. Frankly, I'm afraid of this last possibility in view of the fact that we pay near rent to government for our rooms at Burlington House. My suggestion was poo pooed by some of the rather fossilized members then present, but nevertheless I think it is sound and the danger I allude to is real and may at any moment become urgent. So hardly a ring endorsement for admitting women fellows, some things never change, but nonetheless six women were chosen for nomination. And I think there are some minute books recording that on the table over there, so do look at that later. Two of them were elected on Oris Cowser in June 1920 and two in 1921. Two women refused to be nominated and sadly there's no record as to why. The first women elected in the normal way by ballot were in 1926 and 27 and the election of women went on at a rate of roughly one a year until 1945 when a year in which five women were elected. We can see from the minute books, I'm grateful to Danielle for searching through them, that often women attracted or women often attracted more no votes than men. And indeed a number of women were blackboard during this period. But by 1936 in his anniversary address, the president, Sir Frederick Kenyon, referred in his address to the good work done by women, especially in excavation and declared that the society had done well to admit them. As well he might given the number of significant female archaeologists active in this period, including his own daughter, Kathleen. And we're going to learn more about some of these remarkable women I know in the papers which follow. Despite growing recognition of the important contribution being made by women, even by as late as 1959, the year the first woman president, the redoubtable Dame Joan Evans, was elected. Women fellows remained a small minority, approximately 12% of the total fellowship. But this did at least have the virtue of allowing all of them to be contacted with ease when support was being rallied for Dame Joan's candidature. The machinations around this episode, when Dame Joan stood against the council's nominee for president, Ian Richmond, and won, are recorded in an article by Pamla Tudor Craig in Antiquary's Journal for 2007. She notes that this was a period at which the equality of women was not yet fully recognised and records the scenes of uproar with fellows standing on the benches and stamping on the floor when Dame Joan's election was announced. I have to say that it's not entirely clear from the article whether this was in joy or in irritation. I find it fascinating, unless this milestone in the society's life was still being discussed nearly 60 years later. Times having changed, we no longer record gender as a matter of course. In the early 2000s, the last date for which we have statistics, females made up 27% of the fellowship and although no formal analysis of blue papers has taken place since that time, it is considered, I think, that we do now have a more even gender balance. I hope that what I've said has gone some way towards setting the scene for what is to follow. I have to say that this brief foray into early women Antiquary's has only reinforced my utter admiration for their achievements and I'm very much looking forward to hearing the papers which are now going to follow. And I'm only sorry that due to a previous long standing commitment I'm going to have to leave before the end. But I would just like to record my thanks particularly for Danielle Wilson Higgins and for Amara Thornton for organising this day for us. Thank you.