More than 15 years ago, the need for museums to "write women back into the galleries", especially those focusing on military history, was discussed in these pages (Museums Journal November 1991, p23).
It is now more important than ever to include a wider demographic of peoples' histories in museums and to provide more opportunities for visitors to relate to the collections.
As half of the population, representations of women should logically equal those of men. Even within the context of military history, one cannot assume that women had little or no involvement; there are many examples to show otherwise. Where there is the opportunity, they should be included.
Even if there are just a few representations in galleries, at least these provide some opportunities for female visitors to relate to the collection, as well as to challenge views that these are male-only jurisdictions.
Manchester's Imperial War Museum North (IWM) and the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds provide interesting examples to look at representations of women, as their collections could be assumed to relate mainly to men.
The IWM's 20th-century collection is linked closely to human stories and there is plenty of scope for female representation linked to warfare during this period.
The IWM does manage to represent a diverse society. Its Women at War permanent exhibition in its London museum could be seen as tokenism, but women's experiences and involvement are also integrated throughout other galleries.
The Royal Armouries collection covers arms and armour over 2,000-years, and much of this might not lend itself to a focus on individual stories. But women could feature in galleries from the first world war to today, and in areas such as hunting and sport.
Nevertheless, there are few images of women in the museum. In fact, the collection may appear detached from human experience, an approach adopted to avoid taking a political stance. But this distances the collection from what it was made and used for.
There may have been a rationale behind what representations have been included or excluded, but this is not explained to visitors. The intentions was that the live, acted interpretations would tell the human stories behind the objects, but if visitors miss these, especially any female-based interpretations, then they don't gain these insights.
The focus of the museum displays conceived over a decade ago was on presenting the collection. It is now recognised that more research and new approaches would widen the scope of representations - but change relies heavily on time and budgets.
It will be interesting to see what is revealed by further investigation into the museum's representations of not just women, but also ethnic groups.
Angela Clare Smith is a researcher for the Royal Armouries
It is now more important than ever to include a wider demographic of peoples' histories in museums and to provide more opportunities for visitors to relate to the collections.
As half of the population, representations of women should logically equal those of men. Even within the context of military history, one cannot assume that women had little or no involvement; there are many examples to show otherwise. Where there is the opportunity, they should be included.
Even if there are just a few representations in galleries, at least these provide some opportunities for female visitors to relate to the collection, as well as to challenge views that these are male-only jurisdictions.
Manchester's Imperial War Museum North (IWM) and the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds provide interesting examples to look at representations of women, as their collections could be assumed to relate mainly to men.
The IWM's 20th-century collection is linked closely to human stories and there is plenty of scope for female representation linked to warfare during this period.
The IWM does manage to represent a diverse society. Its Women at War permanent exhibition in its London museum could be seen as tokenism, but women's experiences and involvement are also integrated throughout other galleries.
The Royal Armouries collection covers arms and armour over 2,000-years, and much of this might not lend itself to a focus on individual stories. But women could feature in galleries from the first world war to today, and in areas such as hunting and sport.
Nevertheless, there are few images of women in the museum. In fact, the collection may appear detached from human experience, an approach adopted to avoid taking a political stance. But this distances the collection from what it was made and used for.
There may have been a rationale behind what representations have been included or excluded, but this is not explained to visitors. The intentions was that the live, acted interpretations would tell the human stories behind the objects, but if visitors miss these, especially any female-based interpretations, then they don't gain these insights.
The focus of the museum displays conceived over a decade ago was on presenting the collection. It is now recognised that more research and new approaches would widen the scope of representations - but change relies heavily on time and budgets.
It will be interesting to see what is revealed by further investigation into the museum's representations of not just women, but also ethnic groups.
Angela Clare Smith is a researcher for the Royal Armouries
