Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine, vol. 95 (2002), pp. 46-62 



'That Terrible Woman 5 : the Life, Work and 

 Legacy of Maud Cunnington 



by Julia Roberts 



This paper is an attempt to reassess the life, work, and legacy of the Wiltshire archaeologist Maud Edith 

 Cunnington (1869-1951). It is argued that Mrs Cunnington's work has been dismissed for reasons to do 

 with her personality rather than any inherent faults in her archaeological judgement. By discussing how 

 archaeologists are remembered, the constraints middle class women faced at the end of the 19th and 

 beginning of the 20th century, as well as investigating the developing discipline of archaeology, it is hoped 

 that a clearer picture of Mrs Cunnington's achievements can be reached. 



INTRODUCTION 



As one of the most important members of the 

 Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History 

 Society in the first half of the 20th century, Maud 

 Cunnington presents an interesting study for a 

 variety of reasons. She was a well known and 

 respected figure in archaeological circles at a time 

 when few women were involved in archaeology and 

 when British social expectations were that women 

 would be if not invisible, then certainly in the 

 background. 



Maud Cunnington came from a comfortable 

 middle-class environment, and married into an 

 equally sheltered existence (Figure 1). After her 

 marriage, Maud Cunnington could have retired into 

 this life, taking a leading role in small town society, 

 yet she chose instead to turn her attention to 

 archaeology. Her nephew, Colonel R.H. 

 Cunnington believed this was due to her desire to 

 be involved with the interests of her husband and 

 son (R.H. Cunnington 1954, 288), a reading of 

 women's roles which permeates so much of 19th 

 and early 20th century writing: 



....a man ought to know any language or science he 

 learns thoroughly: while a woman ought to know the 



same language and science only so far as may enable 

 her to sympathise in her husband's pleasure. (Ruskin 

 1865) 



However, a desire to be a helpmeet to her 

 husband hardly serves as sufficient explanation of 

 how Maud Cunnington progressed from being the 

 follower in Ben Cunnington's footsteps to the leader 

 in their archaeological ventures. Nor does it do 

 justice to the energy and enthusiasm with which 

 Maud Cunnington approached her self-appointed 

 task, or the public spirited nature of her work. She 

 published on a wide variety of subjects ranging 

 through all archaeological periods from Neolithic 

 to medieval and became a recognised pottery 

 expert. Mrs Cunnington not only excavated 

 prestigious sites such as All Cannings Cross, 

 Woodhenge and the Sanctuary, but also the less 

 well known sites of Lidbury, Morgan's Hill, and 

 Lanhill, as well as conducting rescue excavations 

 at, for example, Netheravon and Battlesbury. One 

 might question Maud Cunnington's techniques of 

 excavation, or her interpretation of sites (and this 

 paper seeks to demonstrate that she has been overly 

 criticised for these), but one cannot question her 

 commitment to bringing archaeology to as wide an 

 audience as possible. 



SCARAB Research Centre, U.W.C.N., Caerleon Campus, P.O. Box 179, Newport, NP18 3YG 



