Pictoral evidence of women fighting in C14th

[Lady Jane Rochester]

How much evidence is there of women fighting on the battlefield?

Lady Jane

[Lady Cecily]

Oh god - here we go again!

[the real lord duvet]

is that women fighting each other?

Like foxy boxing or a mud related combat?

[Mick,M]

duck and cover

[Jim]

The search function, he is your friend, no?

[Colin Middleton]

The search function, he is your friend, no?

In this case, only if you want a hundred pages of viscious argument!

A rough summary is:
"How much evidence is there of women fighting on the battlefield?" Approximately none. There are some possible hints, but nothing conclusive.

There is evidence of:
Women fighting is seiges.
Women fighting in judical duels.
Women leading armies, but not necesarily fighting or on the battlefield.
Women on the battlefield carrying water for people to drink.
Amazons fighting on the battlefield in mythological stories.

Did I miss anything?

[John Waller]

Virtually no evidence. I can't think of any illustrations dating to the C14th of women in battlefield combat. Mind if there were any in male attire then how would we know?

Check out this paper http://www.imprint.co.uk/hpt/179.PDF

[Lady Jane Rochester]

RLD - I was thinking swords and stuff rather than jelly or baby oil, but thanks for playing

te:The search function, he is your friend, no?


In this case, only if you want a hundred pages of viscious argument!

exakerly! I was looking for helpful fact, not vitriol.

Lady J

[Foxe]

RLD - I was thinking swords and stuff rather than jelly or baby oil, but thanks for playing

Mmmm... jelly baby oil...

[the real lord duvet]

RLD - I was thinking swords and stuff rather than jelly or baby oil, but thanks for playing

Mmmm... jelly baby oil...

One of the lost chapters of talhoffer, 2 women covered in baby oil armed with handbags.....

[KedlestonCraig]

This one looks C15 rather than C14 and I know nothing of the context but here we go

[matilda]

And look - shes tough! all the guys are in full plate with helms!

[EnglishArcher]

This one looks C15 rather than C14 and I know nothing of the context but here we go

Well, there you go. Photographic proof. What more do you need?

Anyway, women didn't fight on the battlefield, they were all archers - along with the children, the elderly and the infirm. All re-enactments I've seen portray them that way, so it must be true!

...

(Sorry. I really must learn to play nicely with the other children. Sarcasm is such a low form of wit; but it does suit me so well.)

[the real lord duvet]

thats a french picture?
So its a guy in a dress trying to surrender

[gregory23b]

15th French.

Absolute proof!

EA - sarcasm is a highly developed form of wit, it is only 'low' for those who don't get it.

[EnglishArcher]

It also demonstrates that either:

a) 15thC French people were about 150ft tall or,

b) Mounted fighting in wendy houses was a common form of combat (possibly part of the tournee?)

[Colin Middleton]

exakerly! I was looking for helpful fact, not vitriol.

Lady J

Actually, it's not quite that bad. There are a lot of interesting points brought up, it's just that some very strong oppinions are held on the subject. Besides, it was too nice an opportunity for a quip!

[Jim]

RLD - I was thinking swords and stuff rather than jelly or baby oil, but thanks for playing

te:The search function, he is your friend, no?


In this case, only if you want a hundred pages of viscious argument!

exakerly! I was looking for helpful fact, not vitriol.

Lady J

Vitriol? On Livinghistory.co.uk? Whatever next! Bad leadership in Parliament?

[Jim]

This one looks C15 rather than C14 and I know nothing of the context but here we go

Hmm, that's a siege situation though and I think we're all agreed that in a siege, you'd end up fighting whether you were male, female, 6 years old, diseased, crippled or ginger. It's either that or you get chopped to bits while you try injuring them with bad language alone.

[Karen Larsdatter]

See http://www.larsdatter.com/women-in-armor.htm -- the links are less "this is what fighting women of our time wear," and more "this is what we imagine ancient legendary Amazons to have worn, but because we're living in the 14th century, we imagine them to be wearing the sort of armor that people wear right now." A few personifications of Fortitude and other such allegorical sorts of armored women, too.

[Marcus Woodhouse]

There is slightly more in the way of written evidence.
There were instances of women commanding castles, or at least being involved in negotiating terms.
There were instances, as have been mentioned of women involved in actual fighting during seiges.
There are also instances when women have acted as figureheads for an army.
Joan of Arc is used as an example of a woman who actually lead and fought but while she did wear armour and carry a sword she does not seem to have actually drawn it and used it-not that she lacked bravery as she led assults on more than one occasion, she also had a natural talent for where to postion cannon if accounts of her career are true.
Dispite being told by numerous gunners over the years that women manned cannons as part of a family run buissness I havn't come across anything to back this up or the use of women to carry water and rescue wounded men, that job seems, from my research to have gone to pages/squires/retrievers.

[Fox]

havn't come across anything to back this up or the use of women to carry water and rescue wounded men, that job seems, from my research to have gone to pages/squires/retrievers.

There are at least one or two pictures of women carrying water; for instance: Paulo Uchello's Battle of San Romano definitely has men and women fetching water among the small background figures.

[gregory23b]

Let us actually take a look at the picture, take it at face value, noting that we do not have the image reference.

1 - the woman is unarmoured, some might say it is to show a woman, as she might be less womanly if shown in harness, but then, Joan of Arc is portrayed as in harness. Others might see this as a specific theme where a specific woman, is involved in a combat.

2 - it is night time, not the usual time for battles. If this was the middle ages, which battle/siege, at night, might this be?

3- Given that a woman is portrayed fighting, something that we generally accept as far from the norm, why? what makes this woman so special? Why use up valuable painting time over a possible frivolity?

4 - The people are in what we might accept as mid 15th c onwards clothing, that might mean it is a documentary image. On the other hand we know the medievals loved their classical themes dressed as they were themselves dressed, so what time frame does this actually portray.

5 - she is on horseback, is she part of the siege break? The city gates are open. Which might mean she is an attacker, rather than a defender.

At the end of the day, one could add any interpretation, with equal validity, without knowing the context of that image.

Without seeming to be rude, it is all rather pointless unless we actually find out more about that image and others like it, I would extend that to any image held in isolation from its context and produced as 'evidence'.

It might be the magic bullet that some are seeking, it may well not be.

[the real lord duvet]

Nicely put mr 23b

ok, lets say its a picture of a fighting woman.......
Thats 1 picture.
Lets put it in true context.
There's 1000000s of paintings of god available....

But does that mean he exists?
And does he look like that?

Bonus point to assist this argument goes to the first person to post pictorial evidence of aliens in the 15th century.

[Darren Mac]

[P]ictorial evidence of aliens in the 15th century.

Pretty conclusive in my opinion...

[the real lord duvet]

[P]ictorial evidence of aliens in the 15th century.

02archer.jpg

thats a monster not an alien!

[Darren Mac]

Busted... damn your eyes man...!

[The Methley Archer]

Nothing to do with the thread, but any chance of that picture without Slimer please.

Thanks in advance, Chris.

[the real lord duvet]

Nothing to do with the thread, but any chance of that picture without Slimer please.

Thanks in advance, Chris.

Its not slimer you charlatan - its B.O.B - don't you know anything?

Bicarbonate Ostylezene Benzoate - An indestructible gelatinous mass created when a genetically-altered tomato was injected with a chemically-altered ranch dessert topping.

[Colin Middleton]

This one looks C15 rather than C14 and I know nothing of the context but here we go

Should have done this sooner, shouldn't I!

Okay;
She's on horseback, so she's probably not a defender, all the other mounted people appear to be killing citisens, so she's probably with them.
She's not wearing armour and all the other attackers are. That's a bit odd.
Her hair is uncovered, which is usually reserved for queens, saints (occasional children) and other 'mythical figures'.

I would say that she's an alegorical figure. Perhaps representing a Saint who 'protected' a particular seige, or Mercy (the blow that never landed?), or possibly some mythical figure, such as Athena or even Boudica. I certainly wouldn't rely on it as evidence without knowing a lot more.

So, how did I do, what is the picture of?