Gender Roles - Female Warriors/Defenders

AC Feedback and Suggestions
182

Myths exist for many reasons, and control and education of a society is one such goal. I find that one myth rather silly (as any woman instantly realizes how it makes zero sense), but your point is well taken. I had never heard the G force myth before. I have read that women have done a rather good job at piloting, however. I am glad to see female combat pilots. :airplane:

Your point A is spot on. I’m sure a woman, even if young or pregnant, may choose to defend herself by some means if forced to via circumstance, but actually taking part in war seems unlikely. There are reports of Pictish women fighting with young children at their sides, though those same reports suggest they were forced into this position, perhaps due to desperation. I cannot imagine this would be a normal course. ([IV. 12] AN OLD-IRISH TREATISE ON THE LAW of ADAMNAN, CAIN ADAMNAIN. Full text of "Cáin Adamnáin : an old-Irish treatise on the law of Adamnan").

As for point B, we only see a small number of women choosing (or being compelled) to be warriors. I will find the quote and post later (on my lunch break without access to my books), but many large graves in the Eurasian Steppes have contained women whom archaeologists believe were warriors (they had weapons and armor fitted to them, wounds visible in their skeletons consistent with direct combat and not fleeing or being simply killed, as well as other grave goods, and their burial practices). Even in these cultures, who evidence suggests would allow women to fight, the maximum number of female graves, was something like 20-30% of the whole (again, I’ll ad citations tonight. I may have already cited them in previous posts, though). I suspect most women did not opt for this line of work. I also suspect that, if a larger number of women did, it would be dangerous to the society (partly your B point).

And yes, men are indeed 10% (I’ve read upwards of 20%) more physically strong, on average. I agree with you (and so does the archaeological evidence) that bows were definitely favored, both in myth and in what is found in graves. [as a side statement which is purely of my own conjecture, I feel that the bow is a more feminine weapon and feels nicer to use than a sword. I wonder if this had any part in the the selection of this weapon or if I am totally wrong lol]

As for the 36DD woman, a bow wouldn’t bother her either. Breasts that size would quicky head south without a bra or significant support. They would move down out of the way. You could also easily bind them, as Roman women did when sporting. It’s easy to do an works like a sports bra. Something like a strophion (cord tied under chest to support breasts, would also help with mobility, though a woman of such figure might not enter the path of a warrior as a result. Running becomes a problem in such a case (though this isn’t wholly preclusive. Greek women were known to compete in athletics, as were Minoans).

As for the weak armed woman, she might not get into warfare, just like her weak armed brother lol :smiley:

Back to the Neolithic

Now, relating to the Neolithic and the game, we can likely dismiss much of this as (to the best of my knowledge and please let me know if I am wrong) there isn’t any evidence of woman warriors among the VERY tiny evidence for anything resembling organized combat (let me know if you have ever read of any). Neolithic combat was probably more hit and go / snatch and grab raiding. The largest “battles” we see were probably the major massacres of the LBK, which still may have been less than 100 warriors (this number is a speculation), especially early in the period.

I don’t expect that women typically joined battles other than in a defensive manner, in most cases (e.g. standing in front of her children with a knife as a last line of defense). There is too much time span and variation among people, as well as stores of famous woman warriors, for me to say that there NEVER was a female warrior who joined a war party, but I would suspect it would be VERY rare, if at all. Defenders yes, offenders, no.

As for hunting small game, I provided references many topics ago about this being VERY common in contemporary tribal society in the Amazon. In fact, women provided the majority of small gaming hunting in one tribe (I will try to find the reference later). Large game hunting isn’t a major concern in the Neolithic (one of the major benefits of the Neolithic), though I suspect this was probably also, if not entirely, a man activity.

183

Ok, size alone doesnt make a longbow. This is a misconception. hunting bows are often very tall, you could have a long comfortable draw and good precision. Tall/long bows are nothing special, or rare. The longbow however is very different, it is determined not by size but draw weight. Longbows are only long because it is difficult to produce a bow with high poundage without making it big, and such a bow would need a crossbow stock if small. Though a traditional crossbow uses metal prods rather than a short heavy draw bow.

Longbows were as popular history tells us the go to weapon of the medieval English and Welsh. The Welsh invented it, or more accurately invented the society to support it, the English capitalized on this and multiplied the societal nature several fold to produce a cadre of exceptional archers.

An English or Welsh warbow, which is what a real longbow actually is has a draw weight in excess of 200lbs. This was so often contested by historians until the Mary Rose was recovered - the Kings capital ship and equipped with the best archers the nation could provide. In fact the ship sunk because it’s fore and aft castles were overfilled with men.
The bowstaves recovered from the Mary Rose were on average 250lb draw weight, and the biggest were well over 300lbs. Some said the latter might be foot bows, this is possible, but wouldn’t account for the deck structure or positioning, more likely they were exceptionally strong archers even for longbowmen.

The enormous poundage of the warbow supports the historical references to it’s use. The killing ground at Crecy was 300 yards from the English lines, as references by both French and English accounts of the battle. It would simply not be possible to inflict mass casualties at that range against heavy armoured soldiers with regular archery, even heavy crossbows would struggle. In fact the metal prod arbalest even with a draw poundage of over 500lbs is less powerful than a warbow because the draw length of a crossbow is small, siege engine crossbows excepted.

The English longbowman, and specifically those identified as English were the most prized mercenaries in Europe alongside Swiss pike and Halberdiers, likewise only if specifially identified as Swiss. This was so much so that a longbowmans pay was six pennies a day, compared to ten for a mounted knight and two for a trained infantryman. A mounted longbowman, which most longbowmen aspired to be, was worth double pay, twelve pence a day, notble and unique for a common soldier as it was more more than an anointed knights pay, by the standardisation of fees of the time.

I saw an defacement in a medieval Bible in Rugby, a graffitti drawing of an archer with bow and arrow in hands and a slain deer nearby. This was most interesting as the archer was barechested and looked very similar to Schwarzeneggar in his prime. The musculature was right. Now presumably musculature to the extent of a modern bodybuilder is quite rare. Yet a medieval graffitti artist was able to correctly proportion it, and include the muscles normally only present in the most ‘ripped’ bodybuilders for his archer. So the artist must have witnessed this to depict it.

Longbowmen were quite unique and a product of English society of the time, with a yeomenry which were largely upcoming and had mostly cordial relations with the ruling classes. Archery was in fact not only encouraged by mandatory under law. Pay was excellent and prospects good. Even so the number of people fit to be called a longbowman and armies were small. Standards must have been very high.

Archery on that level is known in other cultures, but never on that scale. Samurai and Indian soldiers used longbows, but said bows were in fact just bows that were long. The warbow was uniquely English as a tool of massed warfare.
Despiute this many other cultures were aware of the value of a strong archer. Much is made in Homer of the Bow of Odysseus, though it may have been seen as myth by most readers, a compound Warbow could well be historical. Both Egyptian and Indian tales relate stories of exceptionally strong chariot archers with made to measure warbows that few others could draw, and yes a compound warbow could well be the mirror image of its curvature when string and unstrung. Such a bow and a man could well give rise to legends of heroes.

And as for women, could a woman wield a warbow? In general its safer to say no. Few enough men make the grade, which is why the English eventually lost the Hundred Years War despite an awesome military trump. Some women obviously could, a statistical handful that could be ignored, and most of them are in or would qualify for the Bulgarian Olympic shotput team.

1 Like
184

A lower draw weight bow would suit a woman, for sure. 300 Lbs. is far beyond most women. I’ve used 70 Lbs before, but I prefer a 55Lbs. 55Lbs is more than enough to be lethal at shorter range, such as in the Neolithic (I cannot see much reason for long range arrow duels in the Neolithic, as a norm).

I suspect most Neolithic women who used a bow would be killing small game or fishing, so a heavy draw isn’t really an issue. A 30Lbs draw is enough to kill a small animal and to fish (I’ve done so with at 35Lbs [I think it was 35]). I read that some states allow 30-35 lbs draw for deer hunting, but it’s a little light in my opinion.

I thought I remembered a difference in the Long Bow from other bows, but I couldn’t recall it. lol

185

Hunting bows tend to be long, a woman would be best suited to as tall a bow as she can manage as draw length is important. Draw length adds power with weaker as well as stronger bowstaves.

Women are yet slightly disadvantaged as they have shorter arms but I don’t think that matters much. Your huntress is not trying to shoot through plate armour.

The saving grace for martial women in ancient times is that effective armour is rare. If you can handle a heavier bow that is the one you want for war. Hunting requires precision, you need to shoot the rabbit or deer and for shooting smaller game an easy bow is prefered as you can hold the shot for accuracy.

A fighting archer never holds his shot, and accuracy isnt that important. You take the heaviest bow you can draw and aim it at massed ranks of the enemy alongside others doing same. A note here, those medieval longbowmen I wrote highly of earlier I am not attributing any great accuracy to. Some would have been accomplished marksmen, and marksmanship was honoured and occassionally even useful. Trick shots had their place in warfare. Longbowmen would train at the butts, shooting at a disk on a pole at varying ranges, but ability to draw a heavy bow, repeatedly without losing strength, was the skill. Minimum draw weight was 200lbs, likely higher, though later that was quantified at 120lbs minimum under Henry VIII but by then the heyday of the archer was passed, and the arquebus was the infantry weapon of choice. However your archer should not only match the poundage but also keep up a prodigious rate of fire. If the quartermaster had done his work, an archer carried three dozen arrows, and could fire a dozen aimed shots in under two minutes from a heavy draw warbow, and rest by laying out the next bundle of a dozen arrows for fire. It must have been exhausting.

3 Likes
186

Interesting facts about the longbow, for sure!

The winter gave you leather, fur and maybe some woven clothing as your “armor,” but warmer seasons would see unclothed upper bodies or light leather/cloth if at all. A good obsidian head would cut through that like a knife through butter, even on a lower pound bow. Obsidian is razor sharp! =)

Again, I doubt we will find lots (barely any) warrior women in the Neolithic, but they could definitely hunt with a low draw bow.

2 Likes
187

On the famous “Russian fast shooting girl” video. Ah yes, this is an all time favourite of mine. It is important to note that this woman is using a 30 pound bow. Her bow has such low poundage that you could play Dagorhir with it so long as you padded the arrow tips with foam. So no, this isn’t a good example of archery.

Just looked at that and this is more true than maybe intended. Watch the video again and look at the pieces of plastic masquerading as a ‘bowstave’, They barely move. Even a low poundage bow will move more than that. Methinks its a bungee bow, the flex appears to be in the bowstring not the bow.

If so, you could play Dagorhir (whatever that is) all day with her, because bungee bows are what they use for LARP.

I have seen a lot of phony archery videos, but then archery is easy to fake, especially if you don’t know what you are looking at. Real archery isn’t much of a spectator sport, those stuntmen who do backflips while putting shots downrange like Legolas (movie variant) are usually using fake bows.

Being fair in return with exception of a bungee bow is a fake bow actually fake? Poundage is vitally important for effect but a toy bow with an easy poundage in the stave is as much an actual bow as the great bow of Arjuna or a modern composite target bow.

However when assuming capabilities we cant use these videos as evidence of anything. ‘Russian fast shooting girl’s’ skills may yet have value as a part in a fantasy movie.

1 Like
188

Keep in mind that the original reason I posted that video was not because of how fast or skillful she shot. It was simply to illustrate that breasts do not get in the way of shooting. Weather her bow is a bungee bow or the Hungarian horse bow it looks like, the fact that she’s holding it in a normal shooting position and using it in a normal shooting manner, albeit extremely fast, illustrates that breasts are not impeding or encumbering. That was the argument I was countering. There were many other slower archers, but she was the first I selected. I will have to look closely at that again, because it looks pretty realistic to me but I wasn’t paying attention to that as that wasn’t the reason behind that video lol

189

I can accept that up to a point. However her bungee bow has negligible draw weight. So ‘Russian fast shooting girl’ doesn’t have to mimic the moves of an actual archer, her arms could be in pretty much any position and she could draw a bungee bow enough to fire.
I agree with your premise but you need a better example.

Weather her bow is a bungee bow or the Hungarian horse bow it looks like.

Bungee bows are defined by the material, not what they mimic. LARP shops will sell you bungee bows to mimic compound bows, longbows, even arbalests, the principle is the same the draw is in the bungee not the bow and so it bleeds energy quickly.
While the bow here is clearly a bungee bow, it does flex slightly. A LARP bow is normally rigid to ensure all the flex is in the string and thus poundage is fully nerfed for safety. The bow depicted would not pass safety checks for shooting at people.

Yes it is very likely mimicing a horse archers bow, I dont know enough to tell if it is a Hungarian one.

1 Like
190

Looking more closely at the bow, it does not seem to reflex enough. I think you may be right about the bungee part. :smiley: How well, but the point about the breasts remains.

here’s a woman using a horse bow, on a horse, and I am pretty sure this is legit. (bow properly reflexes).

This one is sort of fun. A dude explains how to fix the breast issue for very endowed women. :grinning: This isn’t a problem for women with A-C cup, but D or larger could be an issue. Keep in mind that binding would likely be used (fixing the problem). Now a Neolithic woman in the summer would probably be bare breasted. The advice his guy gives definitely would fix the problem, even for her.

This shows a woman using a bow without any issues, once more. Her bow is also a better example the speed bow woman I first posed.

1 Like
191

While deep in the middle of reading The Amazons: Lives & Legends of Warrior Women Across the Ancient World, by Adrienne Mayor (2014. All citations below come from this work, though they are within the work externally cited from numerous peer-reviewed and scientific sources) I figured I should stop momentarily to give you an update on what I’ve so far learned.

This may be one of the most heavily cited books I’ve read in years, having 44 pages of research notes and 16 pages of bibliography in what looks like 10 point font. The benefit of this level of detail is that you can verify everything that stated, to the fact. I suspect, given the controversial nature of the subject, but the writer chose to have this level of detail to combat naysayers using pure empiricism.

Mayor Spends the entirety of chapter 4 detailing a litany of graves that have been found containing every manner of warrior woman you could possibly imagine.

Some examples:

“More than a thousand tombs of ancient Scythians and related tribes had been excavated across the Eurasian steppe from Bulgaria to Mongolia. Now that modern bioarchaeological methods can determine the sex of skeletons, we know that in some cemetery populations on the steppes armed females represent as many as 37% of burials. In the Thracian-Scythian region alone, between the Danube and Don rivers, archaeologists have discovered more than 112 graves of women warriors from the fifth and fourth centuries BC, most of them between 16 and 30 years old” Mayor, 63-64

“A sixth-century BC burial farther north on the Dnieper River belonged to a warrior woman with a bracelet of fox teeth and gold earrings, a bronze mirror, a quiver with 92 arrows, and an iron spearhead. Next to her was a child.” Mayor, 69.

“In Kurgan 6 lay the skeleton of a young woman wearing gold earrings and large gold and glass pendants. Next to her work to iron darts, more than 30 bronze trilobate arrowheads, and a mirror.” Mayor, 71

*trilobate arrowheads are the type used in battle and have a leaf shaped head, hence the name.

This nonstop accounting of grave after grave goes on for 21 pages, with each skeleton individually detailed and cited with external peer review documents and other archaeological evidence. I haven’t counted them all, but they’re probably exceed 100 examples.

In fact, it turns out that there are examples of women warriors from virtually every part of the world, archaeologically detailed with actual peer-reviewed papers and data ( which makes denying their existence sort of amusing).

The bottom line is that I believe there is enough circumstantial evidence to imply that women not only were hunters and could definitely help in the defense of the tribe, but it is perfectly plausible that on an occasion a woman might even take part in a raid, though I believe the evidence also suggests that this is not a common thing.

2 Likes
192

I would point out that there are a significant number of Bronze Age finds for warrior women, so in any Bronze Age or later expansion, they will no longer be conjecture and would literally need to be a major component of Eurasian Society.

I’m reading about one such grave right now. The woman had an axe wound to the head which had been healing when she died, and the other woman buried near her had an arrow wound to the skull. This was in 1000 BCE.

1 Like
193

The Neolithic is between 2000 and 3000 years earlier than the nomadic warriors of Scythia, Sarmatia, Saka, Pontus and the other cultures of the Eurasian steppe.

When considering the roles of martial roles of women in the Neolithic, we must first ask: Does later history show warrior women of the world, thus setting a precedent for the possibility, or are warrior women merely contemporary or obscure?

Of course there are countless articles in peer reviewed journals and scientific books on this issue (I own a few of them), but now Smithsonian is producing a set of documentaries concerning the existence and extant of women in ancient warfare

VIDEO: The Significance Behind Ancient Scythian Tattoos via @SmithsonianChan Smithsonian Channel: It's Brighter Here

VIDEO: This Female Gladiator Captive Had to Fight for Her Life via @SmithsonianChan https://www.smithsonianchannel.com/videos/this-female-gladiator-captive-had-to-fight-for-her-life/60724

As you can see by watching them, or reading the books and papers on the issue (many of which I have posted), to deny the presence of women in ancient combat, from the bronze age until present, is simply illogical and contrary to the evidence.

I keep hearing people say why they think the idea of warrior women is absurd, mostly based upon incredulity, but I keep amassing the facts. I just obtained a scholarly book containing hundreds of grave findings (it is an archaeological book of data for archaeologists), many of the graves being warrior women with battle wounds (new and healed) as well as their custom fit armor and weapons.
Iron Age Archaeology and Trauma from Aymyrlyg, South Siberia by Eileen M. Murphy

I also have an entire book chapter detailing egalitarianism of Eurasian nomads from 1000BCE to 500AD, by the same woman who provided much of the scientific data for the Smithsonian series. It has detailed accounts for many different first hand eye witnesses from different lands and cultures, as well as pages upon pages of notes and bibliography to back it up.

So the question becomes, why would the Neolithic be different?

1 Like
194

If we really want to go for realistic gender representation, then we should consider two simple rules:

  • Survival of the fittest
  • Might makes right

What I mean with that is, that the more primitive the culture is, the less it will care about what´s “right” and more about what´s efficient in the means of survival. If you are a nice stone age girl with a biceps the size of my head, I wouldn´t mind if you´d come along for a nice fight with the other tribe.

So how about giving stats requirements for the jobs of the community. E.g. accuracy for hunting or something like that. And then if I need 10 hunters, the AI gives me the 10 people with the highest ACC in the tribe.

The other thing is, that, if we really want to make it accurate, then we have to consider the biological realities of the two sexes. Men in general are stronger. To implement this I´d imagine randomized stats with a different starting point for the two sexes. Let´s say the strength of men are 50+/-25 and the women´s STR is 40+/-25. This way the general superiority of men in STR is represented, but does not exclude the women from STR dependent jobs. Lets say I have 10 men with a STR of 35, 36, 40, 46, 50, 58, 64, 66, 68, 73 (I used an online random number generator :slight_smile: ) and 10 women with 10 STR lower stats. If I need 10 people to chop wood (requires STR), that would mean 6 men and 4 women.

Obviously, we would have to consider a lot of other factors to (like one is sick, the other injured, the third is pregnant, etc.), but how about that as a general idea?

5 Likes
195

I agree with this. Though history is filled with warrior women, these societies also traines the women just as the men. To ignore biological differences would be plain inaccurate.

Not sure how their system of character stats will work, but you suggestion seems correct. Men definetly have more muscle than women, as you stated.

Each task should likely have a few ordered stats. For example, weaving requires dexterity.

Since we don’t actually know how labor was diversified, but we do know what stats would be more important for doing various tasks, this would allow for a realistic model.

1 Like
196

Its very much like it is working in the game right now.
Females also get pregnant, and that restrict some tasks for them in this situations. Overall, females can do all tasks, but roles appear by themselves because the nature of things.
Later we can introduce culture restrictions that will do their thing too.

10 Likes
197

Agreed. Just like the example of Cynisca of Sparta shows, when she won the Olympics in chariot racing in 396 BC. The Olympic games were male dominant as most of the disciplines favored physical strength. But in chariot racing, where skill was more important, she could win over her competitors by the virtue of being better than them.

About the diversification of labor. It was probably what worked best. The ultimate goal for every tribe was survival I think. So what served this best was implemented or the tribe died out.

For example hunting. While this was a very dangerous job, I see no reason why women woulnd´t be able to do it. But. Because it is a very dangerous job, it has a high mortality rate compared to other jobs. Men have a low value in respect of procreation. Women have a high one. You need a few men but a lot of women for a tribe to survive if we only take into account population replenishment. So if women would do it in high numbers, the impact of their loss on the numbers replenishing ability of the tribe would be grave compared to the loss of the same amount of men. So it would be reasonable to presume, that those tribe who shifted the more dangerous jobs to the more expendable sex, had a higher chance of survival on the long run.

But there are a bunch of jobs which need to be done in day by day. So if a man goes to hunt someone needs to gather. Hence, men went hunting and women gathered. At least that´s how I think the diversification started.

5 Likes
198

Cultural restrictions.

The society of Athens or Japan comes to my mind. Women had almost no say in anything, were in some cases extremely sheltered. But. This also meant, that a big part of the population didn´t take part in production, research, etc. So what I´m trying to say is. There are some cultural characters, which are actually less effective or even harmful to the whole community but practiced nevertheless. Are there any plans to implement something like that? Especially if it is out of the players control. So like, you are playing, minding your own business, and suddenly your tribe has this bright idea, that women shouldn´t work. And now you sit there with half of the population inactive, but you still have to feed them. Like an unexpected handicap.

4 Likes
199

Not to sound like a biased idiot, who only talks about women. Here are some other examples:

  • food sacrifice when you have a drought and food is already short
  • mandatory coming of age rituals with a high chance of death. After you´ve invested so much into raising the younger generations
  • harmful fashion practices like using poisonous material as make up
  • harmful healthcare beliefs like only take a bath every 6 months, because any more frequent is unhealthy (medieval Europe for example)

And so on. All of which have an average negative effect on the population. But also some other which may have a positive one. Like a doctor extensively cleaning his/her hands and body before treating a patient, because of ancient tradition or something like that.

3 Likes
200

True! Many cultures are well known to restrict women (and sometomes men) from tasks. This will be important in later stages.

I have LOTS of information about iron/bronze age steppes cultures and their treatment of women, when that time period occurs.

It sounds to me like your game mechanics make perfect sense!

2 Likes
201

Agreed. Just like the example of Cynisca of Sparta shows, when she won the Olympics in chariot racing in 396 BC. The Olympic games were male dominant as most of the disciplines favored physical strength. But in chariot racing, where skill was more important, she could win over her competitors by the virtue of being better than them.

There is a lot more going on under the hood. Take these facts in a row

Sparta, like the other major city states was in a constant battle of one-upmanship. The politics of the time could be vety subtle and urbane, Sparta was no exception to this.
Sparta unusually (maybe uniquely) of the city states practiced empowerment of women. Spartan women ran most of civic society with exception of the military, foreign policy and the highest levels of government. Spartan women were taught to be tough, not only to be strong mothers to the next generation of Spartiates but also to be overseers of the Helots and spartan business.
This also meant that Spartan men could dedicate their lives to what mattered to them, becoming as hard as nails ubermenchen, collective homosexuals and elite weaponmasters.
Because Spartan women were free and they knew it they didn’t for the most part waste their privilege. Non Spartan women did not go chariot racing, swimming, riding or wrestling, between bouts of motherhood, Spartan women did and revelled in it. Left Helot women to do the sewing and the cooking.

Now women outside of Sparta were treated very much in the shut-up-and-get-back-in-the-kitchen manner of extreme patriarchy. So imagine the furore when a Spartan woman beats the finest men from other city states in an Olympic event.
One could try banning women from competing, but that would involve saying no to Sparta, and all they would need to is repeat loudly and often that she was only banned bacause the men of other, lesser, city states knew they could not match the skill of a Spartan born girl.

So they would have to let her compete, mainly on the ethos that Olympic glory came with a laurel, not a medal, as proof that sporting glory was fleeting not eternal. Try to beat her, and if not let time mostly forget her and pay to train an Athenian man better for next time.

3 Likes