Postby Julianne Legge » Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:00 pm
It has been a few years since this thread has been picked up, hence I assume the initial questions have been answered to everyone's satisfaction. Nor would I be at all surprised if in the intervening years your research has brought you a clearer picture of women in the medieval martial arts sphere. I am new to the ARMA forum today - in fact, new to martial arts altogether - and I'll add here, if only into a void, for what interests me is not whether women engaged (this has been established), but how, and in what ways their training and participation may have been understood.
I will stick to examples offered within this discussion:
Women's medieval history is a persnickety enterprise. Much of the records we have involve royalty or nobility (a useful, but not an entirely reliable random sample), or the occasional outlier like Jean D'Arc. John Clements mentions Mme Dollinger, wife of a master. This woman does much to dispel any doubts of whether women were capable, nevertheless, she enjoyed an unusual position and was uncommonly skilled. It's what made her worth mentioning in the manuscript.
More useful evidence is the mention-in-passing, such as the young woman in the tower room whom Jay Vail mentioned. This occurs in England, rural in comparison to, say, Florence, and I think it would not be unusual for English noble fathers to have their daughters trained in the arts: this is a skill of combat and command that makes her more marriageable. As Belinda Hertz points out in her post, the wife was relied upon to administrate the manor in her husband's absence. She would be educated in reading, writing, mathematics, economics, agriculture, law, and war. I am unfamiliar with the text to which Jay Vail is referring, and so I cannot be sure of the context here - whether it was unusual for the author to see a woman in training, or to see a woman exhibit such prowess. But I am willing to suspect the latter, as this would make this young woman worth the author's mention. Competence is desirable to preserve morale among the ranks; proficiency, however, might have been downright sexy. But of course I would need Mr. Vail's help with a citation to bear that out.
Despite her skill and physical ability, I predict this young woman - and any other female fighter of the period - to remain at a disadvantage on the battlefield, and her actual position would be protected. Her training would have occurred in-house, likely coached by her male relatives. She would have access only to manuals present in the household - few, since manuscripts were expensive and rare. She would not have access to the camaraderie and exchange in the schools or on the field. Regardless of how good she was at what she did, her repertoire, I imagine, would be considerably limited.
As for my hypothetical woman in citified Florence, I imagine her environment determined needs quite distinct from her rural English counterpart. She may only have needed enough defensive skill to ward off an opportunistic attacker, much like women today are encouraged to learn some defensive art well enough to protect themselves. Typically, I venture, but of course not always (some things change, some stay the same?).
Which brings me to John Clements' Scandinavian women, who put "blabber-mouth" knights in their places. I get a real charge out of these girls, and yet the nuance of gender expectations and social roles makes a strong show in this case. I have the impression these women were reasonably well-trained, and I am curious as to who they were (we will never know). But I find their reported enthusiasm to engage rather poignant; clearly to me, such an occasion opened a door for these women to show themselves useful in the public square. Yet their work did not serve to elevate themselves, but rather to feminize their male opponent. Much in the same way that Muslim women have recourse to removing their veils in front of a badly behaving male: she tells him he is not a man by exempting him from the normal gender rules. Our Scandinavian lancers, wittingly or not, sent the same message.
Alas, not only were there stained glass windows in Medieval Europe, there were also glass ceilings.
I readily say all this depends on what has been posted here, backed up a bit by what I know of European history, but as you see I speculate, cite no authority and claim no authority. Nor have I covered all the terrain of women's participation in Medieval Martial Arts: e.g., there damned well were female archers in the Holy Land. I invite refinement, redirection and correction on any point.
I am aware that what I talk about here drifts a bit from the original question, yet I am interested in the historical context of women's participation in the MA's. In any case, I am sure we will find that what limited women in the arts and on the field were the gendered parameters; certainly not their ability.
My Very Best,
Julianne Legge
