Female reenactors as soldiers?

[Appius Solanius Pertinax]

Avete,

I'd like to ask for the public opinion on the topic of women reenacting soldiers. I'm not trying to discuss the question of women in the roman army. I'm asking about here'n'now. Would/do you accept women into your group, not as civilians but as soldiers?

And what about events that are open to public? Should they ban female soldiers? Allow them? Decide on a case by case basis? And what percentage of events, in your experience, actually has rules on this, and how strict those rules are?

Thanks for any replies,

[jvrjenivs]

Thats a difficult question and I personally think it also highly demand on the purpose your group has. I don't have any problem with it, as long as it doesn't influence the total picture to much. So no loose 1m long blond hair, for instance. And when doing shows, using the right helmet and right type of armor, and nobody will notice. One of my friends use squamata and face mask helmet and you would never spot she is female, when totally in armor.

And of course you could also suggest better roles. I mean, there are way too few camp followers & prostitutes around in the re-enactment scene. When she want to fight, she can become gladiatrix.

Or become Boudica

[Neuraleanus]

While no one in our group is a woman protraying a miles, all of our female members prefer doing traditional female roles, I have seen it successfully done. About four years ago I encountered a person wearing segmentata and a gallic helmet, looked like a man to me, though she gave it away once she spoke. Having short cut hair and not being overly endowed helped. if you cannot tell, well, :wink:

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

I think it should be possible for females to depict Roman soldiers in re-enactment, however if inbetween gigs they do not wear their armour they should in my view wear women's clothes, or at least have their breasts wrapped to their bodies a little bit (ancient but well known technique)

Also i think that Roman male re-enactors on the other hand should then be able/allowed to wear women's clothes, wigs and make-up...

That also was done in the Roman world....... cf Satyricon

:lol:

M.VIB.M.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

I mean, there are way too few...prostitutes around in the re-enactment scene.

No he didn't

[M. Demetrius]

It's a tough argument, and some take very entrenched positions. From what I have seen, there are some women who can make the appearance as soldiers, and it's true that it's a function of whether the group wants to have this issue in their ranks. On a personal perspective, it's ok with me if it's ok with whomever is the leader of the unit. It really needs to be talked out to the end before something (anything) that is very controversial is included in any unit. It can be a deal breaker for some soldiers.

I know of a few instances in which things were not so clearly defined, and rifts developed as a result. As long as everyone is open, above-board and not deceptive, and all hosting groups are made aware ahead of time, then it should work. Nobody likes surprises that make them uncomfortable. I've seen that, too, and it's a bad situation.

Hard to call for someone else's group, and I'd personally be hesitant to make any comment on that.

[Caballo]

Personally, I think the Comitatus cavalry look pretty authentic


And could you tell which of these are female? Comitatus cavalry at Maryport, led by John C.

[Appius Solanius Pertinax]

Well... I'm not asking because we're thinking about including women into our group. We did that right at the beginning. And we're sensible enough to ban things like long hair spilling from under the helmet ourselves.

I'm asking because recently we've encountered some of those deeply entrenched views on the other side of the argument. It doesn't matter that the female has crew-cut, wears the same kit as all the other soldiers, and, what with helmet and armor and bracae and shield and proper wide tunic and everything, you have to be real close and coming from a good angle to be able to tell she's a woman. She's a woman, and this fact alone is enough.

And you can imagine that having to tell the female members of one's group "sorry, you can't go to that event, the guys who run it banned female soldiers" is not something one enjoys...

So I wanted to find out how many people accept this, how many are strictly against it, how many take the middle ground and accept/ban it depending on the quality of the impression, and I'm hoping to learn what percentage of groups (and consequently events) follows which view. I want to know how often we'll have to deal with this in the future...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

While I am all for womans equality in the modern world, our group does not allow woman to protray soldiers simply because it was not
done in the Roman army. There are other groups which authentically allow women to portray a warrior, such as cladiator groups etc.
That is the reasoning behind our groups decision. Authenticity.

[hoplite14gr]

Some careful research in women warriors in Antiquity can allow lots of options to ladies.
Ladies get impressed by heavy infantry and cavalry reconstructions while in ancient times it seems
that women who found themselves forced to fight were ragtag militia or light troops.
Even the Sarmatian girls were probably light cavalry

If you have a group that strives for historical authenticity, then ladies are restricted in their options.
If you see it simply for the fun of it, no argument here.

Kind regards

[M. Demetrius]

Gauls, and other "Celts" had female warriors in the ranks. Romans, of course, didn't. But each group has the authority to determine what is acceptable in their activities. As said below, the problem arises once two or more groups are together for some event. We all have to remember that we are not really Romans, but reenactors, at some level or another. I can't make the decision for any group except my own, and even then, it's a matter of considerable thought and discussion, isn't it?

which of these are female

The one on the left?

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

While I am all for womans equality in the modern world, our group does not allow woman to protray soldiers simply because it was not
done in the Roman army. There are other groups which authentically allow women to portray a warrior, such as cladiator groups etc.
That is the reasoning behind our groups decision. Authenticity.

Same in our group.

[Epictetus]

Just out of curiosity: for those groups which don't allow women, how often have you had to turn someone away?

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

From what i have heard most women in most groups are romantically involved with a member of that group...

not many singles joining re-enactment groups if you ask me...

M.VIB.M.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

For me...never. So far! We haven't had any apply to the Ninth, so it's not been necessary. But the same goes, if a guy wanted to join up to play the role of a female prostitute, or domina, I can assure you he would be treated with the same fairness and equality! :wink: .

We have women who play the Caledonian role, as female warriors. They come various other organisations, so we don't have to supply them, either.