While you're probably speaking in jest, there is actually more truth to your words than you think. Real knights could be quite the pieces of work... in my country, I read the statutes ('Cartas de Foral') that medieval Kings gave to the cities, and in those they specifically forbid the Knights from forcing people to eat shit (a practice described in the documents as 'Merda in Bucca', or 'shit in mouth'), as it seems to be something they were quite fond of doing. At least in the Quest for Holy Grail commoners are just covered in dung, not made to eat it.
"What would medieval people think if they could see a modern medieval games full of lady knights?" The one with bikini armors? 🤔 I also want to know their reaction if such thing is possible. 😂
Lyn Sain They’d probably be more concerned about the bikini armour- that shit ain’t safe. The medieval people weren’t opposed to women learning to fight- in fact if you were a noblewoman who lived in a castle, I can guarantee that you were taught warfare either sometime before or after you were married. We know that they weren’t opposed to females learning to fight because there are images of women learning from swordmasters within medieval training manuals.
Regarding bikini armor, most armorers would likely either laugh or cringe. Not only at the lack of coverage but also at the lack of padding. Can you imagine all that chaffing?
@@cthonisprincess4011 yeah, afterall when the lord was away, who looked after the land? Which includes running and taxing and occasionally fighting off neighbours? The wife of that lord (or husband on some very rare occasions)
You don't have to go as far as bikini armors. The most overused in pop culture, yet completely unrealistic female armor is the form-fitting breastplate (you know, the one with two separate metal breasts). That form completely defeats the purpose of a breastplate which is primarily to deflect hits away from the core.
The English originally burnt Joan of Arc at the stake in a court case because she wore male clothes under her armor, which was a charge of heresy because the court wanted her dead. The controversial thing about this case was that not only did Catholic doctrine at the time give Joan of Arc a good reason to have worn male clothes, which was described in the Summa theologica, but most of the clergy stated that she'd committed no offense. Theologian Jean Gerson used this fact to give an airtight defense for Joan, which was backed up by the inquisition, and would later be used as an argument for canonizing her. Despite all of these protests, the court went through with executing her anyways; they wanted to see her dead because she was a symbol of the French war effort. Really, the trial was unnecessary, since the court was dead set on killing her from the second they heard of her arrest. They did so against the desire of the church, which is *really* bad looking for a Medieval country.
I'm no expert, but I was under the impression that her wearing masculine clothes was part of the evidence for her heresy, but that her defense that it protected her against rape was accepted. Heresy trials were always a farce anyway that revolved around whether the judges wanted you dead or not. Most trials under monarchial regimes were. The only reason she was tried was to humiliate the French, they didn't an excuse.
@@TheAegisClaw Did they really? She ennobled only months before she was captured, there were several attempts to get her back, and Charles VII threatened vengeance over her treatment.
Im so glad you use Dragons Dogma in a lot of these videos. Absolutely brilliant game that flew under the radar, and I highly suggest anyone who hasn't played it to give it a try since its on all platforms
Tbh i also like Dragon`s Dogma, however on all platforms no. Reason:The sucking fucking piece of shit devs mapped light attack and heavy attack to x and y or a and b wtf?
Be honest, Raph; this whole video is an excuse to videotape your girlfriend wearing armour and wielding weapons right? I understand completely. I mean, who can resist the view of a beautiful woman wielding a sword? That is the dream. :)
Wow, not using greaves in HEMA is a huge safety hazard! I get the argument that they don't specifically target the legs, they're really proficient and so on, but the weapons are still metal and a stray hit can do quite some damage. Stay safe when HEMAing, I'm speaking from experience ;) Great video nonetheless!
Somehow managed to misdread greaves as gloves sorry my bad ,but your right you should wear propper safety gear when training HEMA especially when you using accurate replicas with the syme mass distribution as the originals
Pretty sure YT already has a hate boner for Metatron just because he has refused to tow the progressive line, wouldn't be surprised if he's already on a black list for automatic instant demonetization.
For someone who fears of offending others, he seems like a decent man. He certainly isn't like Andrew Klaivan saying that women would absolutely lose in swordsmanship (disadvantaged? Perhaps. But the nature of swordfighting is complicated. In fact, reality defies logic so many times).
@@QwertyBoredom122 stop spreading the false notion that only non progressive content is subjected to excess demonetization , Step back history a far left channel frequently was demonetized , emperor tiger star a solid left channel has been demonetized, etc
The weapon is an equalizer, but to an extent. If they're knights in full plate, then swords won't really be effective, so which weapon? Are they using a lance on horseback? Doing melee with war hammers? How does the difference in mass and strength affects the use and effectivity of such weapons? On average, women have lower upper body strength than men. So, in close quarters, it's not hard to see how that's a disadvantage. Of course, if they have no armor, or light armor that can be defeated by swords quite easily, then strength won't do much of a difference, unless the man can grab the woman, or a similar maneuver when strength matters a lot. There's a reason why boxers are separated by weight, and that's because different weights fight differently. Lighter people tends to be faster, but heavier people pack a lot more punch. It would be quite dangerous for a boxer of low weight to fight a way heavier opponent. But that's for unarmed combat. Several channels with hema practitioners did recently talk about something _related_ to this, regarding the infamous statement of Andrew Klavan saying that "women can't sword fight": ua-cam.com/video/WKovHoBV730/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/zwla_u_9Ock/v-deo.html
@@3nertia Not sure if you noticed, but helmets restrict that significantly, the only way to capitalise on that advantage would be to wear no helmet/visor at all or have such big eye slits that the helmet becomes integrally weaker and has a much more prominent target around the eyes.
I'm female, and short. And I'd like to add that the "equlizer" sword does certainly not equalise reach, if both have the same sort of weapon. I mean, let's face it, the length of my weapon has to work for my body, and I cannot even out my shorter reach with a longer weapon. To the contrary, I need a shorter sword, as I know from experience. So the missing reach is even more of a factor. There is such a thing, however, as fighting intelligence or speed that may ACTUALLY equalise, if it is on the side of the physically weaker or shorter person. And with a longer weapon? Well, reach can be equalised, but my short fingers cannot hold quite as thick a pole, so if the pole is made of wood, it will break more easily.
ASOIAF aims to be an accurate representation of the medieval period, with all the magical stuff added on top but without any changes to the society (technology, ways of life, worldviews, ideologies, conflicts and hardships)
That's something that proofs it's a very well written series of novels* Wonderfully written and realistically!! And, well, the magic does affect some aspects of technology, but very very little (aka, the super ballesta for battle against dragons is an example)
@@taylor_green_9 as i was reading the novels i was astounded by martins knowledge of the middle ages. battle tactics, household customs and chores, everything. it is a very rich world. he had to invent quite a few things no doubt, but still, it all seemed so realistic...
Interesting video, thank you! I think a valuable thing to add about female knights in fantasy lore is that this idea is not a recent one. I think the most valuables example are Bradamante from Orlando Furioso and Innamorato and Clorinda from Gerusalemme Liberata. I think they can help us guessing a perspective of how medieval people would have look to nowadays women knights of fantasy fictions and games!
I know I am late to the party, here: How about the brief period for the Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Frati della Beata Gloriosa Vergine Maria), who allowed, for a time, women to serve, and bear arms, with the title of militissa (a female alternative title comparable to a knight). Although scandalous at the time, and the identities of the militissa are lost, the order did exist, and the records of women, and the removal of women from the rolls were documented. Formed in 1233, and approved by pope Alexander IV in 1261, continued to exist with women in the ranks until the order was suppressed by pope Sixtus V in 1558. I know that many historians seem to discount them, but I was curious on Metetron's take.
Oh no, you're dead wrong here, sorry. Miles means knight in Latin, genitive cause is militis, from which the word militissa is formed, which is normal word formation in Latin. For example, Dux means Duke, genitive cause Ducis, from which is formed word Ducissa, Duchess. So militissa means female knight all right
No metatron the English not the Church burnt her at the stake. She was convicted in a religious court, however it was done so against canon law, the entire thing was a sham. The trial was payed for with money from the English Crown, and the jury consisted of English partisans.
On the contrary, Pierre Cauchon, the bishop presiding over the trial, insisted for everything to be done according to the law. It doesn't mean that the trial was fair or the judges unbiased, of course it wasn't, but it was done in due form, for whatever that is worth... Besides, the second trial, which overturned the verdict of the first, was as much partisan as the first trial had been. Both were politically motivated. The first was shamelessly biased against Jeanne d'Arc, and the second shamelessly biased in her favor.
A large tough honourable noble woman like Brienne of Tarth who had authority in her own right as a landowner or heir, could very reasonably insist on going to war esp on Crusade. Eleanor of Aquitaine did.
I saw another UA-cam channel cover the mostly fictional depictions of knights rescuing maidens. I was wondering if the topic of historical knights versus their poetic depictions interested you
Maybe not a knight, but definately a heroine female warrior leader was Kenau (full name Kenau Simonsdochter Hasselaer), for those who are interested in female participation in historic warfare. Her bravery has been an inspiration for the 80 years of war that created a nation (the Dutch republic), and the birth of republicanism that changed all our nations even today.
I've watched your collaboration video twice now so funny i like your unscripted suff. You and Matt Easton collaborations are great to. Stay safe Metatron 🏴🐆🐆🐆
Correct me if I'm wrong. But I'm fairly certain women in the Teutonic/Templar order (for the Templar order this was possibly about a decades worth [before Council of Troyes]) were *sisters* of the order, not actual warriors/knights!! Edit, aaaah fuck. Shoulda listened to the next 2 seconds lol Good video anyhow
I was talking with our daughter about the knights in our family. This was back when she was 10 years old. She said, " I want to be a knight! " I told her that "she couldn't be a knight, they were men." She then went and got a book and said, " yes I can, there are the Amazon warriors!" And shown me it in the book.( at age 10 her IQ was 112 ).
It raises my spirits to see you in good health again my lord. And it is heartening to see that the quarantine has not separated you from Lady Scarlet. Well we have established the lack of female knights in Europe. But what of the rare, but exceptional, female Samurai of Japan? That is about the closet thing to a female knight from within that time period I can conceive.
@@darthplagueis13 The core is question is whether a woman can be an effective knight, with the main focus being on combat. Hence my point stands. If you want to discuss other aspects of being a knight, then please specify.
@@426mak The core question is the title of the video. Did female knights exist? You could also ask: Could they have existed? And the answer to both is no because the society that knights were part of was both sexist and determined on gender roles, with masculinity being considered a core aspect of knighthood and chivalry. As to whether women could be effective on the battlefield: Yes, they could be effective fighters, but no, commonly enlisting combattants of both genders was neither common nor a good idea (there are videos from a number of UA-camrs on the topic but to break it down: Women on average are at a slight disadvantage to men. Plus, men are considerably more expendable as their obligatory role in procreation ends with having sex, they are not the ones having to walk around with the baby for 9 months and one man could theoretically suffice for a larger quantity of women). As far as I am aware, and correct me if I'm wrong, even in asian history, women were usually not part of armies. The reason why they were involved in combat and in some instances actually trained was because one of their roles was to garrison the places they lived at. If the men all got enlisted into an army, you can either just hope that bandits and brigands will spare the village or you can arm the women and in some places in asia and parts of scandinavia, they went for the latter option. That does however not mean that women were just generally accepted as members of a war-faring class, it just means that they could fight if they had to.
@@darthplagueis13 The Samurai class in Japan were originally gender neutral, with men and women being called to fight when needed. On the Asian steppes there were plenty of records of fighting women on the battlefield. Even Celtic Europe, such as the Iceni tribe had a tradition of fighting women. If your point is that heavily urbanized society generally did not employ women as a fighting force, then yes that is correct. However, that is a social restriction not a physical limitation.
@@426mak Yes, it's a social restriction. I never claimed it wasn't. However, just because it's a social restriction, doesn't mean it's completely arbitrary.
Templars did allow woman in their order at the beggining. So also as special comand for espionage they were used by the order to camouflage their operations, they were subject to the same covenants.
Hey man since we will have ghost of tsushima in a couple mounths can't you do a video about the mongol invasion of japan, good work man your videos are awesome!!!
Hi, Metratron! I'm an Italian girl and I was amazed by your videos, when you show all your passion for ancient civilization, specially for the Roman Empire. I wanted to ask you... did you know in Italy we have some particular festivities where the italians dressed up as romans warriors and they put up a show where they fight with true weapons, different types of swords or some kind of spears and things like that? I think you would enjoy to see some beautiful shows! You can search on Internet! Different cities in Italy has some festivities like this! It was just something for you, because you seem so interested on this kind of things! A kiss from the Italy! Bye!
It is of greatest importance, to don the most well crafted of armors while making of a video of great controversy. It is there to protect you from the many sharp comments that will be released from the comment section. It is written so in the scrolls.
Its also the issue about shear numbers, Say you have 10,000 people carry 100 Lbs for 24 miles. With combat, the issue is that people gets weeded out out of the line. As the endurance over time happens the reality is that the advantage is much wider. The issue is that say during the first hour you won't see a difference between genders. when you reach 8 hours then the diffrences gets much wider. Just like today, the numbers will change over time. So say marching for three days in full plate, and weapons, and gear this is much wider. With that said, you will find the exception on the issue. So if you have 5,000 men, and 5,000 women do a three day march in full gear you will find about 3% of the women left with the 30% of the men who made the test. So its really about the short, and long term effect.
What about the Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Italy. It was founded during the 1200's and as I understand it admitted female knights and allowed them to serve in a military capacity. I know that they were involved in the wars of the Pacification of Lombardy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Blessed_Virgin_Mary
Yes, as far as we know, female knights in such a title did not exist. We have cases of shield maidens during the migration era and other earlier medieval examples; but with the Knights Templar, Teutonic Knights, as well as the Crusades throughout the era, could some whom may have had experience or excelled may have earned something akin to a "lady-at-arms"? If so when she was in kit, you could argue it'd be difficult to distinguish her from the males around her. Would her gender have been hidden due to the stigmas or other prejudices? Just some thoughts not on the prevalence of female warriors during the medieval period, but its presence.
Not sure what you are calling “didn’t really fight”, but Joan of Arc participated in the battles at the frontlines and got wounded several times. We do not know if she personally attacked anyone with her weapons, but in her trials she talks about the practicality of the sword that she is using, so she definitely used it for something. She was also known for being talented with artillery. So I guess we know more about her fighting than for most other knights in her period.
Also, it was a consensus of the church at the time that she was permitted to wear male clothing because the protection was necessary. She was briefly forced to wear a dress during the trial, but was permitted to resume wearing male clothing after someone tried raping her in prison. Virtually everybody in the court believed her execution to be a sham. She was killed for political reasons rather than anything else. The executioner even said he feared he would face the fires of hell for burning a holy woman. Women fighting most certainly was a thing, admittedly less common in europe than in other areas of the world at the time. In japan, certain dynasties allowed it, to the point where some entire units were made of women but certain dynasties prohibited it. One of the tenants of Sikhism is gender equality, and thus women were allowed to fight in india. It was relatively common in many, many cultures throughout asia, africa, the americas. It was more common in nations where heavy infantry wasn't common.
There has always been a small minority of women that acted and dressed like men and went to battle. Rare but true. There have been women that fight. Some have been knighted but not for fighting. Do not know of any that actually trained to be one.
Do remember that once a month a woman will be bleeding. Most are in pain too, and for some women the pain is so accute that they faint. I know a woman who has such a level of pain and needed contraceptive pills to help. That means that between 3 and 8 days a month, a woman might not be available for battle. Personally I'm in such pain that without pain killers, I need a hot water bottle against my abdomen and even that's not enough. In the middle ages, with no pain killers and contraceptives... it might not be worth it to invest in female knights, especially since the average woman is weaker physically than a man. Add to that the culture of 'men are the ones expected to fight', then situations where there are female fighters would be rare. Not non-existent, but rare.
For a moment I was like: "I've never seen someone in armor looking so small"... only after a closer look, I've noticed he didn't wear a gambeson underneath.
First I really like your videos. Thanks for keeping up the good work even in this trying times. I'm from Tyrol. I know Italy was hit way worse than Austria but I think we are all in the same boat with this pandemic. Anyway I read a fascinating little theory a couple of month ago. According to that theory Jeanne d'Arc was actually the bastard halfsister/cousin of the Dauphin and later King Charles VII of France. Her real mother beeing the queen mother of France Isabeau and her father was supposed to be the Kings paternal uncle Louis de Valois, duke of Orleans and that's according tothe theory the reason why she was betrayed to the English. To me it makes a lot of sense. If one (like me) doesn't beliefe in the whole Saint and Chosen One story, her beeing a royal bastard makes the whole stroy so much more logic and plausible: Royal bastards could be brought up in rather modest circumstaces at least for some time but usually they were well educated. Don Juan de Austria bastard son of emperor Charles V. and Commander in Chief of the Holy League Fleet at the battle of Lepanto was raised by a court musician for some time for example. Jeanne beeing a royal bastard would also explain why the Valois as well as the English wanted to get rid of her. A farmers daughter with religious visions was no real threat to the king but his halfsister with royal blood on both her parents' sides and a proven war hero, that would be a threat even if she is female. Wiliam the Bastard of Normandy, later known as the Conqueror, took the English crown with far flimsier a claim just about 350 years before. Robert Guiscard was mercenary with no claims to any Italian titles what so ever but he coquered, robbed and cheated till he becam the duke of Apulia and Calabria laying the foundationfor his grandson Roger to become the king of Sicily. And there were all the shenanigans of the condottieres in Italy during the 14th century who took whole city states and dukedoms with the right of survival o the fittest. So if Jeanne truly was a royal bastard, as well as a genuine war hero who was regarded, even in her lifetime, as a saint by the common people, she was a very real threat to the French king as well as to his English cousin. I honestly have no idea if this theory has any kind of prove. But as I said I find it way more plausible than a farmers daughter being chosen by the archangel Michael to throw out the English and afterwards beating the English so significcantly that they end up loosing the 100years war which they had been mostly winning for about 80 to 90 years at this time and despite this the war would drag on for another 20 years after er execution (or lets call it by name: murder by pyre). Finally to quote, or at least parphrase, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes: if one eliminates the impossible the truth has to be what remains as improbable as it may seem. For Jeanne that leaves only three options either she really was a Divine Chosen One (rather impossible), a mentaly ill girl that would have been put into a hospital in our times (highly improbable due to her track record) or she really was a royal bastard (by far the most plausible option imho.). Cheers and happy easter none the less
Well... looking to the vid with your girlfriend... It must have been a terrifying experience for a noble-one like you... I have a suggestion however. You could do a co-production on the use of makeup in ancient times.
Question: The Norse people did not document their society or culture much, and the writings we do have come from other sources that have had contact with the Vikings. Women in Norse culture was allowed to own land, request divorce, and although they typically did not join the Viking excursions, the women did manage everything in the settlement and take up arms if needed. At this time Christianity was pushing to be the only religion. A prime example would be the attack on the Serapeum that housed a lot of writings. Emperor Theodosius I had ordered all temples in Alexandria destroyed to wipe out any traces of Paganism. Christian leaders understood the power of an "idea". One of the charges that the Church brought against Joan of Arc was for wearing men's attire telling us that they were very strict as to the woman's place in society. How much control did these Christian leaders have over what was allowed to be written? Is it possible that the Norse way of life threaten the Christian Church's rise so much that leaders dictated what was allowed to be documented about these people especially in the aspect of the roles women played in the Norse culture?
Hello “SJW” here what he said isn’t wrong. Plus in modern times woman can almost do anything men can. Where just a little behind because no one thought we could.
Female warriors existed, but it was impossible for a woman to obtain the title of "knight." The closest thing to a "female knight" in the Crusader era was Lady Florine of Burgundy and the Order of the Hatchet. Florine of Burgundy, an armored warrior,joined her husband in the Crusades and took command after her husband's death. As for Order of the Hatchet, you can check it yourself on Wikipedia.
It really depended on the lord. If a lord choose to knight a female, of course it would be talked about throughout that lord's lands. My family ruled Sicily as barons, the Di Giacomo Family. So it really depends on the lord at the time. They're most likely female knights that haven't been recorded in history. During the time of The Persian Empire, the Persians had a female admiral. So there's no doubt in my mind that female knights did exist, it was mostly likely pretty rare. Our sigil is three torches on a blue field.
Hmm, my thought is this: What if people assumed you were a man automatically, BECAUSE you were a knight? I am not assuming a high percentage here, mind, only a rare occurrence. But those rarities would not be chronicled, perhaps, simply because people either ignored or were oblivious to the knight being female. I seem to recall that in another era and place (possibly Persia?) this was a known practice, but I fail to recall where or when I read it: Widows could step into the gap left by their husbands as fighters and would then be considered men from then on.
In fact, they didn't. They just organise court. She was judged by Bishop of Paris and clerc as well members of University. Fact that she atcted oposing to the inqisition was enough to be judged guilty.
As warriors, not knights, we have lots of examples of female warriors, such as the oonas in Japan the shield maids in Europe. So it's totally possible that at least a few women fought and trained to fight through the 13th to 16th century.
Top 10 most memorable military uniforms. Some are majestic (Winged Hussairs), some come with absurd power (US infantry), and some are just terrifying (Flame troopers). But they earned their place in memory!
I was going to mention the order of the hatchet in Spain. It's a shame not much is mentioned about them. But from what I've found about them is most of the more quilted armor and wielded hatchets are axes, only the Richer with spare metal armor wore and used swords. But I'm not sure if this is true but I heard El Sid wife was leader of the order.
Good. As you lived in Great Britain I'm just surprised you didn't mention Eleanor of Aquitaine who met Henry II while on Crusade with her then-husband. Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose.
I'm trying to find information about the battle of Tortosa you mentioned but can't find any. You call it the "Order of something" at 9:05 but I can't understand what you're saying. Could you share it?
While I'm not sure if there is any examples of it happening, one thing that has to be considered is that even if a female knight is something that would go against all convention, that doesn't mean there could never be a breach of convention if some ruler actually decided to for whatever reason.
When you see imagery of men fighting in full plate armour it does not mean they are knights, also if they're in full plate armour it does not meant they're men.
Well, female knights were not known to exist, but it is known that women were fighting in wars in medieval times. We know this from historical texts which mention fighting women. We know it from amours especially made for noblewomen which were used in combat.
So you could say that women in extremely rare cases did wear armor that knights would wear but they most likely weren't knights because there is no historical evidence so far to support them having official knight title. Still pretty cool that there were some rare cases of mideval knight women. But I do agree that in historical games they tend to make it seem like women were common in mideval fighting which I don't support but I don't mind woman as main character or something. It's cool as long as it makes sense story wise. But yeah in fantasy mideval stuff I don't mind it. But I don't like how sexualized their armor is more often than not. Like ...cmon now. Woman in armor is hot enough you don't need to make sexualized armor that doesn't make sense in sense of protection for women to make them look good or attractive .
I don't know if female with the title knight existed, because it is a nobility title, not military title, but there were women who could fight in amor like men did regardless of the title.
@@Akuretarie you could get knighted for for your military succeses in fighting for the king, but it was a nobility title, not military. You could not earn it by studying in military school or being in the military long enough. It was up to your lord own decision to make you knight and he could do so or decide not to according to his will and regardless of your achievments.
@@damasek219 No school in middle age, not even for soldiers only instructors for the rich kids of lords, so no, at first Knight is both a title and a rank in the "military". Today it's different.
@@Akuretarie I disagree. It isn't and wasn't a rank in the military. First of all, you had to be a nobleman to be a knight or you had to do some service to the crown or church to be knighted. It was usually service on battlefield, but it was not military rank or military title. If you did something for a crown you could become a low nobleman of any kind knight was just one of several low nobility titles. If it was military title, you would have to be proficient in military tactics which knights did not have to. If it was military rank you could not inherit it but we know that knighthood was hereditary title. There were some prerequisites a young nobleman who was in training to become knight should be taught before he was knighted but they had nothing to do with high rank military skills such as generals and master tacticians had to have. British Isles were the only place where knighthood was not hereditary, but in continental Europe it was nobility title, not military rank. As a low nobleman you had certain military power at disposal, but if you that's because you're nobleman, not because you have higher military rank.
@@damasek219 No you become knigh while being "knighted" and have to be refered as "Monseigneur" (or Mylord in english) nobility have to come from somewhere, and usually you become a knight AND a noble through military effort (or if you are part of a family that is already noble) at least in the middle age, also general didnt exist at that time nore military schools, that's why only a knight is allowed to wear battle weapons such as swords hammer ect... Beside being a noble isn't related to war specifically if you are the wife of a noble you are not related to the army but are still noble, that's why being a knight is both a rank in the army of a king and a title, and yes the people would have to obey a knight because his title give him autority, you should read about fæudalism i think you are mixing period.
Life before plumbing and modern medicine was pretty hard, look how people are degrading just off a small quarantine, now imagine if they didn't have access to anything modern at all, that anyone was fit enough to be a knight was a big ask already, I'm sure the harsh darwinian conditions produced hardier people back then but still, that window of perfect health must have been very short. You just wouldn't bother with a woman who is by default weaker, their leg geometry is compromised for child birth, their skin thinner, never mind bone and muscle strength and density. Beyond a costume for a noble, it just would be nonsensical. Women in combat is one of those modern luxury beliefs, it hasn't been tested by hardship and reality.
It is actually very simple why the society back then was constructed that way. Because women had the most important part and that is reproduction, If they all go to war with men and die that's it this country, town, tribe whatever will be dead in a generation. By the way AMAZING VIDEO! Keep up the good work buddy!
I think there is a story about a Scottish noblewoman who in the absence of her husband donned armour and headed the defence of her castle against a siege. So I guess women getting involved in fighting were probably brought to that point by circumstance, like defending their property when the men were away.
the point is that unless you have 100% failure, then people would not be able to say it cant happen. its just a lot more rare. A female knight is possible biologically, but historically known politically or there is not other option.
To be realistic medieval armor was always made for men, men of certain criteria (weight, height and more importantly to society at the time, social status. Women were deemed inferior citizens at the time) although there were women in armor and were masculine in appearance mostly called "amazons"
I am glad he mentions cultural issues. Given the expense of the Armor, The rules of Primogeniture, as well as well as the biological such as sexual dimorphism, plus not to mention the role of women as mothers, the idea of women being classic medieval knights is remote.
The terms "militissa" and "chevalise" existed to describe female knights. We also have examples of the rights and liberties afforded to such women in history. It was certainly uncommon, but that the terminology existed strongly suggests that it was something that could and did occur.
Weren't there also some female Samurai (not just from the class), who took to the field armed with naginata? Also, polearms in general seem like a pretty good weapon of choice if faced with fighting a larger opponent, since it can help to keep the larger foe at a greater distance than a sword would allow.
I think the point you make about weapons being an equalizer is only partially true when it comes to knights. In HEMA, fencing and other martial arts, what matters is hitting your opponent, not how hard you hit them. The woman at 6:18 is very skilled and fast, which against an unarmored opponent is enough to kill them. However, if you're fighting opponents who are wearing heavy armor, you often need to rely on brute strength to either pierce the armor or to cause trauma through the armor. Just hitting them with a sword won't stop them. In this respect of course a woman would (on average) have a significant disadvantage.
dekelt - Actually, you’d have to hit a gap or weak spot in the armor to kill someone wearing full armor. At Agincourt, the English got the heavily armored French knights to fall in the mud & either hammered their heads & forced their heads into the mud or stabbed them through the armpits.
@@TraditionalAnglican Yes, when your enemy is down you can stab him with a dagger or something through the gaps, but that's not how you knock him down (unless you're really lucky). There's a reason maces, picks and warhammers became so popular in the late medieval period.
Wait, Females exist?
Feels like an eternity since I've actually seen one because of the Quarantine
Are you in a holy order or something akin to that? 🤣
Quarantine? I've havent seen any even without quarantine!
“Because of the Quarantine”
@@LoliMaster69227 Then I should explain your username to you...
Hahaha, I could say the same about males, dude! :D
If you want a completely accurate representation of knights in a movie then i recommend Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail.
Your mother is a hamster and your father smells of elderberries.
@@rollochairbreaker230 I FART IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION!
@@steyn1775 now go away before I taunt you another time.
While you're probably speaking in jest, there is actually more truth to your words than you think. Real knights could be quite the pieces of work... in my country, I read the statutes ('Cartas de Foral') that medieval Kings gave to the cities, and in those they specifically forbid the Knights from forcing people to eat shit (a practice described in the documents as 'Merda in Bucca', or 'shit in mouth'), as it seems to be something they were quite fond of doing. At least in the Quest for Holy Grail commoners are just covered in dung, not made to eat it.
@@KnightofAges so that's where the phrase "eat shit and die" comes from. I thought it was Duke Nukem all this time.
"What would medieval people think if they could see a modern medieval games full of lady knights?"
The one with bikini armors? 🤔
I also want to know their reaction if such thing is possible. 😂
Lyn Sain They’d probably be more concerned about the bikini armour- that shit ain’t safe.
The medieval people weren’t opposed to women learning to fight- in fact if you were a noblewoman who lived in a castle, I can guarantee that you were taught warfare either sometime before or after you were married. We know that they weren’t opposed to females learning to fight because there are images of women learning from swordmasters within medieval training manuals.
Regarding bikini armor, most armorers would likely either laugh or cringe.
Not only at the lack of coverage but also at the lack of padding. Can you imagine all that chaffing?
@@cthonisprincess4011 yeah, afterall when the lord was away, who looked after the land? Which includes running and taxing and occasionally fighting off neighbours?
The wife of that lord (or husband on some very rare occasions)
You don't have to go as far as bikini armors.
The most overused in pop culture, yet completely unrealistic female armor is the form-fitting breastplate (you know, the one with two separate metal breasts). That form completely defeats the purpose of a breastplate which is primarily to deflect hits away from the core.
They would consider it magic and burn you as a witch
The English originally burnt Joan of Arc at the stake in a court case because she wore male clothes under her armor, which was a charge of heresy because the court wanted her dead. The controversial thing about this case was that not only did Catholic doctrine at the time give Joan of Arc a good reason to have worn male clothes, which was described in the Summa theologica, but most of the clergy stated that she'd committed no offense. Theologian Jean Gerson used this fact to give an airtight defense for Joan, which was backed up by the inquisition, and would later be used as an argument for canonizing her. Despite all of these protests, the court went through with executing her anyways; they wanted to see her dead because she was a symbol of the French war effort. Really, the trial was unnecessary, since the court was dead set on killing her from the second they heard of her arrest. They did so against the desire of the church, which is *really* bad looking for a Medieval country.
Quick addendum for context, I mean catholic doctrine (small c) not Catholic doctrine (big C), as the latter didn't exist yet.
Exactly, it was the English who burned her, not the French.
@@MaxRavenclaw the French very much wanted rid of her too though.
I'm no expert, but I was under the impression that her wearing masculine clothes was part of the evidence for her heresy, but that her defense that it protected her against rape was accepted.
Heresy trials were always a farce anyway that revolved around whether the judges wanted you dead or not. Most trials under monarchial regimes were. The only reason she was tried was to humiliate the French, they didn't an excuse.
@@TheAegisClaw Did they really? She ennobled only months before she was captured, there were several attempts to get her back, and Charles VII threatened vengeance over her treatment.
Im so glad you use Dragons Dogma in a lot of these videos. Absolutely brilliant game that flew under the radar, and I highly suggest anyone who hasn't played it to give it a try since its on all platforms
I agree, a master piece. I finished it and started a New Game+
I loved Dragon's Dogma! I always played as a Magic Knight or a Ranger
@@metatronyt I wish you did a playthrough on it
I started playing it a little while ago, and it's great!
Tbh i also like Dragon`s Dogma, however on all platforms no.
Reason:The sucking fucking piece of shit devs mapped light attack and heavy attack to x and y or a and b wtf?
My girlfriend told me to help her put her makeup too, she got angry and legt after I ate all of it, I don't understand why?
Be honest, Raph; this whole video is an excuse to videotape your girlfriend wearing armour and wielding weapons right? I understand completely. I mean, who can resist the view of a beautiful woman wielding a sword? That is the dream. :)
....that was my first thought as well haha.
Great content anyways lol
Wow, not using greaves in HEMA is a huge safety hazard! I get the argument that they don't specifically target the legs, they're really proficient and so on, but the weapons are still metal and a stray hit can do quite some damage. Stay safe when HEMAing, I'm speaking from experience ;)
Great video nonetheless!
Its also dissadvantage as gloves give you a much better grib on the weapon
@@alpharius4966 greaves are on the lower leg, my friend! I believe you're confusing something here
Somehow managed to misdread greaves as gloves sorry my bad ,but your right you should wear propper safety gear when training HEMA especially when you using accurate replicas with the syme mass distribution as the originals
Metatron: "I don't care if this offends people because it's the reality"
UA-cam: DEMONETIZED!
Pretty sure YT already has a hate boner for Metatron just because he has refused to tow the progressive line, wouldn't be surprised if he's already on a black list for automatic instant demonetization.
For someone who fears of offending others, he seems like a decent man. He certainly isn't like Andrew Klaivan saying that women would absolutely lose in swordsmanship (disadvantaged? Perhaps. But the nature of swordfighting is complicated. In fact, reality defies logic so many times).
@@QwertyBoredom122 stop spreading the false notion that only non progressive content is subjected to excess demonetization , Step back history a far left channel frequently was demonetized , emperor tiger star a solid left channel has been demonetized, etc
It is not demonitized.
@@christianweibrecht6555 Not only but mainly. It's no secret YT is PC and mostly left leaning.
So please refrain from straw manning in the future.
All this is an excuse!, he makes this video for her girlfriend put the armor, fantasy accomplished! nice work mate ;)
😂😂
The weapon is an equalizer, but to an extent. If they're knights in full plate, then swords won't really be effective, so which weapon? Are they using a lance on horseback? Doing melee with war hammers? How does the difference in mass and strength affects the use and effectivity of such weapons?
On average, women have lower upper body strength than men. So, in close quarters, it's not hard to see how that's a disadvantage.
Of course, if they have no armor, or light armor that can be defeated by swords quite easily, then strength won't do much of a difference, unless the man can grab the woman, or a similar maneuver when strength matters a lot. There's a reason why boxers are separated by weight, and that's because different weights fight differently. Lighter people tends to be faster, but heavier people pack a lot more punch. It would be quite dangerous for a boxer of low weight to fight a way heavier opponent. But that's for unarmed combat.
Several channels with hema practitioners did recently talk about something _related_ to this, regarding the infamous statement of Andrew Klavan saying that "women can't sword fight":
ua-cam.com/video/WKovHoBV730/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/zwla_u_9Ock/v-deo.html
Women do have better peripheral vision though and they do tend to be more limber would could potentially offset their disadvantage(s)
@@3nertia Not sure if you noticed, but helmets restrict that significantly, the only way to capitalise on that advantage would be to wear no helmet/visor at all or have such big eye slits that the helmet becomes integrally weaker and has a much more prominent target around the eyes.
@@grizenator4836 There are so many different helmet designs ...
@@anthonyvera8524, sorry, you don't get to choose what people wish to discuss.
I'm female, and short. And I'd like to add that the "equlizer" sword does certainly not equalise reach, if both have the same sort of weapon. I mean, let's face it, the length of my weapon has to work for my body, and I cannot even out my shorter reach with a longer weapon. To the contrary, I need a shorter sword, as I know from experience. So the missing reach is even more of a factor. There is such a thing, however, as fighting intelligence or speed that may ACTUALLY equalise, if it is on the side of the physically weaker or shorter person.
And with a longer weapon? Well, reach can be equalised, but my short fingers cannot hold quite as thick a pole, so if the pole is made of wood, it will break more easily.
Even in GOT, a fantasy setting, Brienne was a very rare case. One of a kind.
and she was constantly mocked and rarely taken serious
ASOIAF aims to be an accurate representation of the medieval period, with all the magical stuff added on top but without any changes to the society (technology, ways of life, worldviews, ideologies, conflicts and hardships)
That's something that proofs it's a very well written series of novels*
Wonderfully written and realistically!!
And, well, the magic does affect some aspects of technology, but very very little (aka, the super ballesta for battle against dragons is an example)
Not to mention she's really tall, even among the men.
@@taylor_green_9 as i was reading the novels i was astounded by martins knowledge of the middle ages. battle tactics, household customs and chores, everything. it is a very rich world. he had to invent quite a few things no doubt, but still, it all seemed so realistic...
Interesting video, thank you!
I think a valuable thing to add about female knights in fantasy lore is that this idea is not a recent one. I think the most valuables example are Bradamante from Orlando Furioso and Innamorato and Clorinda from Gerusalemme Liberata. I think they can help us guessing a perspective of how medieval people would have look to nowadays women knights of fantasy fictions and games!
One Knight Stand.
🙃
I know I am late to the party, here: How about the brief period for the Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Frati della Beata Gloriosa Vergine Maria), who allowed, for a time, women to serve, and bear arms, with the title of militissa (a female alternative title comparable to a knight). Although scandalous at the time, and the identities of the militissa are lost, the order did exist, and the records of women, and the removal of women from the rolls were documented. Formed in 1233, and approved by pope Alexander IV in 1261, continued to exist with women in the ranks until the order was suppressed by pope Sixtus V in 1558.
I know that many historians seem to discount them, but I was curious on Metetron's take.
Idk about what you call a Militissa but I'm assuming it's the female version of a Militia and that's not a knight
Oh no, you're dead wrong here, sorry. Miles means knight in Latin, genitive cause is militis, from which the word militissa is formed, which is normal word formation in Latin. For example, Dux means Duke, genitive cause Ducis, from which is formed word Ducissa, Duchess. So militissa means female knight all right
No metatron the English not the Church burnt her at the stake. She was convicted in a religious court, however it was done so against canon law, the entire thing was a sham. The trial was payed for with money from the English Crown, and the jury consisted of English partisans.
Exactly, that's the same thing I was thinking about.
Didn't they trick her into wearing men's clothing and then burned her for that reason?
On the contrary, Pierre Cauchon, the bishop presiding over the trial, insisted for everything to be done according to the law.
It doesn't mean that the trial was fair or the judges unbiased, of course it wasn't, but it was done in due form, for whatever that is worth...
Besides, the second trial, which overturned the verdict of the first, was as much partisan as the first trial had been. Both were politically motivated. The first was shamelessly biased against Jeanne d'Arc, and the second shamelessly biased in her favor.
A large tough honourable noble woman like Brienne of Tarth who had authority in her own right as a landowner or heir, could very reasonably insist on going to war esp on Crusade. Eleanor of Aquitaine did.
I saw another UA-cam channel cover the mostly fictional depictions of knights rescuing maidens. I was wondering if the topic of historical knights versus their poetic depictions interested you
this vid? ua-cam.com/video/YFC4E796plw/v-deo.html
Maybe not a knight, but definately a heroine female warrior leader was Kenau (full name Kenau Simonsdochter Hasselaer), for those who are interested in female participation in historic warfare. Her bravery has been an inspiration for the 80 years of war that created a nation (the Dutch republic), and the birth of republicanism that changed all our nations even today.
The woman "knights" would be more like a Kokujin in ancient Japan.
What is that
@@paigecoolest a black man
when will you do a Debunking video Metatron???
I thought he stopped doing that, cuz copyright reasons :\.
Hellenic Daemon I hope he starts doing Debunking videos again because they're fun to watch
@@XyzzTooCold true.
I've watched your collaboration video twice now so funny i like your unscripted suff. You and Matt Easton collaborations are great to. Stay safe Metatron 🏴🐆🐆🐆
Oh my god, your partner is so cute in armour!! Especially when she put the helmet on 😍 I should get armour for my partner...
Jeremie Monette my GF looks sweet in army combat fatigues when going shooting and Airsoft wouldn’t mind seeing her in plate armour though
Correct me if I'm wrong. But I'm fairly certain women in the Teutonic/Templar order (for the Templar order this was possibly about a decades worth [before Council of Troyes]) were *sisters* of the order, not actual warriors/knights!!
Edit, aaaah fuck. Shoulda listened to the next 2 seconds lol
Good video anyhow
Read tht from Helen Nicholson?
@@sonnymarst5776 Yeah!
I was talking with our daughter about the knights in our family. This was back when she was 10 years old. She said, " I want to be a knight! " I told her that "she couldn't be a knight, they were men." She then went and got a book and said, " yes I can, there are the Amazon warriors!" And shown me it in the book.( at age 10 her IQ was 112 ).
That story of the women defending a city was fascinating. That could make a fantastic movie!
It raises my spirits to see you in good health again my lord. And it is heartening to see that the quarantine has not separated you from Lady Scarlet. Well we have established the lack of female knights in Europe. But what of the rare, but exceptional, female Samurai of Japan? That is about the closet thing to a female knight from within that time period I can conceive.
Demosthenes10101 - 3 words - “Viking Shield Maidens “.
Can women fight in war. Quick answer yes. Look at Asian history there are loads of example of women performing very well on the battlefield.
That's very much a different question, though, as knights also have a very specific role in society.
@@darthplagueis13 The core is question is whether a woman can be an effective knight, with the main focus being on combat. Hence my point stands. If you want to discuss other aspects of being a knight, then please specify.
@@426mak The core question is the title of the video. Did female knights exist? You could also ask: Could they have existed? And the answer to both is no because the society that knights were part of was both sexist and determined on gender roles, with masculinity being considered a core aspect of knighthood and chivalry.
As to whether women could be effective on the battlefield: Yes, they could be effective fighters, but no, commonly enlisting combattants of both genders was neither common nor a good idea (there are videos from a number of UA-camrs on the topic but to break it down: Women on average are at a slight disadvantage to men. Plus, men are considerably more expendable as their obligatory role in procreation ends with having sex, they are not the ones having to walk around with the baby for 9 months and one man could theoretically suffice for a larger quantity of women).
As far as I am aware, and correct me if I'm wrong, even in asian history, women were usually not part of armies. The reason why they were involved in combat and in some instances actually trained was because one of their roles was to garrison the places they lived at. If the men all got enlisted into an army, you can either just hope that bandits and brigands will spare the village or you can arm the women and in some places in asia and parts of scandinavia, they went for the latter option.
That does however not mean that women were just generally accepted as members of a war-faring class, it just means that they could fight if they had to.
@@darthplagueis13 The Samurai class in Japan were originally gender neutral, with men and women being called to fight when needed.
On the Asian steppes there were plenty of records of fighting women on the battlefield.
Even Celtic Europe, such as the Iceni tribe had a tradition of fighting women.
If your point is that heavily urbanized society generally did not employ women as a fighting force, then yes that is correct. However, that is a social restriction not a physical limitation.
@@426mak Yes, it's a social restriction. I never claimed it wasn't. However, just because it's a social restriction, doesn't mean it's completely arbitrary.
Templars did allow woman in their order at the beggining. So also as special comand for espionage they were used by the order to camouflage their operations, they were subject to the same covenants.
Good to see you back in action! Welcome.
Hey man since we will have ghost of tsushima in a couple mounths can't you do a video about the mongol invasion of japan, good work man your videos are awesome!!!
Hi, Metratron! I'm an Italian girl and I was amazed by your videos, when you show all your passion for ancient civilization, specially for the Roman Empire. I wanted to ask you... did you know in Italy we have some particular festivities where the italians dressed up as romans warriors and they put up a show where they fight with true weapons, different types of swords or some kind of spears and things like that? I think you would enjoy to see some beautiful shows! You can search on Internet! Different cities in Italy has some festivities like this! It was just something for you, because you seem so interested on this kind of things!
A kiss from the Italy! Bye!
It is of greatest importance, to don the most well crafted of armors while making of a video of great controversy.
It is there to protect you from the many sharp comments that will be released from the comment section.
It is written so in the scrolls.
I think it’s more the fact that most *people* would not chose to fight in a battle if possible.
Its also the issue about shear numbers, Say you have 10,000 people carry 100 Lbs for 24 miles. With combat, the issue is that people gets weeded out out of the line. As the endurance over time happens the reality is that the advantage is much wider. The issue is that say during the first hour you won't see a difference between genders. when you reach 8 hours then the diffrences gets much wider. Just like today, the numbers will change over time. So say marching for three days in full plate, and weapons, and gear this is much wider. With that said, you will find the exception on the issue. So if you have 5,000 men, and 5,000 women do a three day march in full gear you will find about 3% of the women left with the 30% of the men who made the test. So its really about the short, and long term effect.
What about the Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Italy. It was founded during the 1200's and as I understand it admitted female knights and allowed them to serve in a military capacity. I know that they were involved in the wars of the Pacification of Lombardy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Blessed_Virgin_Mary
Yes, as far as we know, female knights in such a title did not exist. We have cases of shield maidens during the migration era and other earlier medieval examples; but with the Knights Templar, Teutonic Knights, as well as the Crusades throughout the era, could some whom may have had experience or excelled may have earned something akin to a "lady-at-arms"? If so when she was in kit, you could argue it'd be difficult to distinguish her from the males around her. Would her gender have been hidden due to the stigmas or other prejudices?
Just some thoughts not on the prevalence of female warriors during the medieval period, but its presence.
Not sure what you are calling “didn’t really fight”, but Joan of Arc participated in the battles at the frontlines and got wounded several times. We do not know if she personally attacked anyone with her weapons, but in her trials she talks about the practicality of the sword that she is using, so she definitely used it for something. She was also known for being talented with artillery. So I guess we know more about her fighting than for most other knights in her period.
participating and fighting are 2 very different practices. a fighting woman was not a thing, ever.
Also, it was a consensus of the church at the time that she was permitted to wear male clothing because the protection was necessary. She was briefly forced to wear a dress during the trial, but was permitted to resume wearing male clothing after someone tried raping her in prison. Virtually everybody in the court believed her execution to be a sham. She was killed for political reasons rather than anything else. The executioner even said he feared he would face the fires of hell for burning a holy woman.
Women fighting most certainly was a thing, admittedly less common in europe than in other areas of the world at the time. In japan, certain dynasties allowed it, to the point where some entire units were made of women but certain dynasties prohibited it. One of the tenants of Sikhism is gender equality, and thus women were allowed to fight in india. It was relatively common in many, many cultures throughout asia, africa, the americas. It was more common in nations where heavy infantry wasn't common.
Please, do a video on top renascence weapons, thanks.
Nice to see you back on your feet again.
There has always been a small minority of women that acted and dressed like men and went to battle. Rare but true. There have been women that fight.
Some have been knighted but not for fighting.
Do not know of any that actually trained to be one.
Gotta love that Dragons Dogma throwback with the song from the Daimon boss fight.
Do remember that once a month a woman will be bleeding. Most are in pain too, and for some women the pain is so accute that they faint. I know a woman who has such a level of pain and needed contraceptive pills to help. That means that between 3 and 8 days a month, a woman might not be available for battle. Personally I'm in such pain that without pain killers, I need a hot water bottle against my abdomen and even that's not enough. In the middle ages, with no pain killers and contraceptives... it might not be worth it to invest in female knights, especially since the average woman is weaker physically than a man. Add to that the culture of 'men are the ones expected to fight', then situations where there are female fighters would be rare. Not non-existent, but rare.
A friend once told me that she skipped or had a delayed period in high anxiety and stress situations
Great video.
Glad to see you're doing better. Keep it up, Metatron.
For a moment I was like: "I've never seen someone in armor looking so small"... only after a closer look, I've noticed he didn't wear a gambeson underneath.
You think gambesons were universal under plate armour?
GoT portrayed Brienne as extremely exceptional
First I really like your videos. Thanks for keeping up the good work even in this trying times. I'm from Tyrol. I know Italy was hit way worse than Austria but I think we are all in the same boat with this pandemic.
Anyway I read a fascinating little theory a couple of month ago. According to that theory Jeanne d'Arc was actually the bastard halfsister/cousin of the Dauphin and later King Charles VII of France. Her real mother beeing the queen mother of France Isabeau and her father was supposed to be the Kings paternal uncle Louis de Valois, duke of Orleans and that's according tothe theory the reason why she was betrayed to the English.
To me it makes a lot of sense. If one (like me) doesn't beliefe in the whole Saint and Chosen One story, her beeing a royal bastard makes the whole stroy so much more logic and plausible:
Royal bastards could be brought up in rather modest circumstaces at least for some time but usually they were well educated. Don Juan de Austria bastard son of emperor Charles V. and Commander in Chief of the Holy League Fleet at the battle of Lepanto was raised by a court musician for some time for example.
Jeanne beeing a royal bastard would also explain why the Valois as well as the English wanted to get rid of her. A farmers daughter with religious visions was no real threat to the king but his halfsister with royal blood on both her parents' sides and a proven war hero, that would be a threat even if she is female.
Wiliam the Bastard of Normandy, later known as the Conqueror, took the English crown with far flimsier a claim just about 350 years before.
Robert Guiscard was mercenary with no claims to any Italian titles what so ever but he coquered, robbed and cheated till he becam the duke of Apulia and Calabria laying the foundationfor his grandson Roger to become the king of Sicily.
And there were all the shenanigans of the condottieres in Italy during the 14th century who took whole city states and dukedoms with the right of survival o the fittest.
So if Jeanne truly was a royal bastard, as well as a genuine war hero who was regarded, even in her lifetime, as a saint by the common people, she was a very real threat to the French king as well as to his English cousin.
I honestly have no idea if this theory has any kind of prove.
But as I said I find it way more plausible than a farmers daughter being chosen by the archangel Michael to throw out the English and afterwards beating the English so significcantly that they end up loosing the 100years war which they had been mostly winning for about 80 to 90 years at this time and despite this the war would drag on for another 20 years after er execution (or lets call it by name: murder by pyre).
Finally to quote, or at least parphrase, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes: if one eliminates the impossible the truth has to be what remains as improbable as it may seem.
For Jeanne that leaves only three options either she really was a Divine Chosen One (rather impossible), a mentaly ill girl that would have been put into a hospital in our times (highly improbable due to her track record) or she really was a royal bastard (by far the most plausible option imho.).
Cheers and happy easter none the less
Well... looking to the vid with your girlfriend... It must have been a terrifying experience for a noble-one like you... I have a suggestion however. You could do a co-production on the use of makeup in ancient times.
No, but they did take leadership roles and a few fought in battle. But as knights per se? No.
Question:
The Norse people did not document their society or culture much, and the writings we do have come from other sources that have had contact with the Vikings. Women in Norse culture was allowed to own land, request divorce, and although they typically did not join the Viking excursions, the women did manage everything in the settlement and take up arms if needed. At this time Christianity was pushing to be the only religion. A prime example would be the attack on the Serapeum that housed a lot of writings. Emperor Theodosius I had ordered all temples in Alexandria destroyed to wipe out any traces of Paganism. Christian leaders understood the power of an "idea". One of the charges that the Church brought against Joan of Arc was for wearing men's attire telling us that they were very strict as to the woman's place in society. How much control did these Christian leaders have over what was allowed to be written? Is it possible that the Norse way of life threaten the Christian Church's rise so much that leaders dictated what was allowed to be documented about these people especially in the aspect of the roles women played in the Norse culture?
Owwwww I can already feel how SJW people are smashing their keyboards
So far I've only seen people preparing for SJWs to come, but no "SJWs". I wonder which is more prevalent.
I expect some anti SJW to come in pretending to be SJW to fire up the forces. But so far, none to be seen.
@@kathryngeeslin9509 Wouldn't be very surprising. Enemies have to be found everywhere, don't they?
Hello “SJW” here what he said isn’t wrong. Plus in modern times woman can almost do anything men can. Where just a little behind because no one thought we could.
@@booman62990 more like women are allowed to do a shittier job.
Female warriors existed, but it was impossible for a woman to obtain the title of "knight."
The closest thing to a "female knight" in the Crusader era was Lady Florine of Burgundy and the Order of the Hatchet.
Florine of Burgundy, an armored warrior,joined her husband in the Crusades and took command after her husband's death.
As for Order of the Hatchet, you can check it yourself on Wikipedia.
Dragon's Dogma! AND Final Fantasy Tactics all in one video!? :D The video was interesting too! Good video.
Turkish and Mongolian women would practice fighting from an early age even though they didn't go to war!
Thanks for that unrelated information xD
Likely medieval women too. I.33?
I’m going to look into Viking women. I’m part Norwegian and would find it interesting.
Mathilda of Tuscany!!!
Amazingly well made video 👏👏👏
Glad to see you feeling better! Stay healthy metatron!
It really depended on the lord. If a lord choose to knight a female, of course it would be talked about throughout that lord's lands. My family ruled Sicily as barons, the Di Giacomo Family. So it really depends on the lord at the time. They're most likely female knights that haven't been recorded in history. During the time of The Persian Empire, the Persians had a female admiral. So there's no doubt in my mind that female knights did exist, it was mostly likely pretty rare.
Our sigil is three torches on a blue field.
Wait didnt you rule the whole galaxy?
@@Ezio12376 I took the Palpatine alias on UA-cam because of the Palpatine impression I can do.
That's a dapper look Bro.
Lasy Knights do look nice.
They even encouraged her to do it, until they didn't, then they burned her, then gave her sainthood. Just make up your mind, jeez.
Metatron wearing plate over maille like a total Bretonnian Chad.
Hmm, my thought is this: What if people assumed you were a man automatically, BECAUSE you were a knight? I am not assuming a high percentage here, mind, only a rare occurrence. But those rarities would not be chronicled, perhaps, simply because people either ignored or were oblivious to the knight being female. I seem to recall that in another era and place (possibly Persia?) this was a known practice, but I fail to recall where or when I read it: Widows could step into the gap left by their husbands as fighters and would then be considered men from then on.
The English burned her at the stake because they were salty
In fact, they didn't. They just organise court. She was judged by Bishop of Paris and clerc as well members of University. Fact that she atcted oposing to the inqisition was enough to be judged guilty.
As warriors, not knights, we have lots of examples of female warriors, such as the oonas in Japan the shield maids in Europe. So it's totally possible that at least a few women fought and trained to fight through the 13th to 16th century.
Your Girlfriend is very beautiful wow :)
Gf?
Ah nevermind just got to that part of the video.
Metaron Flexing his wing :p
Top 10 most memorable military uniforms. Some are majestic (Winged Hussairs), some come with absurd power (US infantry), and some are just terrifying (Flame troopers). But they earned their place in memory!
To sum up women going to battle: Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Are those high elf spearmen and Knights of the realm I see there?
Yes he also owns some chaos warriors
I was going to mention the order of the hatchet in Spain. It's a shame not much is mentioned about them. But from what I've found about them is most of the more quilted armor and wielded hatchets are axes, only the Richer with spare metal armor wore and used swords. But I'm not sure if this is true but I heard El Sid wife was leader of the order.
Good. As you lived in Great Britain I'm just surprised you didn't mention Eleanor of Aquitaine who met Henry II while on Crusade with her then-husband. Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose.
I'm trying to find information about the battle of Tortosa you mentioned but can't find any. You call it the "Order of something" at 9:05 but I can't understand what you're saying. Could you share it?
kennyPAGC I believe it’s the Order of the Hatchet. We discussed them a bit in one of my classes on Joan of Arc and Women at War.
While I'm not sure if there is any examples of it happening, one thing that has to be considered is that even if a female knight is something that would go against all convention, that doesn't mean there could never be a breach of convention if some ruler actually decided to for whatever reason.
Someone please tell me what that hat style is called? Please, I'm desperate. I'm crying
It's a hat shaped like a crown
While you were watching the video, she was training the sword.
While you were talking to your friends, she was training the sword.
When you see imagery of men fighting in full plate armour it does not mean they are knights, also if they're in full plate armour it does not meant they're men.
Well, female knights were not known to exist, but it is known that women were fighting in wars in medieval times. We know this from historical texts which mention fighting women. We know it from amours especially made for noblewomen which were used in combat.
So you could say that women in extremely rare cases did wear armor that knights would wear but they most likely weren't knights because there is no historical evidence so far to support them having official knight title. Still pretty cool that there were some rare cases of mideval knight women. But I do agree that in historical games they tend to make it seem like women were common in mideval fighting which I don't support but I don't mind woman as main character or something. It's cool as long as it makes sense story wise. But yeah in fantasy mideval stuff I don't mind it. But I don't like how sexualized their armor is more often than not. Like ...cmon now. Woman in armor is hot enough you don't need to make sexualized armor that doesn't make sense in sense of protection for women to make them look good or attractive .
I agree with you on a female mma fighter wipes the floor with you or I, but how many male mma fighters would lose to a woman?
Very interesting. Question; didn’t a few Norman women fight alongside men like Robert Guiscard’s wife?
Bro all this Dragon's Dogma music is giving me the vibes!
I don't know if female with the title knight existed, because it is a nobility title, not military title, but there were women who could fight in amor like men did regardless of the title.
It was both actually, in middle age at least.
@@Akuretarie you could get knighted for for your military succeses in fighting for the king, but it was a nobility title, not military. You could not earn it by studying in military school or being in the military long enough. It was up to your lord own decision to make you knight and he could do so or decide not to according to his will and regardless of your achievments.
@@damasek219 No school in middle age, not even for soldiers only instructors for the rich kids of lords, so no, at first Knight is both a title and a rank in the "military". Today it's different.
@@Akuretarie I disagree. It isn't and wasn't a rank in the military. First of all, you had to be a nobleman to be a knight or you had to do some service to the crown or church to be knighted. It was usually service on battlefield, but it was not military rank or military title. If you did something for a crown you could become a low nobleman of any kind knight was just one of several low nobility titles. If it was military title, you would have to be proficient in military tactics which knights did not have to. If it was military rank you could not inherit it but we know that knighthood was hereditary title. There were some prerequisites a young nobleman who was in training to become knight should be taught before he was knighted but they had nothing to do with high rank military skills such as generals and master tacticians had to have. British Isles were the only place where knighthood was not hereditary, but in continental Europe it was nobility title, not military rank. As a low nobleman you had certain military power at disposal, but if you that's because you're nobleman, not because you have higher military rank.
@@damasek219 No you become knigh while being "knighted" and have to be refered as "Monseigneur" (or Mylord in english) nobility have to come from somewhere, and usually you become a knight AND a noble through military effort (or if you are part of a family that is already noble) at least in the middle age, also general didnt exist at that time nore military schools, that's why only a knight is allowed to wear battle weapons such as swords hammer ect... Beside being a noble isn't related to war specifically if you are the wife of a noble you are not related to the army but are still noble, that's why being a knight is both a rank in the army of a king and a title, and yes the people would have to obey a knight because his title give him autority, you should read about fæudalism i think you are mixing period.
Life before plumbing and modern medicine was pretty hard, look how people are degrading just off a small quarantine, now imagine if they didn't have access to anything modern at all, that anyone was fit enough to be a knight was a big ask already, I'm sure the harsh darwinian conditions produced hardier people back then but still, that window of perfect health must have been very short. You just wouldn't bother with a woman who is by default weaker, their leg geometry is compromised for child birth, their skin thinner, never mind bone and muscle strength and density. Beyond a costume for a noble, it just would be nonsensical.
Women in combat is one of those modern luxury beliefs, it hasn't been tested by hardship and reality.
It is actually very simple why the society back then was constructed that way. Because women had the most important part and that is reproduction, If they all go to war with men and die that's it this country, town, tribe whatever will be dead in a generation. By the way AMAZING VIDEO! Keep up the good work buddy!
Hello, Sir it's good to see you healthy and well, stay safe, much love and respect..
I have final fantasy tactics on my PSP still it's a God of war PSP hahaha love that game!
the female equivalent of a knight is a dame
I think there is a story about a Scottish noblewoman who in the absence of her husband donned armour and headed the defence of her castle against a siege. So I guess women getting involved in fighting were probably brought to that point by circumstance, like defending their property when the men were away.
That is a full-on quarantine beard my dude 👍
the point is that unless you have 100% failure, then people would not be able to say it cant happen. its just a lot more rare. A female knight is possible biologically, but historically known politically or there is not other option.
Final Fantasy Tactics is a cool game, the most underrated one. Have you tried any Tactics Ogre games?
To be realistic medieval armor was always made for men, men of certain criteria (weight, height and more importantly to society at the time, social status. Women were deemed inferior citizens at the time) although there were women in armor and were masculine in appearance mostly called "amazons"
Shows a video of a woman fighting in a mock sword fight does not mean they could hold their own in actual combat.
I am glad he mentions cultural issues. Given the expense of the Armor, The rules of Primogeniture, as well as well as the biological such as sexual dimorphism, plus not to mention the role of women as mothers, the idea of women being classic medieval knights is remote.
"Is there something wrong with you, madam, that you are unwed and believe yourself safe in the battlefield?"
"Is this a battlefield, sir? I see naught but a horde of bandits and rapists who threaten the farmers who keep us fed."
The terms "militissa" and "chevalise" existed to describe female knights. We also have examples of the rights and liberties afforded to such women in history. It was certainly uncommon, but that the terminology existed strongly suggests that it was something that could and did occur.
There were many women combatants in France and Spain. Were they "official Knights" only in a few cases.
Weren't there also some female Samurai (not just from the class), who took to the field armed with naginata? Also, polearms in general seem like a pretty good weapon of choice if faced with fighting a larger opponent, since it can help to keep the larger foe at a greater distance than a sword would allow.
I think the point you make about weapons being an equalizer is only partially true when it comes to knights. In HEMA, fencing and other martial arts, what matters is hitting your opponent, not how hard you hit them. The woman at 6:18 is very skilled and fast, which against an unarmored opponent is enough to kill them. However, if you're fighting opponents who are wearing heavy armor, you often need to rely on brute strength to either pierce the armor or to cause trauma through the armor. Just hitting them with a sword won't stop them. In this respect of course a woman would (on average) have a significant disadvantage.
dekelt - Actually, you’d have to hit a gap or weak spot in the armor to kill someone wearing full armor. At Agincourt, the English got the heavily armored French knights to fall in the mud & either hammered their heads & forced their heads into the mud or stabbed them through the armpits.
@@TraditionalAnglican Yes, when your enemy is down you can stab him with a dagger or something through the gaps, but that's not how you knock him down (unless you're really lucky). There's a reason maces, picks and warhammers became so popular in the late medieval period.
You forgot the Adepta Sororitas.
Love this channel. So much of this seemed obvious, though.