As discussed in the text and class, the Anglo-Saxon women of England performed active supportive roles during times of battle. As the men engaged in hand to hand combat, the women performed as the cheerleaders of the battle, screaming and crying for their husbands, sons, and families. While the role of this performance served multiple functions, including acting as a support system for the men and as a distraction for the opposing warriors, I'd like to focus on the interpersonal effects of this performative system.
As Tacitus said, "Close by them, too, are those dearest to them, so that they hear the shrieks of women, the cries of infants..." When reading this statement I wonder what it must have been like for the men....facing your opponent, poised and ready to fight in a barbaric battle for which you may or may not survive, and then additionally to know your wife, your daughter, your infant child is standing close by watching your every move and screaming hollering in support. I imagine it must have been difficult for a man, whose primary familial instinct is to protect, to allow his wife to watch him fight and perhaps watch him die. Moreover, I wonder if at times this performative action might have served as a distraction for the Anglo-Saxon man. One certainly would need to be completely focused on the battle at hand, yet knowing ones family was in the direct proximity to danger must have served as a distraction.
While I agree with the class as a whole in that the contributions of men and women were equally valued regarding performative roles in battle, I wonder which had the more difficult role. The man, who served as the warrior and possible sacrifice for the sake of his family and beliefs, or the woman who served as the "witnesses, as reflecting and projecting mirrors which confirmed and incited the actions of men," all while subject to the brutality of rape and murder for which they themselves as well as daughters, mothers, sisters, and friends were also subject to.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Whitney, I like the argument you are making here. The Anglo-Saxon women were the one's who had to live through a devastating loss; however, I do believe that the cheers from the women helped the warriors more than hurt them. We can compare them in modern times as a cheerleader at a football game, but these women showed 'spirit' like their life depended on it. They wanted their men to see the devastation that would follow a defeat, to instill one of the strongest emotions a man can gather.
ReplyDeleteI think that we, as citizens of a modern, capitalist society, can't fathom how their world really was. When people truly are fighting for their lives, they use every tactic that just might work.
I like the fact that you took the interpersonal perspective in this topic. The relationship between the men and the women must be analyzed to come to a conclusion of what sex had the harder time during this era. Men were in battles to protect their family but women were left behind to educate and take care of the children. It is definitly an equal value since men and women had their part to play. I do feel that women had to not only worry about their husbands in the battles but also had the responsibility of talking about the history of the battles to their children.
ReplyDeleteWhitney, I like how you indicated what role would be more difficult to perform because I believe they served a performance tandem, where there was an equal value among both roles of the Anglo-Saxon men and women. The women were educators and storytellers for the children, where they helped shape the culture. I also agree that the women could have served as a distraction because their performance was close to the Anglo-Saxon men. However, the women did help their men by performing riddles as a form of boasting to express their knowledge. I believe riddling took a lot of courage for the women to perform, but also tremendously helped out the men during combat.
ReplyDeleteTo say that the roles of women as performers in this aspect was distracting is analogous to saying cheerleaders at a high school football game are distracting, or that mothers and fathers at their son or daughter's sporting event is also distracting. While no, obviously these events are not life-threatening, one could argue it does place pressure on the players. And if the men did feel pressure that their wives/children might watch them die, would they not take honor in at least their wives watched them die in an act of bravery?
ReplyDeleteI like the approach you took when answering these questions about the performance of men and women during a time of battle. I agree that it would be difficult for the men to be 100% focused on battle with the ones they love most so close to them. I also think it is difficult for women and children to watch this dominant male figure lose their life in battle right in front of them. To say which is more difficult would not be fair, the stress on the individuals involved are subjective depending on situational circumstances I assume. Also, in class Dr. Taylor discussed that once 10% of a society has been lost social dysfunction greatly sets in and social order becomes a social disorder. Think of how strong women must have had to be in order to survive without the man serving as their hero/rescuer. So I think that regardless of gender the situational aspects that we miss through literature instead of actually witnessing these events make it difficult to make that assumption. I also think it is difficult to judge both roles on the same scale one role is extremely physical against others during a time of battle and the other is a supportive role and a survival role and thinking about when women actually lost their male figure I would think having to compensate for that role especially with children involved would be difficult as well. I really enjoyed your answer and you helped me to investigate my feelings on this matter a lot deeper. Thank you Whitney for your great response!
ReplyDeleteI'd like to reply to the comment left by nhoj. While I see your point in that "To say that the roles of women as performers in this aspect was distracting is analogous to saying cheerleaders at a high school football game are distracting, or that mothers and fathers at their son or daughter's sporting event is also distracting" I'm not sure I agree this is an accurate analogy. While athletes do face a level of pressure when on the field and faced with family and friends supporting from the sidelines, this level of pressure isn't a fair comparison to that of a man in battle. When an athelete steps on the field, I doubt he believes his life is in peril and may not survive. Football is a game, a battle is a war. Additionally, my point was in that the men may not only be concerned for thier own survival, or brutalities a family member may witness by performing the act of supporter in the battle, rather for the concern for thier wives performing in such direct proxiity to this type of brutality and danger, thus placing their own lives in danger. I enjoyed your perspective, however, humbly and respectfully disagree. : )
ReplyDelete