Jane Draycott - Women in Historical and Archaeological Video Games

Creative Assemblys Total War: Rome II was first released in 2013. While female characters and recruitable female generals had long been a feature of the game, included in the Daughters of Mars downloadable content (DLC) pack released in August 2014, and the Desert Kingdoms DLC pack released in March 2018, an update made in September 2018 met with complaints from some players that the developer had made female characters and, more significantly, female generals widespread in recruitment pools throughout the game. By way of proof, a screenshot taken by a Steam user purported to show an all-female recruitment pool (see ).

Figure 1.1: Screenshot from Total War: Rome II.

Commentors on the Steam discussion forum sought to provide an explanation for the changes, questioning Creative Assemblys motivations for making them in the first place:

Its a progressive annoyance yes its [sic] unrealistic but its a feature now.

Yes its [sic] goofy, yes its [sic] hamfisted progressive ideology, yes its [sic] unrealistic.

A disgusting attempt to sacrifice history for political correctness.

When challenged about this, Creative Assembly made a declaration on Twitter that stated that the update had made no changes to recruitable female general spawn rates, but that other changes to the game had meant that playable factions might gain more female family members that in turn might mean that female characters might appear as recruitable generals, but that this would only occur in factions that allowed recruitable female generals in the first place.

While at first glance, the terms historical accuracy and historical authenticity may seem to mean essentially the same thing, when it comes to the analysis of historical video games, authenticity is a subjective value, as what a player perceives to be authentic has the potential to vary considerably. Their perception is based on their preconceptions, and these are informed less by up-to-date detailed historical and archaeological knowledge, and more by outdated assumptions. When it comes to women in historical and archaeological video games, preconceptions and assumptions are plentiful, as many of the comments on the Steam discussion forum made clear, and not just in relation to their participation in warfare but in relation to their presence and participation in ancient society more broadly:

Im ok with females as long as they are in factions where Females [sic] have indeed been able to lead armies historically.

Im no historian but I doubt it.

[Gamers] enjoy being able to interact with history. They dont enjoy regressive feminist ideology being shoved into historical situations where it doesnt fit, thats all.

Thus, while it is clear that certain players (perhaps a better term for them is gamers, reminiscent of the Gamergate controversy) do not expect games to be accurate, they also do not expect them to include things that conflict with their worldviews, a degree of hypocrisy called out by other commenters:

Sexism here is the picking and choosing of where you want realism.

Just assumed nostalgia > reality apparently its fine to have ridiculous ahistorical units, but god forbid you add women as people with agency and leadership skills. They must only be added for the male gaze, after all.

So how do you help include women in gaming without representation where they historically were present?

To be fair to the Total War: Rome II players commenting on the Steam discussion forum, some commenters actually praised the additions, although this was not necessarily based on their recognition or appreciation of the historical and archaeological validity of their inclusion:

Im happy that at least CA listened and give [sic] me female generals, something I was asking since the first Rome. I wouldnt mind if I had to pay a DLC to have it even.

But it seems that for many players, the inclusion of women in historical video games violates the so-called limits of play, no matter how historically accurate those video games might be.

There is nothing historically inaccurate about female generals, including in the Greek states and Rome. There are numerous examples from ancient Graeco-Roman history of female involvement in martial activity, ranging all the way from the individual combatant to the general and/or admiral, and even more examples from ancient Graeco-Roman mythology (see for example the goddess Athena/Minerva, the heroes Atalanta and Camilla, and the Amazons), and the archaeological record of ancient Greece and Rome supports this.

Figure 1.2: Marble relief depicting two female gladiators in combat. Image courtesy of the British Museum.

To reiterate, there is nothing historically or archaeologically inaccurate about female generals, or female participation in warfare more generally, although certain players may feel such a thing is historically or archaeologically inauthentic. But perhaps this perceived inauthenticity is not helped by the four

Figure 1.3: The Oracle from Ryse: Son of Rome. Image courtesy of Rokly Wang. Source: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/0WvQG (accessed 18th March 2021).

Figure 1.4: Boudica from Ryse: Son of Rome. Source: Ryse: Son of Rome Wiki: https://rysesonofrome.fandom.com/wiki/Boudica (accessed 15th February 2021).

One additional interesting factor here is that some of the commentors on the Total War: Rome II Steam Community felt that since, in their opinion, women did not tend to play the game, the inclusion of women generals was even more egregious and unnecessary, and was perhaps the result of women working at Creative Assembly exercising undue influence over the game design:

Very few women play Total War games. Id say the audience is in excess of 95% male.

Maybe half the people working for the CA total war series are women So they guilted the weak boys to change history lol.