Professional Documents
Culture Documents
of Matriarchy
SIMON PEMBROKE
as to the origin of private property; and the work of his successors today,
amalgamating as it does phenomena of totally different kinds and reducing
them all into material for a history of social organization whose outline is
known in advance, cannot be described as a contribution to knowledge. The
phenomenological side of the problem, on the other hand, and the evidence of
mythology and religion, are now largely the province of isolated studies deriving
from analytical psychology and broadly unconcerned with questions of historical context and origin. But the main body of classical studies has abandoned not only the idea of matriarchy but the very extensive range of problems
connected with it, and these problems have not ceased to exist. A good many
of the connexions which were made in the last century are unacceptable, but
explicit distinctions must be set out in order to make it clear why this is so.
The first thing to be established is how antiquity itself saw the problem and
how close it came to making a category out of matriarchy. There is no lack
of evidence, and this needs to be organized within specific traditions and set
against a historical background before its significance can be assessed. The
present study is intended as a preliminary investigation of this material, and it
concentrates, for the main, on one area for which the Greek tradition is
particularly strong yet can at the same time be controlled by independent
evidence.* A strictly geographical basis, however, is not altogether satisfactory, and the assessment of this tradition involves an attempt to define its
place in ancient ethnology as a whole, to relate ethnology, in turn, to Greek
reconstructionsof their own past, and since it is not certain, in either case, how
far the simplest categories, such as past and present, Greek and non-Greek,
are effectively operative, to establish a method of confronting this uncertainty
in archaic tradition of all kinds.
I
About the middle of the sixth century B.c., when Cyrus had completed the
conquest of Lydia and was moving on to Assyria, the Persian general Harpagos
was given the task of subduing the South-West coast of Asia Minor. Herodotus,
recording the fact, gives a brief survey of its inhabitants-the Carians,
Caunians and Lycians. He has most to say about the last of them.
Their customs are partly Cretan, partly Carian. They have, however, one
singular custom in which they differ from every other nation in the world:
naming themselves by their mothers, not their fathers. Ask a Lycian who
he is and he answers by giving his own name, that of his mother and so
on in the female line. Moreover, if a free woman marries a slave, their
children are full citizens; but if a free man marries a foreign woman, or
lives with a concubine, even though he is the first person in the State,
the children forfeit all the rights of citizenship.1
A short passage-Herodotus hardly mentions the Lycians again-but one
which has been decisive in the formation of modern anthropology. In i86o
* The Greek colony of Locri Epizephyrii and its foundation
separate article.
1 Hdt. I, 173.
will be examined
in a
There are fourteen passages of this kind, if we discount three passing mentions; and for the present they can be discounted, since they make no pretence
2
SIMON PEMBROKE
Hdt. 4, 45.
Hdt. I, I35. The language is emphatic,
again, more clearly still, when he says that the Babylonians sell their daughtersas wives, not concubines; this time the distinction is made explicit-by annual
public auction.10 In this case there is a mass of evidence from Babylon to
prove that they did nothing of the kind; but it can almost be shown from the
text of Herodotus himself. When Cyrus received a message from the Spartans
ordering him not to interfere with any Greek city, he expressed his contempt
for them by saying 'I have never yet been afraid of any men who have a set
place in the middle of their city where they come together to cheat each other
and forswear themselves'; and Herodotus, having put the words into his
mouth, goes on to explain that unlike the Greeks, who buy and sell in marketplaces, the Persians do not conduct business in this way and in fact do not
have such things as market-places at all.1 A century of excavations has shown
that this is perfectly true, for Persia and Babylon alike; and the fact has farreaching implications for our understanding of their economies, which is still
very far from complete.12 Yet marriage in Babylon, as Herodotus describes it,
does seem to require a market-place. Even so, he cannot bring himself to set
the scene in one; he has the girls rather vaguely 'collected together in one
place' instead.13 On his own showing, the institutions needed to make the
practice feasible were Greek.
Herodotus's account of marriage in Asia, then, shows a consistent tendency
to exaggerate the subjection of women; and the Lydians are no exceptions,
since Strabo, the writer to whom our knowledge of prostitution in this country
is chiefly due, while admitting that the hierodules of Akisilene were by no
means all drawn from the lower classes, and that a girl who had served her
time in this temple was not thought any the less eligible at the end of it-a
state of things which does much to align Lydia with Babylon-explicitly
refuses to go so far as Herodotus and represent every woman in Lydia as a
prostitute.4
It is not the subjection of women, however, that comes to the fore once
Herodotus is off Asiatic ground. The peoples in question all belong to the
more or less remote areas of Libya and Northern Europe; and what he has to
say about them centres-with one exception, which will be considered lateron two things. Either they have intercoursein public, or they are systematically
promiscuous. Both of these apply to the Massagetai, who also practise
monogamy; it is one another's wives with whom they are promiscuous.'5 The
Nasamones of Libya are polygamous, as well as promiscuous, although they
do not go in for the same kind of publicity and when having intercourse make
the fact known less directly, by leaving a stick outside the woman's house. At
a wedding, the bride is had by all the guests; hence the wedding-presents.'"
Hdt. I, I96.
by a Hova prince. 'Chez nous, ajouta-t-il, la
prostitution est encouragfe, honoree m~me,
11Hdt. I, 153.
et les filles des premieres familles du pays
12 Cf. K. Polanyi and Conrad Arensberg,
TradeandMarketin theEarlyEmpires,Glencoe font ce que nous appelons karamou(marchC)
de leurs charmes, et n'ont aucune honte de
(Illinois) 1957.
vendre leurs faveurs au premier venu', B.-F.
13 ESV Xeptov, Hdt. I, 196, I.
14 Str. I I, 14, 16, p. 532, cf. 12, 3, 36, p.
Legu~vel de Lacombe, Voyage & Madagascar
559, and for Corinth 8, 6, 20, p. 378. A very et aux iles Comores,i, Paris I840, p. 145.
similar account was given to a traveller in
15 Hdt. I, 216, cf. I, 203.
1 HIdt. 4, 172.
Madagascar early in the nineteenth century
10
SIMON PEMBROKE
Hdt. 4, I80.
Hdt. 4, I76.
20 Col. H. Yule, Marco Polo, 2, ii, London
1875, p. 35.
21 G. Juan and A. de Ulloa, Voyage
historique de l'Amirique miridionale, i, LeipzigAmsterdam 1752, p. 343; Labat [J. G.],
Voyagedu chevalierdes Marchais en Guinie (17251727),
ii, Paris I730, p. 222, quoted in
Theodor Waitz, Anthropologieder Naturv'lker, i,
18
19
SIMON PEMBROKE
physical ones, and that they are more or less metaphorical in form; Morgan,
however, believed that the terms had survived from an era when human
societies were systematically promiscuous-a state of things for which there
is no direct evidence and which is today generally regarded as an impossibility
for any society which is governed by human speech. It is quite possible,
therefore, that contact with a genuine classificatory system does lie somewhere behind Herodotus; but that his explanation of the phenomenon should
anticipate that of Morgan is no coincidence, since the latter was quite certainly
influenced, directly and perhaps crucially, by this description of the
Agathyrsi.37 And there is no reason to think that Herodotus knew the
Agathyrsi as well as Morgan did the Iroquois.
io
SIMON PEMBROKE
THE ANCIENT
IDEA OF MATRIARCHY
II
12
SIMON PEMBROKE
husband of that part of the country finds a pair of slippers at his wife's door,
he immediately withdraws'."4
Guests are not regular members of the societies they are visiting; and in this
sense the analogy is not wholly satisfactory, since Herodotus, rightly or
wrongly, represents the promiscuity of the Nasamones as a purely internal
affair. It may therefore be worth citing two cases in which a similar use of
tokens is confined to members of the same society as the women in question.
There are, however, important further qualifications in each case, although
the first one, an explorer's description of the Ladrone Islands, which is again
taken from Yule, was written over four hundred years ago.
In these ilands there is one the strangest costume that euer hath bin
heard of or seene in all the whole world, which is, that vnto the young men
there is a time limited for them to marrie in (according vnto their costume),
in all which time they may freely enter into the houses of such as are
married, and be there with their wiues, without being punished for the
same, although their proper husbands should see them: they doo carrie in
their handes a staffe or rodde, and when they do enter into the married
mans house they do leaue it standing at the doore, in such sort, that if any
do come after they may plainly see it: which is a token that, although it be
her proper husband, he cannot enter in till it be taken away. The which
costume is obserued and kept with so great rigour and force, that whosoeuer is against this law, all the rest do kill him.47
As can be seen, there are two significant restrictions in this account. In the
first place, access to other men's wives is confined to a particular age-group.
However, there is no sign of any further restriction within this age-group, and
more emphasis may be placed on the fact that the whole business applies only
to a specific period of time. It cannot fairly be made to represent the everyday
workings of this society, any more than the Saturnalia can be made to represent those of ancient Rome; and if this period was associated with marriage,
it may well have come round with less than annual frequency. There is a
distinct possibility, therefore, that Herodotus has generalized the behaviour
sanctioned at a particular festival into something normal and secular-a
possibility further reinforced by his own reference to wedding-ceremonies;
and a description of ancient Greece founded on similar evidence would have
been at least equally surprising to his readers. This being so, it is as well to
examine the workings of one society of which a more detailed description has
survived from antiquity and in which rights of the same kind were recognized
all the year round.
The people in question were the inhabitants of Arabia Felix; and the one
account of this society which we possess, which was written by the geographer
Strabo, in the first century B.c., claims to be based on information which had
only become accessible to the West in his own lifetime. 'Brothers are held in
more honour than children,' it begins; and the most coherent part of the
46 Hon. Mountstuart Elphinstone, An
47 Gonzalez de Mendoza, The History of the
Accountof the Kingdomof Caubuland its Depen- GreatandMightyKingdomof China,ii, London:
dencies,3ii, London I839, p. 209 (Yule, op. Hakluyt Society, I853-54, PP. 253-4 (Yule,
loc. cit.).
cit., p. 48, n. 3).
THE ANCIENT
IDEA OF MATRIARCHY
13
description which follows does appear to have as its subject a formally regulated system of adelphic polyandry. 'All kinsmen hold property in common,
but control is held by the eldest. One wife is shared by all, and when one man
goes in to have intercourse with her, he leaves a stick outside her door (all of
them have to carry sticks). At night-time, however, she sleeps with the eldest
of them. Consequently, everyone is the brother of everyone else... Adultery
is punished by death, though to be an adulterer, a man must belong to
another family.'48
There is only one other attempt in classical sources to describe the workings of a polyandrous society, and this is Julius Caesar's description of the
ancient Britons. Here too, the men involved are related to one another; and
the control retained by the eldest takes a more specific form. 'Wives are
shared between groups of ten or twelve men, especially between brothers and
between fathers and sons; but the offspring of these unions are counted as the
children of the man to whom the girl was first betrothed.'49 On this analogy,
it seems probable that Strabo has misinterpreted cause and effect in calling
everyone the brother of everyone else, as though the relationship were a
purely metaphorical one; but there are two further difficulties. First, it is
stated that the Arabs have intercourse with their mothers. Here the explanation may be that in some cases not only brothers but also (like the Britons of
Caesar) fathers and their sons, could have access to the same woman, and
that Strabo has failed to distinguish between mothers and other wives of a
father.50 But the additional information that women were, literally or otherwise, the sisters of their husbands, appears to be no more than a mistake; and
the simplest explanation would be that at some stage, a situation in which
women have husbands who are brothers has been transformedinto one where
the women 'have' brothers as husbands.
It could fairly be objected, however, that this is special pleading. Strabo
claims to be reporting from somewhere very near the horse's mouth, yet the
contradictions which have found their way into his account could equally
well be due to literary tradition, and specifically, to the categories in terms of
which so many other societies had been described. Brother-sister marriage
was one such category, intercourse between mother and son another; and
metaphorical brotherhood is known to go all the way back to Herodotus.
Furthermore, Strabo's description of this society concludes with an anecdote,
which is directly relevant to Herodotus; and although it is impossible to
prove that the story is not an Arabian one, its sophistication is perhaps
48 Str. 16, 4, 25,
p. 783.
Caesar BG 5, 14, 4-5. H. Zimmer, ZSS
xv (R6m. Abt.), I894, p. 224, argued that
this description applies only to the interiores
mentioned in ?2 and separated from the
present passage only by the tattooing of
omnesBritanni described in ?3.
50 W. Robertson Smith, 'Animal Worship
and Animal Tribes among the Arabs and in
the Old Testament', Journal of Philology, ix,
I88o, pp. 75-I00oo, suggested a connexion with
the inheritance of father's widows attested
49
14
SIMON
PEMBROKE
sufficient to suggest that the distance between this society and the description
which has reached us is greater than Strabo admits.
One exceptionally attractive woman, according to this story, who had
fifteen husbands, found that she was in almost incessant demand. So she had
the idea of acquiring a set of sticks on her own account. Each of these closely
resembled one of those carried by her various husbands, and with good timing
she was able to postpone their respective visits by leaving the appropriate stick
outside her own door. In the end, however, one of her husbands was led to
suspect her of adultery, because he found a stick at the door one day when he
had just left all his brothers together in the market-place; and in this way, the
trick was discovered.
There is very little outside Strabo which can today be said to confirm his
picture of Arab society.51 The only criterion by which it can be judged is that
of its inner coherence; and if the incestuous element is passed over, this
coherence certainly gains a great deal from the distinction made between the
eldest husband and all the others. The same distinction is made by Caesar;
and although there is again no independent evidence from ancient Britain
which can corroborate this description,52a fair number of societies have been
recorded in the present century to which a similar distinction applies.53
Furthermore both descriptions imply a patrilineal system, with property
51 The Minaean inscriptions referred to in
W. Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage in
Early Arabia,2 London 1903, p. 316, Additional Note G, where an individual is
designated as the 'son' (kinsman) of more
than one man, cannot legitimately be interpreted in this way, cf. M. Hartmann, Der
Islamische Orient, ii: Die arabische Frage,
Leipzig 1909, PP. 197-202: N. Rhodokanakis,
'Katabanische Texte zur Bodenwirtschaft',
SBAW (phil.-hist. K1.), 194, ii. Abh., 1919,
p. 66, n. 4; further references in Repertoire
d'tpigraphie Semitique, v, Paris 1928, no. 2999.
52 Total promiscuity is attributed to the
Caledonians in classical sources from the time
of Dio Cassius (70, 6, 12 and 76, 16) onwards;
but little more can be made of this than the
reports tentatively recorded by Strabo that
the Irish had intercourse in public with their
mothers and sisters, 14, 4, p. 201. The Irish
legend that the Picts originally came from
Scythia and on crossing to Scotland were
given 300 women, having brought none of
their own (so first Bede, hist. eccl. gent. Angl.
I, I, where it is said to explain a contemporary custom: 'ea solum condicione dare
consenserunt (sc. Scotti), ut ubi res perveniret in dubium, magis de feminea regum
prosapia quam de masculina regem sibi
eligerent: quod usque hodie constat esse
seruatum'), has for over a century been
taken to indicate matriliny, which is not
reported by Caesar (J. H. Todd, Leabhar
1961, pp.
I05ff,
15
transmitted through males only; and this too makes perfectly good sense,
which is more than can be said for the Bukhari tradition, since here the
acquisition of an heir, and hence the transmission of property, is represented
as depending entirely on chance.
Despite this, however, it is not easy to draw firm conclusions from Strabo's
description and apply them to the Nasamones of Herodotus. It might perhaps
be said that stick-carrying, like physical likeness in al-Bukhari, refers most
naturally to a situation in which a number of men have access to one particular
woman; and the anecdote lends some support to this view. It is not easy to
imagine a simpler version of Strabo's story which could apply to bilateral
promiscuity, since adultery would be impossible in a society of this kind.
Against this, however, must be set the custom recorded by Marco Polo, since
here it is a number of women who are accessible to one particular man, and it
is the former, not the latter, whose identity is communicated by the stick.
Above all, even if the patrilineal bias manifested by the Arabs does give a
certain verisimilitude to Strabo's description, it is certainly not true that there
is any further coherence between patrilineal inheritance and the carrying of
sticks. An almost identical custom has been reported, again and again, over
a period of several centuries, among the Nayar of Southern India; and this
society is a matrilineal one in which children are regularly recruited to the
lineages of their mothers. A woman may have a number of recognized
lovers, as well as one ritual husband, but none of these has any rights over her
children, and the notion of fatherhood is entirely lacking.54
From the fifteenth century onwards, European travellers have recorded
the fact that the Nayar left their swords and shields outside the houses of the
women they were visiting; and until a comparatively recent date, the accounts
given by these travellers have almost always drawn this picture in far greater
detail than any other aspect of the society. Nicolo di Conti described Nayar
women as taking any number of husbands they liked; the men left their
shields outside the woman's door, and their own property was inherited by
their nephews.55 The Portuguese Joho di Barros went further than this only
to specify (wrongly) that the nephews in question were the children of a
brother.5s Cesare dei Federici, in the sixteenth century, described the
principles of succession in the Royal family, but claimed that the remaining
Nayars held women in common;57 and much the same goes for the account
given by the Dutchman Philip Baldaeus, almost a century later, since here
there are several pages between his description of regal succession and what he
has to say about the Nayar as a whole. The second of these passages is here
quoted in full.
If they meet any of the common people in the streets, they cry out, Po,
Po, i.e. Give way, Give way. They seldom appear without their scymetars
and shields, which they leave at the door when (by a peculiar privilege)
54 See now E. Kathleen Gough in (ed. with
D. M. Schneider) Matrilineal Kinship, Berkeley
1961, pp. 298-404.
B. Ramusio, 'Viaggio di Nicolo
55G.
Conti venetiano alle Indie', Navigationi et
Viaggi, i," Venice 1553, fol. 378a.
16
SIMON PEMBROKE
17
their hand from right to left; and they insist, despite this, that it is they
who go to the right, and the Greeks who go to the left.60
T'hereis no sign, in this passage, of a specific purpose to which, in the time of
Herodotus, oppositions of this kind were already being put-a systematic
moral relativism, which drew up lists of divergent customs as a sort of
dialectic, designed to produce nothing. The marvels of Egypt have no sake
but their own; and the story about Egyptian men sitting at the loom while the
women went out reappears in what is, on any view, one of the most serious
of the plays of Sophocles.61 Even Xenophon, who can seldom be convicted
of any ulterior motive, unless it is one directly connected with himself, can
ad lib. in the same way when describing foreign customs. Thus after reporting
that the Mossynoeci have sexual intercourse in public, he moves on, without
warning, to a more general proposition: they do in public the things which
other people only do when alone, whereas when one of the Mossynoeci is
alone, he does things which elsewhere are only possible in company, like
laughing and dancing.62 More important, there are signs in Herodotus himself of the same tendency in a less fully elaborated form. When he says that the
Persians make their important decisions when drunk and then reconsider them
in a state of sobriety, he is doing little more than exaggerate in making the
drunken preliminary an institution. But he cannot resist adding, 'sometimes
they are sober at their first deliberation, but in this case they always reconsider
the matter under the influence of drink'.63 It is symmetry, not relativism, at
which the addition is aimed.
About the end of the fifth century, however, there appeared a pamphlet
known as The Two Arguments (Dissoi Logoi), of which the sole purpose was
relativism. Its author, like the dialect in which he wrote, has not been
identified; and all further interest could be discouraged with a single quotation. 'Disease is bad for the sick, good for the doctors.'64 One section,
however, deals with the customs of cities and nations; and although a lot of
these customs are derived from Herodotus, there are significant additions,
particularly for Persia, where men are said to wear women's clothes and to
have intercourse with their mothers, sisters and daughters.65 And one
passage has an outstanding importance.
The Macedonians think it fine for girls to have lovers and sleep with them
before they are married, but a disgrace after marriage; the Greeks think
both disgraceful. In Thrace, tattooing is an adornment for women;
everywhere else, it is a punishment for wrongdoing.66
4IBC Migne), anticipates Lewis H. Morgan
with a remarkable evolutionary schema
in which the circumcision of Abraham is
Xen. Anab. 5, 4, 34.
63 Hdt. I,
made to symbolize the rejection of incest, and
I33, cf. I, I40, 2.
no. 9o, ii, pp. is then followed by a period of polygamy
64 Text in Diels-Kranz,5
which lasts until the enforcement of mono405ff.
65
D-K.
The
standard
later
15
408
gamy by the Prophets, but I have been
ii,
p.
treatment of incest is that of Sext. Emp. unable to find this a predecessor in classical
pyrrh. 3, 205, cf. e.g. Bardesanes in Euseb. sources.
PE 6, Io, 6. Methodius of Patara, Convivium 66 Dissoi Logoi ii, I2.
decemvirginum,?3 (Patrologia Graeca XVIII,
60
61
62
Hdt. 2, 35.
Soph. O.C. 337-41.
18
SIMON PEMBROKE
Hdt. 5, 6.
Is. 2, 36; 2, 41; P1. Lach. I79a; Dem. 39, 27; [Dem.] 43, 74.
19
SIMON
20
PEMBROKE
that it belonged there, since it was not a legal or constitutional term, and there
were no institutions, public or private, which it could be said necessarily to
involve. Like the word matriarchy, which despite its mixed descent has fared
better in English, gynaecocracy was more an evaluative than a descriptive
term. The word is not attested before the fourth century B.c., but we possess
one authoritative definition, which was made by Aristotle. Gynaecocracy is
'women getting out of hand'; and the situation in which this is said to happen
is even more revealing. Everything in a democracy, he argues, tends inevitably towards tyranny, 'with gynaecocracy in domestic affairs, so that wives
inform against their husbands, and slaves getting out of hand for the same
reason'.7" It was axiomatic, for Aristotle, that slaves and women were
naturally inferior.75
The next author to deal with life in Lycia is Nicolas of Damascus, who
lived in the first century B.c. and wrote, among other things, a treatise On
Customs.This treatise appears to have consisted of a maximum two or three
sentences on each of the nations described. Among them were the Lycians,
who
honour women more than men, take their second name from the mother's
side, and leave their property to their daughters, not their sons. Any free
man who is caught stealing is enslaved.
be given until a month has elapsed.7"
73Herakleid.
Pol.
I5
(FHG
I313b32.
ii, 217
5
7
21
Of these customs the last two are not at all easy to assess. It is not clear
whether the Lycians are now supposed to be a fully law-abiding society, or
whether theft is to be interpreted as honour among thieves; and it is not clear
whether the time-lag before litigation applies to theft as well, so that the
relation of these two customs to one another is at least as problematical as
their relation to the corresponding ones in Herakleides. However, it is not
certain, with either author, that the first part of the description (which in
Herakleides is the rule of women) is ultimately derived from the same source
as the second, and in the case of Nicolas, attention must be concentrated on
this earlier part.
There is certainly much more detail than there is in Herakleides; but the
mother's name adds nothing to Herodotus, and although Herodotus did not
describe the transmission of property in Lycia, it cannot be said that the way
in which Nicolas has filled the gap is altogether satisfactory, or that the terms
he uses point to direct observation of the system. They can be found a very
close parallel in the account written by Strabo, at about the same time, of the
people known as the Cantabres, in Spain. In this society, according to
Strabo, 'the men bring a dowry to the women, and it is the daughters who are
whether this child was a boy or a girl. The practice is fully documented from
the twelfth century A.D. until I767, when it was formally abolished;78 and
although no longer legally permitted, it appears to have survived its abolition,
in some areas, right down to the present day.79 If the eldest child was a girl,
her husband lost his surname and took hers. It was the eldest child by whom
Str. 3, 4, I8, p. I65.
forms me that the locus classicusfor primo78Eugene Cordier, 'Le droit de famille geniture of this type is Polynesia, cf. R. W.
Revuehistoriquede droitfran;ais Williamson, The Social and PoliticalSystemsof
aux
et Pyrn~nes',
Central
77
353-96,
Philippe
22
SIMON PEMBROKE
the younger ones were given in marriage, quite irrespective of the sex of
either party; and the younger children, all of whom had substantial obligations towards the eldest, are referred to in one dialect by a word which
appears to mean slaves.8s
It was quite possible, therefore, for a man to be the 'slave' of his sister; and
if Strabo, or his informants, had encountered a system of this kind, it would
not be altogether surprising that the description should reach us in the form
which it has. Even if this is the case, however, it must be emphasized that
what Strabo has described is not the system, but simply those situations which
could be contrasted most strongly with the correspondingsituations familiar to
the Greeks. Primogeniture, the one principle which explains these situations,
has been completely omitted, and could not possibly be inferred from the
resulting picture without independent evidence.
There is no sign of primogeniture in Lycia, and no ancient writer again
describes the system of inheritance as Nicolas did, or indeed in any other way.
Strabo himself confined his comments on the Cantabres to the observation
that the arrangements he described exhibited 'a certain gynaecocracy', and
that this was not altogether civilized. But there is no sign that he meant anything more technical than women getting out of hand. Primogeniture of the
Basque type is not a matrilineal phenomenon, and even when property is
inherited by the eldest daughter, it is this woman who is assimilated to a male
role. But the converse does not hold, and her younger brothers are no more
assimilated to a female role than they would be if the eldest child were a male.
In the context of Nicolas's description of Lycia, the fact needs additional
emphasis, because Nicolas is also the author of the one description surviving
from antiquity of a society which was beyond question a matrilineal one. The
Ethiopians, he said, held their sisters in more honour than their children.
So far, the language is identical, in syntax and even vocabulary, to that used
by Strabo in describing the Arabs, except that Ethiopian sisters have ousted
the brothers of the Arabs. But when Nicolas goes on to say that the Ethiopian
kings are succeeded not by their own sons, but by those of their sisters, the
value of his information is no longer open to the same kind of doubt.81 Inheritance by the sister's son is the classic feature of a matrilineal system, just as
inheritance by a man's own son is that of a patrilineal one; and in the first
case, although property and other rights are transmitted through women,
they are not transmitted to them, and control of this property is kept in the
hands of males.82 There is no reason to suppose that contact with Ethiopia
was lost in the course of antiquity, and one reason why Nicolas's description
had no successors, or if it did, why they have not survived, might be that it
was not thought sufficiently interesting.
80 Coutumesancienneset nouvellesde Bardge, du
Pays de Lavedan et autres lieux dependantde la
Province de Bigorre, Bagn~res 1837, art. 16:
'un puin6 ou une puinfe, appelfs en vulgaire
du pays esclau et esclabe, qui sortiront de la
maison pour travailler, trafiquer, ou demeurer valet ou servante ailleurs, sans
I'approbation et consentement du pare et de
la mere, ou de l'hfritier de la maison, sont
23
It is quite possible that this can also explain why he had no predecessors.
The Ethiopians had been described by Herodotus, several centuries earlier;
yet the account which is given by Herodotus does nothing to corroborate the
description by Nicolas.
Their way of choosing a King is different from that of all other peoples, as,
it is said, are all their other laws. They choose from among them that
citizen whom they judge to be the tallest and to have strength in
proportion to his stature.83
It has been suggested that Herodotus is indicating, by means of this story, the
fact that Ethiopian Kings were not succeeded by their sons, and that to this
extent the two descriptions can be said to tally.84 But an interpretation of this
kind is at best allegorical, and like all allegory, it fails completely to distinguish
between intention and result. Nicolas himself mentions the Herodotean
system as the one to which the Ethiopians resorted in the absence of sisters'
sons; and although this might represent an attempt on his part to reconcile
two discrepant traditions, one of which was not available to Herodotus, there
is another possibility, which in the present context must be given a greater
emphasis. It is perfectly conceivable that Herodotus was familiar with both
versions, and that he chose deliberately to exclude the sisters' sons. In any
case, he has not included them, and this fact alone is enough to justify an
exceptionally close scrutiny of the descriptions of Lycia which he inaugurated.
Furthermore the allegorical interpretation can in a wider context be seen as
self-defeating. It can seldom be proved that the various societies described by
Herodotus were not matrilineal; but the fact that he does not describe the
Ethiopians as promiscuous shows how arbitrary it is to treat the many descriptions of promiscuous peoples which were made by later writers as due to
the impression of total confusion which would be made on a Greek or Roman
observer by a matrilineal society.s5 Ancient descriptions cannot simply be
subsumed under the categories of modern anthropology, and it is in every case
the precise nature of the relation between fact and description which must be
ascertained.
83 Hdt. 3, 20.
84 A. Giraud-Teulon,
are said to bring up their children communally. The source of this description is not
SIMON PEMBROKE
24
A Doppelverhidltnis:
J. J. Bachofen, GesammelteWerke,hrsg. K. Meuli, ii, Basle 1948,
p. 87. Whatever his debt to Hegelian dialectic, Bachofen seems to have been the first to
apply the notion of ambivalence to the study
25
26
SIMON PEMBROKE
les ministres des nouveaux Dieux, et donnbrent leurs fictions pour des
aventures arrivies aux Dieux memes.97
In this version, the authors of the fables are clearly in close touch with the
ministers of religion, if not actually identical with them; and this thoroughgoing intentionalism is, in fact, the only basis on which Frdret'sinterpretation
is conceivable. Without the priests, any formal expression of the relation
between one religion and its predecessoris more likely to be the exact opposite
of the real relation, as for instance with the canonization, in modern Greece,
of St. Nicolas the Assassin in Thessaly and of St. George the Vampire in the
Argolid.98
In the case of Poseidon, the problem could be stated as follows: do these
stories constitute evidence of an earlier period in which Poseidon was supreme?
If they do, the fact would have been preserved, on Frdret'sview, by the priests
of the various deities that expelled him. As it is, however, in the two most
striking cases, the information comes from the losing side. The salt treatment
given to Troezen explains why there is a sanctuary of Poseidon outside the
wall; the flood at Argos accounts for an Argive sanctuary dedicated to
Poseidon.99 In both instances, it is the presence of Poseidon, not his expulsion,
that is being explained-and the same thing may be said of Delphi, because
Pytho was buried therel00--the sequence that is arbitrary. What is happening
in these stories is something prescribed by Plotinus: 'myths have to separate
in time things which are really simultaneous'.1?1
With Poseidon's expulsion from Attica, the process is even clearer, because
here we can see what the simultaneous objects were: not the gods themselves,
but an olive-tree and a well (the second of these is described as a piece of sea)
in the Erechtheum, which Poseidon and Athena put there as tokens during
their quarrel-that is to say, to stake their respective claims. Such, at least, is
the version of Herodotus;102 but the later accounts make Poseidon flood the
countryside as well, and one of these, which was given by Varro, provides
an extra detail which is directly relevant to Lycia.
The story is set in the reign of Cecrops. One day, there suddenly appeared
at Athens an olive-tree, while in another part of the city, water was seen to
burst from the ground. The King sent someone to Delphi, to ask the oracle
what this meant and what should be done about it. He was told that the
olive-tree stood for Athena, the water for Poseidon, and that it was up to his
citizens to decide which of the two deities their city should be called after.
Cecrops, accordingly, assembled the citizens of both sexes (for at this time,
women had a vote as well as men); the men all voted for Poseidon, the
women for Athena, and as there was one more woman than there were men,
Athena won the day. Poseidon, furious with the result, performed his usual
trick of flooding the whole country, and the flood was not abated until three
penalties had been laid on the women. They must lose their vote; no child
97 Nicolas Frdret, Oeuvres,xvii, Paris 1796,
pp. 149, i56 = Histoire de l'Acadfmie des
Inscriptions et Belles-lettres, xi, 1770o,pp. 31,
36.
98 A. J. B. Wace, Antiquity30, 1956, pp.
156-62.
s.v. 'oglou
27
born should take his mother's name; and they themselves must not be called
Athenian women.103
The universal suffrage essential for this story need not concern us, unless
as one further instance of a Utopia set in the past and not the future. What is
important is the practice of children taking their mothers' names-which is
apparently what happened up to the time of the story; and this practice is
exactly symmetrical to that of Xanthus in the story given by Nymphis, where
the corresponding change is introduced. With the evidence in its present
state, it is not possible to get much further than this, but the alternatives can
at least be outlined. Nymphis may well have written something like the story
which stands in Plutarch, maternal filiation and all; but this does not mean
that he must have derived it from outside the Herodotean tradition. What is
certain is that variations and combinations of these stories were circulating
over a period of centuries. It makes no difference whether the process was
predominantly oral, or literary, and there is no reason why the story in Varro,
or an earlier version of it, should not be taken as the model, rather than as the
copy.
All the same, one possibility may be raised which has a wider application:
could it be Plutarch himself that attached the Xanthian custom to the story?
To put this more generally, was the tradition of maternal descent in Lycia so
well-known that it would come to mind every time the country was mentioned? Half a millennium separates Plutarch from Nymphis, so there is
certainly room for intermediaries; but it can, as it happens, be shown that
Plutarch himself did not always make this association. 'The lawgiver of the
Lycians,' he wrote, in another context, 'is said to have laid down that citizens
in mourning should wear women's clothes. By this he meant to show that
mourning is a womanish business and not the thing for a gentleman who has
had the advantages of a liberal education.'104
The point at issue is not the origin of the custom, nor even the reliability
of Plutarch, though it is worth observing that the custom in question cannot be
correlated with a descent system, matrilineal or otherwise.105 The important
thing, for the present argument, is the explanation provided by Plutarch;
and this explanation belongs with the story that at Locri, deserters were
publicly exposed in women's clothes,106 or with what the Roman writer
Aelian has to say about the crown of wool which adulterers were made to
wear at Gortyn: 'it means he is unmanly, womanish, and lecherous with
103 Varro ap. Aug. C.D. I8, 9; not discussed in the recent commentary on Plut.
mul. virt. by Philip A. Stadter, 1965.
104
Plut.
consol,
ad Apoll.
I12F;
so also
28
SIMON PEMBROKE
111Arr. Anab. I, 24, 4, clearly distinguishes Lycia from Caria, and explains the
fact that a woman was satrap of Caria by the
practice of Asia as a whole, which in his view
dated back to Semiramis (I, 23, 7, cf. Diod.
17, 24, 2). He does not claim that succession
was matrilineal in Caria, simply that women
were not excluded from office.
29
SIMON PEMBROKE
30
foreign customs and Greek speculations as to their own past. Some of these
ties can be explained by a systematic attempt to relate the two-a view like
that of Thucydides that barbarians were a kind of survival from a stage
which the Greeks had passed.14 Others, however, seem to lie well outside
such attempts, and even to precede them, and the importance of these ties
may be suggested by describing the first as alternatives in space and the
second as alternatives in time.
Alternatives provide the material for what must be one of the simplest
explanations ever put forward. A Maori legend explains the fact that the sun
rises and sets regularly by a story that it used not to, until it was fought by
their ancestor and compelled to keep proper hours. The explanation consists
of nothing but an alternative to the existing state of things; this alternative is
set in the past and enacted, with a change to link the two. If the stories which
must now be considered, therefore, are to be regarded as essentially more
valuable than the Maori one, reasons for differentiating the two must be more
specific than the natural superiority of the Greeks.
The first and most famous of these stories does not affect the issue. In the
works of Hesiod, Man is not created by the gods. All that happens is that
gods and mortals are 'separated'-there are no more details than that-at a
particular place in Greece.15 Woman, on the other hand, is created, but only
later and only as a counter to the gift of fire which Prometheus made to
mankind and which was not intended by Zeus. And though Hesiod has a lot
to say about the difficulties of getting on with women, now that they are here,
he has as much to say about the difficulties of getting on without them.116
Men were much better off before all this; toil and trouble were unknown; but
there is no sign that they could reproduce themselves. They may even have
been immortal, since at that time there was no 'noisome illness, which brings
men their fate'.117 Similarly, aberrant origins, such as autochthony, the
emergence of man from the soil, like that of Phoronis, the 'earliest man' of
Sicyon, are of no interest here, because they are never repeated. Having once
emerged, the autochthonous man goes off to find a local nymph, and thereafter everything is as it should be; and the same goes for the stones thrown by
Deucalion and Pyrrha, which turned into the human race.118
The most important tradition, in the present context, is again centred on
Cecrops, the Athenian King who organized the voting over Athena and
Poseidon. Cecrops was also responsible for a number of inventions, and
among these was marriage.119 He was, certainly, a very ancient figure; he
was known to be 'twofold' or more literally 'two-natured', half-man and
half-beast. But the tradition, as we have it, is late and allegorical in form:
the title is explained by the two natures, male and female, which he was the
first to join in matrimony.1? The question is, what happened before this; and
114
I272
Adler,
31
the sources are unanimous with their answer: promiscuous intercourse. The
first of them, Clearchus of Soli, vaguely adds something about 'collective
marriages'.121 But one goes into more detail.
Some say he found men and women having intercourse quite casually, so
that no son could tell who was his father, no father who was his son.
Cecrops accordingly drew up the laws making them co-habit openly and
in pairs. In fact it was he who discovered the two natures of mother and
father, and so became called two-natured.122
Not, of course, quite accurate: one of the natures-as the first sentence
practically admits-was not the discovery of Cecrops. The identity of the
mother did not come in question, and it was a commonplace, as well attested
for antiquity as for other societies, that it could not do; but paternity was a
more open question. Telemachus, asked if he was the son of Odysseus,
replied rather whimsically that his mother said so, but he himself did not
know, because no man could be sure of his own begetting.123 The idea does
not, in ancient literature, receive the near-obsessional form in which it is
presented by Strindberg; but it does come out, at a serious level, in the
hundreds of formulaic curses, written on tablets, which have survived from
almost all periods of classical antiquity. The procedure was to write down the
victim's name-usually some divinity was invoked-and specify what was to
happen to him; and where it was felt that the occupation or the appearance
of the victim was not enough to guarantee his identity, it was as often as not
his mother's name, not his father's, which was brought in to eliminate all
doubt.124
SIMON PEMBROKE
32
them be monsters. Let the offspring borne by cattle resemble the cattle,
but if I fail, let them be monsters.126
Hesiod has an unjust city too, and it is afflicted with barrenness,pestilence and
famine. But it is surely necessary to see the imprecation behind Hesiod and
not Hesiod behind the imprecation. Here, in fact, is a unique form of alternative to which tense and mood, past and future, are almost indifferent. The
alternatives are there, and each has its consequences. And if, in Herodotus,
the consequence appeared to have become detached, only one thing could be
inferred back from it: a society in which it is possible to assign fathers on the
basis of physical likeness is no less idyllically just than one in which all are
kindred and relatives of one another.
A similar analysis can be made of one further tradition, and the text in
question, which is quite unique, is of fundamental importance to the distinction suggested earlier in this article between promiscuity and matriarchy.
The story was supposed to explain the saying 'Melian boat', which was
applied to boats which no longer held water.
Hippotes was sent on a colony, and he cursed the men who would not sail
with him. They had made excuses, some saying that the boats were
leaking, others that their wives were unwell, and so they stayed behind.
So he laid them under a curse: that they should never find a boat that was
water-tight, and that they should be ruled by women for ever.127
The destination of this expedition is uncertain, but there is no sign that the
victims of the curse accompanied it. What can be stated with certainty is
that the curse itself is identical in structure with a more conventional one.
There are convincing reasons for associating the theme of leaking vessels with
that of virginity; a Vestal Virgin was supposed to be capable of carrying water
in a sieve, and ProfessorE. R. Dodds has suggested that the same theme may
be discerned behind the punishment of the Danaids, who were condemned
for murdering their husbands to an eternity of carrying water in leaking pots.128
An association centred on domestic vessels might perhaps be extended to seagoing ones, although the status which can be given to such associations is a
notoriously difficult problem and it is not wholly essential to the present
argument. What the leaking boats certainly do correspondto is the stipulation
'that the sea shall be impossible to sail', which is made in the conventional
formula; and the second half of this formula specifies that women shall be
sterile, or shall give birth to monsters.129 It is this collective sterility, or miscarriage, which is replaced by the rule of women. Hippotes and the oath of
Plataea, therefore, make only one conclusion possible: matriarchy and the
idyllic belong to two different worlds.
It is worth seeing to what extent, in practice, this distinction is worked
126
L. Robert, Etudes e'bigraphiqueset philologiques, Paris I938, p. 308, ?39ff.; SEG xvi.
140o; Tod GHI1 no. 204 and p. 158. A
similar, half-legendary formula in Aeschin. 3,
II.
127
LSJ s.v.
45I, 488.
tX<o76S, II, I,
33
SIMON PEMBROKE
34
The ancients lived a nomadic life. They had, as yet, no houses, but
coupled without shame, and when children were born, exposed them in
the hollows of rocks and trees. Those who found the children thought that
this was where they came from, and so brought them up.'3
Even if this is a rationalization, the form it takes is significant; and for the
question whether, in a literary tradition, those societies which do not recognize
paternity must place on the women that role of continuity which the fathers
have vacated, it is decisive. The tradition itself is not concerned with continuity, and does not fully work out its own implications. And the earliest
mention, apart from Lycia, of descent being traced on the mother's side,
confirms this view.
The author is Philo of Byblos, who wrote in the second century A.D.,
though he claimed to be translating the work of a Phoenician priest called
Sanchuniathon-a near-contemporary of Moses, whom he placed before the
Trojan War. Whether or not there is anything in Philo's claim is not important
here, since it cannot possible be referred to the passage in question. The
point at which he brings in maternal descent is halfway through a catalogue
of the inventors of useful things-a catalogue whose pointlessness, and failure
to explain anything, cannot be exaggerated. 'They traced their descent on the
mother's side, because women at that time had intercourse casually with any
man they ran into.'135
It would be very hard indeed for this statement to be less appropriate to
its context. It is attached to two brothers, Samemroum and Ousoos; and
these are preceded, and followed, by four generations of two brothers each,
all, in some mysterious fashion, descended from one another. In the course of
this, not a single woman is mentioned.
Phenomena of this kind are barely worth saving. The chief value of Philo's
information lies in the contrast which it provides to the earliest surviving use
of the word for matriarchy, which was made several centuries earlier in a
description of the customs of an Illyrian tribe.
After the Istri come the people called the Libyrni. . these are ruled by
women, and the women are married to free men, but have intercourse
with their slaves and with men from the neighbouring tribes.136
Schol. Ven. AB II. 22, I26, cf. Eust.
I262, 7ff.; the text of schol. B, as printed by
Dindorf, p. 288, 27ff., is obviously corrupt.
Exposure is also mentioned, in the same
context, by schol. Hes. Th. 35. It looks distinctly possible, though the suggestion has
not to my knowledge been put forward, that
these passages contributed to the state of
nature which in Vico's Scienza Nuova succeeds
the universal flood, 'nel quale le madri, come
bestie, dovettero lattare solamente i bambini
e lasciargli nudi rotolar dentro le fecce loro
propie, ed appena spoppati abbandonargli
per sempre (Mothers, like beasts, must
merely have nursed their babies, let them
wallow in their own filth, and abandoned
134
35
Scylax, the author of this passage, was writing at the beginning of the fourth
century B.c. and so anticipated Aristotle's definition ofmatriarchy by a matter
of decades, but there is nothing here to suggest that the definition was less
than usually comprehensive. And there could hardly be a situation further
removed from the cases of promiscuity which have been considered earlier.
The Massagetai all had one another's wives to consort with, whereas the
nightmarish combination of slaves and foreigners presented here meant the
sustained and systematic frustration of every free man in the society. It was
hatred, ridicule, and contempt, but it was not matrilineal, and there is no
sign that Libyrnian husbands could disclaim the children of their wives.
There is no single instance in which what the Greeks called the rule of women,
in Greece or outside it, can be identified as a matrilineal system, and independent evidence is needed, in every case, for the society in question to be
identified at all.
There is, however, a more positive aspect to this conclusion. The traditions which have been considered here show marked similarities of structure,
and the problems arising from them are all closely related, but this does not
mean that the historical facts round which they are organized fall into a
similar pattern, or that a coherent relation can be established between the
pattern of fact and the pattern of tradition. Neither the sequence in which
events are arranged, nor the setting against which they are placed, can always
be isolated as fundamental data; and if this fact does not suggest a high degree
of historical content behind the traditions, it does throw considerable light on
their formation. What the Greeks knew about their past, and about their
neighbours, turns out to be very little; but against this can be set a wider and
more consistent picture of their image of the two things. To some extent, at
least, this image can be seen under construction.