Noel M.

Gajete

ENG 13 – THX7

A Survey on Matriarchy: Is Matriarchal Myth A Myth?

Leadership, these days has been a topic where criticism and scrutiny are not foreign. Whether in

government, politics, economy, or university, we face-off a lot of arguments, facts, or even

opinions whether a certain leader is doing the best actions for the people or not, in most cases

translated as failure. And one famous debate pertaining to leadership, is that whether male or

female leadership is the best. From there rooted two social concepts; patriarchy, and matriarchy;

patriarchy in layman’s term means a system where a male or father is the head, the ruler, the

powerful. From there we could define what matriarchy should mean, a social system where the

mother or females governs, they hold the ruling position over. Pretty visible we could say that

the debate, or the competition, roots out from the concept of gender.

But this is where things get interesting. Historically, and anthropologically, claims are that there

is no such a thing as “matriarchy”. Anthropologist finds it hard to believe that matriarchy did

ever even existed in ancient societies, whether primordial, or civilized. The reason being: there

are no concrete, clear evidence that proves the occurrence of matriarchal groups. No

anthropologist, historian, nor researcher can strongly claim the existence of such a system. The

concept was concreted yet left out and concluded only as a theory by scholars. This brings us to

the concept of “matriarchal myth”, an idea which came from anthropologists which generalizes

the whole situation of research on matriarchy. We will dive deeper on the anthropological
accounts on matriarchy more as we go along, and we will try to find out whether matriarchy is

purely just a myth or if matriarchy did really exist.

Tracking down the roots of the theory of matriarchy and its initial definition leads us to Johann

Jakob Bachofen’s Das Mutterecht (which translates to Mother Right) in 1861. According to a

thesis about the role of matriarchies in social evolution by Rachel Romero in 2008, the use of

recht (which in German usually translates as right) was rather translated as “rights, law, justice,

title, privileges, advantage, prerogative, something to which a person is entitled,” (7). Bachofen’s

study was about the characteristic of matriarchy in ancient times, although he did not actually

used the word “matriarchy”, but rather “Gynaecocracy” (which means rule of women), which

then was translated as matriarchy (from Greek-Latin “mater+arche”) which according to an

article by Michael Petrou, was first used by G.A. Wilken, a Dutch colonial governor in 1884

(74). He, in his study, points the concept of “mother right” which formed from the natural and

human relationship of mother and child. The idea of “mother right” presents a strong influence

on the concept of motherhood and women in societies of ancient times, which Bachofen

considers cultural (qtd. in Romero 7,qtd. in Reid 362). Bachofen postulated arguments, all

supporting the idea and the existence of matriarchy. One is that matriarchy was birthed from the

unjustifiable treatment and expectation of sexuality of women that came from men. According to

a dissertation of Cichon, Bachofen states that because of the state of being defenseless towards

the period of hetaerism, women thought that there was a need of conditions and regulations to

confine men’s actions (103). Then it was developed further through formations of individual

marriages and matriliny. Then it evolved by women taking civil rule. Another argument by

Bachofen is that matriarchy preceded patriarchy. He stated that it was male promiscuity that first
dominated society which Bachofen calls “hetaerism”, then followed by matriarchy, then

followed by patriarchy. He claimed that ancient societies like Greece, Egypt, Crete, India, North

Africa, Central Asia, and other more were patriarchal societies that originated from a matriarchal

system. Bachofen’s work became the pioneer for discussions about matriarchy and influenced

many other researchers on the topic like Freud, Marx, and Jung. Jung takes the ideology of

“mother right” and then imaged the concept of a mother-archetype in which according to

Romero, is a notion of mother-like principles and concepts that conveys motherly attitudes and

characteristics like peace, fruitfulness, divinity, care, etc. in which according to Jung, is present

in these matriarchal societies presented by Bachofen (103).

From here, the definition of “matriarchy” starts to broaden, as the theory of matriarchy and its

definition is being discussed, tested, and criticized by researchers. Heide Göttner-Abendroth, a

feminist, and a researcher on matriarchy and women-centered societies, has been researching on

the topic for 30 years. Her definition of matriarchy can be considered tolerant, for she considers

non-patriarchal societies as matriarchal. She states in her paper Matriarchal Society: Definition

and Theory that we are not required to define matriarchy in parallel with the definition of

patriarchy, for matriarchy does not limit to the definition of “domination by mothers” whereas

patriarchy accurately translates as “domination by fathers” (2-3). According to an article by

Peggy Sanday, “From the start its meaning (matriarchy) was fashioned by analogy with

“patriarchy” or “father right.”. In Göttner-Abendroth paper, she defined matriarchy in 4 levels:

economical, social, political, and cultural. Economically, matriarchies are observed as societies

of agriculture and reciprocity. Matriarchies were, according to Göttner-Abendroth, closely

related to the development of agricultural technology, and that goods were distributed fairly and

equally, observing egalitarian characteristics within these societies (5). On the social level,
matriarchies were seen to be “societies of kinship”, where the mother’s lineage is of great

importance and power, which closely relates to concepts of “matrilinearity” and “matrilocality”

(5-6). Politically, matriarchies are “societies of egalitarians and consensus” (6). Domination nor

increasing political influence and power are not observed in these societies, neither practiced.

Decision-making in these societies is approached with consideration to all bodies or clans (6).

Culturally, matriarchies are societies of divinity and rebirth. Göttner-Abendroth explains that

these societies that believes in a cyclic and non-binary religious belief. The absence of duality in

their beliefs and the idea of a Great Mother who gives life and takes life gives ground to concepts

of cycles (ex. sun and moon as a flow of celestial life) and rebirth (ex. A death of a loved one

will lead to a birth of a new family member) (7). Göttner-Abendroth’s reason of her system of

defining “matriarchy” is that taking definitions from cultural history alone is not enough to

complete and concretize the whole idea of the term. Which is why she did view and constructed

the definition in terms of “levels” (3).

Now that we have a wider understanding of “matriarchy”, we will now investigate why it only

has remained and coined as a theory, even more accurately, a myth, by scholars. This again leads

to the first of scholars who wrote about women-ruled societies, Bachofen. We stated earlier in

this paper that the general reason why it has been only left as a theory is because there was no

proof that matriarchal societies ever existed. Even if the notion is that there is power or authority

bestowed to one gender or the other, there were really no solid evidences in proving matriarchy,

nor its cultural period (Petrou 74). Joan Bamberger, in her essay about the myth of matriarchy,

also states that the ideology and presence of matriarchy can only go as an assumption because

there were no present matriarchies at that time, and that sources were at scarce for researchers
and scholars (263). Petrou quotes Schneider’s statement in 1961 that even in matrilineal

societies, power of women over men was never noticed (76). Even archaeological sources were

deemed difficult to use as proof. Cichon quotes Margaret Ehrenberg in her dissertation, saying

that “As regards matriarchy, . . . I have tried to show not only how little evidence there is in any

living or documented society, but also how difficult it would be to prove from archaeological

data.” (53). Ehrenberg continues that even if there were archaeological data present about the

Minoan Cretes who were believed to have “important women” (Saylor Academy 3), it was still

hard to conclude that women truly had authority (Cichon 53). If there were no sources to attest

the reality of matriarchy, then where did Bachofen took his arguments and deductions? Bachofen

used myths and classical sources to support his theory. Myths about the Amazons, Graceo-

Roman mythologies, classic epics like Homer, legends about Cretes, were some of his basis of

constructing the theory. Bachofen believes that myths have close relationships with history,

which led him to view myths as actual history, not as fiction (qtd. in Bamberger 267). His

method was to analyze these myths, and consider them as history, for he believes that myths are

historical mirrors of culture and events, formed through symbolisms, understanding them as

“metaphors” in literature (Stockings 1190, qtd. in “Graves, Bachofen, and the Matriarchy

Debate” 3). This action perhaps made scholars view his theory as conjugal. This methodology

made Bamberger call Bachofen a “promoter through fiction and fancy”, promoting the idea that

matriarchy begat patriarchy, and that patriarchy “brought” matriarchy “firmly under” it (265).

Addition to Bachofen being a controversial scholar, Bamberger adds that his view on women

with regards to matriarchy is quite biased. According to Bamberger, his view of women was that

like of a mid-Victorian woman; flawless in beauty, immaculate, which seems to be dissimilar to

the characteristics of today’s woman (265). It was a difficult task to prove at Bachofen’s time
that matriarchy was real and that primordial civilizations entered the matriarchal period. For even

before, philosophies on inequality and sexual asymmetry end up giving the man a higher ground

against woman which leads to conclusions that “Male power is considered ubiquitous and is

found even when there is none.” (Marler 168). Even some of those who tried to claim that

societies with the “mother-right” practices or characteristics could be marked as matriarchal were

not that convinced. Sherry Ortner, a feminism anthropologist, claimed that egalitarianism is

complicated and “fragile” that it may not be best to define societies who practice it as matriarchal

(qtd. in Matriarchy).

But, through time, there were people who claimed that matriarchies were far from myths, they

were claimed as real. A paper edited by Hilary Alton titled “Matriarchy Really Did Exist” which

contents were selected from Robert Briffault’s “The Mother” claimed to prove the existence of

matriarchy. Claiming that one main factor of identifying a matriarchal society is the presence of

matrilocal marriage (37), he listed some societies to be counted as matriarchal. In the paper, it

was stated that a method of analyzing functionalism of a culture or practice in a certain society

was much more preferred by anthropologist, since even closely similar practices between distinct

societies might serve a different function between them (Sanday, “Matriarchy Really Did Exist”

5-6). From there, Briffault noted several societies seen as matriarchal; the Targi population of

Sahara was observed that they practice matrilocal marriage, and that economically, the women

had more stability and power especially in inheritance and property (15-17). The Sakai tribes in

the forests of Eastern Sumatra was stated that tribal organizations were “strictly matriarchal”,

properties were in the hands of the woman after marriage and men had none, and the woman will

continue to stay in their family’s house (20). Natives of the Micronesian region had a matriarchal
organization in their society (22). In the Pelew Islands, they were observed to have a distinct

family orientation, where the head of the family is the oldest female, and the head of the district

is named “Mother of the Land” (23). Inheritance was also given only to the women of the family,

or the sister’s daughters of the husband (23). In the Northern and Central Asia, like the Tungus,

social laws were matriarchal (28). They were also coined as “ferocious people”, stating that they

can put a male in the family to death if influence of furiousness, but never their mother (28). The

social customs of the Khasis and Garos of India were observed and was seen that the mothers

hold the highest rule in the family; inheritance, kinship, property, leadership were all owned by

the mother (31-32). There were a lot more stated in the paper, but it only suggests that

matriarchy was originally present in these regions.

Peggy Reeves Sanday, in her article “Matriarchy as a Sociocultural Form”, pointed the people

of Minangkabau, the 4th largest ethnic group in Indonesia (Sanday, Women At The Center) to

have adapted the word “maatriarchaat” which translates in Dutch as “matriarchy”. Although

Sanday stated that although they did used the word to specify their social system, the

Minangkabau rather coins it as the benefits they have economically from customs such as

matriliny and matrilocality. Sanday calls the social system of Minangkabau as matriarchy

because of reasons closely related to the mother-archetype, not through female dominance. This

definition is rooted up to Sanday’s cause to challenge the Western definition of matriarchy as

“rule of women” (Women At The Center). She sees that their traditions, ceremonies, political

activities and laws are all connected to the maternal aspect, which defines the identity of the

Minangkabau.

Some other groups described to be matriarchal were the Mosuo of China where women are

rather liberated sexually. According to Stacy Knight in her online article about matriarchal
societies, women of Mosuo were free to take different sexual, whereas according to Sarah

Madaus, having the same topic on her online article, Mosuo women can choose not to marry.

There are also the Bribri of Costa Rica where it was told that women are seen as venerable

(Madaus). The Nubians of Sudan were said to have an “unusually high number of ruling queens”

and that authority was present within women (Knight). A tribe in Kenja, called Umoja was

tagged as a “No-Mans Land” for men were said to be banned (Madaus).

There are a lot more sources about matriarchy, like an article on National Geographic that

showed archaeological proofs that the Amazons were based on real-life warriors called the

Sycthians by excavating and discovering female bones with weapons like bows and spears

(Worrall). Some also say that some regions in the Philippines like the Palawan had societies

which were hierarchically equal in terms of gender (Knight), which for some reason was

considered matriarchy already. An article in Philstar about Philippines being a matriarchal

society under a macho nation, Flores was trying to point out if the presence of competent and

admirable women leaders can be considered as matriarchy. But from the theory of Bachofen in

1861, until today’s discoveries on matriarchies, maybe the reason for calling matriarchy a myth

was because its definition before was indeed incomplete, and field research was demanding in

many aspects, which led to shallow assumptions of identifying matriarchies. As years passes, so

does our ability to conduct field research becomes more achievable. If researchers can continue

discovering the reality and complete the definition of matriarchy, it is plausible that more than

accepting the term, people will come to acknowledge women as humans who has the capacity to

handle and utilize authority as well as men.

 Works Cited

Bamberger, Joan. “The Myth of Matriarchy: Why Men Rule in Primitive Society.” 2006,

[Link]/sites/default/files/pdf/class_text_052.pdf. Accessed 12

May 2021.

Cichon, Joan Marie. “Matriarchy In Minoan Crete: A Perspective From Archaeomythology And

Modern Matriarchal Studies.” 2013, California Institute of Integral Studies, PhD

dissertation. [Link]/docview/1492362119/B047A45BA8D84E8BPQ/1.

Accessed 12 May 2021.

Flores, Wilson Lee. “Is the Philippines a matriarchal society pretending to be a macho nation?”

The Philippine Star, 29 September, 2002, [Link]

life/2002/09/29/177872/philippines-matriarchal-society-pretending-be-macho-nation.

Accessed 31 May 2021.

Göttner-Abendroth, Heide. “Matriarchal Society: Definition and Theory.” 2004, [Link]/wp-

content/uploads/013106_matriachial_society.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2021.

“Graves, Bachofen, and the Matriarchy Debate.”

[Link]/issues/33/4454_article_1.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2021.

“History of Minoan Crete.” [Link]/url?

sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwirlZub6Yz

xAhULL6YKHchCD9EQFjAAegQIAxAD&url=https%3A%2F

%[Link]%2Fcourses%2F14%2Ffiles%2F844%2Fdownload

%3Fverifier%3D6NdvQpSR5c1VMNXkr8stCiOqC4yeVFLWMULd9L7p%26wrap

%3D1&usg=AOvVaw1hVVtqhvae3pulI-OAOO9f. Accessed 12 May 2021.

Knight, Dacy. “A Look at 5 Matriarchal Societies Throughout History” Brides, 18 February

2021, [Link]

Accessed 31 May 2021.

Madaus, Sarah. “6 Matriarchal Societies That Have Been Thriving With Women at the Helm for

Centuries” Town & Country Magazine, 5 August 2019,

[Link]

list/. Accessed 31 May 2021.

Marler, Joan. “The Myth of Universal Patriarchy: A Critical Response to Cynthia Eller’s Myth of

Matriarchal Prehistory.” Feminist Theology, Vol. 14 No. 2, SAGE Publications, 2006,

[Link]/doi/abs/10.1177/0966735006059510. Accessed 12 May 2021.

“Matriarchy Really Did Exist: Selected extracts from Robert Briffault’s The Mothers.” edited by

Hilary Alton, Radical Anthropology Group, 2011,

[Link]/sites/default/files/pdf/pub_matriarchy.pdf. Accessed 12

May 2021.

Reid, Julia. “‘She-who-must-be-obeyed’: Anthropology and Matriarchy in H. Rider Haggard’s

She.” Journal of Victorian Culture, Vol. 20, No. 3, University of Leeds, 2015,

[Link]/jvc/article/20/3/357/4095676. Accessed 12 May 2021.

Romero, Rachel. “The Role Of Matriarchies And Patriarchies In Social Evolution Vis-à-vis

Bachofen And His Influence On The Social Sciences.” 2008, Texas A&M University,

[Link]/bitstream/handle/1969.1/85971/[Link]. Accessed 12 May

2021.
Sanday, Peggy Reeves. “Matriarchy as a Sociocultural Form: An Old Debate in a New Light.”

[Link]/psanday/articles/selected-articles/matriarchy-as-a-sociocultural-form-

an-old-debate-in-a-new-light/. Accessed 31 May 2021.

Sanday, Peggy Reeves. “Women at the Center: Life in a Modern Matriarchy.”

[Link]/psanday/books/women-at-the-center-life-in-a-modern-matriarchy/.

Accessed 31 May 2021.

Stocking Jr., George, “Myth, Religion, and Mother Right: Selected Writings of J. J. Bachofen.”

Wiley Online Library, 1968,

[Link]/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00240. Accessed

31 May 2021.

Science Encyclopedia, 2021, [Link]

Century-Gender-Kinship-Studies. Accessed 31 May 2021.

Worrall, Simon. “Amazon Warriors Did Indeed Fight and Die Like Men” National Geographic,

29 October 2014, [Link]

scythians-hunger-games-herodotus-ice-princess-tattoo-cannabis. Accessed 8 May 2021.