You state that there are no known matriarchal civilizations. What about the Etruscan civilization? I can't find a legitimate resource on the internet, but in my Italian studies (BS at a Catholic University), as well as my visits to Etruscan ruins in Italy, they portray the Etruscans as a civilization where the women were fully in charge. Their art and artifacts do demonstrate this idea. I am curious to know what you think of this; is this a ruse to draw in tourists, or is this a legitimate matriarchy, and therefore an exception to the rule?
I confess I'm not an expert on Etruscans, so I'm going to have to lean on my more general historian sensibilities. However, historical record clearly mentions kings, so the idea of the Etruscans being matriarchal goes out the window on that point alone.
Googling "Etruscan kings" will find your more sources than you could probably possibly want. Googling "Etruscan matriarchy," however, gives some interesting links as to where the idea comes from. This link jumps out at me as having some quick and dirty answers to the matter, but there are plenty others.
Etruscan women were probably more highly regarded than women in Greece or Rome, however. Their tombs frequently depict both husband and wife in a familiar embrace. Such a depiction is quite different than what you would find in Greece or Rome. Much of what we know of the Etruscans actually comes from Roman sources, who had to fight to gain their independence from the Etruscans, which does suggest their descriptions might be biased. They talk of Etruscan women having a great amount of freedom, not only actively socializing but involving in numerous affairs. Again, part of this might just be talking smack, but it also at least suggests that Etruscan women were more free than their Roman counterparts, which is why the Roman writers found them so scandalous.
So while I'd say they were wrong, I'm not sure it's simply a ruse to draw in tourists. The display creators may well have been working from outdated source materials (claiming civilizations to be matriarchal used to be much more en vogue, before scholars started more seriously looking at the supposed evidence being cited), or the displays themselves may be outdated.
Question of the Day: Matriarchies
2/07/2009 05:29:00 PM | history, Question of the day, Wicca | 2 comments »
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No, you're right. The Etruscans were matriarchal. As a very ancient religion it had its roots (or spread to, nobody's really sure) in the Cretian origins where females were highly regarded as creators therefore rulers of men. When Aneias was founding Rome they came to an agreement after the wars that they would take the religion which a King later researched, Romafied and cemented. They used the Latin religion and the Sabine morals and values. At first all children were regarded as their mothers, and it was only much later that they began to take mens names, the argument these days being that you can never be completely sure of a child's father, but you always know who his/her mother is. Even after the Rape of the Sabines a law was passed by Romulus that no man was to hit his wife and no mistreatment was legal. In the Roman part of the world, it was all pretty much matriarchal, in all senses, not just in name. Later, in Rome when a child was born and his/her parents were legally married he/she had their father's surname and clan name. After the Etruscan religion was decided on as being utterly more true, it was decided that the rutuals were too bloody, and human sacrifice immoral, and changes were made in the Romanisation of it. But the Etruscans kept their own system intact, and kept their language for quite a while until after Rome was built and Vei was conquered. After that things moved to patriarchy pretty quickly, but seems to be at the worst among rich people, while the general population were lovers of women, and women held great respect for their mothers. Even today a lot of Italians are on the verge of being "mummy's boys", and the laws didn't always reflect the culture. Unfortunately, as time went on mistreatment and persecution of women became more common. In the beginning it was shocking, and grounds for execution. I'm sorry, I haven't done the research of exact dates, but the founding seems to have happened in 1300BC, but the city was not yet built until Romulus and Remus's time. And that seems to have happened about 700BC or thereabouts. A lot did change in their society, not just the laws.
Phil, what are your sources for this information?