The Matriarchy

The theory claims that in prehistory, humanity lived in a peaceful, classless society defined by a feminine principle. This society had an emotional competence never before experienced, under the religious oversight of the Great Mother cult. It is questionable whether this meant rule by women or the existence of a harmonious feminine principle independent of governance, which resulted in paradisiacal conditions. The patriarchy appeared at a later stage of history, bringing with it hierarchy, violence, wars, oppression, and destruction. For women, this world meant sexual oppression, witch hunts, genital mutilation, and bound feet.

The scale is clear: the matriarchy was paradise, and the patriarchy was hell. The developer of the matriarchy theory was, however, a man, Johann Jakob Bachofen. The book by the Basel lawyer and ancient historian was published in 1861. Bachofen was a male chauvinist, considering the transition from mother to father as progress. After the disgraceful age of degeneracy and the Amazonian phase of the war against men, the woman reappeared as a mother in the new, agricultural era of humanity. The principle of matriarchy was born around the same time as Darwin's new theory, when the biblical concept of a 6000-year history was no longer sustainable, and new vast time periods needed to be filled with content. This occurred during an era when gender and family structure were strongly patriarchal. At this point, the model was slowly beginning to decay. It was influenced by the accelerating industrialization, urbanization, modernization, and the fact that women were beginning to break down their limitations.

Although this was not Bachofen's intention, his theory provided substantial ammunition for the women's movements. By the early 20th century, the theory had grown into a cultural theory. Its attractive nature was further strengthened by popular, mystical, and pantheistic teachings of the time. After the Second World War, the theory of mother-centeredness experienced a renaissance due to a second wave of feminism, giving the struggle against male power a historical foundation and a future perspective. The theory was also appealing to the esoteric and spiritual New Age feminism of the turn of the century, as well as to prehistoric novelists who profited immensely by popularizing this principle. The scientific endorsement of the theory was thanks to American archaeologist Marija Gimbutas, who wrote about peaceful, feminine prehistoric Europe in several of her books. Many factors contributed to the acceptance of the theory, especially the existence of various spiritual movements.

Of course, any theory would not survive without evidence. Fortunately, archaeological traces were found that seemed to support it, and there were scholars who agreed with it. In the Mediterranean and the Near East, prehistoric fertility cults and strongly sexualized female statues were discovered as remnants of megalithic cultures. Prehistorians were unable to find proper evidence of the early existence of a matriarchy. However, those who supported this principle profited from the fact that it is never easy to interpret archaeological finds or the remains of ancient cultures. They either referred to other indicators or engaged in speculative reasoning. The alleged evidence of matriarchy was freely handled, and with their confident explanations, many laypeople were convinced. The "evidence" can be divided into several groups. In several European museums, there are small Venus statues made of limestone, clay, or ivory, dating back tens of thousands of years from the Paleolithic. The sites of discovery stretch from France to Siberia. While Western European female figures are typically plump, the Eastern ones are leaner. The most famous is the Venus of Willendorf, discovered in Upper Austria in 1908. The common feature of all these figures is their prominent genitalia. These were interpreted as artistic creations of a matriarchal society, sometimes as deifications of the female-cosmic principle, other times as representations of mother goddesses.

However, the fact that Paleolithic female figures honor fertility is quite clear and proves nothing. The assumption that these are depictions of goddesses does not serve as evidence of the existence of a great mother goddess—almost every religion honors goddesses—nor does it rule out the possibility of male deities. A similar situation arises with the distinct finds from the Neolithic period, the megalithic burial mounds. Interpreting these as representations of female genitalia is a possible interpretation, but not necessarily a certain one—and even then, it would not prove the existence of matriarchy or a ruling female principle. Overall, the matriarchy theory uses symbols that could be interpreted in entirely different ways. Even the prime example of matriarchy research, the settlement of Çatalhöyük in Central Anatolia, uncovered in the 1960s, does not withstand scrutiny. This site was once seen as a matriarchal settlement without distinctions of rank, where a Great Goddess was worshipped because she taught people agriculture and settlement. Later researchers considered this to be a speculative fantasy. However, there were followers of this idea, and similar societies were thought to have been discovered in Crete. Even the renowned British archaeologist Arthur Evans, who uncovered the palace of Knossos, subscribed to this belief, which did not serve research well as it followed his subjective judgment. The entire theory is contradicted by skeletal remains that show signs of violence.

Thus far, neither serious archaeological evidence, nor anthropology, nor ethnography support the theory. In proving the existence of matriarchy, they even invoked maternal descent and the attachment to the mother's dwelling. However, this is not sufficient evidence because a system involves more than family structure, and such cases occurred only rarely. They would have included matriarchy in the universal history of humanity, while such a history has long been dismissed due to the diversity of human development. Even if such an era had existed, where are the traces of the transition to the male-dominated world, which must have occurred dramatically? It has often happened in human history that the suffering of the present seeks comfort in the past, and this was the case with Bachofen, the developer of this theory. Yet his theory collapses like a house of cards.

Bernd Ingmar Gutberlet: "Irrtum! 50 Mal Geschichte richtiggestellt"