It turns out that the guy who (basically) invented the idea of matriarchy did so because he wanted to praise the triumph of Christian-Roman-Imperial-OIt turns out that the guy who (basically) invented the idea of matriarchy did so because he wanted to praise the triumph of Christian-Roman-Imperial-Occidental-Idealist patriarchy!
In his "Essay on Mortuary Symbolism", Bachofen does some extremely dubious myth-interpretation, all around the theme of Apollonian/Solar/Idealist/Agricultural/Roman religious values triumphing over their Aphroditean/Lunar/Material/Swampy(!)/Egyptian counterparts. Very clearly pulling a lot from Plutarch's "Isis and Osiris".
In "Mother Right", Bachofen elaborates 3 main stages of social development: 1) a promiscuous ("Hetaeric") stage where women and property are "held in common", 2) the matriarchal stage where women who are tired of so much sex institute monogamous marriage, while still tracing descent matrilineally, and 3) the patriarchal phase, where descent is patrilineal & property is inherited.
In mythological terms, these three stages correspond to Aphrodite, Demeter, and Apollo. He has two lesser stages, a martriarchal Amazonian phase (man-hating) which precedes (& justifies...) the patriarchy and a patriarchal Dionysian phase within the patriarchy where the women are corrupted by oriental decadence (associated with the later Roman empire).
I was actually surprised by how well attested the primitive promiscuity was in his ancient sources, especially Herodotus, although he doesn't claim it to be a stage, just an oddity of African and Asian tribes that he has heard about. It's rather unclear from Bachofen's interpretation whether women are treated as Mother Goddesses at this stage, as this would suggest more agency and power than his claim that they are basically required to have sex with all men who come their way.
The transition from promiscuity to matriarchy is much less well attested by his sources. He does give some examples of the introduction of monogamy, where promiscuity is progressively curtailed to before marriage or to the wedding night. In general, he interprets almost any sign of positive treatment and respect for women as lingering remnants of the matriarchal stage, although this doesn't even make sense within his system as it could also be held over from Goddess figures of the Hetaeric stage.
His evidence for the institution of Patriarchy comes largely from Aeschylus's Eumenides, where the Erinyes (furies) are suing Orestes for killing his mother to avenge his father, losing to Apollo who champions the right of fathers. While there's clearly some important stuff here for Greek gender relations and a preference for men over women, I don't think it vindicates the idea that a fully matriarchal period preceded Athenian patriarchy. He also cites myths of Amazonian warriors falling in love with Greek heroes, but I have trouble putting much stock in these.
In the final selection, from the introduction to his "The Myth of Tanaquil", Bachofen just lets his Western chauvinism & imperialism (which had always been apparent) run rampant, talking about Rome's historical mission to subjugate Asia both politically and spiritually and how much he still thinks that is the basic goal of Western society....more
Short, interesting texts. Agricola is a biography of Tacitus' father-in-law which serves as a critique of Emperor Domitian's despotism and incompetencShort, interesting texts. Agricola is a biography of Tacitus' father-in-law which serves as a critique of Emperor Domitian's despotism and incompetence, a how-to manual for colonialism, and also a record (or pure invention?) of native Britons' critique of their subjection to the empire.
Germania is an ethnography of various Germanic tribes. As with modern ethnographies, it's hard to tell how much is pure projection, especially Tacitus' praise of Germanic monogamy, anti-abortion views, and lack of ideas of money/credit/accumulation. However, given Rome's incredibly patriarchal culture, the claim that men treated women more equally, and were willing to listen to their advice without treating them as either a slave or a goddess, comes off as sincere although perhaps overstating the case. It's pretty clear how his praises of German's freedom of spirit & warrior ethic set the stage for later appropriation by German nationalism, as I'll discuss below. I also wonder if this text is responsible for crass appropriations I've seen of modern Germans dressing up as Native Americans - the similarities between Tacitus' descriptions and (stereotypical) ideas of Native Americans was striking, and I have no sense of how to untangle the way that the former may have influenced the anthropological studies of the latter. (Edit: this seems almost surely the case, based on a quick glance at Kindred by Choice: Germans and American Indians Since 1800)
I did find the introduction by A. R. Birley somewhat dubious and conservative. In addition to taking "Germanic" invasions of the late Roman empire at face-value and being too quick to attribute racial/national continuity between the Germanic tribes and present-day Germans, his description of the modern influences of Tacitus' Germania was very limited. He mentions Montesquieu's attribution of English division of powers back to the Anglo-Saxon liberties, and then jumps to the 19th century Aryan myth, painting a very quick picture of Fichte -> Gobineau -> Nazis. Why not its influence on Pope Pius II's attempt to start a 5th crusade, Machiavelli, the English Levellers, the conceptualization of feudalism as a mixture of Roman and Germanic institutions, Thomas Jefferson, American Anglo-Saxon racial ideology, Germans across the whole political spectrum from Marx to Hegel to Weber & Nietzsche, Bachofen's myth of "primal matriarchy", etc.?
Note that Marx's "primitive communism" was originally a description of the ancient Germanic tribes, contesting Hegel's interpretation of these tribes which is more like "primitive fealty to the state but in a good free way and not a despotic way". It was only later that Marx looked into anthropologies of non-European peoples and tried to find primitive communism there too, although arguably his interpretation was already influenced by Rousseauian "noble savage" ideas based on comparing Native American tribes with ancient Germanic tribes.
It's just an incredibly influential text, for better or for worse (mostly worse), and is a part of the genesis of almost all laudatory narratives of Western/European civilization, capitalism, and world-dominance....more
Loading...
