matriarchy -- evolution to patriarchy

Matriarchy Kamesh R. Aiyer May 4, 2013

1

Matriarchy: The mother of Government

Kamesh R. Aiyer

This essay was written in support of the posts in the “Reimagined Mahabharata” blog,

specifically the fifth one on the three matriarchal cultures of South Asia.

The Evolutionary Framework of Matriarchy

Anthropologists are often cautious in making absolute statements, but poets are not so

constrained. Robert Graves’ asserted, in The White Goddess, that a matriarch-centered

organizational structure is the “natural” state of human bands. It is tempting to say that

this is obvious – mothers stay home and control the family and the “base camp” while

males go off on long journeys and move from band to band. But this is not a given – for

example, two primate species closest to us, the chimpanzees and the bonobos, appear to

exhibit completely different social organizations. Bonobo bands are female-centric and

run by the female head, chimpanzee bands are male-centric and run by the alpha male.

There are many behavioral differences that go with these different organizations, but one

big difference is the relationship between bands and between individuals within bands.

Similar behavioral differences are displayed by other mammals – elephants for example,

form female-centric and female-run bands. Lions appear to form male-centric but

female-run bands. Canines – wolves, foxes, dogs, etc. – seem to form gender-neutral

bands. There are other behavioral differences between these animals but the form of the

band seems to underlie many differences – the similar band organization between

bonobos and elephants may underlie similarities in band behavior.


2

The choice of organization for most animals appears to be genetically specified, but

the demographic and productive nature of the environment drives the selection pressures

that lead to genetically mediated choices. For instance, it appears that the difference

between chimpanzees and bonobos can be traced to a key difference in habitat – the

bonobos have no competition in the niche they occupy north of the Congo river, while

chimpanzees compete directly with gorillas south of the Congo. Inter-species

competition for this niche leads to intra-species competition between chimpanzee bands

for food and security. Battles are frequent between chimpanzee bands, but have never

been observed among bonobos. Chimpanzee males are larger than chimpanzee females –

this makes them better fighters and as a result (possibly) resulted in a social hierarchy in

which males are valued more than females. Evolution has selected for male-centric and

male-run chimpanzee bands. The bonobos, on the other hand, are not subject to such

competition and intra-band competition for resources would be rare (or non-existent, if

our observations are valid). Band members form friendships with members of other

bands and occasionally appear to visit each other.

Population control is achieved in chimpanzees by oestrus (“heat”) – sexual receptivity

of females is limited to certain times during the year, thus limiting fertility – and by

infanticide. When a female chimpanzee is receptive, the male (or males) have an

incentive to prevent other males from accessing the female. At the same time friendships

among males allows the more powerful to share females with the weaker protégé. As a

result, a power hierarchy develops among male chimpanzees that is then used to control

the females. Infanticide happens for many reasons, but one of the most common is when

the alpha male of a troop is overthrown by another unrelated male. Infanticide is both


3

direct, with the new male killing unprotected young and indirect by self-induced

abortions by females. Some pregnancies are terminated by the stress of forced

relocations or by the loss of range forced by competition.

Infanticide does not happen because the new alpha male hates the children of the old

male. While the mother is nursing she will not go into oestrus. By killing the nursing

baby the male ensures greater access to sex.1

Thus, sex is subordinated to power (maintaining control over the band) and even

serves a reward/punishment role.

Population control among bonobos is also achieved primarily by oestrus, but with a

wrinkle – a bonobo female in heat can be barely distinguished from one not in heat.

Males, too, are almost the same size as females. As a result power hierarchies do not help

control access to sex. Instead, many social interactions are accompanied by gender-

neutral sexual acts – hugging and pecking as well as mutual rubbing of genitalia. The

matriarch of the band, the alpha female, is welcomed by all other females as a friend, and

conversely, a female not welcome by others will never become a matriarch. Favored

males are welcomed with sex and unfavored males are ignored. Control of the band is a

distinct second to the use of sex to maintaining relationships.

How does this relate to human bands? Humans form bands that have variant

structures, from matriarchal to patriarchal or even gender-neutral, small to large, from

sets of related individuals to apparently randomly formed groups. The plasticity of human

bands allows these bands to adapt to a variety of niches. A band may be matriarchal if

the niche provides a cornucopia of resources and inter-band competition is either non- 1 At the same time, a male will not kill his own children – we do not know why, but pheromonal or hormonal

reactions may be responsible. It seems unlikely that the male chimp knows that the sexual act leads to pregnancy followed by a baby.


4

existent or not possible (if there is only one band, for instance). If, as a result of band

growth and the formation of new bands, resources become tight, inter-band sharing may

be replaced by inter-band conflict, which could lead to the formation of defensive troops

and the value of the man vis-à-vis the woman would increase. Over a small number of

generations (possibly even in one generation) a band might go from being matriarchal to

being patriarchal.

But in the context of a rich environment with no apparent constraints on resources,

men do not have much of a role in the human family. Like bonobos, a man is not so

much larger than females, and cannot force a unified band to allow access if the women

do not want it. For this reason, we think that all three cultures that developed in South

Asia were matriarchal.

The Role of men in a matriarchal band

In a matriarchal band, the females become pregnant, give birth to children, and jointly

take care of children. It is very obvious that the mother is the creator and sustainer of life

in the band. What makes a man necessary to a band? There are three big reasons:

1. He is a spare hand that is always available

2. His slight advantage in strength makes him useful in inter-band conflicts

3. As the father of some of the children in the band he can help raise them

We will address these in turn. In times of plenty, the male eats more and may or may

not bring in a correspondingly larger quantity of food and other resources. In difficult

times when food is scarce, he needs more and is not likely to be any more productive than

any other female. So the man’s role as provider is questionable.


5

The male viewed as a spare hand that is always available compares unfavorably with

adding another female member to the band who is not pregnant and does not carry a

baby. As we said above, the male also eats more, so he creates a burden when a spare

hand is not needed.

The notion that the father of a child should play a role in raising the child is of recent

origin. Before a band can take this into consideration, the notion of fatherhood has to be

developed. That the father is the man who had copulated with the mother a month or two

before her periods stopped and that the stopping of a woman’s period is the harbinger of

her visible pregnancy is a cultural and intellectual discovery of great consequence. It

may seem unlikely to us that humans could ever have been ignorant of the causal

relationship, but there is sufficient anthropological evidence that human bands existed

that had not made the connection between sex and childbirth. That is, the discovery

precedes the moral assertion that the male must help take care of his child. This raises

two questions – how and when did the discovery happen, and, what were the

consequences of the discovery.

Why is fatherhood not immediately obvious? The psychological basis of how

causality is recognized is one reason – psychologists have shown that the separation

between a cause and its effect must be less than 300 milliseconds, otherwise causality is

not automatically recognized by the human brain. A child watches a ball on a screen hit

another ball – if the second ball moves within 300 milliseconds, the child will describe its

motion as caused by being hit by the first ball. If the second ball takes more than 300

milliseconds to move the child will have difficulty drawing the causal connection. And if

the second ball moves many seconds after being hit, the child will absolutely deny a


6

causal connection. Conversely, the brain will assume a causal relationship between any

two events that occur within 300 milliseconds of each other.

The point is, it is difficult for us to intuit causality when two simple behaviors follow

each other but not within 300 milliseconds. To recognize a valid causal relation for

other, more complex, events is only possible by deliberate and conscious thought

buttressed with protocols that minimize alternative causes and highlight singular effects

(as the scientific method is intended to do). The birth of a child takes place nine months

after conception (actually the last menstrual period before conception, but this precision

does not matter for this argument) – there is no intuitive procedure by which the

relationship between the cause (copulation) and the effect (conception, suspended

menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth) can be discovered. Given that frequently conception

does NOT happen only makes it harder to relate cause and effect.

If the man’s role as “father” is unknown or unrecognized, the only role for the man is

as a sexual partner, a boy-toy if you will. But this changes when fatherhood is

discovered.

The Discovery of Fatherhood

The key discovery is that the men’s role in fathering children is associated with a

single sexual act and only that one act. As we said before, we are so accustomed to

knowing this that it seems impossible that anybody could have thought differently.

However, anthropologists have discovered that many aboriginal societies do not have our

explanation for fatherhood. The interesting thing is that they recognize “fatherhood” but

without any connection to the sex act.


7

In a large fraction of cases, the connection between the father and the child is startling

and obvious – the child looks like the father, has hair and eyes like the father and as he or

she grows up exhibits behaviors unique to the father. Clearly this father had something to

do with creating this child. But what is this something? And how to relate this to the

many cases in which the child does not look like anybody or looks like a grandparent of

either the mother or the father, while the child and the person we think of as the father are

completely un-alike?

Cultures have come up with many explanations. One explanation is that the father

influences the child in the mother’s womb by being present every day (and night). The

relationship is magical in essence and the occasions when it does not happen have a

magical explanation – an enemy witch prevented the influence, or the mother ate

something that neutralized the father’s role, or another male had a more powerful

presence and shielded the mother from the father’s influence. The difficulty of drawing

the connection would have been exacerbated in cultures that had bacchanalia – festivals

during which adults broke customary practices, including sexual exclusivity – often in the

spring around the equinox. Then most of the fertile women became pregnant more or

less at the same time a few months later, and the pregnancy could be explained as a

common effect of spring. And if one woman’s child does not look like her partner, while

another woman’s child does, why, “influence through presence” explains it all.

All the pregnant women participated in the spring bacchanalia -- circumstance could

be interpreted in many ways. Pregnancy occurred through participation because it was a

magical phenomenon or a divine gift. “Go take part in the bacchanalia” would be the

advice to young girls who wanted to be mothers. Since the rest of the world is also


8

blooming, pregnancy could also be interpreted as the way spring affects humans. There

is no way for a human band that is not involved in agriculture and does not raise

domesticated animals (all of humanity before 8000 BCE) to make the causal connection

between pregnancy and a role for the father in that pregnancy.

It has been suggested that the discovery of fatherhood comes about by analogizing the

male ejaculate to the female’s menstrual blood. This is a far-fetched suggestion. One

ejaculate looks like another and there is no obvious reason to believe that this has

anything to do with one woman getting pregnant while another does not. Males

masturbate and the ejaculate is treated as an excretion. The possibility that masturbation

is aided by imagining a sexual encounter only enhances the sex act as a thing-in-itself

with no dependence or connection to other human activities. Anthropologist again have

reported on cultures in which the suggestion that ejaculate had anything to do with child-

birth occasioned derisive laughter. Women produce fluid as well, and that, we know is

not responsible for pregnancy – this makes the male ejaculate hypothesis even more

flaky.

It is not as though sex was not important in the ancient world. “Venus” figurines

found in a wide variety of Eurasian pre-Neolithic bands attest to some kind of obsession

with the female figure and female sex organs. The number, variety, and distribution of

these small clay figurines makes it clear that sex was not far from people’s thoughts.

One speculation is that these figurines were given to men as payment for work or as

presents. The men would then use these as tokens that could be exchanged for food or

sex. Sex became a superior form of masturbation, another necessity of male life after

food, while the ejaculation fluid remained an irrelevant detail.


9

Another observation could be that male animals fight over control of a band of

females – for example, stags fight over does in the spring and lions drive away most other

male lions from prides. Such behavior even occurs among birds – roosters drive away

other roosters from groups of chickens. But the connection between this and pregnancy is

tenuous – most animals become pregnant in the late spring, while the male’s jealous

behavior lasts throughout the season. Even the observation that among birds the male

can be observed to help feed the stay-at-home mother until the eggs hatch and then help

to feed the fledglings only establishes fatherhood as necessary for protecting the mother

and raising the child, not that the father did anything specific to conceive the child.

The bottom line is that no thought-experiment or testing protocol can decode the

mystery of conception.

So how did humans figure out that a specific sexual act is the cause of conception?

The answer lies in human observation of domesticated animals, when these animals have

been raised for some reason other than their meat. For instance, dogs domesticated for

companionship and security, or cows and goats domesticated for milk production, or

sheep domesticated for wool. A caretaker or owner would note the animal’s distress

when in heat, also note that a cow does not go into heat when producing milk for a calf,

note that a cow-in-heat mounted by a bull becomes pregnant soon thereafter, and note

that the calf has some characteristics of the bull, even if the bull never sets eyes on that

cow again.

Even with the above practical knowledge, entire cultures can draw the wrong

conclusions – witness the story of Jacob and Laban in the Bible, in which Jacob

influences the color of goats and lambs by feeding them in the presence of striped and


10

solid wooden rods. And that story was written down at a time when (we think) people

knew better, or should have known better. The hypothesis that sex causes conception is

fundamentally bizarre and unbelievable even when asserted by the wisest people.

An additional philosophical/cultural step is needed – the rejection of human

exceptionalism. Again and again, the wisest humans have made the assumption that we

are different from animals. At the core this is the belief that

Just because an observation is true of an animal, it does not have to be true of

humans. We are different.

That belief is a particularly tough nut to crack. But crack it must in order to draw the

conclusion that sex leads to conception.

Once these steps are taken by the opinion-makers in a culture, the people will accept

the reality of fatherhood. And when that happens, the elements of a rationale for

patriarchy are put into place.

The rise of male power

If many members of a band are sick and unable to work, a man bonded to a woman

can help with gathering food and other work. This can happen even without a disease –

for instance, if most of the women become pregnant. If work has to be done in the fields,

the men of a band may be slightly more productive than the women as they could work

faster and better. But, as we pointed out earlier, these do not make or break the band.

Meanwhile, men claiming paternity for specific children and not for others, or claiming a

bond with one of the women and not the others, pose a risk to the integrity of the band –

they cannot be trusted to take care of the children who are not their children, or the

women who reject them (or whom they reject).


11

But, if a band is in conflict over resources with other bands, any man bonded to a

woman of the band is potentially a fighter for the band. As a culture grows in size, the

possibility of conflict over resources makes it inevitable that the value of fighting men

will increase. This results in the appointment of a tanist, a term used by Robert Graves to

identify the male war-chief of a matriarchal band. The tanist is responsible for putting

together an army that will fight the enemy; the tanist is also responsible for suitably

rewarding these men and disbanding the army when no longer needed. This makes it

necessary that the tanist be personally committed to the success of the matriarch.

Unfortunately, fatherhood is not good enough to bind the tanist to the matriarch. The

male social hierarchy binds the men to each other and to the tanist, but, sex does not bind

in the same way. Matriarchies are nothing if not pragmatic – the matriarch’s lover cannot

be trusted. Traditionally the tanist role goes to the matriarch’s brother or the matriarch’s

son.

As a result, settled matriarchal societies that are in conflict with surrounding

settlements develop a male power hierarchy headed by the brother of the matriarch as

tanist in parallel to the traditional female hierarchy headed by the matriarch. Such a

society needs to show the army, now mostly male and headed by the tanist, that they are

highly valued. During wartime this is easily accomplished with appropriate rewards for

acts of heroism on the battlefield. But even such societies surrounded by hostile

settlements are not constantly in conflict. During the limited periods of peace the band

must show that it continues to value men despite the lack of opportunity for the men to

demonstrate their value.


12

One way to improve the valuation of men in peacetime is to transfer some roles or

tasks performed by women to men and/or to devalue some of the roles played solely by

women. The transferred tasks need to be ones perceived as important. Other roles that

could also be played by men but not transferred to them need to be portrayed as of lesser

value. The tasks assigned to men should be ones that can be suspended or abandoned

during wartime – i.e., they are of symbolic importance, while the tasks assigned to

women are ones that cannot be suspended. This transfer and re-valuation of roles is a

slow process that is speeded up as the intensity of warfare increases. During peaceful

times, the presence of an army of males performing symbolically important tasks does

not result in peace – instead the male armies engage in provocative activities that keep

borders tense and make conflicts endemic. This increases the need for a watchful army

capable of suspending traditional assignments.

As the need for an army, for defense or for offense, extends over many years, and

maybe multiple generations, the tanist demands the right to control the assignment of

resources that are critical to a functioning army. This will include power over budgets,

taxes, fees, access to “justice”, and so on, rights that subvert the material power of the

matriarch. Power shifts, from the old power structure under the matriarch to a new one

built around the tanist. If, or when, that happens, the stage is set for a coup in how power

is transferred.

The coming of the Patriarch

In the initial stages of the takeover, a settled band would be headed by a matriarch

and her brother, a war-leader tanist. The traditional successor to the matriarch is her

daughter – the tanist is her uncle. This is not tenable as he is not as bound to his niece as


13

he was to his sister. So, in the early phase, the tanist brother of the dead (or retiring)

matriarch would also retire and be replaced by the brother of the new matriarch, i.e., the

next tanist is the old tanist’s nephew. This is not, generally speaking, a problem – the

matriarch’s death of old age probably indicates that her brother is also old and ready to

retire. Even if the brother is not ready to give up the role, the traditional power of the

matriarch ensures that the tanist will be deposed and replaced by his nephew.

But as matriarchal power weakens, a powerful tanist could retain power after his

sister’s death, possibly by acting as “regent” for his nephew. The situation would be

fragile and susceptible to violent change. One way to maintain stability is to create

practices that retain an organic relationship between the tanist and the new matriarch (his

niece). For instance, succession can center around the death of the tanist and not the

matriarch. Something like this could have happened in ancient Egypt during the third

millennium. The change was dramatic – when the tanist, called the Pharaoh (“The Great

House”) died, his son succeeded him as Pharaoh, and succession was not tied to the death

of the matriarch (the “Great Queen”, i.e. the lady of the Great House). Her daughter still

became the next “Great Queen”.

There is a hitch – the Pharaoh’s son becomes the Pharaoh and the Great Queen’s

daughter becomes the Great Queen. But traditionally, the tanist is the brother of the

matriarch, and that relationship must be conserved. So, the new Pharaoh must be both

husband and brother of the new Great Queen. In order to avoid full incest, the Pharaoh

must be a half-brother of the Great Queen (son of the previous Pharaoh but with a

different mother). Thus, he is both the tanist brother of the Great Queen and her husband,

the Pharaoh.


14

The daughter of the Pharaoh born of his half-sister is destined to be the next Great

Queen. His sons, with other women, are candidates to be the next Pharaoh. If the Great

Queen dies early, he can continue as Pharaoh, possibly with a symbolic marriage to his

daughter. If the Pharaoh dies first, the Great Queen abdicates and a new Pharaoh and

Great Queen are crowned. If the Great Queen did not have daughters, the Pharaoh would

nominate one of his other daughters to be the next Great Queen.

A side effect of this succession model was that the other daughters of the Pharaoh

were often not allowed to marry as their husbands might attempt to usurp the throne. To

prevent a coup of this nature, the daughter could not be allowed to marry or have lovers

who might inspire revolution. Egypt is a prime example of how a patriarchal, patrilineal

succession model can be jury-rigged onto a matrilineal, matriarchal system.

The transition from a matriarchy to a patriarchy thus occurs in multiple steps – first,

the matriarch loses power to the tanist; next the tanist does not retire when the matriarch

dies; then the tanist decides that the next tanist should be his own heir rather than the

brother of the new matriarch; and finally, the role of matriarch becomes a symbolic one

performed by the tanist’s own wife.

The Matriarchal Mystique – a defensive reaction

Matriarchies did not go away without a fight. The fight is not conducted through war,

but takes place in a political and social framework. The patriarch’s demand is simple

blackmail – we, the males, are needed for defeating the enemy and saving our tribe,

therefore we should rule. One response to this is to create a “matriarchal mystique”

around the person of the matriarch. Such a rationalization is not needed when the band

was primarily female and males were visitors. But once the men become an integral part


15

of the band (a necessity when the band settles down to form a village or town), and claim

privileges, the matriarch’s powers have to be protected. Cultural practices appear that

justify the matriarch’s power – first and foremost are practices that ascribe magical

powers to the matriarch and magical rituals that sustain the tribe. We may think of these

actions as superstitions, but they come into being to defend against patriarchy.

Men do not menstruate and there is no reason to believe that men knew of

menstruation when bands were all (or mostly) female. But with settlement, men become

a permanent fixture in the band and learn about menstruation. Menstruation is bloody

and therefore arouses fear; it stops during pregnancy, a mysterious event associated with

growth and fertility; often, all the women in the band menstruate at the same time, also

mysteriously. Menstruation is magical and is the first mystery protecting the matriarch.

The magic of menstruation expresses itself in the following mysteries:

a) The fertility of the matriarch is seen to determine the success of agriculture. A

settlement culture depends on agriculture. Agriculture is an inherently risky

way of supporting a settled population – droughts are frequent and lead to

famines, and more than one drought is typical in every generation. The analogy

between the land producing food crops and females of all animals producing

children is a compelling one. The connection between menstruation and

fertility extends the analogy. The menstruating woman is analogous to the

fertile land and just as she cannot produce a second child while still producing

or raising one, the land cannot yield a second crop while yielding a current

crop. As the woman ages, she becomes barren and this coincides with

menopause, the end of menstruation and an inability to have children.


16

Menopause resembles a drought. These observations lead to a belief in a

magical relationship between the fertility of the land and the fertility of women,

in particular the fertility of the matriarch. The matriarch is the earth-mother,

blood is rain, and children are the food.

b) Rituals associated with the spring festival make fertility possible. The onset of

spring is often the beginning of a planting cycle and coincides with many

animals and birds going into heat and becoming pregnant or laying eggs. In

northern latitudes (though not in South Asia) the spring planting season is the

only planting season. Women do not go into heat, like many animals, so the

spring festival in which all the fertile women take part is a metaphor for

preparing the soil for planting.

Magical thought, i.e, use of metaphor and analogy to observe and explain external

events as mirroring “internal” events, is a common superstition. The above observations,

viewed through magical mirrors, generate the hypothesis that women, in general, and the

matriarch in particular, influence the fertility of the soil. This is not an arena in which

controlled experiments are possible, and the occasional random coincidence of greater

female fertility (more children) and a productive crop supports the magical belief., while

nothing negates it. The matriarch’s power, being magical, is already a mystery – now the

mystery is put to use as a defense against the power demands of a tanist.

A second defense of matriarchy is to co-opt some of the men into a shared power

structure, creating a republic governed by “aristocratic” men and women. It relies on

separating out a power-wielding class from the rest of the men, thus using some men (the

“leaders”) to rule. Only very rarely is the result a democracy. One of the hallmarks of this


17

stage is the institutionalization of methods to prevent the accumulation of power in a

single man (and it is usually a man). The pot-latches of the Trobrianders is a typical

example, but so are the distributive feasts described in Hindu myth. The bushmen of the

Kalahari will occasionally gang up on anybody who shows the desire to become powerful

by working harder during good times to save for the future.

Springtime is associated with other magical rituals that show the matriarch’s power

over nature. She is born anew, sometimes in fire (Robert Graves identifies a bon-fire

ritual in Greek mythology that may exemplify this)2 mirroring the fire used to clear forest

for planting. She goes into seclusion when menstruating to mirror the land lying fallow

through the winter. She conducts rituals that structure life in the band during the year.

These rituals begin (and end) in the spring festival – a bacchanalia during which men and

women pair up, for that season or that year, and sometimes for life. The women who

participate ensure the fertility of next year’s crop by displaying their own fertility.

Other rituals throughout the year also act to restrain potential patriarchs. Ritual

battles for the role of consort to the matriarch may keep the aspiring patriarch busy and

exhausted; redistributive feasts that the aspiring patriarch is expected to host that often

impoverish them (and thus limit their power); rewards with fame and honor that isolate

the hero and alienate them from their supporters; etc..

In summary: if there is no competition with other bands, the tanist, or other aspiring

male ruler, will be unable to increase his power. The transition to patriarchy occurs

under the stress of competition leading to a militarized society which abandons

2 The annual bonfire during the spring festival of Holi commemorates the death of the monstrous Holika, the sister

of Emperor Bali, who enters the fire with her nephew Prahlad. She is supposedly immune to fire, but through the actions of the god Vishnu, she burns while Prahlad lives. This story is a relic of a time when the matriarch magically survived a bonfire.


18

redistributive feasts, honors war heroes with inclusion rather than isolation, and girds for

struggle by building up its food stores.

matriarchy -- evolution to patriarchy

Education