Thom made some comments on Matriarchy. Here's my rather long-winded take on the issue.
Have matriarchies ever existed in the real world? A lot of course depends on the definition you use, but if we take 'matriarchy' to mean complete control of a society by women (in the manner of certain patriarchal societies) then the anthropological answer, on contemporary evidence, is a definite 'NO.'
The word itself is confusing, as it can sometimes mean the same as 'matrilineal', and sometimes complete control by women. (Peter used it in the former sense when describing the Iroquois). It first came to prominence with nineteenth century 'evolutionary' theorists such as Engels and Morgan. They believed that matriarchy was a universal state of human development that occurred before patriarchy and private property (the source of all the world's ills). These early theorists associated matriarchy with MATRILINY (descent traced in the female line, where the bond between mother and child is recognised as the basis of continuity across generations), MATRILOCALITY (where a husband joins his wife's group on marriage), female control of social institutions, liberal sexuality, and goddess worship.
These theories fell into mainstream disrepute early in the twentieth century, along the whole idea of grand evolutionary schemas of human development. Modern anthropology has clearly demonstrated that matriliny, matrilocality, sexual and religious mores and the distribution of power between the sexes are SEPARATE (though interrelated) phenomena, and that there is no simple correlation between women's power and any of these.
Matriliny does not necessarily correlate with women's power: in most matrilineal societies power and position are held by men, though transmitted through women. (The Iroquois are an example of this: from memory their sachems (chiefs) and other leaders were men chosen by women from a matrilineal pool. Women could act as reagents and were responsible for training potential sachems for their role.)
Despite this, there has been an increased anthropological focus on women's power in different cultures, and a fruitful reexamination of womens' roles in history as leaders, warriors and politicians. The historical 'amazons' have been identified (both lots!) and many classic stories dismissed by a previous generation as 'myth' have received close historical analysis. The relative power between the sexes, both overt and covert, can take many forms.
The concept of matriarchy has powerful mythic resonance. On the fringes of the mainstream, matriarchy has explored by researchers such as Riane Eisler ('The Chalice and the Blade', 'Sacred Pleasure') and Marija Gumbatas, who uses Campbellian techniques to build a case for matriarchy in Neolithic Europe ('The Language of the Goddess', 'The Civilisation of the Goddess'). I'd recommend both these authors for game background and ideas, or for constructing/deconstructing your personal mythology, but be aware their conclusions do *not* enjoy widespread acceptance.
Which brings us to Glorantha, and in particular, Sartar and Esrolia. The status of women is very high in Sartarite culture compared to Solar and even Lunar societies. (Debateable perhaps, but I have my biases :)). This is despite the strong patriarchal leanings of Heortling society, where the dominant kinship systems emphasise the bonds between father and son and between brothers. Yet there are many variants in kinship and marriage custom, and when this is added to a fairy loose sexual division of labour, the cultural emphasis on Freedom, Becoming and pragmatism, and *especially* the religion of Orlanth and Ernalda, then Esrolia doesn't have to be that different to certain Sartarite tribes. Even in the most patriarchal Sartarite clan, women hold much of the power, not only as possible chieftains and Ring members, but as godis and priestesses, collectively as members of the women's circle (informal but all-pervasive) and as hearthmistresses, responsible for the running of domestic hearths.
Greg has mentioned the defining characteristics of Esrolia: I'd add two more. Esrolia is much more urbanised than Sartar, and towns always modify the power-relations within clans in new and unpredictable ways. There will be other factors at work besides clan loyalty.
Secondly, the Esrolian Grandmothers separated themselves from the Heortlings because of the interminable bloodshed and kinstrife of the Sword and Helm War, vowing that they would never again submit to the mindless violence that so often accompanied mens' rule. This is a core imperative of Esrolian culture, and will have implications for any male warrior cult (Humakt, Urox) not closely associated with the Ring of Women. If not illegal, such cults will be marginalised and seditious by their very existence.
If most Esrolian clans are matrilineal, then marriage and family will take different forms. In such systems, a man's resources and identity are bound to his SISTER's children (who are of his lineage/clan), rather than his own and his wife's (who belong to her clan). The brother/sister bond will be very strong, the husband/wife bond relatively weak. Divorce rates are high in most matrilineal societies, and it is usually the woman who sends her husband packing. For children, 'father' may be a relatively distant and unimportant figure, while 'Uncle' (Mother's Brother) will take very close care of them. All very natural to those concerned, but a bit confronting to a stranger from a patrilineal/patriarchal society.
I personally don't think emasculation of individual men is a big thing in Esrolia, any more than overt persecution of women is prominent in Solar culture. Esrolia has evolved a different value system that has brought prosperity, happiness and relative peace: that value system is shared both men and women.
My own analogues for Esrolia? Remembering their common ancestry with the Dragon Pass Heortlings, I'd also happily draw inspiration (with the usual provisos) from
*the Mayans, cause they lead us in entirely new directions, and seem suited
for adaptation to the jungles of Caladraland. "Xochi tea, stranger with the
hairy face?"
No analogue should be taken too literally of course: for every point where Heortlings resemble Celts/A-Ss/Vikings there are equally striking areas where they *don't*. Its all leaven for the corn cake.
This post has reached Digest-size proportions. Enough already.
Cheers
John
nysalor_at_... John Hughes
Powered by hypermail