That’s what anthropologists say. One of the many places that they have said it is in the internationally acclaimed book that has been translated into 26 languages called The Chalice and the Blade, written by system’s scientist, Riane Eisler — from which I have already quoted to you. The fact that you are not aware of something doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
“In this book, Eisler traces the tension between these two models, starting in prehistory. It draws from many sources, including the study of myth and linguistics as well as archeological findings by the Indo-Europeanists J. P. Mallory[6] and Marija Gimbutas[7] and archeologists such as James Mellaart,[8] Alexander Marshack,[9] Andre Leroi-Gourhan,[10] and Nikolas Platon.[11]
Based on these findings, Eisler presents evidence that for the longest span of prehistory, cultures in the more fertile regions of the globe oriented primarily to the partnership model, which Eisler also calls a “gylany”, a neologism for a society in which relationships between the sexes are an egalitarian partnership. This gender partnership was a core component of a more egalitarian, peaceful, and matrifocal culture with a focus on life giving, centering on nurture. These societies once were widespread in Europe around the Mediterranean, and lasted well into the early Bronze Age in the Minoan civilization of Crete.
But then there was a cultural transformation during a chaotic time of upheaval related to climate change and incursions of warlike, nomadic tribes. These peoples brought with them a domination system and imposed rigid rankings of domination, including the rigid domination by men of women and the equation of “real masculinity” with power and violence. This led to radical cultural transformation.”
Here’s more so that you can further educate yourself. The first one is from an anthropologist, talking about current hunter-gatherer cultures and how they reflect the ones we had in the past. The second one is another one of mine.
“Is it true that hunter-gatherers were peaceful egalitarians? The answer is yes.
If just one anthropologist had reported this, we might assume that he or she was a starry-eyed romantic who was seeing things that weren’t really there, or was a liar. But many anthropologists, of all political stripes, regarding many different hunter-gatherer cultures, have told the same general story. … One anthropologist after another has been amazed by the degree of equality, individual autonomy, indulgent treatment of children, cooperation, and sharing in the hunter-gatherer culture that he or she studied.
During the twentieth century, anthropologists discovered and studied dozens of different hunter-gatherer societies, in various remote parts of the world, who had been nearly untouched by modern influences. Wherever they were found — in Africa, Asia, South America, or elsewhere; in deserts or in jungles — these societies had many characteristics in common. The people lived in small bands, of about 20 to 50 persons (including children) per band, who moved from camp to camp within a relatively circumscribed area to follow the available game and edible vegetation. The people had friends and relatives in neighboring bands and maintained peaceful relationships with neighboring bands. Warfare was unknown to most of these societies, and where it was known it was the result of interactions with warlike groups of people who were not hunter-gatherers. In each of these societies, the dominant cultural ethos was one that emphasized individual autonomy, non-directive childrearing methods, nonviolence, sharing, cooperation, and consensual decision-making. Their core value, which underlay all of the rest, was that of the equality of individuals.
The hunter-gatherer way of life, unlike the agricultural way of life that followed it, apparently depended on intense cooperation and sharing, backed up by a strong egalitarian ethos; so, hunter-gatherers everywhere found ways to maintain a strong egalitarian ethos.”
“There is considerable archeological and anthropological evidence that early human cultures were goddess-worshipping. (2) This would make sense since Paleolithic cultures were largely egalitarian, and women’s ability to give birth makes for a natural equation with being the source of life. Reverence for ancestors was a common part of Paleolithic life also and so in their earliest incarnations, these statues may have been a depiction of a Clan Mother or Divine Ancesstress, someone even more personally powerful than later conceptions of a disembodied Goddess.”
And lastly, from another story that I’m currently working on. This quote describes villages like Catal Hoyuk, that have been extensively excavated. It was flourishing about 7000 BC. The Kurgan hypothesis that is discussed references the northern tribes who overtook the peaceful, egalitarian civilizations of “Old Europe” and essentially brought about patriarchy (social hierarchy between men and women but also created classes for the first time, warfare as a common condition, etc.)
These villages were not heavily fortified, and showed little evidence of hierarchical social stratification. However, they did possess highly developed artistic and spiritual sensibilities, as well as baffling and inexplicably advanced capabilities of megalithic construction. A remarkable example is a series of round megalithic temples built out of stones ~50 tons in weight and ~10 feet high, located 9 miles northeast of Urfa (330 miles east of Catal Hoyuk) at Gobekli Tepe.
While the Kurgan hypothesis has been academically controversial and has come under many challenges by scientists including Colin Renfrew, Grey & Atkinson, Mario Alinei and many others, we believe that it remains the most convincing explanation for the early spread of militarism and hierarchical dominance of society.
Here’s some more from a different source about Catal Hoyuk
Çatalhöyük has strong evidence of an egalitarian society, as no houses with distinctive features (belonging to royalty or religious hierarchy, for example) have been found so far. The most recent investigations also reveal little social distinction based on gender, with men and women receiving equivalent nutrition and seeming to have equal social status, as typically found in Paleolithic cultures. Çatalhöyük
So, what’s that you were saying again?
