THE CREATION OF PATRIARCHY
Gerda Lerner
Oxford University Press, 1986,
$21.95
Gerda Lerner wrote this book to prove three principal theses: that patriarchy is an unfortunate accident of history, rather than a necessary expression of biology or developing civilization; that because it was invented in time it can be abolished in time; and that, being bad, it should be abolished. This volume takes us up to the time of Aristotle; a second volume will proceed to the present.
The author, whose training is in American women's history spent years reading ancient Near Eastern sources in modern-language translations to pile up data that show patriarchy in the process of evolving. Having, as she believes, proved the first thesis, she asserts the second as a logical corollary, but even if patriarchy were invented, it does not necessarily follow that it can be abolished. Nor does the third thesis - that it should be abolished - follow from the data presented. The book is, in short, one long non sequitur with source citations. The three principal theses are intermingled throughout the volume, but we can examine each in turn.
To prepare the way for the historical material, Lerner offers, in the chapter entitled, "A Working Hypothesis" - a misnomer, for a hypothesis is tested against possibly disconfirming data. The object here, however, is political: "A correct analysis of our situation and how it came to be what it is will help us to create an empowering theory" (p. 37). "What Freud should have said is that for women anatomy once was destiny. That statement is accurate and historical. What once was, no longer is so, and no longer must be nor should it be so" (pp. 52-53). If it is no longer so, we are at a historic break, a point at which history becomes irrelevant. Why then study it? Yet Lerner insists that "we must prove our case not only by material evidence but by evidence from written sources" (p. 38). The next eight chapters are, then, to be understood as proving her case. They deal with the relations between men and women in prehistoric times and then examine a series of topics such as ancient Near East family relations, the nature of ancient slavery, the meaning of the veiling of women, the relationships between male and female gods and how the former replaced the latter at the top of the pantheon, and more. We learn what Sumerian kings did to their daughters, that Chinese men 2,000 years ago bought concubines, that ancient Scythians put out the eyes of their slaves, and why Achilles sulked in his tent.
Not being an expert in Sumerian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Hittite, ancient Hebrew, and Greek sources, I shall comment only on the logical and ideological aspects of the book. For an evaluation of the author's handling of near Eastern material I refer the reader to a review in The New York Times Book Review of April 20, 1986, by Sarah B. Pomeroy, a professor of classics, who criticizes the number of mistakes that a specialist would not have made and who implies that there were many more. Lerner complained in a letter to the editor, published in the issue of June 1, but in her reply Pomeroy pointed out what no trained historian would need to be told: that if you rely on specialists' collections published in translation, you depend on their decisions and judgments about unclear meanings. An outsider would in any case misconstrue material and overlook
...
Read Full Article
|
