The foundation of the ancient Greeks’ project for civilization was to turn the female sex into a subject population. But there were unintended consequences. This article argues that there is a connection between Plato’s war on women and the end of monarchy.
Philo
We have evidence that the Greeks were toying with the idea of subjecting women before Plato, but it was Plato who influenced Philo, the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher born in 25 BC. Philo used allegory to harmonize Jewish scripture, mainly the Torah, with Greek philosophy.
If we were to judge Plato by today’s standards for hate speech we would conclude that he was a hater of women. However we don’t judge Plato or any other misogynist by that standard. One reason the world accepts Plato’s animosity toward women is that Philo enshrined it in the Bible’s creation story.
Aristotle
This story led some religious leaders to conclude that nothing is due women for their role in reproduction because they are merely repaying their debt to God. This seems to have been the goal of Plato’s student Aristotle who added his own special touch by denying women credit for their part in the creation of life. (This points to the importance of childbearing in the status of women.) The suspicion that certain influential men claimed God as a partisan gendered being with the sole aim of ruling will disturb many readers, but for those who merely want to defend biblical religion there is a solution.
The Bible
There are three ways to read the story of the Fall of Man. It’s a model for the way society should work; it’s a description of the way things are; or it’s warning or a prediction about a human tendency. The second and third possibilities are more revealing than Plato could have imagined. It reveals patriarchal intention.
The last two possibilities are never used to interpret the Fall of Man, although they are used to interpret other biblical stories. The Tower of Babel for example is interpreted as an explanation for different languages and a warning against hubris.
But it is ironic how well the story of the Fall of Man describes human behavior, regardless how we choose to interpret it.
Customs that Guard Against the Subjection of Women
It’s likely that human societies have always had some degree of patriarchal authority. However ancient cultures purposely remedied the disadvantages of women. For example, according to the biblical creation story, equality between men and women is established in marriage. In ancient times this protection was accomplished through customs involving the extended family.
Bride Wealth
The fundamental understanding of ancient cultures was the value of children (and their mother) to the marriage and to the extended family. This value was acknowledged in various ways. One was the custom of bride wealth. Another was the dowry. (Hardship can lead to a breakdown in this custom. In some parts of the world today the dowry justifies the abuse of women).
Matrilineal Kinship
Another custom that has been shown to benefit women and their children is matrilineal kinship. This is a system in which lineage and inheritance are traced through women.
The structure of matrilineal kinship systems implies that, relative to patrilineal kinship systems, women have greater support from their own kin groups and husbands have less authority over their wives. 1
Sara Lowes tested the hypothesis that matrilineal kinship systems reduce spousal cooperation and found that men and women from matrilineal ethnic groups cooperate less with their spouses in a lab experiment. However she also found that matrilineal kinship has important benefits for the well-being of women and children. The children of matrilineal women are healthier and better educated, and matrilineal women experience less domestic violence and greater autonomy.
Matrilineal kinship is not only a remedy for the inequality of women in marriage (Lowes didn’t measure for the effect of bride wealth or bride price), I believe it was the original system for royal succession in Egypt. I base this on the tendency of pharaohs to marry their sisters. Marriage to sisters was not a natural part of matrilineal succession. It was a way for an ambitious pharaoh to escape the limits of matrilineal succession, which makes it impossible to form dynasties. The only way around this obstacle would have been for the son of a pharaoh to wed an heiress. However even this would have gone against custom, if not law. Furthermore, succession by the offspring of a sister (the daughter of the former pharaoh) probably broke the law as well. Normally the son of a pharaoh’s daughter would not have been eligible to succeed him.
This patriarchal strategy can be demonstrated in other countries besides Egypt. The Achaean invader Menelaus married Helen, a kidnapped heiress, because without her he had no right to be king. That’s why Helen’s rescue by Paris led to the Trojan War 2.
Finally, Patrilineal systems inevitably lead to a narrowing of the gene pool for succession. This narrowing of the gene pool has played out in the lineage of European kings. This breakdown in the system of royal succession points to a departure from ancient custom and law.
Plato’s Anti-Democratic Focus
Plato did not only weaken the monarchal ideal. His writings are anti-democratic. Patriarchy weakens participation by women.