THE SEX OF DEITIES UNDER MONOSEXUAL
DOMINANCE The Dominant Sex: The Sociology of Sex Differentiation | ||
12. THE SEX OF DEITIES UNDER MONOSEXUAL DOMINANCE
HUMAN beings are either men or women, and those who serve the deities are either priests or priestesses. In like manner, the deities themselves are not neuter beings but sexed; they are either gods or goddesses. The question therefore arises, what influence, if any, monosexual dominance has upon the sex of deities and upon that of their chosen servants. In the case of the deities, we find that there is a uniform tendency which determines their sex under monosexual dominance. It may be formulated as a general law. As soon as a people has advanced sufficiently far to make deities for itself in human form, the inclination is in the Men's State to give the chief place to male divinities and in the Women's State to female divinities.
Except in the case of those deities which are merely symbols of the sexual life, men have a preference for gods and women for goddesses. There are deep-seated psychological causes for these preferences. The spiritual ties that bind men to gods and women to goddesses are duplex. There is more intellectual confidence between two persons of the same sex than between two persons of opposite sexes. This is a psychological law of fundamental importance. The relationship of a human being to a deity is above all one of trust in that deity, and in its essence (except, of course, in the case
Extremely instructive in its bearing upon the psychological
law we are now considering is the following
legend recorded by St. Augustine:— "During the reign
of King Cecrops a twofold miracle occurred. Simultaneously
there sprouted from the ground an olive-tree,
and there burst forth from another place a spring of
water. The king, greatly alarmed, sent to Delphi to
ask the meaning of the portent and to seek counsel.
The god answered that the olive-tree signified Minerva,
the water Neptune. It was for the citizens to decide
which of the two signs to accept, and after which of the
two deities they would name their city. Cecrops thereupon
summoned a citizens' meeting, consisting both of
men and women, for it was then the custom for the
women to take part in the public assemblies. The men
voted for Neptune, the women for Minerva." We see
that the men were unanimously in favour of a god, and
[1] De Civitate Dei, xviii, 9.
Cumont[3] gives several instances of the religious predilection
of women for goddesses and of men for gods.
"Isis and Cybele found in women their most enthusiastic
and generous supporters, those who were their most
zealous propagandists, whereas the adherents of
Mithra were almost exclusively men." Cumont, however,
failed to recognise that the sex of the deity determined
the preferences of the male and the female
devotees. He imagined that the attraction exercised,
in the one case upon men, and in the other case upon
women, depended upon the nature of the religion.
Writing of the cults of Isis and Cybele, he says that
they aroused feelings and brought consolations which
made them especially congenial to women, whereas men
turned rather to Mithra for the sake of the rude discipline
his worship imposed. This explanation fails to go
to the psychological root of the matter; it is purely
superficial. Besides, the worship of Isis in Rome involved
a discipline no less rude and onerous than that
of the Mithra cult. Juvenal[4] relates that the devotee
of Isis had to bathe in mid-winter in the chill waters of
[2] The use of the Latin names by Augustine, Neptune for Poseidon,
and Minerva for Pallas Athena, partly conceals the significance of
the episode. The influence of the women was preponderant, for the
new city was called Athens.—Of course there is another version of
the legend. In this, while the olive represents Athena, Poseidon
strikes the ground with his trident and a horse emerges. Athena and
Poseidon are vying with each other which shall produce a gift more
useful to mankind, and the council of the gods decides that the olive
is more useful than the horse. Hence the name of Athens is chosen.
But perhaps this version is a Men's-State gloss!—TRANSLATORS'
NOTE.
[3] Les religions orientales dans le paganisme romain, 1906.
[4] XI, 537.
Very characteristic is the fact that the religion of the Magna Mater (Rhea, Cybele) was brought to Rome by women, that is to say through the vaticinations of the sibyls. Herodotus[5] reports that the temple of Athena at Lindos was built by the daughters of Danaos, when they landed there upon their flight. He also tells us that Ladike, the wife of Amasis, when in great trouble, made a vow to a goddess in order to secure a boon. In both cases, therefore, women had recourse to deities of their own sex.
To a large extent men were excluded from the worship
of feminine deities. The men of Lapland were
not allowed to participate in the sacrificial rites
performed by the women in honour of the goddess
Sagarakka. We note the same thing in the case of the
Thesmophoria, the festival in honour of Demeter celebrated
in late autumn at various places in Hellas. In
classical Rome special services were held by women in
honour of the Bona Dea. In many cases males were
forbidden to enter the sanctuary of a goddess. At
Catana in Sicily there was a shrine of Demeter where
men were never allowed to set foot. At Megalopolis
in Arcadia was a temple dedicated to Persephone to
which women had access at all times, but men only once
a year. Poets have intuitively recognised this peculiar
and sexually determined relationship of confidence between
men and gods and between women and goddesses
respectively. Aristophanes, for example, in Lysistrata
[5] III, 182.
Thus we find that in the case both of men and of women, the votaries of religion do not give their perfect trust to deities unless these are of their own sex. A divinity of the opposite sex from the worshipper tends to arouse a sexually tinged emotion, and the worship of such a deity is either a sexual cult or else stands on the border-line between strictly religious worship and a sexual cult. The religious sentiments in such cases serve as a mask for the sexual instinct. When we call to mind the ecstatic mysteries celebrated by women in honour of Dionysos, we remember how they tended to degenerate into sexual frenzy. As a counterpart, we may recall the orgies of the Gaulish men in honour of the Magna Mater. In a paroxysm of sexual enthusiasm, the worshipper would sometimes offer up his manhood as a sacrifice to the goddess.
Religion, centring as it does in a human personification
of one sort or another, naturally tends to arouse
the idea that the best way of winning the favour of the
deity is to imitate the deity's behaviour, to mould the
worshipper's conduct upon the conduct of the object
of adoration.[6] Thereby men and women are impelled
by a psychological determinism to worship at the shrine
of a deity which is masculine in the case of the male
worshipper and feminine in the case of the female.
This is because the worshipper can far more closely
imitate a deity of his or her own sex. In youth, therefore,
the season of life when religious influences are
exceptionally powerful, it is quite common for Pro-
[6] Cf. Cumont, op. cit., p. 59.
Inasmuch as, under the guidance of purely religious sentiments, the members of both sexes will incline to prefer deities of the dominant sex, under monosexual dominance such deities will always hold the first rank (except in so far as the deities are sexual symbols). The ruling sex, having the power to diffuse its own outlooks, tends to generalise its specific ideology. Should the trends of the subordinate sex run counter, they are likely to be suppressed all the more forcibly in proportion as they diverge from those of the dominant sex and in proportion as the power of the dominant sex is more overwhelming. The result is that the hegemony of male deities is usually associated with the dominance of men, and the hegemony of female deities with the dominance of women.
This predominance of the deities that are of the same sex as that which holds sway is not exclusively
The awe-inspiring qualities of the godhead reinforce the tendency to make the divinities beings of the sex which dominates on earth. When the godhead is a symbol of the qualities that inspire dread, and when the deity is the wielder of power, it is given the sex of those who wield real power on earth and who therefore inspire more dread than the members of the subordinate sex.
When there is a transference of dominion from one
[7] In the case of kingship different factors are at work, although at
first sight the psychological determinants might seem the same. We
shall see later that the reality of kingly power makes all the difference.
On the other hand, whichever sex rules, there is a strong tendency to create gods of both sexes. It is true that the dominant sex aims at making the deities of its own sex dominant in heaven, and the ruling sex on earth has power to ensure that this shall be so. But religious need is usually stronger in members of the subordinate sex, and the religious need of the subordinate sex (except when it takes a purely sexual turn) is directed towards deities of its own sex. The result is that the dominance of deities of the ruling sex is persistently imperilled by the rivalry of deities of the other sex, deities which are continually being pushed to the front by the strong religious sensibilities of the members of the subordinate sex. The predominance of deities of the dominant sex is not secure unless monosexual dominance is absolute. This is the explanation of an association which, as we shall see, is very common: the association of monosexual absolutism with monotheism or henotheism.
A further complication ensues from the way in which the sexual instinct leads men and women to create sexual divinities which are of the opposite sex to the creators. We have a historic instance of a change in the sex of a deity as the outcome of a change in mono-
There are additional but indirect indications of these
changes in sex. According to Erman,[10] the dress of the
male deities of Egypt resembles a woman's dress that
has been turned up at the bottom. Perhaps this may
signify that these gods were at one time goddesses,
and that to facilitate the transformation the feminine
dress was retained. There are also deities which have
not merely feminine dress and masculine beards, but are
definitely depicted as bisexual. They exhibit the sexual
characters of both sexes, most of them having a
woman's breasts and a man's beard. Various unsatisfactory
theories have been brought forward to account
for the origin of these hermaphrodite deities. Our
own researches suggest that they are products of the
transition between the two types of monosexual dominance.
In the gradual adaptation of the sex of the
deity to the changing type of sexual dominance in social
life, one of the sexual characters was modified while
the other was left intact. The goddess Istar seems at
a certain stage to have been a bisexual deity of this
kind.[11] The Nile is also personified by a bisexual figure
with breasts and beard. Similar depictions are even to
be found in the case of Christian saints. The reader
[8] Plutarch, Isis and Osiris, Parthey's ed., p. 153.
[9] Cf. Gruppe, Die griechischen Culte und Mythen, etc.
[10] Op. cit., vol. ii, p. 357.
[11] Cf. Jeremias, Das alte Testament, p. 38.
In many cases the deities outlive the monosexual
dominance whose product they are without experiencing
any transformation. This happens especially when the
new type of sexual dominance preserves a strong imprint
of sexual equality. We may take Athens as an
example. Bachofen has proved that here in very early
days women held sway. Excavations have shown that
the earliest pre-Homeric deities were for the most part
feminine.[13] Athena was the most important of these.
Later, in the days of masculine dominance, Athena remained
the leading deity, the protectress of the city.
Her predominance is still conspicuous in Homer's Iliad,
for the side on which Athena fights is victorious. In
the contest described by Homer between Athena and
Ares, the goddess gets the better even of the god of
war. This maintenance of the leading position by the
goddess who had been supreme during the dominance
of women is probably explicable on the supposition that
later, when men had become dominant, women still
exercised considerable influence, and that this enabled
Athena to make headway against the competition of
the male deities. There was still extant in the Attic
Men's State a law by which, in certain circumstances,
women as well as men were called upon to vote. As
[12] A "local saint," i.e., the object of profound local veneration, but
not officially canonised. St. Kümmernis, also known as St. Wilgefortis
(perhaps a corruption of "virgo fortis") and as St. Gehilfen,
is worshipped especially in South Germany and Tyrol. She was,
according to the legend, the daughter of a heathen king who had
vowed herself to the service of Christ. Being troubled with suitors,
she prayed for some change in her appearance which would scare
away the wooers, and was vouchsafed a beard as an effectual deterrent.—
TRANSLATORS' NOTE.
[13] Cf. G. Koch, Lehrbuch der Geschichte, Altertum, p. 42.
Interesting in this connexion is a remark by Rosa Mayreder[14] to the effect that the Holy Ghost was originally feminine. Since the purely religious sentiment of human beings tends to be concentrated in men upon gods and in women upon goddesses, we often find under monosexual dominance that the supreme deity belongs to the dominant sex, but that there are many minor deities of the subordinate sex. The origin and preservation of deities of the subordinate sex is facilitated when the religious sensibilities have a sexual admixture. Such an admixture lessens the resistance of the dominant sex to the introduction of deities of the subordinate sex into the pantheon.
In Babylon at the time of Hammurabi, this being an
epoch when men were apparently dominant but when
women seem to have been advancing towards a position
of equal rights, there were always temples and oblations
for deities of both sexes. The letters of Hammurabi
show that feminine deities were worshipped as
goddesses of victory.[15] They must lead the army to
[14] Zur Kritik der Weiblichkeit, p. 266.
[15] King, The Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi.
In Syria and Phœnicia, feminine deities occupy the foremost place. In Byblos, the chief object of worship was the great goddess Ba'alat. There was also a male divinity, Adonis, addressed as "My Lord."[16] Syria is pre-eminently the home of Astarte, and there is hardly any other country where religion is so strongly tinged with sexuality.
In Carthage, likewise, a city said to have been founded by a Phœnician queen, feminine divinity takes precedence of masculine. Winckler writes that the chief temples of Juno-Astarte and Apollo-Esnum were consecrated in the citadel of Carthage. Unfortunately, the historical traditions that have come down to us concerning the Phœnicians are scanty. Gfrörer's view that the Phœnicians turned the men into women and the women into men throws a clear light on the dominance of women. The interchange of sex rôles, the reversal of feminine and masculine types, is an unmistakable criterion of a phase of social life in which women are dominant.
Cumont describes the predominance of Cybele, the
Magna Mater, in Asia Minor. Beside her was a god
named Attis who was regarded as her husband. In
religious worship, however, the wife took the place of
[16] Cf. Meyer, op. cit., vol. i, 2, p. 426.
Though our information concerning the religion of ancient Egypt is copious, we are hazy about many points. There were deities of both sexes. With the possible exception of certain local divinities, the goddesses appear to have ranked higher than the gods. In especial we find that Diodorus[18] reports the absolute supremacy of the goddess Isis. She ruled her spouse Osiris. For Diodorus, this supremacy of the goddess was the cause of the supremacy of the queens of Egypt over the kings, and of Egyptian wives in general over Egyptian husbands. Diodorus' own religious sentiments made him believe that the position of the goddess was the determinant of the position of the human beings who were of the same sex as herself. But to us, who look upon the gods and the goddesses as creatures of the human spirit, it seems obvious that Diodorus is confusing cause and effect. The goddess Isis is supreme because women are dominant in social life. It is noteworthy, none the less, that Diodorus should have recognised a causal relationship between the two phenomena.
Some additional evidence of the predominant position
of the goddesses in the Egyptian pantheon may
be given. Important in this connexion is the fact previously
mentioned that the male deities should take their
style of dress from the female. The gods which are
seeking recognition must make themselves resemble the
authenticated goddesses as closely as possible. The
oldest Egyptian deity is the goddess Neith or Nut.
Neithotep, wife of one of the first kings of Egypt, had
[17 Op. cit., pp. 138 et seq.
[18] I, 27.
The primal deity, procreative energy, fundamental
[19] Another very early Egyptian deity is a god, Min of Koptos.
Three colossal limestone statues of this divinity are extant. The
images have huge erect penises, and this indicates that the god was
definitely sexual in his attributes. Moreover, the fact that this
sexual deity is masculine indicates that women were dominant.
The god Ammon of Thebae is also depicted with an erect penis.
It seems probable, therefore, that the male deities of the Egyptians
were originally phallic, and that this is why they found a place in
the pantheon during the days when women were dominant.
[20] Op. Cit., p. 29.
[21] Brugsch, Religion und Mythologie der alten Aegypter, pp. 58
and 144, et seq.
In ancient Egypt the feminine divine principle took
[22] Brugsch, op. cit., pp. 108 et seq.
On several occasions predominance over the male deities is expressly ascribed to Isis. She is invariably named before her spouse Osiris in the ancient records. In a complaint Isis brings against Osiris, the goddess says: "Thy wife is thy protectress."[24] The matter is made even plainer in an old inscription reported by Brugsch, which runs as follows: "Isis the Great, Mother of God, Mistress of Tentyra in the temple of Au, the Golden, was born in the city of Golden, Pinubut, the birth of her brother Osiris took place in Thebae, that of her son Horus in Ous, and that of her sister Nephtys in the city of Little Diospolis." Thus Isis stands in the very centre of the stage; she is the head of the family, around whom are grouped her brother and spouse Osiris, her son, and her sister. In a record belonging to the Ptolemaic era we still read of "the Great Isis, the Mother of the Gods."[25]
When the religion of Egypt won to influence in
[23] Isis and Osiris, 9.
[24] V. von Strauss, Altägyptischer Götterglaube, vol. i, p. 128.
[25] Erman and Krebs, op. cit., p. 117.
There is much conflict of opinion among Egyptologists
concerning the Egyptian deities and their relative
importance. A comparison of the writings of Brugsch
with those of Schneider suffices to convince the reader
of this. Doubtless the discrepancies are partly dependent
upon the uncertainty of the data. But the main
cause is that students of Egyptian lore have hitherto
had no inkling of the principle of monosexual dominance
and of its significance in relation to the process
of god-making. The bearing of the dominance of
women upon the mythology of Egypt was not recognised,
and could not be recognised, because the investigators'
vision was subjectively restricted by their familiarity
with the opposite type of monosexual dominance.
Once more we have a plain indication of the
way in which blindness to the influences operative in
the Women's State results from the Men's-State ideology
of the observer. Typical in this respect are the
differing opinions concerning the importance of the
feminine deities voiced in the respective works of
Brugsch, published in 1888, and Schneider, published
in 1907. Brugsch speaks of the gods and the goddesses
of ancient Egypt as coequal in rank. He states in set
terms that according to the Egyptians the divine energy
immanent in the primal matter of the universe was both
male and female, and that the creative rôle was
ascribed by them to deities of both sexes. He quotes
from Horapollon a passage to show that this view
prevailed in Egypt from very early days. Horapollon
[26] Schneider, Op. cit., pp. 548 et seq.
Schneider is a typical Men's-State investigator. In
his study of Egyptian religious lore he practically
confines his attention to the male deities. The goddesses
are mentioned only in passing, so that a reader
who has no independent knowledge of the subject
would naturally infer that their position was altogether
subordinate to that of the gods. We encounter in the
picture presented by this author the characteristic
lineaments of monosexual masculine absolutism; the
Egyptian traditions, with their Women's-State atmosphere,
are transmogrified into Men's-State traditions.
Whereas all the ancient records, and even Plutarch,
who flourished about a century after the birth of
Christ, invariably name Isis before Osiris, Schneider
no less invariably reverses the order.[28] He goes so far
as to imply that Isis is a mere appendage to Osiris, for
he writes: "The need for pairing has led to her being
placed by Osiris' side."[29] He refers in several places
to this inclination to form pairs, and says that in the
Old Kingdom at the time of Narmer there were at
least two gods having human shape, Min and Hathor.
In the Osiris cycle, he says, the gods are invariably
paired.[30] Although he thus faintly indicates the tendency
to equivalence, in general he alludes solely to
male deities—and the phrase "the Osiris cycle" is, in-
[27] Brugsch, op. cit., p. 114.
[28] Cf. pp. 156, 324, 407, 548, etc.
[29] Op. cit., p. 407.
[30] Ibid., pp. 348, 413.
Nevertheless, Isis' precedence over Osiris has been often expressly recognised by recent investigators. Bachofen tells us that Egypt is the land where the dominance of women became stereotyped, and that all the culture of the country was based upon the precedence of Isis over Osiris. He also points out that consecration to Isis took place before the initiation into the Osiris mysteries. Jablonski[31] holds the same view, writing: "Isis takes precedence of Osiris as an object of adoration. We see the same thing in the subsequent diffusion of the Isis cult in the Roman Empire."
Autocracy or predominance of female divinities is
reported in the case of many other Women's States.
The Iroquois had no gods, but only goddesses. In
Crete, goddesses occupied the premier place, and
Demeter was of Cretan origin. Weinhold[32] tells us
that among the ancient Teutons the Norris ranked high
above the other deities. At a later date they came to
be regarded as merely prophetesses or witches, the
change being presumably due to a waning of feminine
dominance. According to Sayce,[33] among the Hittites,
who showed a strong Women's-State trend, the supreme
deity was of the female sex. The Kamchadales[34]
worshipped two deities, one male and one female.
The latter was regarded as a superior being to
the former. Kutka, the male deity, was derided as
clumsy and stupid. It was his fault that the world had
[31] Pantheon Aegyptiorum, p. 99.
[32] Die deutschen Frauen in dern Mittelalter, p. 42.
[33] The Hittites, 1892.
[34] Cf. Meiners, Vermischte philosophische Schriften, vol. i, p, 167.
Just as in Women's States the leading place is usually given to a goddess, so in Men's States a god ordinarily occupies the chief position. This trend is especially conspicuous when a new religion comes into being in a community where Men's-State institutions are already firmly established. In such a case a male deity is given unmistakable precedence over all the goddesses. Often enough, indeed, the latter tend to vanish from the scene, so that a god becomes the one and only deity. Attempts have frequently been made to represent monotheism as a product of advance in civilisation and general intelligence. Our information regarding two of the most highly civilised nations known to history, the Egyptian and the Greek, conflicts with this theory. During the days of their highest development, the Greeks and the Egyptians were polytheists, and their deities were of both sexes. Nevertheless the Greek civilisation seems to have attained a supremely high level.
It is probable that various causes have contributed to the growth of monotheism and henotheism. Among these causes, exalted motives predominate, but monosexual dominance was unquestionably a contributory and important cause, which has hitherto been overlooked. The dominant sex inclines to give the first rank to a deity of its own sex. This superior rank is most effectively secured when there is only one divine being, whose sex of course is that of those who are dominant in the social sphere, for there is no better way of ensuring against attempts on the part of deities of the other sex to push their way to the front.
It is a demonstrable fact that monotheism has always taken its rise during the phase of monosexual dominance, and the invariability of this sequence suggests a causal relationship. Monosexual dominance is the cause, monotheism the effect. Monotheism cannot take root except upon the soil of monosexual dominance. This is shown by the history of all the great monotheistic religions. The ancient records show that Moses was the first to introduce the worship of one God among the Jews. He is supposed to have lived about 1300 B.C. At this time masculine dominance was already established among the Jews, as the Mosaic code of laws plainly shows. It is true that among these laws we find an admixture of Women's-State notions, for Moses drew from old sources as well as from new; but the Men's-State trends predominate.
Even stronger were the Men's-State trends in the days of Mohammed. That is why in Mohammedanism we find that women's title to enter the religious community is disputed on the ground that women probably have no souls.
Christ did not create a new monotheism. He merely gave a new content to the extant Judaic monotheism. In Christianity we have to make a sharp distinction between the aims of Christ, the founder of the religion, and those of Paul, the most active of its apostles. Christ's whole teaching shows him to have been an advocate of equal rights for the sexes. Paul, on the other hand, had a Men's-State mentality. We should have known this if the only one of his
The contrast in this respect between Christ and
Paul may be dependent upon the outstanding endowments
of the former. It may, however, be due to the
fact that the two men derived from racial stocks in
different phases of monosexual development. In the
times of Christ, the Jews were certainly far from having
established equality of rights for the sexes, but
there seem to have been traces of a Women's-State
complexion about the régime of King Herod. There
are two historical incidents bearing on this view.
First of all, Herod's sister Salome divorced her husband
Costobar—a purely Women's-State procedure,
like that of any ancient Egyptian wife. Reitzenstein[35]
points out that this is the only instance known to us
in Jewish history in which the initiative in divorce was
taken by the wife. He quotes Josephus, who declares
that the action was contrary to the Mosaic Law. In
the Men's State, only the husband is entitled to seek
divorce. Secondly, the legendary massacre of the
innocents belongs to the time of Herod. In this massacre
the victims were all boys. We have already
learned that when infanticide and the mutilation of
children are practised, the members of the dominant
sex escape. The infanticide of boys is characteristic
[35] Op. Cit., p. 102.
Nevertheless, we must not forget that the differing
ideologies of Christ and Paul may have been purely
individual. The greater the genius, the more complete
is emancipation from the reign of custom. Invariably,
therefore, we find that in the teaching of
persons of great genius, in the teaching of those whose
minds are detached from the epoch in which they
happen to live, there is a powerful inclination to give
expression to the demand for equal rights.[36] The
reader need think only of Plato, Goethe, and Kant.
Plato devotes a whole section of his teaching to this
matter of equal rights. Goethe, reversing the customary
Men's-State demand that women shall be
subordinate to men, insists that it is the business of
men to obey.[37] Kant, in his Athropologie, expressly
declares that the two sexes are equal in intelligence;
he even goes so far as to compare women with the king
and man with the king's minister. Paul was certainly
a lesser genius than Christ. He may have excelled
Christ in will power, but did not do so in understanding.
[36] In a later work, the authors hope to show that the establishment
of equal rights for the sexes will betoken the highest phase in the
evolution of mankind.
[27] Chapter and verse will be given in the work mentioned in the
foregoing note.
The Men's-State imprint stamped by Paul on the Christian religion has been a hindrance to its spread among many peoples who were in a different phase of development. The Men's-State Judaico-Christian monotheistic creed has only been able to make headway against bisexual polytheism by concessions to the latter. The plurality of the gods reappeared in the hierarchy of the saints. Above all, there developed the cult of the Virgin Mary, in whose person the feminine divine principle was reincorporated.
In Germany, when the dominance of men had entirely replaced the phase of equal rights, favourable conditions had been established for the efforts of the Reformation to abolish the widespread polytheism which took the f orm of the cult of the saints. Protestantism is especially contrasted with Catholicism by the stressing of monotheism characteristic of the reformed faith, for the Reformation would never have been possible had not masculine dominance been intensified almost to absolutism. Were it not that by the time of the Reformation the influence of women had greatly dwindled in comparison with their influence in the days when Christianity was founded, it would have been impossible to degrade the Virgin Mary (the incorporation of the feminine divine principle) to the insignificant position she occupies in the Protestant faith to-day.
As regards ancient Egypt, some Egyptologists contend that monotheism prevailed there in the very earliest times.[38] In view of the well-marked feminine dominance of those days, the opinion is not improbably correct.
Monotheism, however, is not a necessary conse-
[38] Gruppe, op. cit., p. 502.
The way in which the sex of deities is interconnected
with the religious predilections of the worshippers
explains why there have apparently been hardly any
women among the founders of religion. Very various
reasons for this have been adduced.[40] But the main
and hitherto unrecognised reason is that all the history
of religions, like history in general, either relates
to the Men's-State epoch, or else has been written by
Men's-State investigators. Just as, in the Men's State,
but little information has come down to us concerning
[39] Cf. the periodical "Neues Leben," edited by Dr. Ernst Hunkel.
[40] Cf. Havelock Ellis. Man and Women.
Obviously, the Men's State is an unfavourable environment for the work of a woman founder of religion. A woman who should found a religion would, generally speaking, make a feminine deity the centre of that religion. Since, however, men, like women, prefer deities of their own sex, the dominant males would be disinclined to accept the new woman-made religion—and the attitude of the dominant sex is decisive as to the chances a new religion has of making its way. Even if in the Men's State there be just as many women as men with a talent for founding religions, very few religions will, in practical experience, be founded in the Men's State, seeing that the psychology of the dominant sex will, in the case of women, deprive the talent of scope for exercise.
This explains, moreover, why the male founders of religion, with their doctrine of a male deity, address themselves especially to men, whereas women, preaching a female deity, address themselves rather to women. The founder of a religion finds that the members of his or her own sex are those most inclined to accept and to spread the new doctrine. As regards the male founders of religion, proof of this statement would be superfluous. We have much less evidence concerning female founders of religion. In view of
It seems probable, therefore, that women, in the days of their dominance, were also energetic founders of religions.
In this connexion, an interesting parallel may be
drawn between the Men's State and the Women's
State in the religious domain. We find that the history
of the creation is influenced in its various versions
by monosexual dominance. The legend that Eve
was created out of one of Adam's ribs is a typical
product of Men's-State ideology. According to the
Younger Edda,[42] the gods created men and women
[41] I, 171.
[42] Scherr, Geschichte der deutschen Frauen, p. 79.
We have similar reversals of sex rôles in the legends of unions between gods and mortals. In the Women's State we are told of the union between a female deity and a mortal of the male sex. Such stories have been preserved in ancient saga. In the Men's-State versions, on the other hand, we read, as in Genesis (vi. 2-4) : "The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and. . . . when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children unto them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
THE SEX OF DEITIES UNDER MONOSEXUAL
DOMINANCE The Dominant Sex: The Sociology of Sex Differentiation | ||