nevertheless offers so many analogies to ancient Peru. This anomaly must be described with some details, because the believers in a prehistoric gynecocracy complacently rely on it to support their theory.
The general assertions of the writers of antiquity on this point have been confirmed by the demotic deeds recently deciphered. I shall briefly quote both.
Let us listen first to Herodotus on the subject of Egyptian women: "They have established laws and customs opposite, for the most part, to those of the rest of mankind. With them the women go to market and traffic; the men stay at home and weave. . . . The men carry burdens on the head, the women on the shoulders. . . . The boys are never forced to maintain their parents unless they wish to do so; the girls are obliged to, even if they do not wish it."[1] From this last rule it is already logical to infer that the women possessed and inherited property, which is not ordinary in primitive monarchies. Herodotus adds that "no woman performs sacerdotal duties towards a divinity of either sex; the priests of all the divinities are men."[1] In a country so profoundly religious this interdict clearly proves that in public opinion, at least, the woman was held to be an inferior being. Besides, polygamy was permitted in Egypt, which suffices of itself to exclude the idea of feminine domination in the family. However, Herodotus relates that many Egyptians, especially "those that dwelt on the marshes," have, like the Greeks, adopted monogamy.[2]
Diodorus goes further than Herodotus. He affirms that in the Egyptian family it is the man who is subjected to the woman: "Contrary to the received usage of other nations, the laws permit the Egyptians to marry their sisters, after the example of Osiris and Isis. The latter, in fact, having cohabited with her brother Osiris, swore, after his death, never to suffer the approach of any man, pursued the murderer, governed according to the laws, and loaded men with benefits. All this explains why the queen receives more power and respect than the king, and why, among private individuals, the woman rules over the man, and that it is stipulated between married couples, by the terms of the dowry-contract, that the man shall obey the woman."[3]
