In which ancient civilization were women most on a par with men?

Women were most on par with men in:

  • Slavic realm

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Rome

    Votes: 11 11.5%
  • Greece

    Votes: 11 11.5%
  • Celtica

    Votes: 13 13.5%
  • Germanic world

    Votes: 4 4.2%
  • China

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Egypt

    Votes: 18 18.8%
  • Sumer

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Native America

    Votes: 11 11.5%
  • India

    Votes: 4 4.2%
  • Other - please elicit

    Votes: 21 21.9%

  • Total voters
    96
Aug 2017
65
USA
#71
Umm... the obvious answer is Scythia were it was completely acceptable for women to serve in combat roles and hold large amounts of political power and their society was pretty much egalitarian.
This is what I was going to say. I'm surprised it took until the 7th page to be mentioned.
 
Jun 2014
1,221
VA
#72
'Women were much better off than with the Romans, they were factually equal to men.'

La Tène culture - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...so I would say the Celtic world.


But what do you reckon?
Citation needed that article has no proof in it and could have been written by anybody. What's more I do not believe Celtic women had equal rights; that isn't in Plutarch or any other source.

In reality everything I have read about Celtic women has consisted of

"Look in some circumstances they could divorce their husbands so better than Roman women (ignoring the fact that Roman women could divorce their husbands for any reason) and other similarly obviously partisan statements.

Roman women could

Hold property

Leave her husband if she felt she should

Marry who she wished

Be protected against domestic violence (Plutarch's questions answer to why Romans didn't believe in incest; and Cato the Elder)

Control her own property

Have equal intestate inheritance rights
 
Jun 2014
1,221
VA
#73
This is what I was going to say. I'm surprised it took until the 7th page to be mentioned.
That would be because that is a modern myth without any evidence. Scythian women didn't fight and if who gets to rule at the top is your criteria than it is 200% Greeks where from the Hellenistic period through Cleopatra women could be extremely important, important enough to be killed as rivals in Egypt.
 
Aug 2014
3,245
Australia
#74
Other: none.

Every society had limitations on what women could do compared to men. Those differences varied depending on the culture but men always dominated in one aspect or another.
 
Last edited:
Likes: MagnusStultus

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
2,561
Sydney
#75
Medieval society had little problem with women rulers ,
there were plenty of them men were the default choice but lords would rather have a woman ruler than an upstart peasant
class discrimination was way stronger
 
Likes: MagnusStultus
Aug 2017
65
USA
#76
That would be because that is a modern myth without any evidence. Scythian women didn't fight and if who gets to rule at the top is your criteria than it is 200% Greeks where from the Hellenistic period through Cleopatra women could be extremely important, important enough to be killed as rivals in Egypt.
So the graves of approximately 20% of warriors buried with armor and weapons being female isn't evidence? Admittedly, some are likely Sarmation rather than Scythian, but with the way the ancients used terminology it's pretty much the same thing.
 
Jun 2013
727
Agraphur
#78
Sparta, perhaps? I've heard that despite their numerous faults as a civilisation, the Spartans did not oppress their women in the same manner as the other Greek states.
Considering their primordial eugenics program against 'deficient' children and willingness to use and dispose of slaves when convenient, I find it odd that they rejected the commonly held prejudice against women of the time.
The basic idea was that it was response to the shortage of man power, rather then enfranchising a larger group of men, the Spartan's empowered their women to run the estates giving them right to own land and money as to incentivize them to do a good job without supervision.
Thus the men could wholly serve the state, military and administratively. That a Spartiate's status also depended on his ability to pay the mess fees probably went a long way to make marriage a partnership too.
 
Jun 2014
1,221
VA
#79
So the graves of approximately 20% of warriors buried with armor and weapons being female isn't evidence? Admittedly, some are likely Sarmation rather than Scythian, but with the way the ancients used terminology it's pretty much the same thing.
Swords and other weapons have symbolic as well as practical value.

What is unambiguous is literary evidence and in that Scythian women didn't fight.

Ovid actually lived among Scythians and witnessed actual Sarmatian Warriors raiding the area he lived in.

He actually wrote about his experiences living among them in the "Tristia" could you back up your claims with Ovid a source who actually lived among them? Because I have actually had to translate the Tristia and in no way is the society Ovid depicts one where women have anything unusual for their time.

He actually describes raids against the area he was in, there are no warrior women involved.

While Ovid is unique for not noticing any Scythian women in any unusual role while living with them he isn't the only ancient source to go over Scythians this is Arrian

"
Alexander supplied his cavalry with horses from that district, for many of his own horses had perished in the passage of the Caucasus and in the march to and from the Oxus. He then led his army to Maracanda,503 which is the capital of the land of the Sogdianians. Thence he advanced to the river Tanais. This river, which Aristobulus says the neighbouring barbarians call by a different name, Jaxartes, has its source, like the Oxus, in mount Caucasus, and also discharges itself into the Hyrcanian Sea.504 It must be a different Tanais from that of which Herodotus the historian speaks, saying that it is the eighth of the Scythian rivers, that it flows out of a great lake in which it originates, and discharges itself into a still larger lake, called the Maeotis.505 There are some who make this Tanais the boundary of Europe 203and Asia, saying that the Palus Maeotis, issuing from the furthest recess of the Euxine506 Sea, and this river Tanais, which discharges itself into the Maeotis, separate Asia and Europe,507 just in the same way as the sea near Gadeira and the Nomad Libyans opposite Gadeira separates Libya and Europe.508 Libya also is said by these men to be divided from the rest of Asia by the river Nile. In this place (viz. at the river Tanais), some of the Macedonians, being engaged in foraging, were cut to pieces by the barbarians. The perpetrators of this deed escaped to a mountain, which was very rugged and precipitous on all sides. In number they were about 30,000. Alexander took the lightest men in his army and marched against these. Then the Macedonians made many ineffectual assaults upon the mountain. At first they were beaten back by the missiles of the barbarians, and many of them were wounded, including Alexander himself, who was shot right through the leg with an arrow, and the fibula of his leg was broken. Notwithstanding this, he captured the place, and some of the barbarians were cut to pieces there by the Mace204donians, while many also cast themselves down from the rocks and perished; so that out of 30,000 not more than 8,000 were preserved.509"

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Anabasis of Alexander, by Arrian.

There is also Dio he goes over the battle with the Iazyges without any female warriors of any kind here is his description of them

Roman History, Vol. V

The Iazyges were conquered by the Romans on land at this time and subsequently on the river. By this I mean not that any naval battle took place, but that the Romans followed them as they fled over the frozen Ister and fought there as on dry land. The Iazyges, perceiving that they were being pursued, awaited the foe's onset, expecting easily to overcome them, since their opponents were not accustomed to ice. Accordingly, some of the barbarians dashed straight at them, while others rode around to attack the flanks, for their horses were trained to run safely even over a surface of this kind. The Romans, seeing this, were not alarmed, but made a close formation, placing themselves so as to face all of them at once. The majority laid down their shields and resting one foot upon them, so that they might slip less, received the enemy's assault. Some seized bridles, others shields and spear-shafts, and drew them towards them. Then, becoming involved in close conflict, they knocked down both men and horses, for on account of their momentum the enemy could not help slipping. The Romans also slipped down: but in case one of them fell on his back he dragged his adversary down on top of him and then by winding his legs about him as in a wrestling match would get him underneath; and if one fell on his face, he made his opponent fall before he did, also on his face. The barbarians, being unused to a contest of this sort, and having lighter equipment, were unable to resist, so that but few escaped out of a large force.

So Marcus made the Marcomani and Iazyges subservient by a series of great struggles and dangers. A great war against the so-called Quadi also fell to his lot and it was his good fortune to win an unexpected victory, or rather it was given him from Heaven. At a time when the Romans had run into danger in the battle the Heavenly Power most unexpectedly saved them. The Quadi had surrounded them at an opportune spot and the Romans were fighting valiantly with their shields locked together: and the barbarians ceased fighting, expecting to capture their enemies easily by heat and thirst. So they posted guards all about and hemmed them in to prevent their getting water anywhere, for the barbarians were far superior in numbers. The Romans fell into dire distress from their fatigue and wounds and the sun's heat and their thirst, and for these reasons could neither fight nor march in any direction but were standing and being scorched in line of battle and at their several posts, when suddenly numbers of clouds rushed together and a great rain, certainly of divine origin, came pouring down. Indeed, there is a story that Arnouphis, an Egyptian wizard, who was a companion of Marcus, invoked by means of enchantments various deities and in particular Mercury, god of the air, and by this means attracted the rain.

The Amazon seems to be something that never exists among anyone who ever encountered Romans; actual descriptions of armed encounters seems to show no female soldiers.
 
Aug 2017
65
USA
#80
I don't see where it specifically says there aren't any female warriors. Doesn't give much details about the warriors at all. Whatever.
 

Similar History Discussions