What do you think?
Women in Prehistory
This thought-provoking book argues the contributions of women to the earliest advances in human knowledge, especially the discovery and development of agriculture, were much greater than has generally been acknowledged. By examining skeletons and grave goods, archeological evidence from settlement sites, and rock carvings and sculpted figurines, and by drawing anthropological parallels to later societies, Ehrenberg throws new light on the lives and social status of women in Europe from the Palaeolithic era to the Iron Age. The high status almost certainly enjoyed by women as the main providers of food in early prehistoric societies probably diminished in the later Neolithic Age, as men assumed an increasingly dominant role in farming. Even so, in the Bronze Age and Iron Age societies, individual women held positions of power: Ehrenberg considers the possibility that Minoan Crete was a matriarchy and that Boudica was only one of a number of female Celtic leaders.
192 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 1989
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
April 19, 2015
Fascinating, clear and logical; a rational look at the possibilities of women having had more power in the past, but avoiding the hype of the goddess culture theories.
May 12, 2022
Full review to come.
Veredict: don't waste your time. Find pretty much anything else to read. This book is terrible, but unlike a lot of "ancient astronauts" -type books it isn't remotely entertaining or amusing.
The title alone is a great example of false advertising. The book has very little to do with prehistory, very little to do with women, and its scope is limited to Europe.
Beyond that, the quality of the content is dismal (even by the standards of this type of work and/or genre). There are several massive howlers just in the first page of the first chapter. It goes downhill from there.
Veredict: don't waste your time. Find pretty much anything else to read. This book is terrible, but unlike a lot of "ancient astronauts" -type books it isn't remotely entertaining or amusing.
The title alone is a great example of false advertising. The book has very little to do with prehistory, very little to do with women, and its scope is limited to Europe.
Beyond that, the quality of the content is dismal (even by the standards of this type of work and/or genre). There are several massive howlers just in the first page of the first chapter. It goes downhill from there.
April 9, 2026
It looks quite promising when the blurb on the back states that a central theme of this book is 'the relationship between the role of women and economic production'. And, indeed, this book largely lives up to that promise.
Ehrenberg puts forward three main arguments. Firstly, the part played by women in prehistory (that is, before the advent of written records) was much greater than mainstream archaeology has usually acknowledged. Secondly, for most of the time that human beings have existed, until only a few thousand years ago, there was almost certainly equality between women and men. As Ehrenberg herself puts it: 'So, throughout human history, the great majority of women who have ever lived had far more status than recently, and probably had equality with men.' Thirdly, women's status in any society depends largely on their economic role. The more important and independent their economic role, the higher their status.
For most of prehistory, humans lived by gathering plants and hunting wild animals. Because women would often be breast feeding young children or pregnant, it would be difficult for them to hunt large animals. Therefore it seems that in most hunter-gatherer societies, women tended to do the gathering and men the hunting. But this did not mean inequality for women, because their gathering would usually provide more than half of the food consumed. Their important economic role was a basis for their equality with men, in societies which were generally egalitarian.
The development of agriculture (the domestication of plants and animals) about 10,000 years ago brought about tremendous social changes. But in the early stages of agriculture women continued to have high status. Women probably developed cultivation out of their gathering role, and they would have done the early cultivating themselves using the 'horticultural' technology of hoes and digging sticks, while men carried on hunting.
When hoes were replaced by large ploughs pulled by oxen, when people began to keep large herds of animals, often some distance from the home base, and when raiding became common, men began to take over the dominant economic role.
These economic changes not only led to women losing out, they also paved the way for the development of class divisions. Agriculture created a surplus which enabled a ruling class to live in luxury on the backs of the majority.
Ehrenberg tends to talk vaguely about inequality and stratification rather than class and exploitation. She also fails to discuss the extent to which war and trade might have contributed to men becoming dominant. But overall I strongly recommend this book.
Ehrenberg puts forward three main arguments. Firstly, the part played by women in prehistory (that is, before the advent of written records) was much greater than mainstream archaeology has usually acknowledged. Secondly, for most of the time that human beings have existed, until only a few thousand years ago, there was almost certainly equality between women and men. As Ehrenberg herself puts it: 'So, throughout human history, the great majority of women who have ever lived had far more status than recently, and probably had equality with men.' Thirdly, women's status in any society depends largely on their economic role. The more important and independent their economic role, the higher their status.
For most of prehistory, humans lived by gathering plants and hunting wild animals. Because women would often be breast feeding young children or pregnant, it would be difficult for them to hunt large animals. Therefore it seems that in most hunter-gatherer societies, women tended to do the gathering and men the hunting. But this did not mean inequality for women, because their gathering would usually provide more than half of the food consumed. Their important economic role was a basis for their equality with men, in societies which were generally egalitarian.
The development of agriculture (the domestication of plants and animals) about 10,000 years ago brought about tremendous social changes. But in the early stages of agriculture women continued to have high status. Women probably developed cultivation out of their gathering role, and they would have done the early cultivating themselves using the 'horticultural' technology of hoes and digging sticks, while men carried on hunting.
When hoes were replaced by large ploughs pulled by oxen, when people began to keep large herds of animals, often some distance from the home base, and when raiding became common, men began to take over the dominant economic role.
These economic changes not only led to women losing out, they also paved the way for the development of class divisions. Agriculture created a surplus which enabled a ruling class to live in luxury on the backs of the majority.
Ehrenberg tends to talk vaguely about inequality and stratification rather than class and exploitation. She also fails to discuss the extent to which war and trade might have contributed to men becoming dominant. But overall I strongly recommend this book.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews