DNA explodes Greek myth about women

for those who might be history fan
British researchers have unearthed evidence that proves Helen was much more than a chattel

Women in Ancient Greece were major power brokers in their own right, researchers have discovered, and often played key roles in running affairs of state. Until now it was thought they were treated little better than servants.

The discovery is part of an investigation by Manchester researchers into the founders of Mycenae, Europe's first great city-state and capital of King Agamemnon's domains.

'It was thought that in those days women were rated as little more than chattels in Ancient Greece,' said Professor Terry Brown, of the faculty of life sciences at Manchester University. 'Our work now suggests that notion is wrong.'

Mycenae is one of the most important and evocative archaeological sites in Europe. According to legend, Agamemnon led his armies from Mycenae to Troy to bring back Helen - the wife of his ally, Menelaus - who had run off with the Trojan prince Paris.

The citadel was first excavated in the 1870s by Heinrich Schliemann, who uncovered tombs containing crumbling bones draped with jewels and gold face masks. 'I have discovered the graves of Agamemnon, Eurymedon, and their companions, all slain at a banquet by Clytemnestra and her lover Aegisthos,' he told the King of Greece.

In fact, the graves have since been dated and shown to be too old for those of Agamemnon. Nevertheless, Mycenae has since proved to be a treasure trove of archaeological riches. Most recently, these have involved scientists using a range of new techniques, including facial reconstruction work carried out by Manchester researchers John Prag and Richard Neave. They recreated the faces of seven individuals whose skeletons had been excavated at a circle of graves inside the citadel.

The images provided scientists with a family picture album for the rulers of Europe's first great city-state. However, genetics experts have now taken this work a stage further by attempting to extract DNA from 22 of the 35 bodies found in the grave circle. 'The facial reconstructions were carried out 10 years ago, but it is only now that scientists have developed sensitive enough techniques to get DNA from skeletons as old as these,' said Brown. 'In each case we had to deal with a single cell's worth of DNA.'

The genetic material isolated by the scientists is known as mitochondrial DNA, which humans inherit exclusively from their mothers. However, of the 22 skeletons that were tested, only four produced enough DNA for full analysis. Nevertheless, findings from these provided a shock for the team from Manchester.

While two of the males had DNA that indicated they were unrelated, the genetic material extracted from the remaining pair, a man and a woman, revealed they were brother and sister. They had been thought to have been man and wife.

'To be precise our DNA evidence suggests the pair were closely related, possibly siblings or possibly cousins. However, the facial reconstruction work of Prag and Neave also shows they were very similar in appearance which indicates they were brother and sister,' said Brown.

The critical point, he said, was that the woman was thought to have been buried in a richly endowed grave because she was the wife of a powerful man. That was in keeping with previous ideas about Ancient Greece - that women had little power and could only exert influence through their husbands.

'But this discovery shows both the man and the woman were of equal status and had equal power,' he said. 'Women in Ancient Greece held positions of power by right of birth, it now appears.

'The problem has been that up until recently our interpretation of life in Ancient Greece has been the work of a previous generations of archaeologists, then a male-oriented profession and who interpreted their findings in a male-oriented way. That is changing now and women in Ancient Greece are being seen in a new light.'

That sound is the sound of thousands of Womyn's (sic) Studies departments ignoring this and continuing to teach that women have ALWAYS been subjugated by men, etc.

I always felt that Greeks revered too many Goddesses to be sexist...

~K

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bikerpunk

That sound is the sound of thousands of Womyn's (sic) Studies departments ignoring this and continuing to teach that women have ALWAYS been subjugated by men, etc.

---

I went to a university with one of the best women's studies departments in the country and they did not teach that. Where do you get the idea that anyone, no matter how they spell womyn or how they interpret herstory, thinks that?

*shrugs* I guess your mileage may vary in that program.... the one at our college was a pit of reality-dodging misandry.

that would probably be why its the best - it takes actual intelligence to be able to see that discrimination is a two sided coin. you defend feminism every time it comes up, and i respect your opinion, but as an outsider i see more female sexism these days than male sexism.

that isnt to say i dont support feminism - i really do. i believe in equal rights for all, regardless of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, shoe size or anything. i just feel that sexism is often used as an excuse to be just as sexist by those who arent as intelligent as you. a real feminist fights for equal rights, but a lot of women preaching female superiority are calling themselves feminist and many people dont see the distinction. much like in religion, the extremists are ruining it for everyone.

Femininism is as feminism does.

I love Hothead Paisan, but in real life give that crowd wide berth.

For the record, I respect the hell out of many a feminist, agree with it in principle, and suchlike, but the place I went would not have seen a strong, independant, completely together woman in Amelia G - they would have seen a pornographer and a "house n*gger" (excuse the expression) to the patriarchy.

I've always had massive respect for Amelia and what she and Forrest have accomplished, even if we've disagreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bikerpunk

Femininism is as feminism does.

I love Hothead Paisan, but in real life give that crowd wide berth.

For the record, I respect the hell out of many a feminist, agree with it in principle, and suchlike, but the place I went would not have seen a strong, independant, completely together woman in Amelia G - they would have seen a pornographer and a "house n*gger" (excuse the expression) to the patriarchy.

I've always had massive respect for Amelia and what she and Forrest have accomplished, even if we've disagreed.

---

Full disclosure: I once had most of an upper level womyn's studies seminar walk out of class in protest to something I said about women owning their sexuality and their sexual power.

Maybe I had unrealistic expectations, because so many people told me I would loooooooooooooove Hothead Paisan, but, even though I am a huge comic strip fan and buy tons on such books and read many webcomics, I remember being kinda baffled by Hothead Paisan. I liked the artwork and it is not that I don't have any anger, but maybe I just am not angry about those specific issues. I don't know. I think that, absent certain social conditioning, men and women are very similar, so I think hating men is stupid.

I think that there are many women in the more generalized adult industry who, to avoid a potentially inflammatory expression, I will say are wholly complicit in both their own oppression and the oppression of other women. I am, of course, personally frustrated when companies hire women to role-play my job, but I think the issue goes way beyond my own personal frustration. Some of the companies which treat women the worst will put some female figurehead up and pretend they are virtuous because of that. Which is offensive on so many levels. First off, it makes people think that no women actually run anything and there are so many companies and people who have failed to do business with Blue Blood because they want to talk to The Man when it is time to do business. Secondly, there is no rule which says women can't treat other women badly. Look at any junior high school group of girls to see proof. Thirdly, I will happily debate any sex-negative pseudo feminist or any fake-ass non-leading mascot, any time there is an audience that wants to hear it and I will tear them apart because I'm right.

make her pope! :p:

wow this topic when deeper than I thought it would... wonderful like to see good debates and they are civil.

Evil, kiss the ring

Ya know, now that I think about it, I wonder if the archaeologists considered extreme inbreeding as an explanation for the similar DNA and if that would in any way alter the views on the position of women in ancient Greek society. I mean, I think it is fairly well-accepted that there were priestesses and courtesans in that time period who were very powerful within their own spheres, but I wonder . . .

Thats what the DNA tests from my home town reveal ;)

I hope you realise that my statements aren't a blanket slam of women's studies (note that I spelled it in a non-sarcastic manner in this context) but a certain subset who, as you say, walk out in protest when you try to say something reasonable. Because the slogan was - porn oppresses women and women do this and don't do that, and when you argue that you kind of like it and if it's done right it can be liberating, that doesn't wash with their pre-concieved notions.

There's a subset of feminism that says: "I deserve a job I am unsuited for and special privilege because my mother and grandmother were oppressed, women were always oppressed, etc. etc. etc." and that all matriarchal societies are wonderful and happy and female leaders are enlightened and non-warlike therefore PUT US IN CHARGE. This is because it's designed to promote an agenda. So when evidence comes up like, oh, in Greece women's role wasn't to be on their backs pushing out kids, they get angry.

I once watched a woman's studies professor SCREAM at a sobbing woman who'd confessed that her lesbian lover beat her. Because according to her lecture, only men abuse, because only men have power, it's a symptom of the patriarchy, and therefore LESBIAN PARTNER ABUSE CANNOT HAPPEN. When a girl confessed in tears that it does, she was deemed a liar and some kind of fifth columnist in support of the phallocracy.

It took me a fucking LONG time to give any self-professed FEH MUH NIST any degree of respect after those years.

But once again - you meet someone who has her shit together, who pulls her own weight, blazes her own trail and walks the walk - that gets my respect far more than any bullshit theory. I raise my glass of bourbon to you.

As a matter of law, these are all recent gains. I don't even bother with feminist theory per se. It tends to be self-defeating. I have friends that are radical lesbians. They know better. We laugh about a lot of it.

OEC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bikerpunk

I hope you realise that my statements aren't a blanket slam of women's studies (note that I spelled it in a non-sarcastic manner in this context) but a certain subset who, as you say, walk out in protest when you try to say something reasonable. Because the slogan was - porn oppresses women and women do this and don't do that, and when you argue that you kind of like it and if it's done right it can be liberating, that doesn't wash with their pre-concieved notions.

There's a subset of feminism that says: "I deserve a job I am unsuited for and special privilege because my mother and grandmother were oppressed, women were always oppressed, etc. etc. etc." and that all matriarchal societies are wonderful and happy and female leaders are enlightened and non-warlike therefore PUT US IN CHARGE. This is because it's designed to promote an agenda. So when evidence comes up like, oh, in Greece women's role wasn't to be on their backs pushing out kids, they get angry.

I once watched a woman's studies professor SCREAM at a sobbing woman who'd confessed that her lesbian lover beat her. Because according to her lecture, only men abuse, because only men have power, it's a symptom of the patriarchy, and therefore LESBIAN PARTNER ABUSE CANNOT HAPPEN. When a girl confessed in tears that it does, she was deemed a liar and some kind of fifth columnist in support of the phallocracy.

It took me a fucking LONG time to give any self-professed FEH MUH NIST any degree of respect after those years.

But once again - you meet someone who has her shit together, who pulls her own weight, blazes her own trail and walks the walk - that gets my respect far more than any bullshit theory. I raise my glass of bourbon to you.

---

I think culturally it is much more common for a man to physically abuse his partner, male or female, than it is for a woman to physically abuse her partner. Anyone who thinks it never happens both way or can't happen both ways is totally delusional. I also never got the thing where it was okay for a woman to slap a man but not for a man to hit her back. I think that has passed with current generations, though. At least, I hope so.

Both of my grandmothers were powerful personalities who would have been titans of industry in another time or in another gender, but they did not let their times turn them into total victims either and helped their husbands succeed at everything they did. When my mother went to Harvard, it was still called Radcliffe for female students. Although she set a good example for me in so many ways and busted through so many glass ceilings, I think she did so without even always noticing the obstacles set in her way for being a woman. I think I have her ability to ignore obstacles most of the time and succeed against adversity and I aspire to some day have half her poise in the face of it.

At least where I went to school, I can't say that I noticed that the denizens of Womynist House were much more kind to one another than the residents of DKE. I mean, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, neither one of them started WWIII, but people minded their p's and q's for both, out of both fear of and respect for their strength.

that was a cool read. thanks bacchus.