Not as it is understood to be the gender-reverse of patriarchalism, no. There have been claims made that matriarchal societies have existed, but credible historians generally reject this, especially when defined that way, as patriarchy's gender-opposite. There is no evidence that there has ever been a society based upon "rule of the mothers," wherein women hold the political power, are considered the head of the household, control land and property, and in which men as a rule are excluded from positions of leadership, influence, and authority.

There have been matrilineal societies, and those which are matrifocal or matrilocal, but these typically exist within a patriarchal framework or an egalitarian one, in the more primitive cases (primitive here used to refer to societal advancement in industrial terms, not questions of superiority).

Usually where you see this claim - in my experience, anyway - is in context of hunter-gatherer societies. Either the romantic view, often from pagans, or an antifeminist one seeking to discredit all forms of non-patriarchal hierarchy, but claiming either way that hunter-gatherer societies were matriarchal prior to the onset of the agricultural revolution. The reality, however, is that most such societies were egalitarian. There typically was a strict division of labor according to gender, but not a society in which one gender ruled society at the expense of another.