Reply #14: I've done both

[Chulanowa]

In fact I had Rianne Eissler in mind when I was talking about "golden age" mythologies. You can claim a grand conspiracy of evil white guys trying to "suppress the truth" all you want - it really seems to be what you're best at - but the fact is, neither work you point out actually has any archaeological basis.

Marija Gimbutas used a supposed linguistic theory to create a model of a singular continent-wide society for Neolithic Europe, leaning heavily on mother-dolls as proof... which is like saying that every culture that used the svasticka supports Nazi ideology. Her theory of a matrilineal Europe got a note of vindication when Neolithic remains in Scandanavia were found to be interrealated through the female side, but it's hardly conclusive evidence - matrilineal societies are pretty damn common through history, in all four hemispheres. And Scandinavia is quite a hike from where Gimbutas was building her theory in the Balkans.

I would be interested in knowing what you think gives her Kurgan theory more weight than the Anatolian hypothesis, or the ones suggesting the Indo-Europeans came from the Indian subcontinent? They all have about the same amount of evidence backing them, after all.

And then, we have Rianne Eissler. She more or less took Marja Gimbutas' theories, and stapled the Communist Manifesto to it for her book. According to The Blade and the Chalice not only did Marija Gimbutras' agrarian goddess-worshippers exist for certain, but they were a perfect and utopian society, where there was no warfare or strife, no class or social divisions, no extremes of wealth, no hunger, no sexism, totaly egalitarian with free love for all. Of course, one has to ignore the fact that in this proposed society women were dominant and "the goddess" was the singular divine figure, in order to swallow the "egalitarian society with no sexism or class divisions" bits. A little note on this "goddess" - I find it curious that there is no name for this entity. Generally when dealing with lost cultures, it goes the other way around - We know the name, but none of the particulars. At any rate, this paradise in Europe was shattered when evil penis-worshipers from the east thundered down on their horses, raped everyone, and set up a system that had absolutely no purpose or aim except to kill people and subjugate women. Furthermore, this event completely and utterly ruined humanity the world over - It's strange that the loss of a utopia in ancient Europe would have much of an effect on the natives of, say, Australia at the time, but apparently it did, which is why their matriarchal societies stoll have war, strife, class divisions, et cetera...

If you can't tell, I find the book to be goofy. It takes a shaky foundation, injects a heavy amount of modern ideology into it, and then uses it to denounce all the other societies that, in theory, should fall in line with the book's proposed history - and it all claims to be absolute historical fact. It's sort of like believing that Robert E. Howard gives an accurate portrayal of Picts and Cimmerians.

Now, are these two women wrong? In my opinion, most probably - and if so they will be joining a long list of white men who were also wrong on the same subject, so don't give me any of that crap. The simple fact is, my opinion aside, there just not enough evidence about these people to make a solid theory on their culture beyond "well, they made pottery this way, and they probably grew an early form of turnip, because we found some terra cotta bowls with roots in there...." We're talking about folks who had no written record, built no real permanent residences, and lived six, seven thousand years ago on a continent that has seen a hell of a lot of migration across all directions.

However, might I recommend Dancing Shadows by AOUMIEL to you? It's similar to The Blade and the Chalice and draws on several of the same suppositions, but focuses more on the "out of India" theory and leaves out the trappings of the 19th century idea of utopia. I'm sure I have other books to recommend, though I confess, most of my library focuses on shamanism (I try to vie away from the "male vs. female" aspect of paganism, myself...)