What do you think?
Rate this book
Diosas y Dioses de la vieja Europa
En esta obra de referencia, convertida ya en clásica, la profesora Marija Gimbutas reunió las fuentes arqueológicas que le permitieron hablar de una cultura matrifocal y probablemente matrilineal, agrícola y sedentaria, en la Vieja Europa (7000-3500 a.C.), en el área sudeste del continente, es decir, en la cultura pre-indoeuropea, decididamente patriarcal, pastoral, nómada y guerrera, que se impuso en toda Europa en el transcurso de tres olas de infiltración desde la estepa rusa, entre los años 4500 y 2500 A.C. El estudio de las imágenes míticas, de sus signos y símbolos, muestra una persistencia del culto a la diosa, poniéndose de manifiesto la supremacía de aspectos tales como el poder de generar vida y el de la fertilidad.
372 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1974
27 people are currently reading
2016 people want to read
About the author
Marija Gimbutas
43 books193 followersMarija (Alseikaite) Gimbutas (Lithuanian: Marija Gimbutienė), was a Lithuanian-American archeologist known for her research into the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of "Old Europe", a term she introduced. Her works published between 1946 and 1971 introduced new views by combining traditional spadework with linguistics and mythological interpretation, but earned a mixed reception by other professionals.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
November 18, 2009
Gimbutas's survey of Bronze Age and Chalcolithic religion in South-Central Europe is a tour de force of scholarship that revolutionized our concept of the evolution of religious culture when it first appeared. Reviewing archaeological evidence from around 7000 - 3500 BCE she argues for the existence of a fairly homogeneous sedentary agricultural cultural zone with a continuity of religious symbols primarily based around different forms of the goddess. In this book she briefly mentions but does not much argue on behalf of the controversial thesis that these cultures were matriarchal and matrilineal. Her chief focus in this book is establishing and documenting different forms of the goddess and deciphering the fragmentary record of pottery, sculpture, and painting to partially reconstruct the religious ideology these items represent.
Gimbutas sees remnants of this symbolic complex persisting in some latter-day European mythological systems and makes a particularly persuasive case that key features remain intact in the belief systems of the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations. However for the most part this worldview was displaced by the Indo-European complex that spread across Europe with its predominantly male pantheon centered around the Sky God. The Indo-European Earth Mother figure has an entirely different character from the "Old European" fertility and vegetation goddess, being subordinate to the sky god and requiring his active participation to become fertile. Nevertheless they may be easily confused as they may serve overlapping ritual functions based on the ritual reiteration of natural fertility cycles aimed at guaranteeing the continued fecundity of the land.
The primary symbols of the Old European Earth Goddess are the moon, the snake, the bird, the bee, the butterfly, the doe, the dog, and other sundry animal powers. These find expression primarily in the period under analysis, but some aspects of the Earth Goddess may extend back and are perhaps continguous with the much earlier Aurignacian goddess of the "Venus of Willendorf" type.
The book is lavishly illustrated with numerous delightful images of various archaeological relics, and is cogently and coherently argued for the most part. The degree to which Gimbutas is willing to read individual artifacts in the light of her overarching thesis is continually distracting, however, and somewhat troubling. If she has a technique for distinguishing between similarities of form or symbol that owe to cultural diffusion from all the other factors that could produce similar symbols in different cultures -- such as the self-evident appropriateness of depicting certain features of our world in relationship to certain animals, for example, or perhaps archetypal images of the unconscious that are part of a shared human biological heritage -- then she keeps it to herself. This is very troubling.
Equally troubling is the certitude with which she reads highly ambiguous forms. For example, she insistently reads pottery painted with central cross figures surrounded by projecting spiral lines as cosmogonic depictions representing the emanation of the creative powers of the universe out from a central figure. To my eyes this reading goes far beyond the data, and these may simply represent decorative motifs. But again and again she interprets ambiguous signs as clearly depicting this or that.
In the light of these two errors I can understand why Gimbutas has been criticized for being ideologically motivated by a feminist, revisionist agenda, by which she coerces the fragmentary data into a picture of an idealized pre-patriarchal egalitarian culture, opposed to the mean old Indo-European dominator culture that took over. I do not entirely agree with that criticism, because in the course of the book Gimbutas does provide an enormous amount of converging evidence for her general theory. In the main I believe her core argument for an Old European goddess culture supplanted by a patriarchal Indo-European cult is not problematic.
This is a strong, important, and beautiful book that is beautifully illustrated and a delight to read, although it is fairly technical and not really for complete beginners. Over all it's a fine volume.
Gimbutas sees remnants of this symbolic complex persisting in some latter-day European mythological systems and makes a particularly persuasive case that key features remain intact in the belief systems of the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations. However for the most part this worldview was displaced by the Indo-European complex that spread across Europe with its predominantly male pantheon centered around the Sky God. The Indo-European Earth Mother figure has an entirely different character from the "Old European" fertility and vegetation goddess, being subordinate to the sky god and requiring his active participation to become fertile. Nevertheless they may be easily confused as they may serve overlapping ritual functions based on the ritual reiteration of natural fertility cycles aimed at guaranteeing the continued fecundity of the land.
The primary symbols of the Old European Earth Goddess are the moon, the snake, the bird, the bee, the butterfly, the doe, the dog, and other sundry animal powers. These find expression primarily in the period under analysis, but some aspects of the Earth Goddess may extend back and are perhaps continguous with the much earlier Aurignacian goddess of the "Venus of Willendorf" type.
The book is lavishly illustrated with numerous delightful images of various archaeological relics, and is cogently and coherently argued for the most part. The degree to which Gimbutas is willing to read individual artifacts in the light of her overarching thesis is continually distracting, however, and somewhat troubling. If she has a technique for distinguishing between similarities of form or symbol that owe to cultural diffusion from all the other factors that could produce similar symbols in different cultures -- such as the self-evident appropriateness of depicting certain features of our world in relationship to certain animals, for example, or perhaps archetypal images of the unconscious that are part of a shared human biological heritage -- then she keeps it to herself. This is very troubling.
Equally troubling is the certitude with which she reads highly ambiguous forms. For example, she insistently reads pottery painted with central cross figures surrounded by projecting spiral lines as cosmogonic depictions representing the emanation of the creative powers of the universe out from a central figure. To my eyes this reading goes far beyond the data, and these may simply represent decorative motifs. But again and again she interprets ambiguous signs as clearly depicting this or that.
In the light of these two errors I can understand why Gimbutas has been criticized for being ideologically motivated by a feminist, revisionist agenda, by which she coerces the fragmentary data into a picture of an idealized pre-patriarchal egalitarian culture, opposed to the mean old Indo-European dominator culture that took over. I do not entirely agree with that criticism, because in the course of the book Gimbutas does provide an enormous amount of converging evidence for her general theory. In the main I believe her core argument for an Old European goddess culture supplanted by a patriarchal Indo-European cult is not problematic.
This is a strong, important, and beautiful book that is beautifully illustrated and a delight to read, although it is fairly technical and not really for complete beginners. Over all it's a fine volume.
June 24, 2021
Over the course of June 2021 I have re-read Lithuanian-American archaeologist Marija Gimbutas' best known book "Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe" which attempts to reconstruct the religions of Neolithic European farmers: In particular those of the Balkans and Minoan Crete, where their culture survived well into the Bronze Age after Mainland Greece had been taken over by the Proto-Indo-Europeans. Several ancient Greek sources, eg the Iliad, refer to these indigenous inhabitants of Greece as the Pelasgians. Please note that I am reviewing the 1982 expanded edition, which also includes more illustrations than the original edition which first saw print in 1974.
I have been curious to see how well ”Goddesses and Gods” holds up today. After all, many of Gimbutas' ideas about the social structures and religious observances of the Neolithic Europeans are based on pure guesswork since no primary sources survive in languages understood today.
Imagine my surprise, then, at how much more is backed up by hard archaeological evidence than I remembered. It is an interesting experience to read about how archaeology came around in the 1960's and 1970's to very relunctantly admit that complex societies existed much earlier and more frequently in Europe's history than previously assumed. I was also impressed by all the conclusive evidence Gimbutas had chronicled for the Neolithic Europeans developing some of the most complex urban planning on the planet at the time: In particular the Cucuteni-Trypilia culture of Romania and Ukraine and the Vinca culture of Serbia whose cities rivalled the Indus Valley culture of the Indian subcontinent. The Cucuteni were even in regular contact with people from as far south as Greece and Italy, as demonstrated by bones from people originating in Southern Europe as well as craftsmanship in the style of contemporary cultures from those places turning up in excavated settlements in Ukraine. ”Goddesses and Gods” also contains in depth information about the architecture of Neolithic Europe I don't remember from the first reading, with some impressive artistic depictions of complex shrines and temples surviving from that era. If the statuettes are any indication the Neolithic Europeans were capable of weaving highly ornated and detailed clothing as well.
Something else I found interesting was how much religious artwork from the Neolithic Balkan civilisations Gimbutas found to depict goddesses very similar to Artemis, Athena, Demeter, Hecate and Hera of the later Greek pantheon. Their cults appear to have involved similar symbolism and rituals as well: Identification of those goddesses with deer, dogs, owls and crows; as well as festivals and rituals where their worshippers wear masks of those animals. Throughout ”Goddesses and Gods” Gimbutas proves that quite a few religious practices of the Minoans and related cultures were continued by the Mycenean Greeks and their descendants. Notice that in the "ages of man" described by Hesiod and Ovid, the Silver Age's matriarchal agricultural society bears a striking resemblance to what we know today about the Neolithic farmers right down to those societies being conquered by the militaristic patriarchal societies of the Bronze Age...
While we are at it: Special mention should be given to the uncanny resemblance the Vinca culture's statues of their deities bore to the grey aliens who currently haunt UFO contactees like Whitley Strieber! No seriously, compare a lot of the Vinca statues depicted in here to the triangle-headed almond-eyed extra-terrestrials who adorn the cover art of Strieber's books ”Communion” and ”Transformation”. I am not sure exactly what this means (yet) but Gimbutas theorised that these statues depict cultists wearing animal/god/demon masks like ancient Greek worshippers of certain deities did during their rituals.
In any case: while some of Gimbutas' guesswork about the cultures of Neolithic Europe ultimately can't be verified one way or the other, she deserves a better reputation if ”Goddesses and Gods” is typical of her work. It's worth reading just for a good look at some impressive artwork especially considering the technology it was made with. Fantasy authors looking for worldbuilding ideas might also find inspiration here.
I have been curious to see how well ”Goddesses and Gods” holds up today. After all, many of Gimbutas' ideas about the social structures and religious observances of the Neolithic Europeans are based on pure guesswork since no primary sources survive in languages understood today.
Imagine my surprise, then, at how much more is backed up by hard archaeological evidence than I remembered. It is an interesting experience to read about how archaeology came around in the 1960's and 1970's to very relunctantly admit that complex societies existed much earlier and more frequently in Europe's history than previously assumed. I was also impressed by all the conclusive evidence Gimbutas had chronicled for the Neolithic Europeans developing some of the most complex urban planning on the planet at the time: In particular the Cucuteni-Trypilia culture of Romania and Ukraine and the Vinca culture of Serbia whose cities rivalled the Indus Valley culture of the Indian subcontinent. The Cucuteni were even in regular contact with people from as far south as Greece and Italy, as demonstrated by bones from people originating in Southern Europe as well as craftsmanship in the style of contemporary cultures from those places turning up in excavated settlements in Ukraine. ”Goddesses and Gods” also contains in depth information about the architecture of Neolithic Europe I don't remember from the first reading, with some impressive artistic depictions of complex shrines and temples surviving from that era. If the statuettes are any indication the Neolithic Europeans were capable of weaving highly ornated and detailed clothing as well.
Something else I found interesting was how much religious artwork from the Neolithic Balkan civilisations Gimbutas found to depict goddesses very similar to Artemis, Athena, Demeter, Hecate and Hera of the later Greek pantheon. Their cults appear to have involved similar symbolism and rituals as well: Identification of those goddesses with deer, dogs, owls and crows; as well as festivals and rituals where their worshippers wear masks of those animals. Throughout ”Goddesses and Gods” Gimbutas proves that quite a few religious practices of the Minoans and related cultures were continued by the Mycenean Greeks and their descendants. Notice that in the "ages of man" described by Hesiod and Ovid, the Silver Age's matriarchal agricultural society bears a striking resemblance to what we know today about the Neolithic farmers right down to those societies being conquered by the militaristic patriarchal societies of the Bronze Age...
While we are at it: Special mention should be given to the uncanny resemblance the Vinca culture's statues of their deities bore to the grey aliens who currently haunt UFO contactees like Whitley Strieber! No seriously, compare a lot of the Vinca statues depicted in here to the triangle-headed almond-eyed extra-terrestrials who adorn the cover art of Strieber's books ”Communion” and ”Transformation”. I am not sure exactly what this means (yet) but Gimbutas theorised that these statues depict cultists wearing animal/god/demon masks like ancient Greek worshippers of certain deities did during their rituals.
In any case: while some of Gimbutas' guesswork about the cultures of Neolithic Europe ultimately can't be verified one way or the other, she deserves a better reputation if ”Goddesses and Gods” is typical of her work. It's worth reading just for a good look at some impressive artwork especially considering the technology it was made with. Fantasy authors looking for worldbuilding ideas might also find inspiration here.
January 9, 2018
Gimbutas has been accused of "finding what she wants" in her researches and writings, viz. that there was a matriarchal pantheon centered around fertility, hunting, and other stuff in pre-Classical Europe. She certainly makes a good case for it, basing her findings around statuary and relics found throughout mostly SE Europe. She all that and makes a good effort at reconstructing what believers in Old Europe might have chased after, religiously-speaking, which probably isn't to the liking of schismatic sexists and pure-headed Christians alike since it's another puzzle piece showing the roots of most of European culture.
April 22, 2021
Existieron cultos a deidades prehistóricas que pervivieron hasta tiempos históricos, sobre todo en la península de los Balcanes. Marija Gimbutas apoya cada postulado con un inundación de evidencias arqueológicas deliciosas de ir visualizando y analizando. Este trabajo, de excepcional profundidad, tuvo un tremendo calado en el ámbito científico, y sigue siendo un referente para comprender la simbología y la historia cultural de la Vieja Europa. Es es libro más hermoso e interesante que llevo leído este año para mi investigación.
November 8, 2025
¿A quién no le va a gustar una representación de la Gran Diosa Pájaro del V milenio a.C.? ¿A quién no le va a gustar?
October 15, 2018
I was a little leery of this book at first, mostly because it was published quite a while ago, and I wasn't sure what kind of biases or inaccuracies might be in it. But I was incredibly surprised. This is more of an archaeological than theological book, and there are numerous pictures of finds of neolithic art/ritual objects. I think the most important thing about this book was actually in the conclusion, when Gimbutas states that for many of us, European history starts at Greece. But there were many fully formed cultures that pre-date Greece and it's pantheon. I used to think that truly European religion and culture started much further north, outside the sphere of influence of Babylon and ancient Egypt. This book proved my assumption wrong and I'm rather interested in pursuing this topic further. It also further proves a personal belief of my own, that we of European cultural descent often believe ourselves to be at the pinnacle of our development and that anything in our past, particularly the ancient past, is primitive, undeveloped and not only to be looked upon with scorn, but also to be considered unworthy of our time and study, when in truth the reality is far from this assumption.
September 27, 2007
every literate person should read this book. it should be taught in school from kindergarten through college.
September 24, 2016
As good as the others. This one had a more narrative lens, which was nice.
December 12, 2013
This was my first real introduction to pre-civilization cultures. If you look hard enough, you will find plenty of criticism about her work. You might even say that some of it is legitimate. However, you must remember where the work was coming from. Gimbutas was very active in the same period as the Feminist Movement. That particular period caused a great many books to be written. 'The Feminine Mystique' and 'The Other Sex' are two of the most noteworthy, but there were also several 'historical' works which attempted to write a prehistorical history of our race. Most had no training in history, and all were so intensely biased and even hateful of men that their efforts resulted only in poorly written works which were largely ignored. The result is that study in the entire period, with leanings toward androgynies, was largely ignored. I don't know if Gimbutas was involved in the movement, and frankly don't care. When I read her book I see the same problems in her conclusions as with every other scholar whose work is decades old; here an outdated assumption, there an erroneous conclusion that seems well justified given the evidence at hand.
December 17, 2023
On Chapter One,
I find it interesting that this has been designated by Gimbutas as "The Culture of Old Europe", seeing as it is essentially contained within the balkans and the areas surrounding the adriatic and black seas balkan-ward. There is mention of the Bandkeramik linear Pottery culture in its cultural infusion into the central danubian culture, is this culture less explored/understood or for some reason less representative of "europe"? In my pre-learning before this book I've understood a sort of sensibility given to Gimbutas in her youth in Lithuania as a related cultural item stemming from what she writes about, and I'm wondering if her other books expand past this region, or if it doesn't.
also, many things are just stated like the changes or the spread of certain pottery cultures. Are the effective ethnic spread, or whatever she called it, and Zoey know that if she had sources or foundations of these ideas, she couldn't put them in the book because it would be too much, I do doubt them, I don't know the foundation that those claims are based on.
On Chapter Two,
hhh i mean I'm glad that she said it! The artists weren't bad or unskilled per se, it's just that there was 'use of schematization' eg abstraction of shape that was common culturally. I have fun imagining that these shapes then are connected with stories, formulaic. It's hard for me to wrap my head around trends (?) that last so long or take so long to change when I'm used to artistic styles on an individualistic level, although I guess that really, it's likely that everyone in the village was making these sculptures, probably as decoration and play things and storytelling devices, and if they're copying the abstracted forms of, let's say, the most popular artiste in the village, they could keep the same forms for many generations, the shapes themselves no longer being referential but the base themselves.
I wonder if these items were kept through generations, or if they were discarded regularly. I wonder what types of display they had, let's say a cucuteni-tripolya town has 20k people, I bet there was a village hall where they would display things and put on stories at parties.
On Chapter Three,
oh good i love fashion. So we love formfottong fashion bellies out legs strapped!! These are literally the hottest babes hahaha. I really want an interactive 4d map with figured with those red triangle "collars".
On Chapter Four,
the masks are scary man!! they're scary. She is SO confident there is a consistent lineage of mask wearing for performance from paläolithikum communities to ancient IE greece. I mean it's definitely unquestionably possible but the SURETY she has is truly wild to me.
On Chapter Five,
aka the "miniatures" chapter, establishes that a) people made shrines of most of their buildings, or at least one in the middle of town, and made "votive offerings", aka mini people to fill them. I'm convinced these had part in story telling, like I believed in the former chapter, but I guess I would like more knowledge on where they tended to be found and buried. The connection between the balkan cultures and crete was Driven Home Hard, and repeatedly. Gimbutas is convinced of old scripts, I took pictures and i'll look them over later to see if they seem like letters to me. I noticed the hint Gimbutas was implying, that there was a particular male god found, and it was associated with the copper sickle, likely inherited from new farming technologies coming from the levant. I wonder if there'll be more parallels, masculine gods coming in from the near east. There's the thought that the culture of the people of the balkans in this time is a farming culture, but with roots in the culture before agriculture, when they were hunter gatherers. I want so badly to know the genetic makeup of these people, and the cultural changes brought in with the agriculture. Did these people see themselves as the same group as before, but farmers now? Did they see themselves as colonizers new to the area? A population mixed between? I feel like there are answers there linguistically, but I don't have any background proof of that assumption.
I've had a REAL issue in this chapter with example/visual references not lining up with their numbers. I'm not even able to find some of the examples provided, specifically the women lifting things.
On Chapter Six,
Okay this is where I start heavily questioning dr gimbutas. Firstly, there appears to me a greater connection of the snake with the universe, than with water, and it seems like she forgets her previous assertion ( see image ) and is telling me how the bird is related to the universe and the egg and a symbol of birth, rather than that of water! Or maybe water is birth, it's all one thing, yada yada.
Also, she really hates the connected idea of steatophygy (big ass) in european figures of women, in other areas she would use the presence of shared ideas in hunter and fisher communities in africa (at least in the mediterranean and nilic) as reasoning and justification for the ideas within old europe, but now it's undignified (literally a quote) and combined anthropomorphic egg carrying women make more sense. Sure, gimbutas.
The fishers of old europe were evidently getting mad sexual with the fish there. I love the idea of river boulders with fish-human faces on them, and showing motifs and sculptures of fish rubbing and sucking on phalluses, horse and human, are funny to me.
On Chapter Seven,
Mistresses of Water: bird and snake goddess
I can't help but to continue to question Gimbutas' associations with certain designs. The connections she's making between bird figured and water figured and meanders and chevrons are things that she's proving on INCREDIBLY shaky grounds, maybe this is where previous reading would come in handy, but it's taking a lot to just accept that assertion and let her continue making assertions that rely FULLY on these connections. On page 130 there is a cucuteni vase where some symbols are taken to [possibly represent horns, such as that of a horned snake, a goddess connected to the bird goddess, who is connected to the water, and thus decorated with a meander] whereas I instantly understood these lines to be forehead creases, granting the face an emotion! No necessarily associated them with a snake, but rather indicative of a goddess based on reaction.
Very interestingly! there's what appears to be an algiz on a vase above a "gate", from the Tisza culture.
The Algiz is aparently ONLY associated with the bird goddess, very cool.
Her ideas of continued (perhaps underground) worship of the goddesses as they assimilated to Indo-European culture are very convincing!
On Chapter Eight,
The Great Goddess
Oh yes. this is the chapter I've been waiting for. The connection between the displayed images and the text descriptions are impeccable in this chapter, and it really puts into light the ease it makes to read with the correct references.
This chapter seems VERY grounded, the in-text references allow for a lot more well rounded assertions, and the pictures are enjoyable. I love me some moon goddess.
On Chapter Nine,
Pregnant Vegetation Goddess
Short chapter for a short era! With the vegetation goddess really forming from the new cultural action of farming, I wonder how her character was different from the previous huntergatherer informed goddesses.
On Chapter Ten,
The Year-God - Again a very short chapter. The parallels with priapism and Dionysus are fun, but I really don't think there's enough distinction drawn between pre and post indo-european pantheon!
I find it interesting that this has been designated by Gimbutas as "The Culture of Old Europe", seeing as it is essentially contained within the balkans and the areas surrounding the adriatic and black seas balkan-ward. There is mention of the Bandkeramik linear Pottery culture in its cultural infusion into the central danubian culture, is this culture less explored/understood or for some reason less representative of "europe"? In my pre-learning before this book I've understood a sort of sensibility given to Gimbutas in her youth in Lithuania as a related cultural item stemming from what she writes about, and I'm wondering if her other books expand past this region, or if it doesn't.
also, many things are just stated like the changes or the spread of certain pottery cultures. Are the effective ethnic spread, or whatever she called it, and Zoey know that if she had sources or foundations of these ideas, she couldn't put them in the book because it would be too much, I do doubt them, I don't know the foundation that those claims are based on.
On Chapter Two,
hhh i mean I'm glad that she said it! The artists weren't bad or unskilled per se, it's just that there was 'use of schematization' eg abstraction of shape that was common culturally. I have fun imagining that these shapes then are connected with stories, formulaic. It's hard for me to wrap my head around trends (?) that last so long or take so long to change when I'm used to artistic styles on an individualistic level, although I guess that really, it's likely that everyone in the village was making these sculptures, probably as decoration and play things and storytelling devices, and if they're copying the abstracted forms of, let's say, the most popular artiste in the village, they could keep the same forms for many generations, the shapes themselves no longer being referential but the base themselves.
I wonder if these items were kept through generations, or if they were discarded regularly. I wonder what types of display they had, let's say a cucuteni-tripolya town has 20k people, I bet there was a village hall where they would display things and put on stories at parties.
On Chapter Three,
oh good i love fashion. So we love formfottong fashion bellies out legs strapped!! These are literally the hottest babes hahaha. I really want an interactive 4d map with figured with those red triangle "collars".
On Chapter Four,
the masks are scary man!! they're scary. She is SO confident there is a consistent lineage of mask wearing for performance from paläolithikum communities to ancient IE greece. I mean it's definitely unquestionably possible but the SURETY she has is truly wild to me.
On Chapter Five,
aka the "miniatures" chapter, establishes that a) people made shrines of most of their buildings, or at least one in the middle of town, and made "votive offerings", aka mini people to fill them. I'm convinced these had part in story telling, like I believed in the former chapter, but I guess I would like more knowledge on where they tended to be found and buried. The connection between the balkan cultures and crete was Driven Home Hard, and repeatedly. Gimbutas is convinced of old scripts, I took pictures and i'll look them over later to see if they seem like letters to me. I noticed the hint Gimbutas was implying, that there was a particular male god found, and it was associated with the copper sickle, likely inherited from new farming technologies coming from the levant. I wonder if there'll be more parallels, masculine gods coming in from the near east. There's the thought that the culture of the people of the balkans in this time is a farming culture, but with roots in the culture before agriculture, when they were hunter gatherers. I want so badly to know the genetic makeup of these people, and the cultural changes brought in with the agriculture. Did these people see themselves as the same group as before, but farmers now? Did they see themselves as colonizers new to the area? A population mixed between? I feel like there are answers there linguistically, but I don't have any background proof of that assumption.
I've had a REAL issue in this chapter with example/visual references not lining up with their numbers. I'm not even able to find some of the examples provided, specifically the women lifting things.
On Chapter Six,
Okay this is where I start heavily questioning dr gimbutas. Firstly, there appears to me a greater connection of the snake with the universe, than with water, and it seems like she forgets her previous assertion ( see image ) and is telling me how the bird is related to the universe and the egg and a symbol of birth, rather than that of water! Or maybe water is birth, it's all one thing, yada yada.
Also, she really hates the connected idea of steatophygy (big ass) in european figures of women, in other areas she would use the presence of shared ideas in hunter and fisher communities in africa (at least in the mediterranean and nilic) as reasoning and justification for the ideas within old europe, but now it's undignified (literally a quote) and combined anthropomorphic egg carrying women make more sense. Sure, gimbutas.
The fishers of old europe were evidently getting mad sexual with the fish there. I love the idea of river boulders with fish-human faces on them, and showing motifs and sculptures of fish rubbing and sucking on phalluses, horse and human, are funny to me.
On Chapter Seven,
Mistresses of Water: bird and snake goddess
I can't help but to continue to question Gimbutas' associations with certain designs. The connections she's making between bird figured and water figured and meanders and chevrons are things that she's proving on INCREDIBLY shaky grounds, maybe this is where previous reading would come in handy, but it's taking a lot to just accept that assertion and let her continue making assertions that rely FULLY on these connections. On page 130 there is a cucuteni vase where some symbols are taken to [possibly represent horns, such as that of a horned snake, a goddess connected to the bird goddess, who is connected to the water, and thus decorated with a meander] whereas I instantly understood these lines to be forehead creases, granting the face an emotion! No necessarily associated them with a snake, but rather indicative of a goddess based on reaction.
Very interestingly! there's what appears to be an algiz on a vase above a "gate", from the Tisza culture.
The Algiz is aparently ONLY associated with the bird goddess, very cool.
Her ideas of continued (perhaps underground) worship of the goddesses as they assimilated to Indo-European culture are very convincing!
On Chapter Eight,
The Great Goddess
Oh yes. this is the chapter I've been waiting for. The connection between the displayed images and the text descriptions are impeccable in this chapter, and it really puts into light the ease it makes to read with the correct references.
This chapter seems VERY grounded, the in-text references allow for a lot more well rounded assertions, and the pictures are enjoyable. I love me some moon goddess.
On Chapter Nine,
Pregnant Vegetation Goddess
Short chapter for a short era! With the vegetation goddess really forming from the new cultural action of farming, I wonder how her character was different from the previous huntergatherer informed goddesses.
On Chapter Ten,
The Year-God - Again a very short chapter. The parallels with priapism and Dionysus are fun, but I really don't think there's enough distinction drawn between pre and post indo-european pantheon!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 22, 2020
Un lavoro eccezionale di questa archeologa lituana naturalizzata poi americana che per prima ha consolidato sia con prove archeologiche che grande cultura, l’ipotesi di una Grande Dea che ha dominato su territorio europeo, dai Balcani fino alla Spagna, dal Paleolitico in avanti per lungo tempo. Decade dopo l’impatto con le tribù indoeuropee patriarcali. La Gimbutas raccoglie ed imbastisce un catalogo eccezionale (con foto e illustrazioni a china) delle tante statuine (di cui diverse recuperate anche da lei, quando ha diretto qualche scavo archeologico per l’UCLA) che lei analizza sia nel dettaglio stilistico (dando prova di un’approfondita cultura sull’argomento) sia nel quadro d’insieme riuscendo a fornire al lettore anche un quadro di dov’era collocata questa statuina e con quale funzione. Scrive in maniera affascinante: lineare ma precisa e allo stesso tempo rendendo affascinante l’argomento; inoltre ha suddiviso l’opera in tanti paragrafi che permettono sia di seguire bene la struttura del suo ragionamento sia di potersi facilmente interrompere senza per questo perdere il filo – filo di riflessioni su questa Grande Dea che dopo Graves o Frazer o Bachhofen che espongono in maniera un po’ confusa e complicata, finalmente scorrono con grande chiarezza. Un gran bel lavoro.
Read
May 14, 2009I'm not sure this is one of Gimbutas' books I've read--I've read many of them, and this title looks familiar.
These books tend to be coffee-table size, because of all the illustrations. I wish I could get copies for my private library, but even if I could find a used one, it'd be too big to fit on my shelves.
The theories advanced are a bit unorthodox--but as a person with a background in archaeology, I'm more aware than most of the politicized nature of orthodoxy. Enough people have joined Gimbutas' 'school' that the arguments raised are beginning to get some official attention, if only through attempts to disprove them.
These books tend to be coffee-table size, because of all the illustrations. I wish I could get copies for my private library, but even if I could find a used one, it'd be too big to fit on my shelves.
The theories advanced are a bit unorthodox--but as a person with a background in archaeology, I'm more aware than most of the politicized nature of orthodoxy. Enough people have joined Gimbutas' 'school' that the arguments raised are beginning to get some official attention, if only through attempts to disprove them.
February 6, 2016
I'll admit I mostly skimmed this book and only read a few chapters in their entirety. My takeaway is that Old Europe expressed a lot of mythologic ideas that influenced later civilizations. I also learned that Old Europe was more than just the Vinca culture but actually started much earlier and spanned a much larger area.
February 18, 2024
This makes the last one of all her books I have read! Easy to read, a lot of it was familiar (as I am accustomed to her theories and style) and lots of new details on various symbols, such as my favorite 'bird-Women Goddesses. Delightful to know humans revered women back in the Paleolithic- and that should give us all hope going forward.
August 28, 2013
A fabulous sourcebook on Goddess history and archaeology. Gimbutas was a powerhouse of excellent research and commitment to her area of study. A fundamental resource text.
December 31, 2023
Tiršta knyga, todėl skaitėsi lėtai, mažais kąsniais, vis bandant suvokti tuos tūkstantmečius, kurie skiria Senosios Europos laikus ir dabarties momentą, ir įsivaizduoti tą realybę, kuri tikėtinai egzistavo. Nors pirma knygos pusė yra labiau techninė, kurioje skaitytojas (kaip aš pati), artimiau nesusipažinęs su archeologijos mokslu, gali pasiklysti tarp metodinių terminų ir pasikartojimų, antra knygos pusė sodresnė - Gimbutienė suteikia bendresnį Senosios Europos civilizacijos paveikslą ir kaip tas paveikslas nunyko su indoeuropiečių atvykimu. Tačiau man pritrūko bent kiek išsamesnio interpretacijų pagrindimo arba detalesnės minčių eigos, kaip Gimbutienė prieina prie savo išvadų. Galbūt tai randasi kitose jos knygose, bet manau, buvo vietos ir čia suteikti kiek nors gylio tokioms įdomioms hipotezėms.
November 13, 2017
Gimbutas champions neolithic cultures, pulling together interdisciplinary research documenting the matrifocal, egalitarian and peaceful societies of the pre-Indo European peoples. Her deep dive into mythology accompanied with artifacts from the time period is absolutely fascinating and accessible to anyone with an interest in the subject. I was awed by the spiritual objects and how they hinted at the importance of sacred relationships cultivated with the earth and cosmos thousands of years prior to our "churchianity."
July 19, 2019
It is trury fascinating to have a glimpse of the Vinca culture and the archetype of Mother earth associated with it, none the less Marija Gimbutas in her time focused too much on relating every artifact with the Goddess. Which I do believe had a central role in the culture she was presenting, but some interpretations of very abstract artifacts could be maybe interpreted a little bit biased on what she wanted to proof.
August 26, 2021
It would take someone with a broader knowledge of philology and comparative mythology to determine whether the author's conclusions--that Europe was originally inhabited by an ethically homogenous, non Indo-European people with a special predilection for steatopygous figurines--is actually correct. The text itself is pithy, forceful, and, if you're into anthropology, very interesting. Hard to "rate" books like this, so take my four stars as the vague impression of a non-specialist.
Read
May 16, 2022I'm no archeologist nor historian, which this book makes extremely clear, given how dense and technical the text is. Thus, I do not feel like I can adequately rate the book. What I can do is say that from the other reviews I've read, the book is good and mostly holds up, though sometimes there's confirmation bias towards Marija's ideology.
Thus, I think this can be a great book for students of this period, but only if someone could add comments about where the bias is kind of blinding.
Thus, I think this can be a great book for students of this period, but only if someone could add comments about where the bias is kind of blinding.
August 2, 2018
. un catálogo pormenorizado de restos arqueólogicos del Neolítico que van del octavo al primer milenio a. d. N. E. y a través de los cuales la autora define el culto a una gran diosa, previo a las religiones de origen indoeuropea
August 2, 2019
Very useful for my dissertation on matriarchal myth!
February 3, 2021
Impressive scholarship, dedicated observation and wonderful illustrations and photographs
January 5, 2023
Great and authentic work on archeomythology!
June 27, 2013
I first got interested in Marija Gimbutas when I got interested in Eastern European archaeology. Her work here is magisterial and though I don't always attribute the same meaning she does to Old European art and symbolism (not everything is the Goddess, sometime a line is just a line) the illustrations alone are fascinating and demonstrate a zeitgeist we can only guess at. Though her Goddess theories have earned her dismissal and some ridicule, it is gratifying now that her Kurgan Theory of Indo-European origins is largely being proved correct. Perhaps she was also right about a lot more things.
November 18, 2024
Estimulante pese a que el tiempo transcurrido desde su publicación y los testigos históricos de la arqueología y la antropologia, no le han garantizado consistencia a varias de las tesis.
Y, aun así, entre la especulación y el feminismo, la intuición y la polémica, Gimbutas acertó al señalar la importancia (ora espiritual, ora social, ora mítica...) de lo femenino en los tiempos del amanecer de la civilización. Además de reinterpretar las viejas teorías de Bachofen...
Hay otros autores y autoras que han tratado este tema de formas más transversales y sólidas, pero el trabajo de Gimbutas sigue siendo pionero, amen de imaginativo y audaz.
Y, aun así, entre la especulación y el feminismo, la intuición y la polémica, Gimbutas acertó al señalar la importancia (ora espiritual, ora social, ora mítica...) de lo femenino en los tiempos del amanecer de la civilización. Además de reinterpretar las viejas teorías de Bachofen...
Hay otros autores y autoras que han tratado este tema de formas más transversales y sólidas, pero el trabajo de Gimbutas sigue siendo pionero, amen de imaginativo y audaz.
July 28, 2008
Have wanted these books of hers for years, but they are hard to find. Definitely on my "Wish List"
September 18, 2012
Loved this book so much I did a Goddess painting for it!
Read
November 6, 2012To be taken with a large pinch of salt.
December 3, 2020
Fascinating!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews