DOCSLIB.ORG

Discontinuity, Cultural Evolution and the Historic Event Waalsr De N *Va D J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Discontinuity, Cultural Evolution and the Historic Event Waalsr De N *Va D J Proc SocAntiq Scot, 114 (1984), 1-14 Discontinuity, cultural evolution and the historic event Waalsr de n *va D J SUMMARY Aspects of the traditional culture concept, the closely connected twin concepts of continuity and discontinuity, theirand usefulness prehistoryfor reconsidered.are Continuity discontinuityand are considered as functions of the evolution of culture; it is argued that the role of the historic element should not be overlooked. 1. INTRODUCTION This paper is the revised version of part of the Rhind lectures presented by the author in 1983. It is written by someone who, as a prehistorian, grew up under the domination of the migration paradigm, in the service of which the twin concepts of continuity and discontinuity becam e essentiath e l instruments d whoa student an s , a , , discussed with fellow studentw ho s prehistory could appea preseno t r t itselturmoia s a f f movemenlo migrationsd an t , notwithstand- e facinth gt that well-documented wanderings lik ee Cimbrthosth d Teutonf e o ean th i r o s Visigoth lefd archaeologicao n stha l trace t alla s . A generation ago, the (prehistoric) culture concept was central in the work of most prehistoric archaeologists in Europe. In 1929, Childe had been the first to really define the concept, but since the turn of the century and the days of Kossinna the idea had been at the heart of the continuity-discontinuity-migration paradigm, which somehow monopolized thinking on the explanatory level , analytie whilth n eo c leve maie th l n concer beed distributioe nha nth timn ni e and space of archaeological phenomena. The excesses of the ethnocentric continental school of prehistory in the first half of this century, and the abuse made of the latter's findings by party- statd an e ideologists dond ha , e littl alero et t pre-war prehistorians (wit exceptioe hth f Childno e and Tallgren) but it may have helped to put post-war prehistorians on their guard, and to prepare youngee th r generatio reactione th r nfo , which ultimately broke through wit writinge hth Binforf so d in the United States and David Clarke in Great Britain. Today, the culture concept in the Childean sense is handled with suspicion and the migration paradigm is banned from archaeology. Prehistoric archaeology is penetrating into new and promising fields of research. Literature is full of stimulating ideas. Yet archaeologists of the older generation, even when applauding these new trends, wonder how readily concepts are being * Biologisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, Poststraa , Groningent6 , Netherlands 2 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1984 rejected because they have been used in a way we now :recognize to be defective, without further reflectio theio t s na r possible usefulnes r understandinou r fo s waye th culturf f so g o e changet Le . this paper be accepted, not as a futile attempt to turn back the clock, but as an effort to prevent future babies being thrown away with the, bathwater. 2. ASPECTS OF THE CULTURE CONCEPT Of the prehistorians working in the first six decades of this century under the dominance of the culture-(dis)continuity-migration paradigm, Childe was the one to reflect explicitly on the implications of the culture concept. In a recent analysis of his work, Barbara McNairn (1980) exposed the development over almost 30 years of Childe's thinking on the culture concept. For the present purpose, we select the definition Childe gave in the introduction to his Prehistoric Migrations (1950). It certainly does no justice to Childe's varied considerations on the subject, but t conveyi essence sth understoos ea contemporariess hi y db : 'A culture is defined as an assemblage of artifacts that recur repeatedly associated together in dwelling same th f eso kinwitd dan h burialsame th ey sb rite arbitrare Th . y peculiaritief so implements, weapons, ornaments, houses, burial rites and ritual objects are assumed to be concrete expression commoe th f so n social tradition that binds togethe people'a r . The definition consists of two parts, of which the first gives the definition proper, whereas the second presents an interpretation. As to the definition proper, its phrasing leaves no doubt that a prehistoric culture in the partitive sense is implied. The archaeological reality of such recurrent assemblages is not under discussion. As regards the second part, there would be no problems in accepting it as an assumption referrin complete th o gt e assemblag contemporary f artefactan eo f o c et s y grou peoplf po e witha common social tradition. The objection is that it is questionable to what extent the archaeological reality correspond originan a o st l reality othen i , r word whao st t exten t couli tproduca e db f o t systematic depositional, post-depositional and interpretational bias. The definition might induce illusioe th n tha prehistorie th t c culture coul reae d th givl o idecharacten t e a s aa culture th f ro f eo e 'peopleth ' once living, whic shoule hw wil, is d l t casei e statrarel th s eA e . yb tha t thougr ou h prehistoric cultures represent sociae th l traditions commo certaio nt n group peoplef so , thee yar meano n y b s representative f themo . With respect to the 'common social tradition' the functional and technological traits represented r assemblagou n i e lesar es informative thae stylistith n c traitsr n somou I . f o e assemblages stylistic traits are more difficult to isolate than in others. They can even be under-represented instancr fo , thosn ei e Neolithic culture whicn si pottere hth ya f appearo e b o st purely utilitarian character. Theoretically, differing assemblages of purely functional traits could merely represent different poses of one and the same 'people' (Newell et al, forthcoming). Binford (1965) stated that Childe's culture concept implie d'normativea ' vie f culturewo , the underlying assumption being that common patterns of behaviour produced spatial regularities in traits, including mortuary practices, which crystallized into 'cultures' d BinforAn . d imputed thae 'degreth t f formao e l similarities observed among independent sociocultural units wa s assumed to be a direct measure of the degree of genetic or affiliational cultural relationship amon e unitgth s being compared' e implicatioTh . f Binford'no s criticis t onlmno y concerne th s comparison of cultures, but also the validity of the delineation of the cultures themselves. Many cultures show up regional variants. Their being grouped into one culture may depend on the seemingly dominant homogeneity of the traits preserved. Non-surviving traits might have offered VAN DER WAALS: DISCONTINUITY, CULTURAL EVOLUTION AND THE HISTORIC EVENT much more variance extene th o t ,t tha t couli t d have been preferabl grouo et p certain peripheral variants with neighbouring variants now allotted to different cultures, or to make altogether different groupings. In such situations, not only post-depositional bias but also subjective preference e influentialb y ma s . Anyhow e non-representativenesth , s thu se fac th addt o t s observed by Clarke (1968), of which Childe was also aware (McNairn 1980), that boundaries of subsystem f culture t o snecessaril no o d s y correspond l thesal n ei observationl Al . s countee th r tendency towards partitioning of cultures based on subtle differences. Another consequence of the non-representative nature of 1 the 'culture' is that the anthropologica laggregationa e naturth d ean le (grou leveth ) f 'peopleo lpof ' concernee b y dma different from 'culture' to 'culture'. It cannot be determined simply on the basis of the patterning and spatial organizatio regionaf no l groups withi culturee nrelatef th o d sdan cultures themselves (Hodder 1978; Shennan 1978; McNairn 1980). majoA r deficienc e seconth f o yde definition th par f o t , responsibl e confusionth r fo e s induced by the migration paradigm, is the fact that this second part does not include any restrictions as to time or space: the assumed equation: cultural assemblage=social tradition=(group of) people is not restricted to a specific moment, nor to a special area. It can therefor prehistory wa e usee th eb yn di always did speakinn i , instancr g fo 'Funnee th f eo l Beaker Culture', thus extendin e equatiogth n assemblage=tradition=people (now encompassing many generations) over a period of almost a millennium. It is the presence in the definition of the word 'tradition', itself a diachronic concept, which suggests its use in this way. The justification is that each successive phase of such a culture, as far as can be learnt from the surviving assemblage, can be recognized as directly deriving from the preceding phase, with which it presents predominant similarities in shape. But if we accept the equation in this diachronic sense, without restrictions as spaceo t t impliei , s tha geographia t c expansio f thano t cultur course th n f timei eo e shoule db consequence th f migrationeo t doeI .t allo sno radicar wfo l chang f cultureo e otherwise thaa s na consequence of migration and conquest. This is in fact the way Childe used it, for example in his Prehistoric Migrations, according to Kossinna's axiom, and it is this aspect of it that we have to revise therefore W . e shoul restrictioa d d ad spac o t s r timena eo equatioe th : onls ni y valia r dfo given period, or, when used in a diachronic sense, within a defined, constant area. The Foulbe in West Africa, now spreading from Senegal to North Cameroons, are quite conscious of their common social tradition, which finds expression in their actual material culture, institutions and language knoe w t w Bu tha.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Rehabilitation of Marija Gimbutas' Kurgan Theory, Recent Research Developments Content of This Article
    The rehabilitation of Marija Gimbutas’ Kurgan theory, recent research developments This update is in English and not in Dutch because recent literature on the rehabilitation of Marija Gimbutas is in English. This text will be included in in the new edition of The Language of MA titled ‘The Language of MA revisited’, forthcoming in 2020. The abbreviation of this 2020 book is LOMA rev.; the abbr. of the 2013 edition is LOMA. Several Dutch articles on patriarchy and the transition from matriarchy to patriarchy can be found on my website www.anninevandermeer.nl under the button ‘Vaderland’ and subbutton ‘De invasies van steppevolkeren en het begin van het patriarchaat’ and ‘actuele visies op de overgang van moederland naar vaderland’. Content of this article: 1. The Kurgan-theory of Marija Gimbutas 2. The rehabilitation of Marija Gimbutas, recent interdisciplinary research 3. Colin Renfrew rehabilitating Marija Gimbutas’ Kurgan-theory 4. David Anthony: ‘Marija Gimbutas was right’… 5. Concluding remark 1. The Kurgan-theory of Marija Gimbutas Cultures in Old Europe: 6500 BC-4500 (left), 4000-3500 BC (middle), right 3500-3000 BC mapping the end of the Neolithic. The Kurgan-people, LOMA, 135. Marija Gimbutas described the culture of the steppe tribes or in her words the ‘Kurgan people’ as follows: ‘they have a herders' economy with rudimentary agriculture, coarse pottery with cord impressions and sun motifs, domestication of horses, warfare, metal weapons, worship of masculine sky gods, a patrilineal social system, and finally elite graves of important men’.1 These graves she called ‘kurgans; the Russian word for ‘grave in a hill’ is kurgan (they use another word for a ‘hill’); these burial mounds form ‘hills’ in the landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • In Pursuit of the Goddess
    In pursuit of the goddess How one woman defied the odds to restore the feminist principle Rita Repsiene 19 April 2010 Controversial in her day and not without opponents even now, she became a feminist icon and a hero of the post-religious twenty-first century. Lithuanian- American archeologist Marija Gimbutas (Lithuanian: Gimbutiene) revolutionized ideas of "Old Europe" and reinstated the Great Goddess in her rightful place before the onslaught of the Indo-European male ascendancy dethroned her and left women mere consorts and companions. Marija Gimbutas was the luckiest of scholars. She was the only twentieth-century scholar to have discovered and described an entire, unrecognized civilization. Vytautas Kavolis Most important, let us not cut off the bonds with the spiritual past of our nation. Marija Gimbutas One of the most renowned US archaeologists, Lithuanian-born Marija Alseikaite- Gimbutas (1921-94), created her own myth of extraordinariness. Like the goddess of light she describes in her work, she is acclaimed, respected, even adored. [1] Having opened the door to the archaeological past of “Old Europe”, she built a unique methodology for which she coined the term archaeomythological. She explored Baltic mythology in depth and, having revealed the merits of the matricentric – what she called “matristic” – culture became an icon of feminist ideology. In 1991, she received the Anisfield-Wolf prize for her book The Civilization of the Goddess: The World of Old Europe published in that year. The prize has been awarded in the United States since 1935 for the most outstanding research in the history of world culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Marija Gimbutas Papers and Collection of Books
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c8m04b8b No online items Marija Gimubtas Papers and Collection of Books Finding aid prepared by Archives Staff Opus Archives and Research Center 801 Ladera Lane Santa Barbara, CA, 93108 805-969-5750 [email protected] http://www.opusarchives.org © 2017 Marija Gimubtas Papers and 1 Collection of Books Descriptive Summary Title: Marija Gimbutas Papers and Collection of Books Physical Description: 164 linear feet (298 boxes) and 1,100 volumes Repository: Opus Archives and Research Center Santa Barbara, CA 93108 Language of Material: English Biography/Organization History Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994) was a Lithuanian-American archeologist and archaeomythologist, and Professor Emeritus of European Archaeology and Indo-European Studies at the University of California Los Angeles from 1963-1989. Her work focused on the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of Old Europe. She was born in 1921 in Vilnius, Lithuania. At the University of Vilnius she studied archaeology, linguistics, ethnology, folklore and literature and received her MA in 1942. In 1946 she earned a PhD in archaeology at Tübingen University in Germany for her dissertation on prehistoric burial rites in Lithuania. In 1949 Gimbutas moved to the United States. She worked for Harvard University at the Peabody Museum from 1950-1963 and was made a Fellow of the Peabody in 1955. Her work included translating archeological reports from Eastern Europe, and her research focused on European prehistory. In 1963 Gimbutas became a professor at the University of California in Los Angeles in the European archeology department. Gimbutas is best known for her research into the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of "Old Europe," a term she introduced.
    [Show full text]
  • Zukauskaite Images of the Horse and Horseman in Corded Ware
    ImaGes of the hoRse aNd HORSEmAn IN CoRded WaRe CuLtuRe studIes JURGITA ŽUKAUSKAITĖ Images of theHorseman Horse inandCulture Studies Corded Ware Abstract This article presents an overview of the representations of the horse and horseman in Corded Ware Culture studies. A survey of the literature is proposed, discussing assumptions of the role of the horse in the communities of this culture. JURGITA JURGITA ŽUKAUSKAITĖ Key words: Corded Ware Culture, mobility, horse, horseman, East Baltic. Introduction for an alternative approach based on the theory of au- tochthonous development see Malmer 1962 and Kris- The visibility threshold always is a challenge in ar- tiansen 1989), the fast and extensive spread of Corded chaeological research, especially when one talks about Ware Culture bearers could be explained by the no- groups of people who are used to being described madic and warlike nature of the community, where the as mobile or nomadic. Since pastoral nomads are so mounted warrior played the essential role. This con- ephemeral and enigmatic, they always fascinate ar- cept dominated for many decades and served to form chaeologists, but their representation often tends to be an image of the Corded Ware Culture man as a warlike oversimplified. While the Late Neolithic Corded Ware rider on horseback (Fig. 1). Other assumptions made Culture generally has been identified with mobile were that boat-shaped battle axes – the characteristic groups of people within its rich history of research, it artefact of the Corded Ware Culture – were weapons still remains quite a mysterious phenomenon. Despite used only by the riders, as these axes were not suitable various opinions about Corded Ware Culture commu- for unmounted struggles (Rimantienė 1989, p.54), and nities, the majority of researchers have long agreed that broken battle axes found in settlements pointed to upon a particular model of subsistence for the Corded the not always peaceful character of the infiltration of Ware Culture people: the basis of their economy was the newcomers (Loze 1996, p.67).
    [Show full text]
  • Old Europe Meets the Indo-Europeans Indo-European Languages Shared IE Words Proto-Indoeuropean (PIE) Characteristics
    Indo-European Languages Old Europe Meets the Indo-Europeans Spoken today from Europe to India. Alan R. Rogers Examples: Latin, Greek, German, English, Celtic, Armenian, Russian, Sanskrit March 14, 2018 1 / 30 2 / 30 Shared IE Words Inherited from PIE. These shared words tell us something about the PIE homeland. I Numbers I Body parts: heart, hand, foot I Oak, beech, wolf, bear, salmon I Snow I Relatives 3 / 30 4 / 30 Proto-IndoEuropean (PIE) Characteristics I Milk words I Horses, sheep, cattle, pigs, goats, grain I Copper, maybe bronze, not iron I Carts, weaving, mead I Patrilineal clans, raiding, war, revenge I Young male warriors, wolf totem Wheel/Horse area overlap at 5k ago shaded in blue. 5 / 30 6 / 30 PIE Characteristics, continued Gods I Deus, Zeus, Jupiter (Zeu Pater), Duanz Pita, Indra I Three classes: warriors, clergy, farmers I Jove, Sius, Deva I Epic poetry: Rig Veda, Iliad I Thor, Perjanya I “driving cattle,” “undying fame,” “immortal gods” I Hestia, Vesta I slay a dragon I Aphrodite, Venus, Freya, Lakshmi I Various twins 7 / 30 8 / 30 PIE were not technologically advanced Anatolian Hypothesis: Colin Renfrew Sumerians had I wheel IndoEuropean originated in I writing Anatolia (Turkey). I arithmetic I cities Spread north with the early Neolithic, 7 kya I irrigation PIE had domesticated the horse. 9 / 30 10 / 30 Kurgan Hypothesis: Marija Gimbutas Old Europe: 6500–2800 BC IndoEuropean originated in Pontic Steppes (Ukraine) Spread West, East, and South in Bronze Age, 5 kya It now seems clear that Gimbutas was right; Renfrew wrong. 11 / 30 12 / 30 Old Europe Varna Cemetery, Farming Bulgaria Gold, copper 4900–4400 BC Dispersed settlements little Lots of gold ⇒ warfare.
    [Show full text]
  • The Degeneration of Ancient Bird and Snake Goddesses Into Historic Age Witches and Monsters
    The Degeneration of Ancient Bird and Snake Goddesses Miriam Robbins Dexter Special issue 2011 Volume 7 The Monstrous Goddess: The Degeneration of Ancient Bird and Snake Goddesses into Historic Age Witches and Monsters Miriam Robbins Dexter An earlier form of this paper was published as 1) to demonstrate the broad geographic basis of “The Frightful Goddess: Birds, Snakes and this iconography and myth, 2) to determine the Witches,”1 a paper I wrote for a Gedenkschrift meaning of the bird and the snake, and 3) to which I co-edited in memory of Marija demonstrate that these female figures inherited Gimbutas. Several years later, in June of 2005, the mantle of the Neolithic and Bronze Age I gave a lecture on this topic to Ivan Marazov’s European bird and snake goddess. We discuss class at the New Bulgarian University in who this goddess was, what was her importance, Sophia. At Ivan’s request, I updated the paper. and how she can have meaning for us. Further, Now, in 2011, there is a lovely synchrony: I we attempt to establish the existence of and have been asked to produce a paper for a meaning of the unity of the goddess, for she was Festschrift in honor of Ivan’s seventieth a unity as well as a multiplicity. That is, birthday, and, as well, a paper for an issue of although she was multifunctional, yet she was the Institute of Archaeomythology Journal in also an integral whole. In this wholeness, she honor of what would have been Marija manifested life and death, as well as rebirth, and Gimbutas’ ninetieth birthday.
    [Show full text]
  • A FEMININE ALTERNATIVE: MARIJA GIMBUTAS and the MATRIFOCAL MODEL by SEAN MILLER Integrated Studies Project Submitted to Dr. Lisa
    A FEMININE ALTERNATIVE: MARIJA GIMBUTAS AND THE MATRIFOCAL MODEL By SEAN MILLER Integrated Studies Project submitted to Dr. Lisa Micheelsen in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts – Integrated Studies Athabasca, Alberta August 2014 Table of Contents Abstract................................ 3 Introduction.......................... 5 Part One................................ 8 Part Two................................ 26 Part Three.............................. 49 Conclusion............................. 60 Bibliography.......................... 63 3 Abstract During the 20th century, in tandem with transformations within and challenges to the traditional Western archaeological canon, a new and highly contentious theory gradually evolved within the halls of academia, a theory which contended that egalitarian and women-centred societies proliferated within “Old Europe”, a geographical territory which today encompasses parts of Eastern Europe and the Greek Isles, during the Neolithic, New Stone, and Copper Ages (roughly 6500-3500 B.C.). The basic tenets of this theory are centred upon the notion that within these ancient societies women and men lived as relative equals in virtually all aspects of daily life. Moreover, women were often accorded esteemed status due to their reproductive capabilities; indeed, the identity of women as life-givers was closely tied to the life-giving goddess who served as the focal point of Old European religion. Although this “matrifocal” model for Old European society has its share of supporters and proponents, the individual most responsible for its formulation and subsequent dissemination was the renowned and highly accomplished Lithuanian archaeologist Marija Gimbutas. Gimbutas incorporated her extensive knowledge of prehistoric Eastern European folklore and burial rites, the symbolic nature of the multitude of artifacts accrued from her Eastern European excavations, and her fluency in a number of different languages (including those of Eastern European origin) in order to develop the matrifocal model.
    [Show full text]
  • Anatomy of a Backlash: Concerning the Work of Marija Gimbutas
    Anatomy of a Backlash Charlene Spretnak! ! Special Issue 2011!! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!Volume 7! ! Anatomy of a Backlash: Concerning the Work of Marija Gimbutas Charlene Spretnak Introduction: Marija Gimbutas’ Pioneering distancing themselves from a caricature of Work in Five Areas Gimbutas’ work they termed “outdated”—that they had made a number of fresh discoveries Anyone who assumes that material published and conclusions about Neolithic societies which under her own name will stand as an inviolable are, in truth, exactly what Gimbutas had record of her positions might well consider the discovered, observed, and written about decades case of Marija Gimbutas (1921–1994). She is a earlier. An example is “Women and Men at renowned Lithuanian-American archaeologist Çatalhöyük” by Ian Hodder in Scientific who was internationally regarded as occupying American,1 in which Hodder incorrectly informs the pinnacle of her field, having left an his readers that MariJa Gimbutas “argued extensive written record of her pioneering work forcefully for an early phase of matriarchal for over half a century (scores of monographs society.”2 In this article on the excavation of and excavation site reports, editorships of Catalhöyük in Turkey, Hodder announces “fresh scholarly journals, presentations at international evidence of the relative power of the sexes” in conferences published in proceedings volumes, that Neolithic settlement—as if it were a break- three hundred fifty articles, and more than through discovery of his own, supposedly
    [Show full text]
  • Interdisciplinary and Linguistic Evidence for Palaeolithic Continuity
    Interdisciplinary and linguistic evidence for Palaeolithic continuity of Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic populations in Eurasia, with an excursus on Slavic ethnogenesis by Mario Alinei Expanded version of a paper read at the Conference Ancient Settlers in Europe, Kobarid, 29-30 May 2003. – Forthcoming in “Quaderni di semantica”, 26. 1 Introduction This contribution is based on my recent work on the problem of the origins of Indo- European (= IE) languages (Alinei 1996, 1998, 2000ab, 2001, 2002) – and lately on Etruscan (Alinei 2003) –, and is divided in five parts: (A) the first outlines the three presently competing theories on the origins of IE languages; (B) the second summarizes the converging conclusions reached by different sciences on the problem of the origin of language and languages in general; (C) the third surveys recent theories on the origins of non IE languages in Europe; (D) the fourth illustrates examples of how the IE linguistic record can be read in the light of the Paleolithic Continuity Theory, and in comparison with the two competing theories; (E) the fifth concerns the specific problem of the Slavic ethnogenesis. 2 The three main paradigms for the origins of Indo-European languages At present, the international debate on the origins of IE languages and peoples concentrates on three different theories: the traditional theory and two new, quite recent ones. 2.1 Copper Age theory = warlike invasion by Proto-Indo-Europeans as pastoral nomads (kurgan) (Gimbutas, Mallory etc.) As we know, until recently, the received doctrine for the origins of Indo-Europeans in Europe was centered upon the assumption of an Indo-European Invasion in the Copper Age (IV millennium b.C.), by horse-riding warrior pastoralists (fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal of Archaeomythology Summer, 2005 Volume 1, Number 1
    The Journal of Archaeomythology Summer, 2005 Volume 1, Number 1 Marija Gimbutas’ Kurgan Hypothesis and Indo-European Studies Edgar C. Polomé It is difficult to measure how extensive an actively all her life). Here again, she coordinates impact any one scholar has had on a specific linguistic data with the results of archaeological field. Not only are her or his publications findings, displaying a sound scepticism versus relevant, but more important is the response of the Balto-Slavic hypothesis: other researchers within the discipline. Sometimes, the influence of particular views is The question of unity or parallelism. even made deeper by the dissenting opinions is mainly a matter of terminology and they have triggered or the continued chronology. Judging from archaeological investigations they have inspired. Nowhere are evidence, the period of convergence these considerations more valid than in the case must have ended in the first half of the of Marija Gimbutas. second millennium BC, and in the long history of relationships between the The earlier work of Marija Gimbutas, on the Baltic and Slavic languages there were Balts and the Slavs, led to the two brilliant periods of complete independence and monographs in the series Ancient Peoples and parallelism (Gimbutas 1971:25-6). Places (1963 and 1971). Beside rich archaeological and prehistorical data, The Balts Her position is comparable to that of G. Devoto contain a remarkable synthesis of her views on versus the alleged unity of Latino-Faliscan and Baltic religion, which she later expanded in Osco-Umbrian. several contributions drawing, with independent thoughts, on the works of Biezais.
    [Show full text]
  • The Life and Work of Marija Gimbutes Joan Marler
    Comparative Civilizations Review Volume 33 Article 2 Number 33 Fall 1995 10-1-1995 A Vision for the World: The Life and Work of Marija Gimbutes Joan Marler Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/ccr Recommended Citation Marler, Joan (1995) "A Vision for the World: The Life and Work of Marija Gimbutes," Comparative Civilizations Review: Vol. 33 : No. 33 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/ccr/vol33/iss33/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the All Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Comparative Civilizations Review by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Marler: A Vision for the World: The Life and Work of Marija Gimbutes 1 A VISION FOR THE WORLD: THE LIFE AND WORK OF MARIJA GIMBUTAS Joan Marler In June of 1993 Marija Gimbutas made her last visit to her motherland, Lithuania. From the moment she emerged from passport control the T.V. cam- eras were rolling, press cameras were clicking and a throng of family and friends swept her into their embrace. That evening the television news exclaimed that Marija Gimbutiene had arrived - and throughout the two and a half weeks of her visit, there were daily articles in the press, television coverage of her lectures and interviews, docu- mentary filmings and meetings with scholars, students, family and friends. Marija Gimbutas had returned as a world class scholar to receive an honorary doctorate at Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas where fifty-five years earlier she began her study of archaeology.
    [Show full text]
  • Gimbutas, Marija, and the Goddess 10/16/12 9:20 AM
    Gimbutas, Marija, and the Goddess 10/16/12 9:20 AM Home For Librarians Help My SpringerReference Go Advanced Search Author Submit Article Track Changes Exit Editing Maureen Murdock Gimbutas, Marija, and the Goddess Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion ! Article ID: 310423 ! Chapter ID: 9329 Editor [edited] [options]The work of Marija Gimbutas has been crucial to the growth of feminist BA, MA, PhD David A. Leeming spirituality, feminist religious scholarship, feminist psychology, and the liberating Emeritus, Blanton-Peale Institute implications that the existence of a goddess tradition can bring to women everywhere. and, Rhinebeck, USA Whatever the reactions to Gimbutas’ theories,it is important to acknowledge the larger implications of the idea of an embodied sacred feminine that preceded patriarchy. As Charlene Spretnak writes: Gimbutas’ work, which was illuminated by her sensitivity to spiritual matters and to sculptures of all eras, has radical implications for the history of both Western religion and Western philosophy. In each of those fields, the early belief systems and schools are not seen to be bridge traditions. That is, the attention in both the Greek “mystery cults” (demeaned as pre-Christian pagan irrationalism) and the pre-Socratic philosophers to unitive dimensions of being and a cosmological wholeness was an attempt to preserve the remnants of Old European wisdom (Spretnak, 1997, pp. 403-404). Owl, Fig. 300, Language of the Goddess illustration materials (boxes 252, 253). Marija Gimbutas Collection, Copyright OPUS Archives and Research Center, Santa Barbara, CA. Gimbutas’ work helps us entertain the hope that the oppression of patriarchy did not always exist. If a culture did exist in peace approximately 8,000 years ago, prior to the Indo-Europeans, that would certainly be a model of a mythos and psychology for the 21st century.
    [Show full text]