God the Mother or Paleolithic Porn?

If you Google "Venus of Hohle Fels" today, you will find articles regarding this major archaeological find. It is one of the oldest known examples of figurative art in the world and is at least 35,000 to 40,000 years old. She was found by an archaeologist in Germany, Nicholas J. Conrad.

Big news, but at the same time, take note of the articles you find. They have titles like: "Busty Figurine Likened to 'Paleolithic Playboy'" and "Buxom Babe." Right Here on the Huffington Post you'll find, "Venus of Hohle Fels: PREHISTORIC PORN." A New York Times article describes the figurine's blatant sexuality as "bordering on pornographic" and she is described as being associated with fertility beliefs.

You've got to be kidding me, and if you weren't, I had a good chuckle anyway. I have been working with the modern implications of the Goddess archetype for years now and it relates to the emergence of right brain "feminine" strengths in men and women. My presentation "In Our Right Minds" is a real eye-opener for audiences. We are all using our right hemispheres more and this is changing everything! Funny thing is, back in those Paleolithic days, humanity used to be in balance in terms of utilizing right brain skills, and they venerated the Goddess -- yep, I said it, the Goddess. Maybe there is something we can learn from the past and our Venus of Hohle Fels.

Today's articles fail to mention that Paleolithic cultures, the era from which the Venus of Hohle Fels hails, were Goddess cultures. In Paleolithic and Neolithic cultures, the driving force behind all things was considered female. Dr. Elinor Gadon, Cultural Historian writes about these Goddess cultures: "...Goddess religion was earth-centered, not heaven-centered, of this world not otherworldly, body affirming not body-denying, holistic not dualistic. The Goddess was immanent, within every human being, not transcendent, and humanity was viewed as part of nature, death as part of life. Her worship was sensual, celebrating the erotic, embracing all that was alive."

It is nearly impossible for us to see the Venus of Hohle Fels as sacred, even as -- dare I say it -- God the Mother. She is a messenger coming to us from a culture that honored all things female. Goddess cultures are our history, and in fact they persist, with characteristics worthy of our attention.

In a survey of 150 cultures today, anthropologist Peggy Reeves Sanday compared cultures structured around male dominance with those that embrace female power. She found a clear correlation between female power in society and Goddess veneration. Where the divine has a feminine face, there is a correlation with the society's honoring of nature, women's role as officiators of sacred sacraments, connection to the land, and female power. In these societies, there is egalitarianism, rather than women holding power over men. These cultures value community, birthing, nurturing, empathy, intuitive intelligence, earth, nature, connection and interdependence. Also, the orientation of time is not linear, but is cyclical and aligned with the eternal cycles of birth, growth, death and renewal. The divine is understood to be embodied in every person and in nature, not somewhere else, abstract and disembodied. Sensuality and sexuality are honored as sacred.

What we have come to describe as "feminine" values are actually attributes that belong to women and men; they are a valued part of society when the feminine is not subjugated. They are not women's tenets, they are societies'.

It is certainly out of alignment to describe an artifact from this ancient era as "pornographic." This is quite at odds with the sacred sexuality of egalitarian Goddess cultures.

Pioneering archaeologist Marija Gimbutas published The Language of the Goddess in 1989. Before she died in 1994, Gimbutas studied thousands of Paleolithic and Neolithic artifacts and uncovered a language of prehistoric peoples -- the language of the Goddess. As a scholar, Gimbutas had to rise above the prevailing intellectual perspective that could not get past seeing through the lens of modern culture. Judging by today's headlines, things haven't changed much.

Before we so quickly dismiss the Venus of Hohle Fels as pornographic we should consider our loss in doing so. As Eric Neumann wrote: "Comparative religion ... teaches us that there is in man (beyond the psychological need for a father symbol) an equally great, or possibly even greater need: that of the divine woman who appears in many different forms throughout the world, yet remains basically the same everywhere."

Maybe we can learn from our foremothers and forefathers. What other goodies come with feminine-venerating cultures? Dr. Elinor Gadon writes, "Perhaps the most provocative discovery of recent archaeological research is that nowhere in Neolithic Goddess cultures is there any sign of warfare. There is no evidence of fortifications, of violent death, invasion or conquest. We can only conclude that there was some direct relation between Goddess religion and peaceful coexistence. Neolithic Goddess culture was woman-centered, peaceful, prosperous, and nonhierarchical."

Vicki Noble writes, "Archaeologists ardently seek to find evidence of war in earlier societies, but there is actually no proof whatsoever of violence or war before the middle of the fifth millennium B.C.E. Although people built houses close together and lived in fairly high population density in the early urban centers, they apparently developed ways of resolving conflict and living in harmony with their environments that allowed them to share food and resources, irrigate fields, and participate in large ritual and artistic endeavors...Goddess scholars believe that content and form cannot be separated and that the reason for the lack of violence and conflict in early societies is the presence of the active worship of the Great Mother."

Hmmm...No warfare, no gender hierarchy, honoring of earth, sacred sexuality -- quite a history our Venus of Hohle Fels connects us to. If we were to travel back in time, our ancestors would simply not comprehend what we have done with sacred sexuality, the greatest force on the planet. Imagine if at the dawn of adolescence, our daughters could embrace their sexuality as sacred as opposed to slutty? Wouldn't it be great if our sons could see the female form as holy rather than pornographic? Something to ponder on this May day in 2009, as we look at an artifact that we have called "pornographic" and our ancestors called "holy." The Kagaba Indians of Columbia sing, "The Mother has left a memory in us all." I think we would do well to remember.

Comments

[bodhibliss]

(Sorry for the series of posts - they make sense if you start with the earliest and work your way to the top)

That doesn't mean that the Paleolithic and Neolithic were matriarchal utopias. However, as best as we can tell, there was a broad cultural continuity between 35,000 and 11,000 B.C. (as evidenced in the relatively stable level of technology and the recurring artistic imagery of the period). That doesn't mean everyone spoke the same language or lived in complete unity - but these hundreds of goddess figurines appear to represent an image recognizable across thousands of miles and thousands of years (much like Jesus, or Madonna and Child), and were no doubt related to motherhood and childbirth - an image far deeper, mysterious, and more complex than mere "pornography."

Maybe I am misguided, but I prefer to embrace the mystery and respect the clearly sacred intentions of the creators, rather than assign the values of our relatively recent and very young consumer culture to these relics of our prehistoric past.

A fascinating discussion indeed ...

[Dawn Work-Makinne]

The number of figurines over such a wide geographic and temporal spread has excited comment by many scholars of archaeology and gender. It is correct that labeling these figurines "pornographic" has been criticized. In fact, even calling the figurine a “Venus” perpetuates that discourse. Scholars would be much more likely to indicate that they had for their creators religious, funerary, or fertility importance. While some scholars argue for a matriarchal prehistory, more argue for an egalitarian social structure, even to what Sherratt calls the "secondary products revolution" in the Neolithic. (See Ehrenberg, Women in Prehistory.) Work in religious studies focusing on indigenous peoples indicates less of a divide between "life" and "religion," so much so that scholars like J.Z. Smith decry the use of "religion" as anything but a category for scholars. For us to say that the figurines have a "religious" purpose, with our Western assumptions that there was a "secular" life for our indigenous ancestors, may be missing the point. When there is no distinction between "sacred" and "nonsacred" there would certainly be no distinction between "religious" and "secular" artwork. A "fertility image," for instance, would not be separated as "secular" artwork, but would be a full participant in the sacred cosmos. Our cultural baggage of "pornographic" linked with the "female" has almost permanently soured the possibility of the connection of "sacred" with "female." I am a scholar that argues for their reconnection.

[bodhibliss]

Can we posit from these images a peaceful matriarchal society? Not definitively.

We do know that much later in the Neolithic - the time of Catal Huyuk, oldest city on the planet - that yes, there were weapons and some sort of defensive force - but this is after the emergence of agriculture, when a surplus of food and goods existed that needed to be protected from raiders.

Prior to the advent of agriculture all members of a tribal community possessed the same basic technological skills (compare still existing primal cultures). Tasks do appear to be differentiated according to gender, yet men could weave a basket if need be and women could flake off a primitive flint knife

... but with the appearance of agriculture, for the first time there is a surplus of food - and this generated specialized roles within a community: farmers growing food didn't have time to make their own shoes or bake clay pots or stand guard to protect their property - so they traded surplus food to shoe makers, spear makers, pottery makers, and others..

Naturally there was the occasional raid on a village's surplus, and some communities did bump into one another and engage in minor skirmishes with some loss of life (as we see in ritual battles between villages in Africa and South America yet today), but wars of subjugation, with the conquest and wholesale slaughter of an entire people, didn't appear until the third millenium B.C. (with Sargon of Agade, c.

[bodhibliss]

Even in primal hunter-gatherer cultures swollen breasts and bellies are commonly associated with a specific condition: pregnancy.

It''s not a great leap to associate that common condition with these stone images. Indeed, some have been found in contexts suggesting menstrual and/or childbearing rites. And then some offer not-so-subtle clues.

The Venus of Laussel (precariously carved on that limestone overhang) holds aloft in one hand a crescent shaped bison horn with 13 crescent shaped marks etched into it, while her other hand is placed on her bulging womb. We know that crescent-shaped bull and bison horns were later associated with the Moon; again, it's not unreasonable to wonder if that association is foreshadowed here - especially given the 13 crescents etched into the horn (same as the 13 lunar months - and 13 menstrual cycles - in one year).

It's difficult not to wonder if a connection is being drawn here between the lunar and menstrual cycles, and pregnancy. Not pornography, but perhaps fertility rites ...

It's an educated guess, but just one sample among many that lead to such conclusions.

[bodhibliss]

What IS emphasized is the regenerative triangle - that area of the female form associated with birth (heavy breasts, swollen belly, vulva): these parts of the body are huge and exaggerated, even in images where the head is small and neck and legs are elongated and slender (e.g., the Venus of Lespugue, some 27,000 years old). Nevertheless it's true that describing many of these "Venuses" as zaftig or Rubenesque is quite the understatement, so it's natural that some assume fat women were the Playboy Playmates of the Paleolithic

... yet what we DO know is that morbid obesity was hardly epidemic during those twenty-four thousand years. Excessive leisure, indolence, and a high calorie diet were not characteristics of the semi-nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle in the Stone Age. Real flesh-and-blood women of the period did not look like this (note the physique of females in the few comparable primal cultures remaining today: whether the Yanamamo in South America or the aborigines on the Australian subcontinent, none still living a traditional lifestyle are morbidly obese).

So these figurines don't look like the women of the period, and yet we know the artists from the same culture responsible for the exquisite cave paintings of Altamira, Lascaux, or Les Trois Freres were adept at creating naturalistic images. It's reasonable to assume there must be purpose and intention behind the abstract, exaggerated design of these Venus figurines.

[bodhibliss]

The lack of feet, for example, suggests these figurines were designed to stand in mud or clay in household shrines (as Joseph Campbell points out, we know this because some have been found "in situ"). This suggests a sacred context and elements of ritual, and indicates a deeper meaning than mere pornography.

The universal absence of facial features over roughly 25,000 years isn't because hundreds of generations of artists were inept (after all, cave paintings from the same cultural matrix and time period depict elegant, detailed naturalistic features of horses, bison and other creatures). Rather, it seems the "Venus" figurines aren't meant to be naturalistic representations, and certainly not specific individuals - these aren't portraits of Betty or Sue or Maria. Perhaps they represent a deity, perhaps an Earth Goddess or Mother Goddess - or maybe even just Everywoman - but clearly the emphasis isn't on a specific human personality.

[bodhibliss]

Especially in the Paleolithic we notice characteristics common to these figurines regardless of whether they were carved 15,000 years or 35,000 years ago - particularly the exaggeration of and emphasis on the regenerative triangle (bulbous breasts, belly and buttocks, and a well-defined pubic triangle), along with no feet to speak of, and no face.

Many early anthropologists in the Victorian era - all male - assumed these were samples of caveman porn (i.e., masturbatory fetishes - Fred Flintstone getting his rocks off?).

Of course, in a time when a woman's naked ankle could excite arousal, it's no surprise some assumed any naked form, no matter how obese, was designed for that purpose. Though that perception has been largely discredited, it's no surprise the media continues to tout this titillating claim (notice the widespread publicity and attention this description has garnered, compared to the little attention paid recent discoveries that stretched the dating of Paleolithic cave paintings - absent women - back another 20,000 years ... there's no doubt that sex sells).

No one knows exactly what these images portray, but we are able to make intelligent extrapolations grounded in those shared traits. (These theories could well be wrong; they have certainly been challenged, as well as championed, by reasonable, well-intentioned anthropologists and scholars - but they remain part of the academic discussion.)

[bodhibliss]

In the Paleolithic era (the "old stone age"), roughly 200 of these "Venus" figurines have been uncovered in a swath stretching from Spain to Siberia, created some 11,000 to 25,000 years ago (among the best known are the Venus of Laussel - or "Woman with the Horn" - carved on a limestone overhang, and the Venus of Willendorf, both roughly 25,000 years old). Many anthropologists suggest these figures haven't been found in Africa, which shared the same cultural and technological level, not because they didn't exist, but because there the raw material would have been wood, rather than stone.

And now the Hohle Fells figurine, some 35,000 years old, stretches the recurrence of this artistic motif across some 24,000 years!

It's not unusual to find variations on one theme over time in religious art - despite individual differences, we have no trouble recognizing Jesus on the Cross, whether an image painted 1500 years ago, or an abstract work created last year - but 24,000 years is the longest any one theme has dominated the field of artistic representation (apart from the human handprint).

That's quite a cultural continuum!

(After a lengthy absence this archetypal image re-appears in the Neolithic, or "new stone age," concentrated between 7,000 and 3,000 B.C., which includes the period of Catal Huyuk - but there are differences with the Paleolithic figurines, including a growing differentiation and individuation in the Neolithic representations.)

[RadioDiva108]

Congratulations Dale on getting the Divine Feminine back in the news and discussion stirred up. Many might rather She remain buried beneath the sands of time because her absence has served the patriarchal culture we find ourselves in as we swirl down a deep, dark hole. Those naysayers might be better to open more books and realize that these ideas are as plausible as any accepted in Churches and Temples across the land - and before they bash Marija Gimbutas, perhaps they might like to know the beloved Joseph Campbell called her work "a rosetta stone" it was so important in unlocking the herstory of Goddess across continents and cultures. They might also ask themselves what it has cost humanity to have denied a feminine face of god.

If anyone out there would like more on this subject, please tune in to my radio show, Voices of the Sacred Feminine -- just google it. Or go to www.karentate.com

[LRuyle]

Dale is courageously telling Herstory with words, scholarship and action as a writer/performer of the Feminine Divine. Her passion for the Goddess is evident in her article and her views are supported by many other scholars studying, writing and creating ideas and art inspired by God the Mother. Keep up the good work, Dale !

For more images and Goddess Herstory go to www.lydiaruyle.com

[Kari Henley - Huffpost Blogger]

Congratulations on your first post with Huff Po!
Welcome aboard.
I see you have "stirred the pot" quite nicely here, judging by the comments. Fantastic! Creating conversation is what it is all about.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge, your passion and your interest to a "current event" that many of us would have missed.
kari

[Jonahson]

The ying-yang symbol shows there is a little Venus in every man and a little Mars in every woman.

[h0tr0d]

This post seems more about ideology than anything else. This female centric worship doesn't sound much different from paganism....which hardly changed the world. If you believe in evolution, whatever was buried with "Venus of Hohle Fels" apparently deserved to be.

[DiogenesOfAlaska]

Methinks your faith in evolution is calvinism, not science.

[Montreaux1991]

Anyone who practices ecstatic trance would recognize the pose of the figure in a second: it's the posture of Inanna.

[marlovian]

Rubenesque! An evocative word encompassing all longings be they prurient or profound.

[Badbone]

"an artifact that we have called "pornographic" and our ancestors called "holy."

Holy, perhaps. But that doesn't mean it was worshipped in a positive way. Many cultures created totems of the things they hated and feared the most.

What do you think is the subject of most of the artifacts we find? Death. Not birth, not hunting, not the sun. Death. So can we then conclude that they loved death? Worshipped death? Saw death as "holy"?

Perhaps these icons weren't some hippie-dippy earth mother celebration, but a totem against evil. The point is, we don't really know. And to assign them meaning based on our current politics is just plain absurd.

[Veleda]

Death is *not* the subject of most archaeological finds. It's life, vitality, regeneration, which is why these figurines were buried with the dead, placed in shrines, painted in many cases with red ochre (earth mother's blood), and even worn as amulets (the Hohle Fels figurine itself has a loop, as a pendant). Tthe reality is that these female figurines occur all over the planet (see http://www.suppressedhistories.net/femalecions.html ) as sacred objects. If you think that's hippy-dippy, it's your loss. These figurines represent an important part of the human spiritual heritage which hasn't gotten due recognition, and is dismissed just as women are in this society.

The sacral interpretation is not from "our current politics." Just the opposite: Dominant modern attitudes are what dictates this "ancient pinup/porn" interpretation, or the tired, flattening stereotype of "fertility idol" which anthropological theory insists on nowadays. Certainly one of the meanings of these female figurines could be protection against evil, but that's just one out many.

[Theresa Darklady Reed - Huffpost Blogger]

The education I received while I earned my anthropology degree differs in interpretation of the "goddess cultures" from what you present, but that's not my purpose in posting.

My purpose in posting is to say that as a person with an anthropology degree who has worked in the porn industry as a journalist for nearly 2 decades (now we know what can be done with dual degrees in history & anthropology!) I'm appalled that nudity is constantly associated with pornography in the minds of the mainstream.

It's not porn that's "sexualizing" our culture, it's a culture that promotes a sophomoric attitude toward sexuality and our bodies in their natural state that's responsible for that.

There's nothing inherently or de facto "pornographic" about a fecund or fat woman, although there may be much that symbolizes fertility, health, female power, etc. Only a person who can't see the nude body without seeing it as exclusively sexual and therefore naughty, forbidden and titillating will consider sheer nudity to be "pornographic."

But that's the culture that the mainstream media and religiousl­y/socially conservative thought has presented us with. A culture where we deny that minors have sexuality yet sexualize even photos of babies in their baths and where women with naturally large breasts feel shame under the eyes of people who can't seem to see past their cleavages.

[Montreaux1991]

Well said!!!!

[moflard]

Too true. Unfortunately the MSM always looks for a catchy headline, not the more complex truth. As you're probably aware that isn't how these figures are presented in the academic literature (well, not often anyway I mean it actually IS a possibility if an unlikely one). Honestly, as an archaeologist I have to say that one of the most important pieces of info to come out of these figures is the evidence for some form of weaving.

[carrieanna]

Puritanism is alive and well in "modern" United States. Most people just don't recognize it in themselves.

[Veleda]

I agree with your comment that female nakedness is equated with sex and with pornography. The "pornographic" take is based on the idea that women are reducible to sex. Not sexual beings, but sexual objects who can be appropriated.

But I strongly disagree with your claim that it's not porn that is 'sexualizing' the overculture. It is the hugest single force in publishing and in Net consumption, and is reshaping sexual culture and behavior in incalculable ways, including for very young people. Sometimes merely in the direction of sophomoric attitudes, but much worse than that, it is mass-propagating fetished concepts of the female body and a powerful tyranny defining expected sexual behavior.