I feel like my comments on the second half of the book, in which Eisler moves away from prehistory to deal with the political power men have had over women throughout history, can be dealt with by pointing out that it's unfortunate that Judith Butler's Gender Trouble came out in 1990, three years after Eisler first wrote this.Įisler sees the main theme throughout history as 'the struggle between so-called feminine and masculine values' (138). Gimbutas, and by extension Eisler, with all her claims after those, moves onto increasingly shakier ground.* Anything after that, we can't really say for sure. My conclusion: there are a couple strong points to the idea of a more egalitarian Neolithic society that had possible elements of a religion involving numerous goddesses. Gimbutas is a highly controversial figure in archaeology, and I tried to wade a bit into the debate around her by reading a number of articles, to better weigh Eisler's argument. The first half is in large part a summary and popularizing of the work of archaeologist Marija Gimbutas, who argues that before the spread of Indo-European civilization there existed a matrifocal, peaceful, egalitarian society, that practiced a predominately female-oriented polytheism that also involved a single Goddess figure. I read it because I know a number of people who claim this book fundamentally shaped their worldview (and a number of others who don't make that claim, but are certainly influenced by the popularity of Eisler's ideas). The first half is in large part a summary and popularizing of the work of archaeologist Marija Gimbutas, who argues that before the spread of Indo-European civilization there existed a Three stars because it was a pretty interesting read, and she covers, well, all of human history. Three stars because it was a pretty interesting read, and she covers, well, all of human history.

El caliz y la espada pdf