Archaeology: Move Over Venus of Willendorf

Wow, that is gross. No wonder there is so much misogyny! What a hateful image of woman. and this started over 35,000 years ago?

Why is that a hateful image?

Rene, I don't think that it is a hateful image. This is a symbolic representation of a force of nature, not someone's mother, I guess.

And, I am sure that there are loads of images which were lost.

Evidence exists that women's position was higher then, rather than lower, but there is an element of guesswork in all of it.

Men did not know that they were involved in procreation. Women probably had the final word, and men were sacrificed to the goddess and maybe eaten in a sacred meal, the blood smeared onto the fields where the increased nitrogen increased plant growth.

When men took over the priesthood from the women in ancient Greece, they wore breastplates and wigs and, to this day, priests wear what are in effect dresses.

I have the feeling that with the double head that this is a representation of what became the "Two Goddesses" of Life and Death, sometimes seen with a young boy, their son.

But, I can't tell, looking at the statuette, if that is another female head or the head of a child that she is holding.

I think finds are this are such a fascinating look into the past.

Another reason to read Clan of the Cave Bear.

Facinating! but ugly.

I think Rene is playing ...

35000 years ago a good fat lady meant there were plenty of bison always to eat and good grass for years and years... It meant fertility and a soft companion to sleep by without skinny scarecrow bones sticking into your hunters ear ..

However scarecrows were not invented then  but windy furs on sticks were okay !   They were known as scarefurs ... You heard it here first ...

(winks)

Not playing, guys. Notice the mysogynistic defense only from males. It is plain ugly, obscene and designed to terrify young boys. uh, girls too. I'm sure Venus is highly offended that men would dare name these ugly little effigies after her.

Have a realistic view here. How in any rational mindframe can anyone call these things attractive or inducive to love, much less sex?

It is plainly a hateful image. Can see just how deeply ingrained the mistrust and hatred of women actually is. 35,000 years ago.

There are no faces on these images.  The goddess was the source of all that happened to them. It is not someone's mother. It is god.

And, I have never ever heard any woman anthropologist claim that these images were misogynistic, just for the record.

I'll have to agree with Roy here.  The image speaks to me of the importance of fertility with the important parts emphasized.  The ability of women to 'magically' produce new humans was a revered act in ancient times.  I'm not an anthropologist, but what I've observed is that as humans became more 'civilized' the emphasis was more and more placed on phallic symbols.  Just my take on it.

The emphasis on the masculine happened as the conscious mind, technology, warfare, hierarchy, all became more important.

But Rome still had its Great Mother goddess and Rome was recognized as "mother".

Good post, Rene.

I was aware of the unsuitability of the name "Venus". Nevertheless, on the "Venus of Willendorf", there is no face, a strange occurrence, given the closely woven hair and obvious capacity to depict a face.

This lack of a face could be interpreted as a sign of the non-personal aspect of this force, the Great Mother, from which the very name word, matter, comes.

Misogyny is a heavy charge that could only be substantiated with more information. There is nothing about primitive life where women are actually mistreated that would suggest that the misogynists' art would come out as seen, while the female-positive culture would design the statuettes as real women might appear.

Rene :

I am a sculptor of sorts  (and artist) and 35000 years ago my guess is,  provided you can transport us in the Rene Time-whirl machine , there may not have been too many really good tools about  and most of the ladies would not have been doing gym work outs - they would have been pretty strong mammoth arms wrestlers . The evidence is the mammoths gave up .. ...

Seriously though and cheek aside ,  I love the figure as much as I love anything tribal that emerges from a primitive need to express reality figuratively .. Its just a symbol of human need to create and endow something with human  properties ..Beautiful because it gives a time-bridge to another mind  and the way they created their "magical thinking " ..  Its basic ofcourse but then everything was 35000 years ago  - I mean look at Fred Flintstone's car .. 

(winks)

Hmmmm

Rene

I am just checking my Time Machine photos and 35000 years ago Germany was not like the Kalahari Desert -- mind you these photos may be warped by the way I am looking at them ..

I wonder if hunter gathering was also quite like we assume and may have been more variable in its forms ..   ... Perhaps in a game-stable Germanic forested area pranging the edible horned daschunds and a few boars was easy and perhaps the abundance of food meant sculptured art could be done in the time when everyone was relaxed ..

So relaxed in fact that mating and child rearing took off big time and fertile big ladies were more approved of so fit children could be raised .... Who knows ..

Rachel's great great great great great x 5000 grandmother though it is rumoured was a bit fat in those days and was named :

"Rachel Squelch "... Its amazing how names change over time ..

Only kidding ....ADR x

My ancestor Chief Tin Canosaurus who was magical looked like this  :

Ps :   Here's one of my sculptures  ( I love wood sculptures)

Made from a Workhouse floorbeam for the memory of my Great Grandmother Emma who was in the Workhouse ..

Quite a talent you have!