{"id":3790,"date":"2017-09-20T17:42:06","date_gmt":"2017-09-20T17:42:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/?page_id=3790"},"modified":"2023-08-09T10:48:17","modified_gmt":"2023-08-09T10:48:17","slug":"essentialist","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/essentialist\/","title":{"rendered":"Gimbutas &#8211; an &#8220;essentialist&#8221;?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\t<p>T H E \u00a0 T O T A L L Y \u00a0 U N W A R R A N T E D \u00a0 A C C U S A T I O N \u00a0<\/p>\n<p>O F \u00a0 M A R I J A \u00a0 G I M B U T A S \u00a0 B E I N G \u00a0 A N \u00a0 &#8221; E S S E N T I A L I S T&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Quoting Charlene Spretnak in her article:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.archaeomythology.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/07\/Spretnak-Journal-7.pdf\">Anatomy of a Backlash: Concerning the Work of Marija Gimbutas<\/a><\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/6\/2017\/09\/Sk\u00e4rmavbild-2017-09-20-kl.-21.21.09.png\" alt=\"Sk\u00e4rmavbild 2017-09-20 kl. 21.21.09\" itemprop=\"image\" height=\"646\" width=\"635\"  \/>\n\t<p>In a similar vein, ( as the accusations of being &#8220;oudated&#8221; a. s. o. by Meskell, Conkey &amp; Tringham et. al.: <a href=\"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/gimbutas-social\">See former page \u00bb<\/a>) the accusation of &#8220;essentialist&#8221; was repeatedly affixed to\u00a0Gimbutas&#8217; work in the 1990s. It began with Conkey and Tringham who claim that Gimbutas&#8217; reading of prehistory is so <em>&#8220;essentialized&#8221;<\/em> that it precludes <em>&#8220;an engendered prehistory&#8221;<\/em> that &#8220;<em>envisages women as thinking and acting people who affect the course of prehistory.&#8221;<\/em>90 The charge was repeated by many other feminist archaeologists and was also applied to the &#8220;<strong>Goddess movement,&#8221;<\/strong> which Gimbutas&#8217; detractors delight in erroneously conflating with her. For instance, <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Lucy_Goodison\">Lucy Goodison<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/profile\/Christine_Morris6\">Christine Morris <\/a>(formerly a research assistant for Renfrew) state in their introduction to the anthology Ancient Goddesses,<\/p>\n<p><em>`Their biologically essentialist vision is one which they share with reactionary forces who have always opposed the emancipation of women; it serves, as <a href=\"https:\/\/umich.academia.edu\/LaurenTalalay\">Lauren Talalay<\/a> has pointed out: &#8220;to isolate women outside of history. &#8230; If women&#8217;s reproductive capabilities are the source of their power, then women remain, to some extent, locked within an unchanging domestic sphere.91\u00b4<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Essentialist is a derogatory term that was invented in post-structuralist feminist circles in the 1980s to demean any women who noted, say, a connection between female embodiment and religious honoring in any past or present culture; it was claimed that any such honoring necessarily limits women to nothing but our biology and prevents us from being agents of culture. The &#8220;anti-essentialist&#8221; scholars accept the traditional divide in patriarchal societies between nature and culture, agreeing that any association with nature situates one on the wrong side of the chasm. Although I have been addressing this straw-man argument since 1991 (in States of Grace), suffice it to say here that it is nonsensical that anyone could read the passages cited above from Gimbutas&#8217; writings about women and culture in Old Europe and\u00a0honestly accuse her of viewing women as not being cultural agents and being outside of history.<\/p>\n\t<p>Finally, Gimbutas&#8217; conclusions about Old Europe as a matristic but balanced (roughly egalitarian) civilization was apparently enough to set off alarm bells in the psyche of many male archaeologists and journalists, who reacted with angry charges such as &#8220;A Sexist View of Prehistory&#8221; (Brian Fagan) and &#8220;Gyno- supremacism&#8221; (a journalist writing in the Chicago Tribune).92 Visceral feelings about the utter rightness of patriarchal culture and a male godhead are apparently no more uncommon in archaeology than elsewhere.93 Even Gimbutas&#8217; observation that most of the Neolithic figurines were female is seemingly received by some male archaeologists as an affront that requires retribution.<\/p>\n\t<p>90 Conkey and Tringham 1994: 219.<\/p>\n<p>91 Goodison and Morris 1998: 14.<\/p>\n<p>92 Margolis 1995.<\/p>\n<p>93 See Goldenburg 1997.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.archaeomythology.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/07\/Spretnak-Journal-7.pdf\">Continue reading Charlene Spretnaks article here\u00a0\u00bb<\/a><\/p>\n\t<h1 dir=\"ltr\"><a href=\"https:\/\/books.google.se\/books?id=WyW9RK6l8b0C&amp;pg=PA41&amp;lpg=PA41&amp;dq=Richard+G+Lesure+Gimbutas+essentialist&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=VKiXEZTKrj&amp;sig=ZVgQHQNwm1FH-fhLzvhaf-Kvr1g&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiKwo3gtbTWAhVkMJoKHWJTDlkQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&amp;q=Richard%20G%20Lesure%20Gimbutas%20essentialist&amp;f=false\">Interpreting Ancient Figurines: Context, Comparison, and Prehistoric Art<\/a><\/h1>\n<p>By Richard G. Lesure<\/p>\n<p>As Richard Leisure also is embracing the derogatory idea about \u00a0Gimbutas\u00b4 alleged &#8220;essentialism&#8221; I wrote an e- mail and asked him to specify the reason to why he \u00a0labelled her as such, and then he send a mail back in which he simply referred to Cynthia Ellers: <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/The_Myth_of_Matriarchal_Prehistory\">The Myth of Prehistory;Why An Invented Past Will Not Give Women a Future .<\/a><\/p>\n<h1 id=\"firstHeading\" lang=\"en\"><\/h1>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/6\/2017\/09\/Sk\u00e4rmavbild-2017-09-20-kl.-20.48.06.png\" alt=\"Sk\u00e4rmavbild 2017-09-20 kl. 20.48.06\" itemprop=\"image\" height=\"723\" width=\"660\"  \/>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/6\/2017\/09\/Sk\u00e4rmavbild-2017-09-20-kl.-20.44.21.png\" alt=\"Sk\u00e4rmavbild 2017-09-20 kl. 20.44.21\" itemprop=\"image\" height=\"644\" width=\"658\"  \/>\n\t<p>More to read about the subject\u00a0\u00bb<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/hiotuxliwisbp6mi.onion.link\/video\/torrents.complete\/Routledge\/0415253128.Routledge.Archaeology.Ritual.Religion.May.2004.pdf\">ARCHAEOLOGY, RITUAL, RELIGION page 58-60<\/a><\/p>\n<p>by Thimothy Insoll<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>T H E \u00a0 T O T A L L Y \u00a0 U N W A R R A N T E D \u00a0 A C C U S A T I O N \u00a0 O F \u00a0 M A R I J A \u00a0 G I M B U T A S \u00a0 B&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"full-width-page.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3790","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3790","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3790"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3790\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3976,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3790\/revisions\/3976"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/scholars\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3790"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}