Venus of Willendorf

[David19]

I have a question about the Venus of Willendorf paintings, that were found, i know a lot of wiccans, pagan's, and feminists use it to say that there was a 'matriarchial religion that just worshipped the goddess' but does it really show that, is it really of a goddess, could it just be a drawing of some cave-woman, or some cave-man's fantasy woman.

I just thought i'd ask what others think about it as on a lot of sites and in some books, people always go on about it, also i think it was found in europe, if it was a goddess, then is it a part of the Norse pantheon (or is it pre-Norse/Germanic), and why do you think that a goddess would be depicted as obese, normally aren't all gods supposed to be attractive and can get anyone they want, or is she pregnant, which could just mean it was done because they were excited about the birth.

Anyway, what are your thoughts?

[Toby Stimpson]

Well the interesting thing with the Venus of Willendorf is that no one knows, but archeologists made an educated guess based on what little they could find that it was a Goddess being worshipped. Honestly, I dont even know if it is true that it was a matriarchal system...but it is likely that the women held more power than later 'civilization.' The trouble with going back so far is that since early Humans lackd any real written language is that a lot is up to speculation. As for the question about Norse...well the Norse as a people did not exist (and correct me if Im wrong) until about 700 bc? The Venus goes back 10 000 or so years so it was actually, from what I know, the pre culture that eventually fostered into the various different cultures of europe.

Obesity is a fun question. In the world toay in some cultures, to be fat is to show a sign of health and fertility. If you live in an environment where rapid malnutrition exists and you're a little overweight it shows that you are eating healthy food. Weight is also a metaphor in many different ways. Look at the various features of the Venuses for example, very large wide hips which is a sign of good fertility (wide hips allow more ease during labour)...small but fat legs, these to me would represent sturdyness....and a fat stomach, which shows health. In a more metaphorical way, and this could be one ancient source of the impiortant of the Cow, large breasts could be seen as udders and lager women could be akin to Cows in their life giving nature. Cows are all over the world as Mother Goddesses.

That is what little I know from my own research. I would think there is a lot more to say but I havnt had a look at European socieites and religion in a long time, trying to get my through the east right now hehe. Good question david

Namaste

Tobias

[Zibblsnrt]

I have a question about the Venus of Willendorf paintings, that were found, i know a lot of wiccans, pagan's, and feminists use it to say that there was a 'matriarchial religion that just worshipped the goddess' but does it really show that, is it really of a goddess, could it just be a drawing of some cave-woman, or some cave-man's fantasy woman.

The main reasons people assume figures like that - and there's a lot of "Venus" figurines found across Europe and elsewhere - is that there's a certain consistency about how they're made and used. If you see one sculpture, one picture, it could be anything; if you see hundreds of similar ones, you're probably seeing something more than mere coincidence. If you're seeing them associated with certain things, particularly graves, then you're probably looking at something with religious significance.

Whether she was a "goddess" is, of course, well enough up for debate that we'll likely never know for sure. For all we know, the culture(s) which sculpted her didn't have the concept of deities, and took a vaguer, more animistic view of the world, where Venus and her ilk represented concepts like fertility or agriculture instead of representing an individual.


I just thought i'd ask what others think about it as on a lot of sites and in some books, people always go on about it, also i think it was found in europe, if it was a goddess, then is it a part of the Norse pantheon (or is it pre-Norse/Germanic),

She's almost certainly not part of the Norse pantheon; she dates to something earlier than 20,000 BC, when the people who would become the Norse probably hadn't begun to migrate into their homes in the north yet. Europe went through a lot of cultures between then and historical times, most of which people can only guess at.


and why do you think that a goddess would be depicted as obese, normally aren't all gods supposed to be attractive and can get anyone they want, or is she pregnant, which could just mean it was done because they were excited about the birth.

Two things there. First, some cultures depict gods and goddesses as attaining some idealized form, while others don't. We come from the Greco-Roman tradition, where that's a big deal. Other cultures - earlier ones in Europe, numerous ones elsewhere - focus on different things. It's pretty much impossible to generalize about all gods, or even most gods, unless you get into a specific part of a specific pantheon.

In the case of Venus, the idealized form wasn't what they were apparently shooting at; rather, her sculptors were thinking much more symbolically. A lot of Venus figures aren't necessarily depicted as obese, but parts of them are greatly exaggerated, obviously. This could be seen as exaggerating the importance of what's emphasized - in her case, pretty much anything to do with fertility and reproduction.

And, as Galadraal said, "obesity" in numerous ancient and modern cultures represents success, luck, health and vitality. Venus was carved in a time where the average life expectancy was perhaps as low as twenty-five years, between disease, starvation, accidents, predation, and war; anyone who looked like they were doing more than merely surviving would carry an air of success or power about them.

[ap Dafydd]

It can be difficult conceptually to decide whether an archaeological relic is a sacred one or not, if only because we don't actually know whether the Ancestors at that time had the same conception of things being either sacred or profane that we do. It could be that they had no thought that anything could be other than sacred.

So the Willendorf Venus could have been an object of worship or a piece of pornography (and both have been suggested) but have been equally a sacred object in either case.

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[David19]

So the person that painted/created it may have just been feeling horny that day and wanted some porn, lol!.

[Toby Stimpson]

wow...must have been a widespread problem...but isnt it F***** up that soem don't even have heads?...hmmmmm

[Seren_]

There are a lot of theories about what the figurines are for. Representations of goddesses is the most well known, but there is a theory that they could have been porn, as ap Dafydd said. In a hunter gatherer type society, the men would have to go off to bring in food, and the theory goes that they'd have these figurines to keep them "company" on those long lonely nights. The guy that suggested this theory even did a paper on it, comparing the stances of the figurines to modern Playboy spreads. No, really...

Another theory is that they were sculpted by women as a form of sex/health education because the breasts, belly and genitals are usually so obvious, with little spindly legs and arms, if at all, suggesting they weren't as important. This theory goes that as they sculpted the figurine the young women would be taught how to look after themselves, ensuring healthier pregnancies and childbirth which were obviously a dangerous time without the benefits of modern medicine.

One of the biggest problems in interpreting what they were for is that many of them were found before archaeology became a scientific thing rather than a hobby of rich men. The people who found them didn't care where they were found, or what with so we can't say much about the context they were found in. A lot of them seem to have been found under hearths, for example, so this could be significant. They are also found pretty much all over the European continent, and so generally its assumed they're indicative of the same culture being everywhere, but the sculptures can be very different from each other (heads, no heads, stylised heads, limbs, no limbs etc) and aren't necessarily from the same time period - there can be thousands of years between them, so what they meant at one time isn't necessarily the same as another.

Another problem is that there are plenty of male/phallic paleolithic figurines as well, which are relatively ignored in the whole scheme of things, perhaps due to a hangover of Victorian values (sculptures of naked ladies are one thing, sculptures of what appear to be paleolithic dildos is another). These haven't been studied much, but neither have the figurines as a whole. It's fine to say the female figurines are indicative of a matrilineal society etc, but this ignores completely the male figurines.

[_Banbha_]

Link (http://witcombe.sbc.edu/willendorf/) The best evidence that the Venus figures were revered is that most of them found were covered in red ochre, which has been used in burials and other sacred events and objects from prehistoric through recorded history. In a hunter/gatherer society, obesity could have been a sign of beauty, health, fertility, sucess or security. I've also read theories on the venus figure being inserted like a dildo as a fertility charm. I once saw some really interesting photos of average sized pregnant, but not obese, contemporary women angled in such a way that the figures could have been a woman carving herself without the benefit of a mirror. If I can find it on-line, I'll post the link. It's true phallic/dildo-like objects have been found and our culture is to freaky about the subject to explore it fully(at least it seems that way!); but the female figures far out number the male/phallic symbol finds(another thing people seem to find freaky at times).

[_Banbha_]

Here are two of the oldest Venus figures and there are many more on these sites.
The Venus of Berekhet Ram found in Isreal at the Golon Hieghts between two layers of ash was carbondated up to 800,000 years old. Link Here (http://donsmaps.com/ukrainevenus.html)
The Venus of Tan Tan found in Morroco is up to 500,000 years old was found covered on red ochre. Link Here (http://donsmaps.com/venus.html#ukrainevenus)

[Nacken]

About 20 were found in total in Europe. They were statuettes, not paintings. The theory that I heard was that they were children's dolls, but who knows? The whole Matriarchal utopia theory was discredited among the archeological community decades ago.

[_Banbha_]

About 20 were found in total in Europe. lf you reference the site above and count the pictures you'll see morre than 20. They have found merely 3,000 figurines from the Mesolithic and Paleolithic periods. These are considered low number's. So twenty would be less significant by far. You might be confused by considering only the most popular images of the figurines, Wilendorf being the "Mona Lisa." The Neolithic (earliest agricultural era) has so many figurines from old Europe and environs It's difficult to find a tabulation. The closest I can find is approaching 100,000 if you include broken pieces. These figures are mostly female. There are male, animal, a fusion of both and androgonous figures, thrones and other objects.
The theory that I heard was that they were children's dolls, but who knows? That is one theory and a minor one.
The whole Matriarchal utopia theory was discredited among the archeological community decades ago.What theory are you refering to? This is too vague to be creditable. Sounds more like a radical feminist religious/spiritual claim. So, why would "the archeaological community" bother disputing a such a claim. There are many theories involving the proto-Indo-Europeans. As a matter of fact it's all theory.