What do you think?
Rate this book
The Myth of the Goddess: The Evolution of an Image by Baring, Anne, Cashford, Jules (1991) Hardcover
Éste es un libro único.;Cuenta, por primera vez, la historia completa de lo femenino a través de las distintas ideas religiosas donde ha ido evolucionando la imagen mítica de este desde las diosas paleolíticas, o Istar en Mesopotamia, Isis en Egipto o las diosas del mundo clásico, hasta Israel, donde lo femenino se oculta, para finalizar con la vuelta de la diosa madre en las figuras de María en el cristianismo y de Sofía en los gnósticos. Este libro, y sus más de 400 ilustraciones, explica cómo el mito originario de la diosa se perdió y cómo la divinidad masculina fue desplazando su papel por la necesidad de situarlo en el nuevo contexto de la evolución de la conciencia humana. Ahora, cuando los modelos de lo masculino y lo femenino están más confusos, cuando hemos desacralizado la naturaleza y somos incapaces de contemplar la vida como una unidad viviente, quizá se haga necesario conocer a fondo cuál es la naturaleza de la antigua diosa madre, para comprender mejor las implicaciones psicológicas que ha supuesto su pérdida para el ser humano.
Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1992
104 people are currently reading
1766 people want to read
About the author
Anne Baring
24 books28 followersAnne Baring (1931-) is the author and co-author of seven books and has recently published her latest one -- "The Dream of the Cosmos: A Quest for the Soul". She is a Jungian analyst and lives near Winchester, England. She is passionately interested in the fate of the Earth and the survival of our species in this critically important time of evolutionary change. Her work is devoted to the recognition that we live in an ensouled world and to the restoration of the lost sense of communion between us and the invisible dimension of the universe that is the source or ground of all that we call 'life'
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
January 1, 2015
This book is astounding. I never would have known about it if it hadn't been required reading for a women's studies class, but it holds a treasured place on my shelf. I understand some of the reviews. If you're seeking to read this to just come from an archaeological standpoint, then you will get way more than you bargained for. There is archaeological information here, but overall it is a very in-depth and incredibly well written look at how history, myth, theology, and religious history collide.
In many ways, this is a collection of the unsung glory of women from Prehistory into the Medieval period.
We so often forget that what we think of as 'mythology' was living, breathing religion for ancient societies, no different than how fiercely religion is followed today. The greatest difference is that in our religion we have lost almost all trace of the feminine. The feminine is watered down into the virgin state of Mary, or ill fitted to a God that is solely masculine and warmongering. What Baring and Cashford did is bring a book that opens the eyes and minds to acknowledge how vastly different our spiritual history can be if we can allow all the feminine threads of the past to come to light and sink into our consciousness.
Personally, this is a beautiful book that never ceases to inspire me with its information.
In many ways, this is a collection of the unsung glory of women from Prehistory into the Medieval period.
We so often forget that what we think of as 'mythology' was living, breathing religion for ancient societies, no different than how fiercely religion is followed today. The greatest difference is that in our religion we have lost almost all trace of the feminine. The feminine is watered down into the virgin state of Mary, or ill fitted to a God that is solely masculine and warmongering. What Baring and Cashford did is bring a book that opens the eyes and minds to acknowledge how vastly different our spiritual history can be if we can allow all the feminine threads of the past to come to light and sink into our consciousness.
Personally, this is a beautiful book that never ceases to inspire me with its information.
November 27, 2012
This book changed my life. I read it when it first came out and I have just re-read it again, 20 years later. While many people like to deny the sources quoted in this book about the goddess-worshipping that may or may not have happened in Neolithic time, that is just a small aspect of this book and those who dwell on that are really showing their sexism. What this book does BRILLIANTLY is break down every single religious "doctrine" that the Christian world adheres to. Every story can be traced back to an earlier culture. Just look at the story of Osiris in Ancient Egypt - the same story of Jesus and his resurrection. Anne Baring and Jules Cashford show us each and every way the feminine aspect of the divine was denied, erased and deleted from history. These facts are undeniable and those that have "reviewed" this book and trashed for its "bad research" either never read the book, or are so blinded by their own internalized sexism that they can't take the time to follow up on the tremendous and completely accurate resources used in the writing of this incredible book.
May 6, 2011
One of the most absurd analyses of iconographic tradition I have ever encountered, written by people who have no experience addressing material remains in any capacity and do it poorly. Tries far too hard to fit art and other historical objects into a historical/religious tradition which they have constructed strictly from interpretations of mythic traditions. They show absolutely no understanding of the many factors that must be brought to bear on archaeological objects, and they are disturbingly comfortable with slapping the label "goddess" on any and every ancient or prehistoric image of a female. Damn poor scholarship.
December 17, 2010
Extraordinary reading, a must have in every library. Having read it once, frequent reads and research happen all the time. A favourite for years.
August 15, 2012
Excellent reference book on the spiritual / mythical history of the feminine .
January 6, 2014
This book contains some good images which is why I have given it one star. I thought about not reviewing it at all as I can only give it a negative rating, but hell this book needs slating!
For me there were three fundamental problems with this book. One, the blind application of Jungian theory to ancient artefacts. Two & three, an utter lack of critical thinking combined with some utterly erroneous interpretations of the images reproduced. For instance, on page 175 an Akkadian seal of Inanna-Ishtar is described as holding a staff with intertwined serpents and as standing before an eight rayed star - symbol of Venus. To be sure the image they reproduce isn't great quality but it is still easy enough to see that the eight-rayed star is in fact an Akkadian sun-disk and the serpent entwinned staff is in reality the goddess' familiar symbol of a scimitar! Check out a decent image (by Stéphane Beaulieu) of this picture for yourself at
http://www.matrifocus.com/SAM04/spotl... (third image)
Given that this book is about the imagery of the goddess this is utterly atrocious. I could make several more observations of a similar nature but won't ....
For me there were three fundamental problems with this book. One, the blind application of Jungian theory to ancient artefacts. Two & three, an utter lack of critical thinking combined with some utterly erroneous interpretations of the images reproduced. For instance, on page 175 an Akkadian seal of Inanna-Ishtar is described as holding a staff with intertwined serpents and as standing before an eight rayed star - symbol of Venus. To be sure the image they reproduce isn't great quality but it is still easy enough to see that the eight-rayed star is in fact an Akkadian sun-disk and the serpent entwinned staff is in reality the goddess' familiar symbol of a scimitar! Check out a decent image (by Stéphane Beaulieu) of this picture for yourself at
http://www.matrifocus.com/SAM04/spotl... (third image)
Given that this book is about the imagery of the goddess this is utterly atrocious. I could make several more observations of a similar nature but won't ....
February 10, 2022
There is a lot to admire here but also a lot of problems. For example, the dependence on very old sources, the lack of real attentiveness to any scholarship after 1970 (the book was published in 1990, the many little factual errors and the insistence on cramming everything into a Jungian framework. Somewhere in here there’s an inspiring polemic about the Goddess and the desperate need for what she represents but it’s weighed down by a lot of very lengthy assertions which are either backed up by unquestioned adherence to Joseph Campbell et al or figures such as James Fraser out of Victorian times. Ultimately, the “monomyth” and its insistence on a single interpretation of everything they present threatens to be no less disrespectful to the vast mosaic of stories and civilisations the work trawls than the Judaeo-Christian perspectives they critique. So why three stars? Because there are so many good bits between the clangers and Joseph Campbell worship, I suppose. Worth your time? MMV.
November 18, 2009
An interesting and thought-provoking examination of the evolution of Western goddess religion, beginning in the Paleoolithic era through Mesopotamia and ancient Greece and on through modern conceptions of the Virgin Mary and the rise of Neo-Paganism. I ranked it a four mostly because I found it an interesting read that piqued my curiousity in the history of ancient religion -- and specifically the presence of goddesses (long since booted off stage by the Big Three of monotheism).
Read the book with one foot in the skeptic plane, though -- it's heavily influenced by the research of Marija Gimbutas, who theorized that (in southeastern Europe, at any rate) the shift from Neolithic to Bronze Age culture was due in part to the followers of sky gods, swooping in and turning conquered territories from peaceful, established matriarchal societies into violent, warrior-glorifying patriarchies. It's certainly unclear from this book alone whether there's any evidence-backed merit to that theory, or if Gimbutas, Cashford and and Baring base their interpretations on wishful thinking. (Then again, it's also hard to tell how many of Gimbutas's critics are simply crochety old misogynists...)
Read the book with one foot in the skeptic plane, though -- it's heavily influenced by the research of Marija Gimbutas, who theorized that (in southeastern Europe, at any rate) the shift from Neolithic to Bronze Age culture was due in part to the followers of sky gods, swooping in and turning conquered territories from peaceful, established matriarchal societies into violent, warrior-glorifying patriarchies. It's certainly unclear from this book alone whether there's any evidence-backed merit to that theory, or if Gimbutas, Cashford and and Baring base their interpretations on wishful thinking. (Then again, it's also hard to tell how many of Gimbutas's critics are simply crochety old misogynists...)
Read
August 5, 2011Most people are unaware that the majority of the people of the world worshipped a goddess for thousands of years before and longer than god was seen in exclusively male terms. This book explores that largely forgetten, ignored and repressed history. The authors present a convincing case that this evolution of the sacred image from feminine to mascule also demonstrates an evolution in human consciousness. The book is well written and is never overly scholarly making it accessible to a wide audience. Becuase of the perspective they take, the authors often quote scholars like Joseph Campbell, Erich Neumann and Carl Jung to support their case. While this isn't necessarily bad, I think their argument would be much stronger if they also included scholars from outside this circle to support their position.
August 2, 2019
Thanks for reminding me of this book! I wrote my doctoral dissertation on matriarchal myth, so I have 4 bookshelves decicated to women's history as well as others on women's fiction and poetry for my later scholarly work.
July 7, 2020
A history of religion in Europe and the Middle East from the Palaeolithic to the present day. Their focus is on Goddesses. Their special weapon is the analysis of religious art. It’s a rich, fascinating and thought provoking book. With major issues.
In chapter one Baring and Cashford discuss the Venus figurines of the Stone Age. They twice warn against back-projecting our own cultural concepts onto people long dead, but then proceed to do exactly that, describing these figurines as images of a Goddess. They aren’t necessarily a Goddess. They could be a kind of sympathetic magic. As it happens, I agree with with them, but the matter is up for debate. They carefully note the size of each of them until we come to figure 6 (the book is superbly illustrated), an object they describe as “ivory rod with breasts”, a stylised images of the Goddess. I was immediately suspicious because to me it looks like a dildo with a cleft clitoral stimulator at the base of the shaft. I looked it up online. 8.5cm. So not a dildo then. It’s either a cock and balls, or a penis onto which some pervert has carved a pair of breasts. Not a Goddess.
The book is well referenced, but every so often they make a statement of what can only be a historical fact and these statements are unreferenced. Have the authors made these facts up? Have they imagined them? I suggest that they have. This from page 678:
“...we cannot remember [how to think symbolically] if the Imagination is not valued as a mode of perception that brings knowledge.”
Imagination brings knowledge? Really? Does it bring knowledge even of what you have imagined? Surely it would be memory that brings that knowledge. How can if bring knowledge of the beliefs of a dead person?
Looking at the references themselves I notice a definite reliance of secondary sources. I developed rather an obsession with checking each reference. Most of these sources are fine. For example they reference S H Hooke. I’ve read several of this chap’s books and he knows what he’s talking about. When he gives a reference I check it to find out where he’s found that little gem of information. With this book I was checking that I wasn’t being lied to. I had developed some trust issues with the authors. You may well say that this is non-fiction and I should be checking references. You’d be right. Fail to check a reference on Monday and by Tuesday night you’re burning down a 5G phone mast. Twice in the body of the text they give the opinion of dowsers as support for their arguments. I find this appalling. Listen to a dowser on Wednesday and by Thursday afternoon you’ll be wobbling around the WI hall aerating your wombspace.
Baring and Cashford are doing a little mythmaking of their own. They posit a Golden Age in Europe where only a feminine deity was worshipped and women ruled society. War was unknown. Thereafter followed a Fall caused by warlike Asians who invaded and brought their male Gods with them. (This is a Kurgan hypothesis. A perfectly respectable hypothesis. I’m not suggesting the authors are racist. They would of course be descended from these invaders). Over time these male Gods entirely replaced the female in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
As it happens, I agree with the replacement theory and I’ll come back to that in a mo. But I have issues with this Golden Age. They are using the prevalence of female images to infer that the societies were matriarchal. Yet look at the prevalence of images of the Virgin Mary. Does that mean women were dominant in Mediaeval Europe? Does the prevalence of images of women in advertising mean they are dominant today? Furthermore, does the fact that only female images have survived mean that male Gods were not worshipped? Here we can use they own arguments against them. They argue for system of ‘zoë’ and ‘bios’: “Zoë is eternal and infinite life; bios is finite and individual life.” A divine example would be the Mother Goddess and her Son-Lover. One could easily argue that images of Goddesses were carved from stone as representative of something eternal. Images of Gods could have been carved only from wood as repesentative of something that is cyclically reborn. The wood would not survive.
These sort of problems span the whole book but are particularly prevalent in the first chapter. The authors are on firmer ground when we reach the historical period and writings can tell us what the images mean. You may well wonder why I’m giving four stars to a book with this many issues. Well, I enjoyed it. And there is so so much in this nearly 800 page book where they are bang on the money. Several times I checked in disbelief something fantastical that they said only to find it widely confirmed by respectable scholars. I could fill page after page with the good stuff, but I’ll restrict myself to one example. They discuss the Tiamat/Marduk controversy. I find this subject fascinating and have read several books which discuss its repurposing in Genesis 1. These authors were interested in it as evidence for the development of monotheism. Baring and Cashford are interested in it as evidence for the supplanting of a male God for a female. It’s worth noting that those other authors were Protestant men. I shall be forever grateful that they have helped me see they subject in a whole new light.
In chapter one Baring and Cashford discuss the Venus figurines of the Stone Age. They twice warn against back-projecting our own cultural concepts onto people long dead, but then proceed to do exactly that, describing these figurines as images of a Goddess. They aren’t necessarily a Goddess. They could be a kind of sympathetic magic. As it happens, I agree with with them, but the matter is up for debate. They carefully note the size of each of them until we come to figure 6 (the book is superbly illustrated), an object they describe as “ivory rod with breasts”, a stylised images of the Goddess. I was immediately suspicious because to me it looks like a dildo with a cleft clitoral stimulator at the base of the shaft. I looked it up online. 8.5cm. So not a dildo then. It’s either a cock and balls, or a penis onto which some pervert has carved a pair of breasts. Not a Goddess.
The book is well referenced, but every so often they make a statement of what can only be a historical fact and these statements are unreferenced. Have the authors made these facts up? Have they imagined them? I suggest that they have. This from page 678:
“...we cannot remember [how to think symbolically] if the Imagination is not valued as a mode of perception that brings knowledge.”
Imagination brings knowledge? Really? Does it bring knowledge even of what you have imagined? Surely it would be memory that brings that knowledge. How can if bring knowledge of the beliefs of a dead person?
Looking at the references themselves I notice a definite reliance of secondary sources. I developed rather an obsession with checking each reference. Most of these sources are fine. For example they reference S H Hooke. I’ve read several of this chap’s books and he knows what he’s talking about. When he gives a reference I check it to find out where he’s found that little gem of information. With this book I was checking that I wasn’t being lied to. I had developed some trust issues with the authors. You may well say that this is non-fiction and I should be checking references. You’d be right. Fail to check a reference on Monday and by Tuesday night you’re burning down a 5G phone mast. Twice in the body of the text they give the opinion of dowsers as support for their arguments. I find this appalling. Listen to a dowser on Wednesday and by Thursday afternoon you’ll be wobbling around the WI hall aerating your wombspace.
Baring and Cashford are doing a little mythmaking of their own. They posit a Golden Age in Europe where only a feminine deity was worshipped and women ruled society. War was unknown. Thereafter followed a Fall caused by warlike Asians who invaded and brought their male Gods with them. (This is a Kurgan hypothesis. A perfectly respectable hypothesis. I’m not suggesting the authors are racist. They would of course be descended from these invaders). Over time these male Gods entirely replaced the female in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
As it happens, I agree with the replacement theory and I’ll come back to that in a mo. But I have issues with this Golden Age. They are using the prevalence of female images to infer that the societies were matriarchal. Yet look at the prevalence of images of the Virgin Mary. Does that mean women were dominant in Mediaeval Europe? Does the prevalence of images of women in advertising mean they are dominant today? Furthermore, does the fact that only female images have survived mean that male Gods were not worshipped? Here we can use they own arguments against them. They argue for system of ‘zoë’ and ‘bios’: “Zoë is eternal and infinite life; bios is finite and individual life.” A divine example would be the Mother Goddess and her Son-Lover. One could easily argue that images of Goddesses were carved from stone as representative of something eternal. Images of Gods could have been carved only from wood as repesentative of something that is cyclically reborn. The wood would not survive.
These sort of problems span the whole book but are particularly prevalent in the first chapter. The authors are on firmer ground when we reach the historical period and writings can tell us what the images mean. You may well wonder why I’m giving four stars to a book with this many issues. Well, I enjoyed it. And there is so so much in this nearly 800 page book where they are bang on the money. Several times I checked in disbelief something fantastical that they said only to find it widely confirmed by respectable scholars. I could fill page after page with the good stuff, but I’ll restrict myself to one example. They discuss the Tiamat/Marduk controversy. I find this subject fascinating and have read several books which discuss its repurposing in Genesis 1. These authors were interested in it as evidence for the development of monotheism. Baring and Cashford are interested in it as evidence for the supplanting of a male God for a female. It’s worth noting that those other authors were Protestant men. I shall be forever grateful that they have helped me see they subject in a whole new light.
October 23, 2020
I thought this book was extraordinarily interesting, but unfortunately I didn't see a whole lot of evidence for their claims beyond Jung and Campbell. To it's credit, the book really made me think about the history of religion, matriarchy and patriarchy in culture and religion, and the culture of ancient people's in a brand new way. It definitely made me approach religion with fresh eyes. That being said, they made some sweeping claims about pre-historic cultures that could not possibly be validated and even some claims about historic, well-documented cultures and religions. It gives plenty to think about, but you need critical awareness to be able to recognize that some of the theories and ideas cannot possibly be fully understood or validated.
March 10, 2021
One of the best and most important books ever written about the development of human consciousness and culture through images and the fading of the feminine divine in the human psyche that led to the last four thousand years of unbalanced patriarchy. Brilliant on so many levels. I do a detailed discussion of the book in Issue 2 of Sexy Fantastic magazine. https://sexyfantasticmagazine.com/iss...
October 25, 2024
Lectura esencial
Simplemente espectacular ✨
Simplemente espectacular ✨
January 11, 2021
Review for a friend:
Finished Myth of the Goddess. What a book.
Taking the development of consciousness along all the various ages and points towards an holistic vision that integrates polarities and can hold duality internally.
Very cool.
And right up my alley😏😎
And now for Goodreads:
This book contains an overview of how consciousness developed and how the mythic images transformed along with it throughout time.
We never got rid of the Goddess. She was always there.
I am a student of depth-psychology, Jungian psychology and mythology. This would be the one book I would recommend to people who may want the completely picture of what mythology is, what it does and how it relates to our consciousness.
I find this book better than Campbell's own work, and more accesible than Jung's.
But it still took me quite some time to read it. It was a serious commitment in terms of time and energy for me. This is not for the casual reader.
But if you want to go all in and you love this stuff, by all means, be my guest and enjoy!
Oh yes, I find the feminist undertone and various assumptions early on quite disconnecting, but I decided to carry on and soon found that those were minor incidents. For reference: I'm into men's work and am refined in ancient history and doubted the accuracy of some statements.
For a comparison of weight of the book: I am well-read in classic literature, mythology and psychology, but found this book quite heavy. It's a dense book. Be prepared.
Admittedly, Campbell's prose can be very confusing and Jung can ramble into the esoteric, which these authors kept to a bare minimum. Praise-worthy. Especially since the topic can he both confusing and esoteric.
There you go. It's good.
Finished Myth of the Goddess. What a book.
Taking the development of consciousness along all the various ages and points towards an holistic vision that integrates polarities and can hold duality internally.
Very cool.
And right up my alley😏😎
And now for Goodreads:
This book contains an overview of how consciousness developed and how the mythic images transformed along with it throughout time.
We never got rid of the Goddess. She was always there.
I am a student of depth-psychology, Jungian psychology and mythology. This would be the one book I would recommend to people who may want the completely picture of what mythology is, what it does and how it relates to our consciousness.
I find this book better than Campbell's own work, and more accesible than Jung's.
But it still took me quite some time to read it. It was a serious commitment in terms of time and energy for me. This is not for the casual reader.
But if you want to go all in and you love this stuff, by all means, be my guest and enjoy!
Oh yes, I find the feminist undertone and various assumptions early on quite disconnecting, but I decided to carry on and soon found that those were minor incidents. For reference: I'm into men's work and am refined in ancient history and doubted the accuracy of some statements.
For a comparison of weight of the book: I am well-read in classic literature, mythology and psychology, but found this book quite heavy. It's a dense book. Be prepared.
Admittedly, Campbell's prose can be very confusing and Jung can ramble into the esoteric, which these authors kept to a bare minimum. Praise-worthy. Especially since the topic can he both confusing and esoteric.
There you go. It's good.
December 22, 2009
There was nothing in this book that I hadn't already gleaned from many other books on art, feminist criticism, comparative religion, and studies on the religious feminine. However, as a textbook for undergraduates, it does provide a sound overview. That said, I still wouldn't recommend anyone read it just for kicks. There were questionable claims in several spots that I felt compelled to argue with based on other books I've read. Also, the prose just isn't all that hot. It's got good pictures though and a useful bibligraphy in the back. If you're interested, check it out from the library.
November 29, 2020
Absolutely fascinating. Thorough research, clearly presented and accessible. Haven’t come across anything else like this, which pulls together so much research and history in how we have viewed woman/the feminine over the ages. How empowering it would be these days to see a representation of a vagina over the porch of a holy place, rather than the usual man on a cross.
August 24, 2018
Tis gevaarlijk om De Slegte zomaar even binnen te lopen...want dan kom je met een schat als dit weer buiten. Met prentjes. :-D
Het boek concentreert zich op de westerse geschiedenis en perceptie van (het archetype van) de godin, van de preshistorie tot nu.
Het boek concentreert zich op de westerse geschiedenis en perceptie van (het archetype van) de godin, van de preshistorie tot nu.
February 10, 2013
An amazing overview of how the spirituality of humanity has been influenced by patriarchy, and how patriarchy has influenced our humanity.
May 4, 2017
It relies heavily on Jung's absurd theories so the conclusions lack strength. Otherwise quite an entertaining book if skeptically read.
June 8, 2017
powerful book about the changing attitudes about female deities... read this in the midst of relearning how females are treated by a male-dominated society...
October 21, 2017
One of the finest books I have ever read. I recommend everyone to read this, as it is a story of the feminine that has been buried for far too long.
June 28, 2018
Meticulously researched and wisely written, this book challenged my previous perceptions of goddess myths and images while illuminating hazy connections previously hinted at in similar works.
May 28, 2025
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. I am careful about which books I purchase these days, but this one was worth investing in. I know I will refer back to it and perhaps read selected chapters again. I am grateful for the Essential Reading at the end of the long Bibliography. I'll start there :)
I think this quote basically sums up what the book intends to convey: "The idea that woman belongs to man rather than to herself and God appears here to be so deeply rooted as to be beyond history, yet it goes back no farther than the Iron Age, specifically to the beliefs and tribal structure of the once nomadic Aryans and Semites."
I found this description of alchemy helpful: "Many fairy-tales, rich in alchemical and Gnostic symbolism, no doubt came originally from the alchemists themselves. Alchemy is one of the few traditions in which imagery and practice rather than theory are the teacher. The images throughout are taken from nature, and so are known to all and therefore accessible to all, yet their meaning cannot be grasped by the intellect alone, which is often confused and infuriated by them, as it is by the Zen Koan. They have to become the subject of meditation, or the process that Jung called “active imagination,” and their meaning may be suddenly revealed only after years of contemplation."
A couple of other favorite passages:
"In the language of mythology this is to say that the myth of the goddess is not absent from the collective psyche just b/c it is disregarded. In fact, it is exactly where we might expect to find it -- in the collective unconscious of the race."
"Before these terms can be reunited in a new myth, they have to be brought into balance with each other; from our point in history, this is effectively the question as to how the goddess myth can be brought back into consciousness so that its values may again become available and complement (not replace) the prevailing myth of the god."
I think this quote basically sums up what the book intends to convey: "The idea that woman belongs to man rather than to herself and God appears here to be so deeply rooted as to be beyond history, yet it goes back no farther than the Iron Age, specifically to the beliefs and tribal structure of the once nomadic Aryans and Semites."
I found this description of alchemy helpful: "Many fairy-tales, rich in alchemical and Gnostic symbolism, no doubt came originally from the alchemists themselves. Alchemy is one of the few traditions in which imagery and practice rather than theory are the teacher. The images throughout are taken from nature, and so are known to all and therefore accessible to all, yet their meaning cannot be grasped by the intellect alone, which is often confused and infuriated by them, as it is by the Zen Koan. They have to become the subject of meditation, or the process that Jung called “active imagination,” and their meaning may be suddenly revealed only after years of contemplation."
A couple of other favorite passages:
"In the language of mythology this is to say that the myth of the goddess is not absent from the collective psyche just b/c it is disregarded. In fact, it is exactly where we might expect to find it -- in the collective unconscious of the race."
"Before these terms can be reunited in a new myth, they have to be brought into balance with each other; from our point in history, this is effectively the question as to how the goddess myth can be brought back into consciousness so that its values may again become available and complement (not replace) the prevailing myth of the god."
March 21, 2021
Si nunca han leído a Campbell, este libro será una deliciosa introducción al mundo de la mitología comparativa. Si ya se ha leído a este autor, u otros textos que hablen del mismo tema, este libro será un increíble compendio para añadir fuente tras fuente a nuestra interminable pila de lectura.
Baring y Cashford trazan un recorrido histórico en el cual asistimos al auge y caída de lo que mitológicamente se considera el sagrado femenino, y cómo el advenimiento de la cultura patriarcal lo demolió y absorbió dentro de su aparataje cultural. Todo con una prosa que, sin ser pedestre, es accesible, pero a la vez de una densidad propia de aquellos que escriben de un tema que no solo conocen, sino que les apasiona. Incluso las partes en las que se nota que solo están exponiendo lo leído en Campbell tienen pequeños detalles que ayudan a comprender más al autor omnipresente en esta clase de textos. Léanlo si logran conseguirlo.
Baring y Cashford trazan un recorrido histórico en el cual asistimos al auge y caída de lo que mitológicamente se considera el sagrado femenino, y cómo el advenimiento de la cultura patriarcal lo demolió y absorbió dentro de su aparataje cultural. Todo con una prosa que, sin ser pedestre, es accesible, pero a la vez de una densidad propia de aquellos que escriben de un tema que no solo conocen, sino que les apasiona. Incluso las partes en las que se nota que solo están exponiendo lo leído en Campbell tienen pequeños detalles que ayudan a comprender más al autor omnipresente en esta clase de textos. Léanlo si logran conseguirlo.
September 26, 2019
Pese a que el propósito de este libro es mostrar el problema de la conciencia escindida al rechazar la fgura de la diosa, según un esquema jungiano, esto no ocupa mucho en la gran extensión de este libro, en el que se nos da un repaso por la presencia histórica desde el Neolítico hasta nuestros días de esta figura en Occidente. Quizá hubiera estado bien ver otros continentes, ya que la pretensión de universalidad de la teiss de las autoras queda en entredicho. Un libro interesante, y que no es tan capcioso como podría uno imaginar. Con un apoyo justo de materiales gráficos que explicitan el texto en cuanto a referencias arqueológicas y artísticas.
July 11, 2025
This one the most important books I have read about the Herstory of the Divine Feminine & Goddess worship. it is dry at times and a lot of facts to take in but well worth the read especially if you are a scholar.
June 16, 2019
Anne Baring and Jules Cashford have created a very important work on the reunion of the masculine and feminine parts of the self and the world. Invaluable. A must read.
September 20, 2022
slayed
November 18, 2025
Un año entero leyendote. Que bendición fuiste en mis noches más oscuras.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews