Women's Ancient Architectural Heritage

MIMI LOBELL

In the summer of 1984, I received an envelope of material on women and architecture from Pauline Fowler, who was then finishing architecture school at the University of Toronto. The material included design projects she and other women had done for a women's Cultural Building, a research paper she had done under George Baird analyzing the various ideological approaches to the Cultural Building program,1 and an article she had written critiquing Kenneth Frampton's work.2

I was impressed with the brilliant intellectual rigor of Fowler's work, and the design projects were ideologically stimulating, displaying both a rich sense of irony and a serious search for an inspiring female heritage in architecture. Because the project was a Women's Cultural Building and the designers were women, I hoped to see in the designs something of the archetype of the feminine principle in architecture, that deep psychological reservoir of forms and meanings culled from eons of female experience, sensibilities, and ways of knowing the world.3 There were ancient cultures whose architecture was largely generated from this archetype, and in recent decades archaeologists have been excavating their remains and bringing more information about them to light.4

Ten years earlier, when several women architects in New York began planning what was to become the exhibit and book Women in American Architecture,5 two very different approaches were apparent. One group wanted to show that women can design as well as men; the other, that women have something different to offer. This is a fundamental split in feminist theory, but I believe that people are increasingly adopting the second attitude. In addition to insuring that women have equal opportunities to succeed in the "man's world," we need to recognize the differences between men and women. We need to value what women have to offer and allow women to transform this world to make it more balanced, more life-affirming, psychologically richer, and more fully human. In order to do this, however, women must be able to draw strength and vision from a well-developed inner reservoir of women's cultural heritage that is at once archetypal and historical, mythic and psychological.

The women designing the Women's Cultural Building addressed a broad range of theoretical issues, and they clearly aspired to expressing something uniquely female. Although they did not tap this inner reservoir, they ingeniously sought other sources of inspiration: some designers overtly reacted against masculinist architecture (Fowler's project, for example, was an excellent deconstruction and reformation of the traditional men's club); one or two focused on gardens rather than buildings as inspiration; another drew a free-form tabula rasa; and another presented an image-montage rather than a building design. Some designs incorporated kitchens, laundries, and day-care facilities as evocations of women's culture. The women may have emphasized these domestic facilities for their present-day irony or for their symbolic meaning (ovens, for instance, suggest the magical retort of women's highest "alchemical" powers: the womb), but I feared the women used them mainly because they had not been exposed to the extensive body of ancient sites, buildings, and works of art that would have given them access to the rich reservoir of archetypal female imagery in architecture. Alison McKenzie, designer of one of the garden projects, summed up the problem: "Lacking a visible mythology, women's culture therefore lacks a symbolic language."6

This cultural impoverishment of women can, in part, be traced to the way architectural history is taught. Most architecture schools, as well as art and architecture history texts, ignore the huge body of archaeological data that has become available in the last forty years. Perpetuating the nineteenth-century assumption that history begins with the "high" civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Greece, they convey the impression that nothing worth mentioning was built by the cultures that preceded the male-dominated, hierarchical, warlike states of the ancient world.7 They virtually ignore the Paleolithic and Neolithic cultures whose art and architecture abound in female imagery, and who also invented architecture and urbanism. This neglected aspect of history (namely, prehistory) constitutes what I call a "buried treasure" of women's ancient heritage in architecture. The response I sent to Pauline Fowler outlining this observation was the genesis of this essay.

There is a women's cultural heritage in architecture (it is, of course, also a men's heritage in that men, too, need to reconnect with the feminine principle). It dates back to at least 25,000 B.C., the Gravettian period in the Upper Paleolithic, when people began to carve sculptures of female figures such as the so-called "Venus" of Laussel in their rock-shelters. This figure announced some of the major symbolic motifs that continued through nearly thirty thousand years, making feminine imagery in art and architecture far older and longer-lived than masculine. The Venus of Laussel was originally covered in red ochre, which has a color affinity with blood and often was used in prehistory to indicate the sacred mysteries of life and death. An ample, pregnant woman, the Venus carries in her right hand a horn of lunar crescent shape, the earliest representation of the Cornucopia and the Horns of Consecration. The horn has thirteen marks of the type Alexander Marshack has correlated with Paleolithic lunar records.8 Her left hand rests over her womb, as if to point to the connection between the cycles of the moon and her menstrual cycle, within the overall matrix of fertility suggested by the Horn of Plenty.9

Later, the Horns of Consecration reappear in association with female deities in every part of the world that had domesticated cattle.10: in Ç atal Hü yü k shrines in 5500 B.C., in Sumerian cattle byres sacred to the Goddess Inanna in 3500 B.C., in the Palace of Knossos in Crete in 1500 B.C. and in an Egyptian image of the Temple of Hathor at Dendura dating from the first few centuries B.C., to name just a few. In the more general form of gateways to sacred precincts, this symbol appears in much of the world's religious architecture including the pylons of Egyptian temples, the Jachin and Boaz columns in Solomon's Temple, and even the tripartite entrances to Gothic cathedrals.

Three important criteria determine whether a work contributes to women's ancient heritage in architecture:

  1. The work is the product of a culture that revered the feminine principle (shown, for instance, by goddess worship and by the expression in the culture of feminine values such as peacefulness);
  2. Women in the culture enjoyed equality, independence, and respect (discernible in art, burial practices, dwelling layouts, and other material remains, as well as in ethnographic parallels); and
  3. The work is gynecomorphic, that is, shaped like the female body or symbolizing it in some way (often subtly).

Based on these criteria, a distinction can be made between primary and secondary works. A primary work is one that meets all the above criteria. A secondary work is gynecomorphic in form, may be dedicated to a goddess, but was not built by a female-centered civilization. For instance, the apse of the Gothic cathedral has its archetypal origins in such Neolithic structures as Newgrange and the Maltese temples. Although the Gothic apse is gynecomorphic and is associated with a "goddess" (the Virgin Mary), we would consider it secondary because it was built by a patriarchal civilization.

Secondary works are important, however, because they greatly expand the manifestations of women's cultural heritage in the world. Most of the world's sacred architecture is modeled on Neolithic prototypes or on the archetype of the feminine principle: not only the apse and crypt of the Gothic cathedral, but also the garbha-griha or "womb-house" of the Hindu temple, the and a or "cosmic womb" of the Buddhist stupa, the "Great Womb Store" of the Japanese Shingon sect, the kiva or "womb of Mother Earth" of the Pueblo Indians, and at the dome of the Islamic mosque (the dome is considered feminine while the minaret is masculine).

The unifying image is the "womb-cavern," which has attracted countless seekers, pilgrims, heroes, ascetics, mystics, prophets, and sages in their quest to reunite with their origins in the primal darkness in order to attain the highest illumination. The world's mythologies and religions are full of accounts of those who failed in the encounter and came out mad, as well as those who succeeded--from Mohammed to Milarepa--and emerged with the holy books, oracles, treasures, and visions that inspire the human spirit. Because the journey into the cavern of the underworld is the central human quest, the "womb-cavern" is the archetype of every holy-of-holies. It is as though architecture has recorded for eternity the forgotten goal of religion--to reunite with the feminine principle in order to transcend duality and attain wholeness, oneness, and enlightenment.11

The works of art and architecture of the Buried Treasure are not anomalies isolated from meaningful or widespread cultural contexts. On the contrary, these works span the Upper Paleolithic, Neolithic, Chalcolithic (Copper), and early Bronze Ages, with the majority representing the Neolithic way of life that spread across the earth as people began to develop agriculture and domesticate animals.12 The female-centeredness of prehistoric cultures is typically indicated by evidence of the following:

1. The worship of goddesses--usually represented by small, sacred figurines found in homes, small shrines, tombs, or granaries, which contrast markedly to the large, impersonal, hieratic sculptures of the later male-oriented religions.
 
2. Marked and prolonged peacefulness--seen for example in the absence in art and architecture of signs of war such as weapons, armor, fortifications, scenes of battle, and burials of people killed in war.
 
3. Egalitarian social structures--demonstrated by burial practices, which are usually communal, and by relatively little status differentiation in dwellings.
 
4. Matrilineal descent and inheritance patterns, where evidence is available.
 
5. The prevalence of female imagery in art and architecture, combined with the lack of dominant male figures in art and architecture--for instance, female-centered cultures do not have princely burials, heroic commemorative art, or powerful chieftains and kings.

Because these cultures subscribed to a world view so different from our own, they are not well understood in the male-dominated fields of archaeology and anthropology,13 and they are even less known to the public. Yet they have much to teach us because they are not simply reversals of patriarchal cultures (thus the term "female-centered" is preferred over "matriarchal," which suggests a simple role reversal with powerful queens and women warriors oppressing men.) The values and institutions of female-centered cultures emanate from and reify the feminine principle, and thus are vastly different from the values and institutions of patriarchal cultures, which emanate from and reify the masculine principle. One gift of the Buried Treasure is the revelation that war is not inherent in human nature and that people were able to thrive for thousands of years without it. Certainly the fact that these cultures flourished in simpler times and in a less crowded world contributed to their peacefulness, inventiveness, and general prosperity; but the veneration of women and feminine values was important also.

What then are the primary works of architecture in women's cultural heritage? There are many types. Below is a listing of some of the more important ones.

 

Megalithic structures--Including long barrows, passage mounds, stone circles, dolmen, and temples (ca. 4000-2500 B.C.). Some examples are Newgrange and Knowth passage mounds in Ireland;14 Avebury,15 West Kennet Long Barrow, and Merry Maidens in England;16 Gavrinis and Carnac in France;17 and the temple and rock-cut tombs of Malta.18 Most of these structures are gynecomorphic. For instance, West Kennet Long Barrow and several Maltese temples have plans in the shape of an amply bodied Mother Goddess. Newgrange, Knowth, and Gavrinis have dark, womblike chambers with entrances and passageways resembling the birth canal. They also have engravings of eye goddesses.

 

Earthworks--Windmill Hill, Silbury Hill, Maiden Castle (Neolithic phase), and Knowlton Circles in England (3000-2700 B.C.)19 and Hopewell and Adena mounds in Ohio (1000 B.C. to A.D. 400), such as the Great Serpent Mound. 20.

 

Shrines--Ç atal Hü yü k in Anatolia (ca. 5500 B.C.), a Neolithic town with shrines rich in female imagery, including a relief sculpture of a goddess giving birth to bulls;21 Lepenski Vir in Yugoslavia (6500-5500 B.C.), a village consisting of buildings with vulva-shaped arrangements of stones in their centers;22 and Sabatinovka II in Soviet Moldavia (ca. 4200 B.C.), a shrine with sixteen small, clay, serpent-headed goddesses seated on horned thrones and one large throne, probably used by a presiding priestess. Grindstones and a large round oven suggest the baking of sacred bread.23

 

Beehive dwellings and tholoi--Khirokitea in Cyprus;24 and Arpachiyeh in Mesopotamia (ca. 5500 B.C.)25 had small, domed, undifferentiated, "uterine" dwellings typical of Neolithic Near Eastern cultures, which also produced a multitude of goddess figurines.

 

Kivas--Pueblos and cliff-dwellings in the southwestern United States (ca. A.D. 1100 to the present). As the transformative womb of Mother Earth, the sacred kiva is the mythical Place of Emergence where dancers enter as humans to be reborn as kachinas.26

 

Sacred caves--France and Spain (Upper Paleolithic), where the veneration of bulls was first expressed (e.g., the "Hall of Bulls" at Lascaux), as well as the sculpting of female figurines; Crete (ca. 6000-1500 B.C.), a Bronze Age civilization that did not build temples, but instead worshipped goddesses in sacred caves in mountains.27

 

Sacred springs and wells--Various shrines in the Mediterranean, the Near East, the British Isles, the Aegean, etc.28 The association of water with goddesses is one of the earliest forms of religious symbolism. Many rivers, such as the Danube, Boyne, and Ganges, were named for goddesses; and Bath and Chartres were located at healing springs sacred to pre-Roman and pre-Christian goddesses, respectively.

 

Ritual baths--Mohenjo-Daro in Pakistan (2500-1800 B.C.), a sophisticated Bronze Age city with an elaborate ritual bath that may have been used for menstrual purification much in the manner of the Jewish mikvah.29 Clay female figurines were the most abundant finds in Mohenjo-Daro's Indus Valley civilization.

Early villages and towns--The villages of Mesopotamia up to the Ubaid period and those of Egypt up to the Gerzean period;30 Ç atal Hü yü k and Hacilar in Anatolia; Khirokitea in Cyprus (ca. 5500 B.C.); Mohenjo-Daro in Pakistan (2500-1800 B.C.);31 Banpo in China (Yang Shao culture, ca. 2000 B.C.).32 These towns and villages and others mentioned above exhibit most of the characteristics of female-centered cultures.

Art and artifacts--The non-architectural record of female-centered cultures includes bas reliefs and sculptures (Paleolithic "Venuses" and Neolithic goddess figures); petroglyphs and stone engravings as at Newgrange and Malta; pottery and textile designs; tools; toiletries, clothing, and jewelry; paintings and frescoes as at Ç atal Hü yü k and Knossos.

The last category also embraces artifacts from prehistoric female-centered cultures that left little architecture, such as the Paleolithic rock-shelter dwellers of Laussel, or whose architecture has disappeared or is too fragmentary or insufficiently excavated to be conclusive, such as the Valdivia culture of Peru (with its many fine female figurines);33 the Neolithic Amur culture of Siberia,34 and the Jomon of Japan.35 In The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe, Marija Gimbutas presents abundant evidence of goddess-worship in Neolithic European civilization.36 Though comprehensively excavated architectural sites may be rare for these cultures, their pottery and sculpture are rich in symbolic meaning.

Taken together, the architecture, enhanced natural sites, art, and artifacts of women's cultural heritage build a complex vocabulary of feminine forms, symbols, and psychological principles. Recurring motifs include: the "womb-cavern" (seen in sacred caves, passage graves, tholoi, and kivas); sacred springs and wells; female-shaped buildings such as the Maltese temples; and shrines ornamented with water signs, spirals and labyrinths,37 fish symbols, serpents, oculi, ovens, grain grinders, stylized vulvas, lunar crescents, bulls and the Horns of Consecration, and other symbols traditionally associated with women and with goddess worship. Contrary to common belief, not all the motifs have to do with fertility. The composite feminine principle the emerges from the Buried Treasure embraces astronomy and the rhythms of the stars as well as the earth and its agricultural seasons. Many megalithic structures, for instance, were aligned to the solstices, equinoxes, and significant extremes in the moon's orbit.

The feminine principle includes not only the physical powers of fertility, birth, nurturance, and sexuality, but also the spiritual and intellectual powers of prophecy, divination, death, transformation, and resurrection.38 The Great Goddess shown in prehistoric art was the sun as well as the moon, heaven as well as earth, spirit as well as body. It was only under the dualistic metaphysics of the later male-dominated cultures that women and the feminine principle came to be equated solely with the earth, fertility, sexuality, nature, matter, and the unconscious. (Even ostensibly balanced schema such as China's yin-yang symbol, India's Siva/Sakti principles, and various concepts of androgyny are products of this later thinking.)

The recurring motifs offer a rich and satisfying treasure of new/old forms to draw upon in design, but they are more than a mere stylistic repository. Because they originate in our deep past, dating to thousands of years ago, these forms activate a deeply buried archetypal stratum in our psyches, a powerful, potentiating inner Buried Treasure waiting to be discovered to enrich our understanding and practice of architecture.

On art historical and technological grounds alone, however, the architecture of the Buried Treasure is important and should be known to every architect. The Newgrange passage mound, built in 3200 B.C., is 280 feet in diameter and was once entirely covered with white quartz. It contains a megalithic, corbel-vaulted, cruciform chamber, 20 feet high, which can be seen as the dome of the Treasury of Atreus in primitive form and as the primordial cathedral plan. The mound is precisely oriented so that on the winter solstice the rays of the rising sun penetrate the chamber--an architectural enactment of the birth of the pre-Christian Divine Child (the sun) from its winter nadir. In the Boyne Valley surrounding Newgrange, several other structures are oriented to the sun at other times of the year, so that the whole landscape cradles an extensive system of megalithic calendars predating Stonehenge by a thousand years. Unlike Stonehenge, which has no art to speak of, Newgrange and its neighbors have stones engraved with a full symbolic language of abstract art: spirals, meanders, zig-zags, lozenges, solar disks, lunar crescents, and astronomical and calendrical notations.39

In many of the works, we can find precedents and origins for more familiar historical motifs and architectural achievements. The city of Mohenjo-Daro in the Indus Valley of Pakistan had sophisticated plumbing and drainage systems predating those of Rome by two thousand years.40 The impressive megalithic temple at Tarxien in Malta is ornamented with highly refined spirals and with the first known egg-and-dart motif. The concave entrances to passage mounds such as at Los Millares in Spain prefigure similar entrances in baroque architecture. The motif of flanking, protective lions (such as those in the Lion Gate at Mycenae and outside the New York Public Library) appears for the first time in a sculpture from a Ç atal Hü yü k granary showing the Great Goddess giving birth while seated between two leopards.41

Greek and Roman temples and medieval cathedrals often were superimposed on ancient structures. This is obvious at sites such as Maiden Castle and Knowlton Circles in England where a Romano-Celtic temple and a Norman church, respectively, sit within Neolithic henge monuments. The asymmetry of Canterbury Cathedral's Trinity Chapel indicates that its foundations were laid directly upon an egg-shaped prehistoric stone circle.42 When Alexander Thom surveyed thousands of stone circles, he found that the egg was a common shape.43

Wells Cathedral is sited near natural springs, from which the town and the cathedral take their names, and one spring is an ancient holy well.44 Like the waters of nearby Bath, the site drew worshippers and pilgrims from the earliest times and may have originally been presided over by a female deity similar to the goddess at Bath, whom the Romans renamed Sulis Minerva. Although the Christians dedicated the well to St. Andrew, their building of the nearby St. Mary's Chapel in the early tenth century restored the tradition of associating wells with female divinities. By superimposing temples, baths, and churches on preexisting sacred sites, later cultures drew on their energy and inspiration while channeling the devotion of the old sites' worshippers into the new religious and social order. Thus, another meaning of the Buried Treasure is that often it literally lies buried beneath some of the most important monuments of the later classical and Christian cultures, just as in the metaphor of the mind, it lies buried beneath the patriarchal cultural superstructure under which we currently live.

For what it can do for women, for architecture, and for society at large, the Buried Treasure of women's cultural heritage in architecture needs to be unearthed. This will mean more than simply adding a few new structures to those that architecture students must memorize. It will mean recognizing an entirely different model of culture, consciousness, and gender. It will mean giving women the imagery we need to gain confidence and independence through our womanhood, not in spite of it. For women and men alike, it will mean reentering that deep, dark, womb-cavern in the psyche from which we create, from which we are spiritually reborn, and in which we find that eternal, peaceful, still center allowing us to listen to our work, to approach it as oracles and seers rather than as heroes.

 

Notes
 
An asterisk (*) indicates that the writer has some awareness of female-centered cultural contexts and interpretations or has an interest in issues concerning women and architecture.
 
1. Pauline Fowler,* "Architecture for a Women's Cultural Building," paper for Professor George Baird (University of Toronto, 29 February 1984). Fowler is now a university teacher in Cardiff, Wales.
 
2. Pauline Fowler,* "Shaking the Foundations," Fuse (February 1984): 199-204.
 
3. Erich Neumann,* The Great Mother: An Analysis of the Archetype (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955).
 
4. Jacquetta Hawkes, Atlas of Ancient Archaeology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974), a good introduction to many of the sites under discussion, and James Mellaart,* The Neolithic of the Near East (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1975), a valuable summary of the ancient Near East by the archaeologist who excavated Ç atal Hü yü k.
 
5. Susana Torre,* ed., Women in American Architecture: A Historic and Contemporary Perspective (New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1977).
 
6. Alison McKenzie,* quoted in Fowler, "Architecture": 24.
 
7. Colin Renfrew, "Ancient Europe is Older Than We Thought," National Geographic 152 (November 1977): 615-23. Corrected radiocarbon dates have revealed that prehistoric Western European sites are up to 1800 years older than traditionally estimated; these sites were therefore not subject to cultural influences from Crete, Egypt, or the Near East as was long assumed. See also Merlin Stone,* When God Was a Woman (New York: The Dial Press, 1976). Stone analyzes the origin of the suppression of pre-existing female-centered cultures and religions in the Biblically based, male-dominated cultures of the Near East.
 
8. Alexander Marshack,* The Roots of Civilization: The Cognitive Beginnings of Man's First Art, Symbol and Notation (London:Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1972).
 
9. Joseph Campbell,* The Masks of God: Primitive Mythology (New York: Viking Press, 1970). Campbell has also discussed the meaning of the Venus of Laussel in several lectures.
 
10. Gertrude Rachel Levy,* The Gate of Horn (London: Faber, 1963).
 
11. José and Miriam Arguelles,* The Feminine: As Spacious as the Sky (Boston: Shambala Publications, 1977).
 
12. Mimi Lobell,* "Ancient Religions in the Context of Cultural Types," in Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the Ancient Mediterranean: Papers Presented at the First International Conference on Archaeology of the Ancient Mediterranean, ed. Anthony Bonanno (Amsterdam: B. R. Grü ner Publishing Co., 1986), 43-54. See also Mimi Lobell,* "Spatial Archetypes," ReVISION, 6 (Fall 1983): 69-82.
 
13. Mimi Lobell,* "Male-Biased Paradigms in Archaeology" (Paper presented at the World Archaeological Congress, session on "History of Pre and Proto-Historic Archaeology, 1986).
 
14. Martin Brennan, The Stars and the Stones: Ancient Art and Astronomy in Ireland (London: Thames and Hudson, 1983). See also Michael J. O'Kelly, Newgrange: Archaeology, Art and Legend (London: Thames and Hudson, 1982).
 
15. Aubrey Burl, Prehistoric Avebury (New Haven and London: Yale University Pres, 1979). See also Michael Dames,* The Avebury Cycle (London: Thames and Hudson, 1977).
 
16. Richard Cavendish, Prehistoric England (New York: British Heritage Press, 1983).
 
17. Aubrey Burl, Megalithic Brittany (London: Thames and Hudson, 1985).
 
18. J. D. Evans, The Prehistoric Antiquities of the Maltese Islands (London: Athlone Press, University of London, 1971); Renfrew, "Ancient Europe"; Sibylle von Cles-Redon,* The Realm of the Great Goddess: The Story of the Megalith Builders (London: Thames and Hudson, 1961), written before corrected radiocarbon dating eliminated the possibility of Near Eastern cultural diffusion to prehistoric Europe; and Robert Wernick and the editors of Time-Life Books,* The Monument Builders, The Emergence of Man series (New York: Time-Life Books, 1973).
 
19. Cavendish, Prehistoric England; Michael Dames,* The Silbury Treasure: The Great Goddess Rediscovered (London: Thames and Hudson, 1976); and Mimi Lobell,* "Temples of the Great Goddess," Heresies 5: The Great Goddess (Spring 1978): 32-39.
 
20. Robert Claiborne and the editors of Time-Life Books, The First Americans, The Emergence of Man series (New York: Time-Life Books, 1973), 126-35; and Robert Silverberg, Moundbuilders of Ancient America: The Archaeology of a Myth (Greenwich, CT: New York Graphic Society, 1968).
 
21. Dora Jane Hamblin and the editors of Time-Life Books,* The First Cities, The Emergence of Man series (New York: Time-Life Books, 1973), 42-67; Lobell,* "Temples," and Mellaart,* Neolithic.
 
22. Marija Gimbutas,* The Gods and Goddesses of Old Europe: 7000 to 3500 B.C. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1974). Gimbutas wanted her book to be titled The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe..., but the publisher refused to put "goddesses" first in the title; in 1982, however, the book was reissued under Gimbutas's original title. See also Dragoslav Srejovic, Europe's First Monumental Sculpture: New Discoveries at Lepenski Vir (New York: Stein and Day, 1972).
 
23. Gimbutas,* Gods, 72-73.
 
24. Vassos Karageorgphis,* The Civilization of Prehistoric Cyprus (Athens: Ekdotike Athenon S.A., 1976), 19-57.
 
25. Mellaart,* Neolithic.
 
26. Frank Waters,* Pumpkin Seed Point (Chicago: The Swallow Press/Sage Books, 1969) and Book of the Hopi (New York: Viking Press, 1972).
 
27. Lobell,* "Temples." See also Vincent Scully, Jr.,* The Earth, the Temple, and the Gods: Greek Sacred Architecture, Revised Edition (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1969).
 
28. von Cles-Redon,* Realm; and Janet and Colin Bord,* Sacred Waters: Holy Wells and Water Lore in Britain and Ireland (London: Granada, 1985).
 
29. Rosemary J. Dudley,* "She Who Bleeds, Yet Does not Die," Heresies 5: The Great Goddess (Spring 1978): 112-15.
 
30. Mellaart,* Neolithic.
 
31. Hamblin,* First Cities. See also Sir Mortimer Wheeler, Civilizations of the Indus Valley and Beyond (London: Thames & Hudson/McGraw-Hill, 1966).
 
32. Kwang-Chih Chang, The Archaeology of Ancient China, Third Edition (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1977), 80-143.
 
33. Henri Stierlin, Art of the Incas (New York: Rizzoli, 1984) 17-40.
 
34. Alexei Okladnikov, Art of the Amur: Ancient Art of the Russian Far East (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1981).
 
35. Namio Egami, The Beginnings of Japanese Art (New York and Tokyo: Weatherhill/Heibonsha, 1973), 13-36.
 
36. Gimbutas,* Gods.
 
37. Janet Bord,* Mazes and Labyrinths of the World (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1975).
 
38. Gimbutas,* Gods; and Neumann,* Great Mother.
 
39. Brennan, Stars.
 
40. Hamblin,* First Cities; and Wheeler, Indus Valley.
 
41. Hamblin,* First Cities; and Mellaart,* Neolithic.
 
42. Lyle B. Borst and B. M. Borst, Megalithic Software (Williamsville, NY: Twin Bridge Press, 1975).
 
43. Alexander Thom, Megalithic Sites in Britain (London: Oxford University Press, 1967).
 
44. L. S. Colchester, Wells Cathedral: A History (Shepton Mallet, Somerset: Open Books, 1982), 3-14.