The aim of this article is to assess the value of Marija Alseikaitė-Gimbutienė’s (Gimbutas) 1946 dissertation published in Tübingen (Germany). It is also important to follow how much of an impact this work had on Lithuanian archaeology and what inspiration it may provide for scholars today. This paper concentrates on the parts of the book which deal with burial customs during the Roman Iron Age. Relevant problems of cultural divisions based on burial site types as per Gimbutienė are examined to see how much this classification may be accepted today. The second part of Gimbutienė’s dissertation, which focused on the meaning of burial customs, provides insights that are still important for scholarship today, and reveals the young scholar’s ability to reconstruct an old belief system and to discern the prospects for the further investigation of burial site material.
Çatalhöyük East, a Neolithic site in Central Anatolia, has often been referred to as the place of the Mother Goddess. This is because of interpretations made by Mellaart, who discovered and excavated the site in the 1960s, when he discovered its striking symbolism. The female figurines among the finds are the most important reason for this fame. Therefore, various feminist groups have been attracted to this place because they perceived the site as a proof of the existence of a peaceful matriarchal community in the past. All of this is aligned with Gimbutas’ peaceful era theory, which has a Mother Goddess belief. This article will explain how archaeological finds at Çatalhöyük accompanied these theories in the time of Gimbutas and Mellaart and how new studies and new perspectives have altered these assumptions.
Marija Gimbutas (Gimbutienė) is a renowned archaeologist who specialised in European prehistory. This paper explores her life and work, including her personal biography, showing how her upbringing in Lithuania shaped her academic interests and orientations. This paper also reviews her professional achievements and contributions via the lenses of seven aspects of her academic life, namely her time in higher education, her work on Lithuanian folklore and symbolism, her explorations of Old Europe during the Neolithic, her Kurgan Hypothesis and engagement with Baltic studies, her excavations in southeast Europe, her work on the Goddess, and her symbolism work. It also examines academic and popular reactions to her writing and her influence on scholars and public discourse.