Rating: 
Summary: Incoherent nonsense
Review: I've seen a number of books that make all sorts of preposterous claims in order to promote some arbitrary agenda. However, this silly and absurd book doesn't even do that. It has nothing to offer anyone.
I didn't have any preconceived demands on this book. I didn't need it to say something like:
... We Women hold up our half of the sky. And more. But in monotheistic society, we've been doing two thirds of the work. And having only one third of the fun. Moreover, this unnatural, patriarchal monotheism has made tyrannical religious demands upon us. That's not how we lived in the past. We can and should return to Paganism and a more natural and cooperative society which cherishes and values everyone. ...
Of course, had it said that and defended it with a modicum of clarity, I'd have applauded it and given it five stars. But suppose it had merely looked at the overall problem of the role of Women in human society. Something like:
... There are differences between the roles of Women and Men. The Women bear the children. The Women nurse the children. While both Women and Men have a big role in raising children, these roles are not exactly the same. In addition, the Men are generally stronger than the Women. One major societal problem is that Women tend to work harder to help their own children than they do to help the children of others. And Men tend to work harder to help their children than they do to help the children of others. But Women generally know which children are theirs while Men aren't always so sure. Here's how some societies have dealt with these issues, and how a few societies, including our own, have gone astray. And here is how we can make things better. ...
Well, that would have been okay too. And it would have been heading for five stars as well.
But this book didn't do anything of the sort. Instead, it simply wandered all over the map. There were plenty of factually dubious statements and poor logic that obliterated any possible flow of argument. And there never seemed to be a point to it: almost nothing in the book seemed relevant to any possible thesis. It was frustrating. I doubt that I have ever read a less coherent book.
If you must read "The Chalice and the Blade," try the one by Glenna McReynolds.
Rating:
Summary: Revisionist histories do women no good at all.
Review: My issues with the book are that it is not historical fact, but speculative history at best. Theory�.not fact�..not history�.Theory. Eisler has not laid out a case for any of her claims and many of her ideas are contradicted by what is actually known of the times and areas she speaks of. Since most of her work is based off of Marija Gimbutas, whose work has been rather discredited as well, it is tainted from the onset. She also attempts, when she does have any shred of evidence to apply it to the whole of humankind like a blanket, ignoring the many cultures that were actually present and any that would contradict her tidy little paradigms. Just because something may have been done one way someplace�.doesn�t hold that it was done that way everywhere. This is as true now as it was 5000 years ago. Another issue I take with Ms. Eisler�s theories are that she divide the genders into strictly �male = bad� and �women (or maybe I should use womyn) = good�. Human beings don�t work that way and some of the cruelest and callous individuals I know are female. Even giving that there is nothing to back up her claims of that peaceful and nurturing matriarchal society (that the big bad men came and destroyed), when you apply basic human nature to the idea�it has even less credence. Finally, I dislike the way that Eisler handles criticisms of her book. Her comments are not addressed to the real issues that have been raised about her ideas, but in attacking anyone that brings them up, with comments that they have an agenda to discredit her as part of the evil patriarchal system. The idea that there are some real issues with her scholarship never seems to cross this woman�s mind. It is my contention that revisionist histories such as this do women no good at all overall.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Perfect, But Important to Read
Review: This book, in many ways, changed the way I thought. It raises awareness to the fact that there were goddess worshiping, female oriented societies in Neolithic times. It examines these societies and compares them to the warring, male-dominated cultures that eventually took over. In the book, some of the interpretation of the archeological evidence is speculative, but usually only in regards to the meaning of the symbols used in those cultures, and when this type of speculation occurs, it is easy to spot so you can judge for yourself. In regards to larger issues about the structure of those ancient cultures, the conclusions drawn based on the archeological remains are more concrete and obvious. This book is an easy and enjoyable read, and opens your mind to how things might change as we swing back towards being in balance with the feminine aspect.
| 
