You've just entered the theater of an alien sky.
If the words and images seem strange to you, there's a reason for this.
Our world was once a vastly different place.
To experience this won't hurt you and there is nothing to fear.
The Prehistoric Mother Goddess
Myths and symbols of a prehistoric mother goddess
have long enchanted investigators of the early cultures.
One reason for the fascination is the connection of the goddess
to the earliest forms of artistic expression.
In their creation of revered goddess figurines,
what were these prehistoric artists depicting and why?
Examples are abundant but where are the plausible explanations?
From the vantage point developed in this video series,
might we discern something concretely experienced
but unknown today?
Amongst all of the prehistoric goddess images,
the most attention is gone to the so called Venus of Willendorf
categorized as Venus Steatopygia ― "The obese Venus" ― .
Along with thousands of counterparts, this unusual theme poses a profound question
as to Earth's prehistoric environment.
Beginning in the 1960's, with the first stirrings of a so-called goddess movement,
researchers began to selectively interpret the prehistoric theme
seeing it in the context of envisioned matriarchal cultures.
But then almost as quickly, that interpretation receded into the background.
In the mid-1970's, we proposed that a close congregation of planets, Earth included,
moved through a cloud of dust and gas obscuring the background stars
while highlighting the unique appearance of the gathered bodies as a living form.
We suggested that this occurred long before any such body was named as a planet
and prior to the quasi- stable polar configuration
we've discussed at length in this series.
What was seen in that prehistoric epoch was not static
but produced a complex of spiraling aspects, toruses and other features
often including a tapering extension of gas and dust
descending toward the horizon of observers on Earth.
This earlier, more primitive, goddess form presents a radical contrast
to everything we've learned about the later evolution of the polar configuration.
In this phase, we see little or nothing to suggest
direct solar illumination of the planetary participants.
In fact, no indication of any cosmic cycle whatsoever
and certainly nothing comparable to the revolving crescent in the polar configuration,
few if any radial discharge phenomena either.
And seeking to comprehend the prehistoric goddess,
we begin with one inescapable assumption
that widespread patterns must have an explanation in human experience,
even if that explanation is yet to be recognized.
Of course, it would be futile to search for reference in the sky today.
The sky has changed
but the ancient motifs can be revealed
by simply following the evidence for an unusual condition.
For example, what does the unnaturally rotund goddess aspect signify?
Why her arms and feet are frequently missing?
Or why the often conical or tapering lower limbs?
Or the occasionally tapering upper aspect?
Or why the unnaturally spherical, often featureless, head
or other spherical aspects of the goddess?
As to the uncertainty of theoretical interpretations,
we offer a tip of the hat to Wikipedia.
"The original cultural meaning and purpose of these artifacts is not known,"
Wikipedia states.
That is indeed the truth of the matter.
Anthropologists and archaeologists cannot explain the motive or the cultural context
for the prehistoric goddess images.
The one recurrent pattern in particular gives us a window into the prehistoric condition.
Certain unique features of the archaic goddess remind us of the toroidal forms
we previously observed in the evolution of the polar configuration.
In the prehistoric setting, this aspect shows up almost endlessly,
often appearing as a pair of unnaturally spherical eyes
somewhat similar to the eye mask we've highlighted in earlier discussions.
But we also see these unnatural eyes accompanied by other toroidal forms
seemingly with no natural place or function.
In the prehistoric period, this toroidal aspect stands out most prominently
in its connection to folded arms enclosing the breasts of the goddess,
sometimes from above and sometimes from below.
This variable form deserves a closer look.
By all appearances, the observer standing on Earth
experienced something close to an edge-on view into a toroidal configuration.
But it seems that librations in that position
highlighted an alternating appearance of the goddesses' arms, above,
or below the toroidal boundary.
In both cases it's the repeated connections of the goddesses' arms,
to the toroidal enclosure,
that give us the enigmatic but most familiar pose of the goddess.
Ambiguities in our first impressions will generally disappear under closer investigation.
In the most common view of the goddess figurine,
an observer may not immediately realize that the goddess's arms fold over her breasts
and yet that position becomes undeniable
when seen from a side view of the goddess.
More frequently, we see the arms of the goddess in the lower position.
The conclusion standing out above all other details
is the implied toroidal form of the goddesses' arms,
marking out and highlighting the enclosed space.
Once discerned, that general pattern becomes predictable
across a large number of prehistoric goddess forms
and in many cases it will be impossible to miss.
Our proposed answer to the mystery of the prehistoric goddess
requires nothing more than a medium of gas and dust
and charged particles through which planets formerly moved.
Planets immersed in this dusty plasma cloud
engaged in continuous electrical transactions.
The one requirement to produce all the formations anciently observed
including the entire variety we've already documented in this series.
But can the connection between the paleolithic goddess and planets
be named more precisely?
Clearly, the modern scholars,
who first named the ancient goddess images as Venus figurines,
had no idea as to how appropriate that language might become
as these artifacts began to draw more scholarly attention.
And of course, the Paleolithic goddess images
arose long before the polar configuration we've described,
and that means long before the astronomical identification of the goddess
with a particular planet, Venus.
And yet, this undisputed fact still leaves the question as to why,
with the rise of planetary astronomy in ancient times,
the newly trained observers of the sky
consistently identified the mother goddess with just one planet,
Venus, and no other.
So we cannot afford to overlook the question of cause and effect.
Throughout this series of Discourses,
we've suggested that none of the mythic archetypes, not a single one,
could have arisen under the present sky.
The sky changed.
But now, just as clearly,
we can see that the earliest prehistoric forms of a mother goddess
also point back to an unfamiliar sky in Paleolithic times.
This evidence deserves to be followed with the same attention to detail
that we've applied to the later polar configuration.
Is it possible to reconstruct an ancient experience
before the emergence of the polar configuration?
What changes in Earth's celestial environment must have occurred
after the dominance of this archaic goddess form
to inspire the great civilizations or the consequent explosion of writing, storytelling,
the emergence of kings and kingship rites,
all with little or no precedent in the earlier epoch.
On their own, the prehistoric goddess images
do not sufficiently clarify the cultural context,
and many details seem to appear out of nowhere.
And yet, the recurring similarities are suggestive of something much more profound
than mere absurdity or outlandish caricature of female forms.
These curiosities are an open invitation to systematic comparative investigation
as we shall further document in our next episode.