Buy new:
-16% $22.72
FREE delivery Monday, May 20 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Ships from: Amazon.com
Sold by: Amazon.com
$22.72 with 16 percent savings
List Price: $26.95

The List Price is the suggested retail price of a new product as provided by a manufacturer, supplier, or seller. Except for books, Amazon will display a List Price if the product was purchased by customers on Amazon or offered by other retailers at or above the List Price in at least the past 90 days. List prices may not necessarily reflect the product's prevailing market price.
Learn more
Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns
FREE delivery Monday, May 20 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Or fastest delivery Wednesday, May 15. Order within 18 hrs 53 mins
Only 8 left in stock (more on the way).
$$22.72 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$22.72
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Ships from
Amazon.com
Ships from
Amazon.com
Sold by
Amazon.com
Sold by
Amazon.com
Returns
30-day easy returns
30-day easy returns
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.
Returns
30-day easy returns
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.
Payment
Secure transaction
Your transaction is secure
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
Payment
Secure transaction
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
$19.95
Former library book; Pages can have notes/highlighting. Spine may show signs of wear. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less Former library book; Pages can have notes/highlighting. Spine may show signs of wear. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less See less
FREE delivery May 21 - 28. Details
Or fastest delivery May 15 - 20. Details
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
$$22.72 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$22.72
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.
Ships from and sold by ThriftBooks-Phoenix.
Kindle app logo image

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.

Breaking the Mother Goose Code: How a Fairy-Tale Character Fooled the World for 300 Years Paperback – February 27, 2015

3.6 3.6 out of 5 stars 30 ratings

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$22.72","priceAmount":22.72,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"22","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"72","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"3JsWX1XvCL94PYgjk0UKldOWDn9ic21V6c6PAgDPDMmP6aw%2FaSL9Xsa0q21PCzIclB86K0dObOlsOI84zj%2FvrOA3phzLtOvepdJ0L3dGexBuBKr4yBifG%2B27puunWRT%2FjafdIWb8BUUmCh2x1J%2FnuQ%3D%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"$19.95","priceAmount":19.95,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"19","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"95","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"3JsWX1XvCL94PYgjk0UKldOWDn9ic21V9Lf%2BK1As3GL7L66AvfAs6yMKD%2FicRC7pDU%2FfiA4CQtmjP36TimfIYTtYBrZyVsHD8VzEGJe4cnoehWfiTGUJzAb8oYgmAXsdQvG4b7JhszHRBboy7z678mJr58s%2BpS2K2Y1wWu%2BsSBqY4pvEqFDBHcj67M4OZ26L","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

Who was Mother Goose? Where did she come from, and when? Although she’s one of the most beloved characters in Western literature, Mother Goose’s origins have seemed lost in the mists of time. Several have tried to pin her down, claiming she was the mother of Charlemagne, the wife of Clovis (King of the Franks), the Queen of Sheba, or even Elizabeth Goose of Boston, Massachusetts. Others think she’s related to mysterious goose-footed statues in old French churches called “Queen Pedauque.” This book delves deeply into the surviving evidence for Mother Goose’s origins – from her nursery rhymes and fairy tales as well as from relevant historical, mythological, and anthropological data. Until now, no one has ever confidently identified this intriguing yet elusive literary figure. So who was the real Mother Goose? The answer might surprise you.
Read more Read less

The Amazon Book Review
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Jeri Studebaker is the author of Switching to Goddess: Humanity’s Ticket to the Future. She has advanced degrees in anthropology, archaeology and education. She lives near Portland, Maine, in the U.S.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

Breaking the Mother Goose Code

How a Fairy-Tale Character Fooled the World for 300 Years

By Jeri Studebaker

John Hunt Publishing Ltd.

Copyright © 2014 Jeri Studebaker
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-78279-022-8

Contents

Acknowledgments,
Illustrations,
Introduction,
Part I,
Chapter 1: Beginning My Search for Mother Goose,
Chapter 2: Old Mother Goose When She Wanted to Wander: The One and Only Nursery Rhyme about Her,
Chapter 3: Geese, Golden Eggs, and the Silvery, Silvery Moon: Symbols in Old Mother Goose When She Wanted to Wander,
Chapter 4: Goddesses Who Loved Geese: Goddesses Mother Goose Resembles,
Chapter 5: The Harlequin-Hellequin-Helle-Holda Connection: Mother Goose, Folklore and the Theatre,
Chapter 6: Witch, Peasant Nurse, or Saintly Grandmother? Mother Goose and the Graphic Arts,
Chapter 7: Miscellaneous Evidence that Mother Goose was a Goddess,
Chapter 8: Was She Around Before the Patriarchy Crashed into Europe? (Is Mother Goose a Pre-Patriarchal Goddess?),
Chapter 9: Mother Goose's Secrets Hidden in Nursery Rhymes,
Part II,
Chapter 10: Mother Goose's Fairy Tales,
Chapter 11: Fairy Tales about the History and Future of Europe's Old Religions,
Chapter 12: Fairy Tales about Creation, Cosmology and Theology,
Chapter 13: Fairy Tales as Magic Spells and Incantations,
Chapter 14: Fairy Tales about Right and Wrong,
Chapter 15: Questions, Questions and More Questions,
Appendices,
Appendix A: Frequently Used Terms and Time Periods,
Appendix B: Mother Goose Timeline,
Appendix C: Grimms Fairy Tale #24, Mother Holle,
Appendix D: Perrault's Tales of Mother Goose: A Synopsis of Each Tale,
Appendix E: Fairy-Tale Code Words (Heide Gottner-Abendroth),
Appendix F: Discussion Questions,
Bibliography,


CHAPTER 1

Beginning My Search for Mother Goose


It was years ago – as far back as the early 1990s – that I first began to suspect that Mother Goose might be a goddess in disguise. My theory was this: Mother Goose and her fairy tales form a secret code cobbled together by our pre-Christian ancestors during "the burning times" – a period several centuries long during which the Church murdered tens of thousands of so-called "witches", people who'd supposedly made pacts with the Devil. I knew that academics were beginning to suspect that far from being just ordinary bystanders unfortunate enough to have been caught up in the Inquisition's deadly net, "witches" were actually some of Europe's last magico-religious practitioners, many of whom probably still believed in strong, powerful and beneficent female deities (later academics have increasingly added to the evidence for this; see Klaniczay 1990, Behringer 1998, Wilby 2005 and Bever 2008, among others).

Throughout the 16 and 17 centuries especially, the Church worked hard and fast to destroy the last vestiges of non-Christian religion in Europe. According to my theory, the few non-Christians left standing were desperate to find a way to hide their ancient Mother Goddess until it was safe for her to appear in the open again. What they came up with was ingenious: they hid their beautiful deity in the guise of an ugly old crone, a grizzled grandmother who spun innocent "fairy" tales around the kitchen fire. These tales, however, were far from innocent. They carried within them the secrets of the Old Religion. What better way to safeguard a great and ancient faith than to tuck it away in "harmless" stories for children?

I probably got the idea of the Mother Goose/Mother Goddess connection from the goddess scholar Buffie Johnson. In Lady of the Beasts, Johnson includes a glossy, full-colour picture of Mother Goose looking exactly like a Halloween witch: straddling a broomstick, Mother shoots to the moon in a dark night sky, her blood-red cape flapping in the wind; under the cape she wears an ankle-length black dress, and snake-like strands of her white hair escape from under her tall black hat. Behind her stands a white goose, its webbed feet clutching her broomstick with a vengeance (Johnson 1988).

Buffie stuck the same picture, in black and white this time, in a section of her book in which she says certain goddesses were strongly connected to geese. She also notes that for years a small group of scholars suggested that European fairy tales originated in pre-Christian mythology and religion. I knew also that the Church believed that the women they were burning at the stake for being witches were still holding on to pre-Christian beliefs and practices. So, just like the old European goddesses, Mother Goose too was mixed up with witches and geese.

Around the same time, I read a fascinating take on the fairy tale Cinderella. According to this explanation of the tale, theWestern version of the Cinderella story is secret code for the fact that Westerners will eventually return to their ancient Mother Goddesses. Cinder-Ella is the ancient Great Mother Goddess Ella (or Hella, Hel, Holda, Holla, along with several other names, depending on which part of Europe you're in during which time period), whose regenerative powers have burnt out and become cinders rather than the full-blown fire the Goddess needs to keep the earth and its inhabitants strong and healthy. The bad people in the story – the wicked stepmother and her two obnoxious blood daughters – represent the Church, the landed nobility, and the Church hierarchy (bishops and so forth), in that order (Walker 1996).

Waltzing these ideas a bit further down the road, it seemed clear to me that Cinderella, her fairy godmother, and her birth mother form a holy trinity. Just like the Father-Son-and-Holy-Ghost trinity, many ancient European goddesses too were organised into trinities, typically labelled Virgin-Mother-Crone (or, Daughter-Mother-Grandmother) – Persephone-Demeter-Hecate, for example, or Persephone-Artemis-Hecate (Leeming 2005: 268). In the Cinderella story, Cinder-Ella would be the Virgin, her birth mother the Mother, and her fairy godmother the Crone. Disguised as a fairy godmother, the Crone aspect of the goddess uses her powers to remove Cinderella's ugly cinder disguise, so that humanity (played by the prince) can once again become cognisant of Ella's monumental beauty, and accept her as their principle deity.

This view of the Cinderella story as prophecy roused me into rooting around for more information on the tale. Where had it come from and when? Early on I discovered that one of the first Westerners to publish Cinderella was one Charles Perrault, a Frenchman who included it in 1697 in a book of eight fairy tales, Tales and Stories from Times Past, or Tales of Mother Goose. Here again loomed another nagging, shadowy suggestion that Mother Goose might connect somehow with ancient European Mother Goddesses.

Of the eight stories in Perrault's Tales of Mother Goose, five have become almost universally popular: in addition to Cinderella these include Little Red Riding Hood, Sleeping Beauty, Puss in Boots and Blue Beard. The other three – The Fairy, Riquet with the Tuft, and Little Thumb – are less well known (see Appendix D for a synopsis of each). After thinking about these stories for a while, I couldn't really see the Mother Goddess hiding incognito in any of them except Cinderella. One possible exception, however, was Sleeping Beauty. Like Cinderella, Perrault's Sleeping Beauty has fairy godmothers in it — but eight to Cinderella's one.

Seven of these "God Mothers" gave good gifts to baby Sleeping Beauty. The eighth, however, an old fairy, gave a deadly gift; when Beauty grew up, the young woman would "pierce her hand with a spindle and die ..." To me, this didn't seem very goddess-like. On the other hand, I mused, this elder fairy could represent the death-cycle aspect of the old triple goddess – that part in charge of making certain all living creatures eventually move on to make room for new life on a finite planet. In this case, the Virgin-Mother-Crone trinity would play out like this: Beauty is the Virgin, the good godmothers are the Mother, and the elder godmother is the Crone.

Still, unlike the Cinderella tale, Sleeping Beauty didn't seem to have anyone playing the parts of the bad guys, the bullies who shunted the Great Mother Goddess underground in the first place (I'd learn later that Perrault had dropped the part of the tale with the bully in it). These would be the patriarchal religions. Beginning with the ones ushered in during the fourth millennium BC by the first invading wave of Indo-Europeans, and ending in the 300s AD with the Christians, the patriarchal religions had been a thorn in the side of the European Mother Goddess for quite some time. Overall, the connection between Perrault's tales and Mother Goose seemed tenuous at best, and for a few years I put aside my interest in Mother Goose toconcentrate on other writing projects.

Recently, however, I began again to get serious about exploring the mysteries and secrets surrounding Mother Goose. Could she really, as Buffie Johnson suggested to me years ago, be secret code for the Mother Goddess? A way to keep female deities from disappearing during times when Europe's power elites shifted into overdrive to cripple and crush them? Near the beginning of this new phase of my research, I began to wonder: if Mother Goose is secretly a goddess in disguise, exactly which goddess is she? Although in the past much of Europe apparently worshipped goddesses, the separate European culture groups were by no means all married to the same local deities. The goddesses of the Germanic tribes, for instance, differed from those of the Romans, and from those of the Celts, Slavs and other regional European groups.

Remembering that years ago I'd seen pictures in Buffie Johnson's Lady of the Beasts of goddesses riding geese, I picked the creamy, linen-covered book off my bookshelf and leafed through the index until I got to the word "goose". Buffie had only a few references to geese, but they all pointed to one and the same goddess: Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love and beauty. Or at least that's the way most people think of Aphrodite. Actually, modern scholars say she was much more than a pampered beauty queen (see, for example, Bernard and Moon's Goddesses Who Rule). Although this is the one-dimensional deity the Greeks and Romans turned her into, in other times and places Aphrodite was a powerful and complex goddess of fertility and new life – in addition to sensuality and romantic love.

In Lady of the Beasts I found two ancient images of Aphrodite flying through the air on a goose. In the first, the goddess perches sidesaddle on the bird, and in the second she stands regally and bolt upright on its back. Actually, in the second image the bird is a swan, but as Johnson points out, in ancient Classical imagery swans, geese and ducks are used interchangeably. A main trait all three birds share is their ability to travel on air, water and land alike. Not many of earth's creatures possess this special set of abilities, and scientists would eventually place all three birds into the family Anatidae, alone, with no other birds sharing their separate little corner of the biological classification system.

It's easy to see why these three birds might have been considered sacred to ancient peoples – so sacred, in fact, that among the Celts it was forbidden to eat them (Green 1986: 114). Of course geese are far from sacred today – think "silly goose", "to cook someone's goose" and Christmas goose for dinner, and you can see how far geese have fallen from grace. Interestingly, they fell at exactly the same time "witches" were being burned at the stake.

Even though I'd found my goose goddess (or so I thought), I admit I was a tad disappointed. Aphrodite didn't exactly fit my idea of who I thought Mother Goose should be. She wasn't ancient enough, for one thing, and she seemed to originate among people I had little respect for: the warlike, patriarchal Indo-Europeans. But, oh well, there it was. Aphrodite was the goddess who rode geese, so I was stuck with her – or so I thought.

Around this time I invested in a copy of Marguerite De Angeli's Book of Nursery and Mother Goose Rhymes. In it I found the only nursery rhyme known to mention Mother Goose: Old Mother Goose When She Wanted to Wander ("... flew through the air on a very fine gander."). This rhyme contains several symbols directly connected to goddesses: an owl (Athena's bird), an other-worldly woman who flew in the sky on the back of a goose (Aphrodite), a woman with a magic wand she used to morph her son Jack into "the famed Harlequin", and the moon – that celestial entity almost always associated with goddesses, probably because it shares its 28-day cycle with the menses, women's magical ability to shed blood without bleeding to death. Later I would learn that this rhyme was first published in 1815 in a chapbook by T. Batchelar, who titled it Old Mother Goose, or, The Golden Egg (chapbooks were small, inexpensive booklets sold by peddlers from the 15th century through the 18th century) (Delamar 1987: 252).

Harlequin, however, was a puzzle. What connection did he have, if any, to Aphrodite, or any other European goddess? Harlequin had long been a character in European stage entertainments, a jester of sorts, good for a chuckle or two and sometimes even a belly laugh. Not very goddess-like. But neither, of course, were pictures of Mother Goose as the prototypical, homely Halloween witch. This homeliness did, however, fit with my idea that Mother Goose was the goddess in disguise. Like Cinderella and not a few other fairy-tale females, was she hiding her exquisite beauty behind a mask of extreme bad looks? And could Harlequin too be hiding behind his dunderhead disguise?

As is the case with Mother Goose, Harlequin's origins are shrouded in mystery. Digging around a little I found a confusing stew of possibilities. One that snagged my attention was this: Harlequin was really Hellequin, or the ancient northern European goddess Helle (aka Holda, Holde, Hel, Ella, etc.) (Lecouteux 2011: 179-80). Shades of Cinder-Ella! Mother Goose being code for the ancient pre-Indo-European, pre-patriarchal goddess Helle was a fascinating possibility. All the evidence pointed to Helle being one of the last Great Goddesses of Europe before the patriarchy hit, the goddess who probably stood for peace, nonviolence, and social and gender equality (Studebaker 2008). Of course back then Helle went by different names in different parts of Europe, but "Helle" she was in northern Germanic areas (Gimbutas 2001: 190-95).

There was only one problem: Helle didn't ride a goose. It was Aphrodite who rode the goose. It looked like Helle and Harlequin were dead ends in my search. The only other goddess Buffie Johnson mentions riding geese is the East Indian goddess Devi. Europeans are distant cousins of East Indians – through their common Indo-European language and heritage.

For a while, I laid the whole goose issue aside and turned back again to Perrault's Tales of Mother Goose. Did these tales have anything in common, anything at all that might connect them to the Mother Goddess? After reading all eight tales again, carefully this time, one thing hit me immediately: in a full half of them, fairy "godmothers" (God Mothers? Mother God-esses?) rushed in to rescue the main characters in their times of need.

These magical god(ess)mothers rescued Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, the good daughter in The Fairy, and both Riquet and the princess in Riquet with the Tuft. Years before, I'd been struck by the similarity between the terms "godmother" and "God the mother". Add the word "fairy" into the mix, with its connotations of supernatural powers, and it seemed fairly obvious to me that "fairy godmother" could well be code for "God the mother", aka "the Mother Goddess".

After weeks of mulling over Perrault's tales, the only thing I found in common among most of them (seven out of eight) was this: all but one includes a mother and her daughter(s). Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty had good mothers who died young, and Red Riding Hood, the princess in Riquet, the daughters in Blue Beard, and the little ogre daughters in Little Thumb all had good mothers who were nevertheless powerless to rescue them from the trouble they tumbled into. The only story missing a mother-daughter dyad was Puss in Boots; in it Perrault includes a daughter character, but mentions only her father, not her mother.

At this point I became curious about Perrault himself, the first person on record ever to use Mother Goose in a book title. Who was he exactly? What I read at first was intriguing: Perrault hadn't signed his own name to the first edition of Tales of Mother Goose, but had instead signed his son's name (Appelbaum 2002: ix). Not only that, he used a form of his son Pierre's name so vague and obscure that it seemed almost intentionally designed to hide even his son's identity: "P. d'Armancour" ("Armancour" was the name of a piece of land Perrault had given Pierre) (Philip 1993: 125-27). Even more telling was the fact that on later copies of Mother Goose, Perrault didn't use even his son's name, but left his readers guessing who the author of the book was. To me this sounded like a man who'd written revolutionary material and didn't want his name anywhere near it.

But the more I read about Perrault, the more uncertain I became that he might have been purposely promoting a pre-Christian agenda with his Tales of Mother Goose. Perrault dedicated the book to the niece of Louis XIV, and at least one writer has suggested that he did this to introduce Pierre into high society (Perrault himself, who worked for one of Louis XIV's influential ministers, was quite prominent in French society). If you're dedicating a book to the king's niece, what better motivation for making your tales about young girls and princesses? What's more, Perrault had monkeyed around quite a bit with his Mother Goose stories, changing each from the folk versions into "literary folk tales" that some scholars suggest were more palatable to his wealthy, upper-class friends. Of course, such monkeying might also make for a better disguise for Mother Goose, and that's what I was looking for ...

At any rate, at this point I lost a bit of enthusiasm for Perrault. I even began wondering if it was pointless to suggest Mother Goose was a mother goddess, or that she was code for anything. Wasn't it a bit unrealistic to think that any trace of goddess worship would have survived after centuries of abuse, beginning in the 300s AD with the Roman Emperor Constantine, and ending with the extremely efficient Inquisition that was finally closing up shop around the time Perrault wrote Tales of Mother Goose? This was 14 centuries of terror and brutality – could any religion have survived such a thrashing?


(Continues...)Excerpted from Breaking the Mother Goose Code by Jeri Studebaker. Copyright © 2014 Jeri Studebaker. Excerpted by permission of John Hunt Publishing Ltd..
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Product details

  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Moon Books (February 27, 2015)
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • Paperback ‏ : ‎ 319 pages
  • ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 1782790225
  • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1782790228
  • Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 10.9 ounces
  • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 5.54 x 0.69 x 8.44 inches
  • Customer Reviews:
    3.6 3.6 out of 5 stars 30 ratings

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Jeri L. Studebaker
Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.
Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

At age 18 I left home hoping to become an archaeologist. Although that didn't happen I did acquire a degree in archaeology and a bit of excavating experience - at a medieval castle in Ludgerhsall, Wiltshire, England, which King John had turned into a hunting castle in 1210 AD, and at Seip Mound, a Hopewell Indian sacred site in Ross County, Ohio.

I also took an archaeology course at Oxford University (Merton College), about Britain when the Romans ran it, and got to work in Oxford's famous Bodleian Library as well as tour some of the more magnificent of Britain's archaeological ruins (Stonehenge, for starters, and Silbury Hill).

Although during my thirties I was a "professional student," I eventually settled down, in Maine, into a career working with refugees. After spending most of my working career helping resettle political refugees from Poland, Russia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Sudan, Ethiopia and other countries, I took an early retirement in 1999 and began writing and traveling a bit.

The highlight of my travels was a month-long trip to the Mediterranean islands of Crete and Santorini to study ancient Minoan art (and to nearly expire from delight after a month's diet of Mediterranean food, culture, wine and other exotic spirits). Santorini, which is actually the burnt-out shell of a volcano, stuns the senses: stacks of dazzling white buildings under burnt-orange roofs cling to the inside walls of the old volcano against a sky of midnight blue - and all the while the sun is shining! I haven't written my book on Minoan art yet, but I did finish the first draft of a fantasy-mystery novel set on Crete and Santorini: *Murder in a Minoan Museum*.

In 2012 I temporarily put aside the Minoan novel to write the book *Breaking the Mother Goose Code: How a Fairy-Tale Character Fooled the World for 300 Years*. If you love Mother Goose, fairy tales and goddesses, I promise you: you'll want to pick up a copy of this book.

Finally, in 2020 I wrote *Still Starving After All These Years: The Hidden Origins of War, Oppression and Inequality*. Gist of this book: 4000 BC saw the beginnings of almost everything we in the modern world hate about ourselves. Although we think these warts on our species are an inevitable, inborn part of us, they are not.

~

My credentials for writing include a B.A. in anthropology, an M.A. in archaeology, and completion of the coursework for a Ph.D. in cultural anthropology (after which I decided college/university teaching wasn't for me and so moved on to other things).

Customer reviews

3.6 out of 5 stars
3.6 out of 5
30 global ratings

Top reviews from the United States

Reviewed in the United States on May 24, 2015
I love a book that brings out my curiosity and offers lots of potential "what if" questions around a topic. I enjoyed following Jeri on a meandering path through the history, and possibly pre-history, of fairy tales; I felt like I was on the quest right there with her. The book felt a little memoir-like in how she invited me to consider some theories. And, unlike many books that feel too authoritative and as if they are shoving the author's perspective down my throat, Jeri's book was an absolute delight to read because I felt completely at ease in considering what I thought about the possibilities she was presenting.
4 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on February 17, 2015
This well-researched book tracing (and speculating about) the origins of Mother Goose and the symbolism contained in these familiar tales and nursery rhymes is an impressive piece of literary detective work. Although scholarly, it is written in a warm, witty, conversational style, and is a highly enjoyable read--with one glaring omission that kept me from giving it five stars. Just a few pages into the book, the author refers to "mysterious statues found in certain old French churches. . . these puzzling statues have one human foot, but a second foot that is webbed--like the foot of a goose." I eagerly flipped through the next few pages, then the entire book, looking for pictures of the statues and quickly discovered there were none--in fact, THIS BOOK, WHICH FREQUENTLY CITES SPECIFIC ARTWORK AND CRIES OUT FOR ILLUSTRATIONS, CONTAINS NOT A SINGLE ONE! Instead, the reader is directed to several websites that offer related art, and an entire chapter is devoted to verbal descriptions of illustrations appearing in other books! I wound up doing a lot of Googling--with limited success--but never did find pictures of the goose-footed church statues. Still, this book contains a wealth of information and an excellent bibliography, and deserves a place in the library of anyone interested in folklore, literature, or mythology.
11 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on March 16, 2015
I really wanted to like Jeri Studebaker’s Breaking the Mother Goose Code: How a Fairy-Tale Character Fooled the World for 300 Years (Moon Books, 2015). I’ve been on something of a folklore kick for the last couple of years, trying to incorporate as much Scandinavian, German, and English folk-practices into my own religious practice as I could, tracking down similarities, resonances, etc. So when I saw this book advertised as a pre-order, I leaped at it, thinking it would make some solid connections between the “Mother Goose” nursery rhymes and folklore, and possibly pre-Christian material as well. Based on the blurb on the back, that’s what it should have been:

“This book delves deeply into the surviving evidence for Mother Goose’s origins – from her nursery rhymes and fairy tales as well as from relevant historical, mythological, and anthropological data.”

Alas, it was not to be. What we get is an exercise in wishful thinking, circular logic, outright incorrect information, and discredited theories. The frustrating thing is that the author does make one excellent connection, which could have been ground-breaking, but was so intent on pursuing a defense of her ideological predilections that it is treated as a mere afterthought, and not given the development it deserves. More on that later. To begin with, this book is steeped in the feminist myth of the “Great Mother Goddess”, and the so-called matriarchal civilization that supposedly existed 6,000 years ago in an idyllic egalitarian world. The long-since discredited theories of Marija Gimbutas are prominently referenced (there are seven direct references to her in the index, and , and indeed the whole premise of the book rests on the notion that 6,000 years ago, a matriarchal civilization was overthrown by nasty patriarchal Indo-European invaders:

“Although we homo sapiens have been stomping around planet earth for at least 150,000 years, it’s only been during the last 0.04 percent of that time – i.e., the past 6,000 years – that we’ve been plagued by patriarchy.” (Studebaker, p. 90)

To say that this is not a view of history embraced by mainstream scholarship is an understatement. It is the anthropological equivalent of Flat Earth-ism. Even feminist anthropologists don’t feel she makes her case:

“The story that has been presented by Goddess literature is neither the only story nor “the” story, despite its power and seduction for those who actively seek to re-imagine the past and to create a “usable” past for contemporary contexts. … It may seem more satisfying to be given the “facts” of temples, of shrines, and reverence for a deity, but as feminists we are sure that longer-term interpretive satisfaction is more complicated than that.” (Ruth Tringham and Margaret Conkey, “Rethinking Figurines”, in Ancient Goddesses: The Myths and Evidence, Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1998)

Indeed, entire books have been written (by female scholars, it must unfortunately be noted), refuting the myth of the idyllic matriarchal society destroyed by evil patriarchal invaders. Look no further than The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Won't Give Women a Future by Cynthia Eller (Beacon Press, 2000):

“Feminist matriarchalist interpretations of ancient myth are rather transparently driven by ideology. Mythical evidence can by its nature be given various incommensurable interpretations. In this case, it provides no real support for the proposed prehistoric patriarchal revolution, though it does offer a fertile field for imagination.” (p. 179)

Although an in-depth study of the fallacious nature of the matriarchialist view of prehistory is beyond the scope of this review, suffice to say that it is recognized as ideologically, rather than academically, based, and respected scholarship in the field finds the idea suspect at best.

That said, it would still be possible to find value in The Mother Goose Code, were it to engage in a study of the rhymes themselves, making attempts to link them to pre-Christian beliefs and practices. Unfortunately, the book places such a focus on the myth of some matriarchal Goddess culture that it largely ignores much of what we do know about pre-Christian society. And where it does try to make associations, it gets even the most basic facts wrong.

To take but one example, the author asserts that the Norse mythological figure "Angr-boda" (ON Angrboða) is “of the Vanir” (p. 59). This is untrue; Angrboða is, in fact, a Jötunn, and there is nothing whatsoever to link her to the Vanir in Norse mythology. That is but one of many instances of sloppy research.

The author makes similar leaps in trying to tie the figure of Mother Goose to pre-Christian religion to the 16th-century figure. As the number of examples of goose-related goddesses is extremely limited, the author makes the completely unwarranted assumption that anything to do with animals in the family anatidae (which includes ducks, swans, etc.) should also be swept up in the net, and later brings anything even vaguely bird-related in to make her case. It is perhaps understandable, since examples of actual swan-related myths are few and far between (which would seem to be a strike against the thesis; if Mother Goose were truly the vehicle for the survival of some Goddess-culture lore, surely geese would figure more prominently).

Here we also see the first of many instances of circular logic; birds are related to the Goddess, and thus Mother Goose is the Goddess, because she has the word “goose” in her name, so thus all birds are related to the Goddess…

The author also seems to be confused as to what, exactly, constitutes her pre-patriarchal society. When it suits her purpose, her Mother Goose/Goddess stretches back 6,000 years (before the invasion of the Indo-European peoples), but at other points in the text she doesn’t scruple to use examples from Indo-European religion and myth to make her case. Which is it? Is Indo-European Paganism the evil patriarchal destroyer, or is Christianity the evil patriarchal destroyer? Depending on the circumstance, either it seems will suffice. We see this most strongly in her use of the Frau Holle myths in Germany; Frau Holle is linked to either the Germanic goddess Freya or Frigg (the evidence is inconclusive), but either way both goddesses were part of the Indo-European cultus.

There is also a sudden divergence into folklore and folktales, which are, strictly speaking, outside the purview of a book on Mother Goose. For a book that is ostensibly concerned with a specific corpus of literature (the Mother Goose rhymes), to bring in a discussion of Grimm’s fairy tales seems somewhat extraneous. It does nothing to advance the central thesis that Mother Goose’s rhymes are a survival of a 6,000 year old social/magical/religious tradition.

The author also fails to make any sort of convincing case for why the figure of Mother Goose, specifically, would be a vehicle for retaining pre-Christian (or is it pre-Indo-European?) lore. As the author herself admits, the figure of Mother Goose is no older than the 16th century, well after the demise of Paganism in Europe.

Unfortunately, the author brings in yet another well-debunked myth; the “burning times”. In her conception, Europe was thick with tens of thousands of Goddess-worshippers (how they survived through five thousand years of patriarchal Indo-European oppression is left unexplained), who were put through a deliberate campaign of genocide (although it might more properly be termed memocide) akin to the Final Solution. And lest this seem like an exaggeration:

“Is there evidence that European foundling homes were designed to serve as re-education and death camps for the offspring of non-Christians? I believe there is. First, the timing is suspect. Foundling homes began when the witch trials began – in the 1300s. They quickly swelled in size and almost immediately began showing incredible death rates.” (p. 240)

Setting aside the fact that the whole myth of the “burning times” has also been thoroughly debunked, the section of the book that diverts into this discussion is not only completely non-sequitur, but verges on paranoia. It smacks of someone desperate to establish themselves as the victim of some enormous tragedy, and unfortunately it once again is completely without historical merit.

The author does not, however, make any sort of argument as to why Mother Goose would be the embodiment of the surviving Goddess Culture. There is a 6,000 year gap (or perhaps 500 years; she doesn’t make clear whether the villain in her piece are the Indo-Europeans or the Christians) that remains completely unaccounted-for. All of a sudden we’re supposed to think that a figure evolved out of nothing, to encapsulate all of that secret knowledge.

It should be noted that Mother Goose wasn’t the only figure that occupies that role. There’s also Old Mother Hubbard and Tom Thumb, who are both also credited with being the source of these fairy tales and rhymes as well. (Something that is mentioned only in passing in the current work.) Clearly it is not the specific figure that is significant, but the content of the knowledge.

This is all on top of the author’s other failings, she seems to take the view that any book published before she was born must somehow have some deep significance. That 1950 was the year in which the True Nature of Mother Goose was lost, until she rediscovered it in 2015. How else to explain her bizarre notion that commercial images of Mother Goose on the cover of books published well into the modern era have some hidden significance? Some commercial artist commissioned to do a drawing of Mother Goose in 1950 is not encoding any deep truths. He is making an image that will sell the most books, period.

With all these failings, it would be easy to set aside the book as a complete loss, but there is one idea that it raises that I find completely inspired, but which is lamentably not developed to any degree. That is the linkage between the nursery rhymes of Mother Goose (et al) and the Germanic tradition of charms and charming.

Simply put, in the Germanic tradition, folk charms take on the form of a story that is told, with the story itself being the magic spell that will achieve the desired result. We see this in the First and Second Merseburg Charms, which are a spell of release and a spell of healing, respectively. As the story is told, the desired result comes about. The use of the fairy stories and nursery rhymes in the same capacity is frankly an inspired one, but one which enjoys but a single paragraph in the book. Chapter thirteen is even entitled “Fair Tales as Magic Spells and Incantations”, but the rest of the chapter is given over to a flight of fancy wherein they are said to be representations of shamanic journeys.

This is perhaps the most wasted potential of the book. Imagine if you would a book that gave the original Mother Goose rhymes, with perhaps a chapter of background, and then spent the rest of the work explaining how each could be used in specific magical contexts. Assuming that at least some of them were surviving charms, what use was “Cock Robin” (#109 in the Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes)? Which ones were based on 17th or 18th century events, and thus could be excluded? Which could be traced back to pre-Christian practices and beliefs (gods as well as goddesses)? All this potential for real analysis of the existing folklore, squandered in a single paragraph in favor of speculation on shamanic journeys. It’s both sad and infuriating.

It's all the worse because when she does attempt to fit some ancient lore into the context of magic spells, it's not the Mother Goose rhymes at all. It's more conventional folk tales such as those found in the Brothers Grimm. Given the non-lyrical format of those tales, to try to shoehorn them into a European-type charm, and not the Mother Goose rhymes (which I thought were supposed to be the focus of the book)? The rhymes would seem to have been a much better fit, but they seem to have been forgotten as the author goes off on a fairy tale tangent.

There are some more prosaic failings with the book as well. The author spends a lot of time discussing various images of Mother Goose (and related images), but there’s not a single illustration in the whole book. While she does an admirable job of attempting to describe the images, the book would be much better served with a series of plates containing the images. This is a failing to be laid squarely on the shoulders of the publisher, rather than the author, however.

All in all, this book is a complete waste. It is based on an anthropological theory that has been debunked, invokes historical events that never occurred, indulges in circular logic, gets basic facts wrong, and buries the one flash of insight it contains in a stew of conjecture and wishful thinking. Some people who are already invested in the myth of a utopian Goddess-based matriarchy will doubtless eat this drivel up. Anyone who is actually interested in real scholarship and its possible application to modern-day religion will need to go elsewhere.
36 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on December 22, 2015
I got this as a sample, then as the full book. It is intelligently written, well researched and informative. I was unaware of the changes in the depiction of Mother over the years, and this has opened my eyes to other descriptions and depictions. I can see the evolution of the character and the stories in a slightly different light, and it has urged me to search further. I am not saying you should buy into everything the author suggests, but, my Goddess, it does make you think.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on October 27, 2015
The author mostly concentrates on the nursery rhyme about Mother Goose and the story Little Red Riding Hood. Her insights are valuable, but I was hoping for more symbology of other nursery rhymes as well.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on July 14, 2016
Enjoyed the premise, but a little repetative.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on April 13, 2015
This is a fascinating look at the relationship between long suppressed myths and religion beliefs of early Europeans. A must read for anyone interested in Mother Goose and the Great Goddess.
One person found this helpful
Report

Top reviews from other countries

Kathy J
5.0 out of 5 stars A well researched and thought through exploration of the stories ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 13, 2015
A well researched and thought through exploration of the stories of Mother Goose and her relationships to the Ancient Mother Goddess in Europe.
Well done, Jeri !
3 people found this helpful
Report
Mollie Semple
3.0 out of 5 stars Three Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 2, 2016
Rather speculative in her assertions, very little provable evidence of the claims Studebaker makes. Very repetitive.