The passage I chose was “Herodotos from The Histories” because a brief section of the Amazons had intrigued me the most. One detail that stood out to me was, in marriage a virgin Amazon can’t wed till they slain a man of the enemy. I have never come across such an obligation before being wed . I believe the author was trying to communicate the importance of human behavior between the Sardis, artemisia, , amazons,and spartans. In my opinion the document was telling us the causes of war. This describes a time and place where countries had conflict with one another. With conflict , it focuses on the fall and success of the wars as well. This document seems to relate to other articles we have come across by the idea of war and actions that can lead to such disaster. I would like to know more about Amazons in war and a summary of their background including their ethnicity. 

One of the most striking passages I find is the Amazons and their fusing with the Scythians (4.110–4.117) —, how Herodotos described a matriarchal war-oriented civilization that challenged societal norms of gender. The Amazons didn’t just fight in battle: They insisted on autonomy; they wouldn’t join the Scythians’ families, insisting on establishing as a new community separate from both their own people and the Scythians themselves. I believe Herodotos was attempting to bring attention to how civilization is formed through the mixing and violence of cultures; possibly more aptly, he was inquiring how gender roles are socially created and are not organic. The Amazons’ story fascinates with women who live at the margins of Greek domesticity; it challenges the reader to consider how societal roles are accepted or resisted.

This document builds a picture of a world in which power, gender and politics were deeply interlinked; through figures such as Artemisia, the Spartan queen Gorgo and the Amazons, Herodotos shows that female influence — while rare — was acknowledged and sometimes admired. This text provides a foil to the other readings, which often portray women as secondary or submissive; there are examples of resistance, the exercise of autonomy, and cunning (in, of course, the Old Testament sense); it shows how different cultures envisioned women’s roles (rather than being fixed) as fluid and negotiable. Nevertheless, Herodotos tends to present these women as exceptional or exotic — an ambivalence that is one more element of admiration, but also, really, discomfort, if not fear, reflecting a cultural climate that simultaneously recoiled from, and glorified, powerful women. I want to learn more about how these stories would have been received by Herodotos’s original audience; were they read as cautionary tales, moral lessons, historical records?

Herodotus: Histories

The reading that stood out to me as Artemisia of Halicarnassus. When the Persian King Xerxes I launched an invasion of Greece, Artemisia was one of his allies. She provided ships and troops to the Persian fleet becoming one of Xerxes most trusted advisers. Artemisia played a significant role in the battle of Salamis, A naval engagement between the Greek city states and the Persian empire. Despite being outnumbered, Artemisia great intuition and valor won a decisive victory.

During the battle, Artemisia commanded a contingent of ships to the Persian fleet. Her tactics, acumen, and bravery were praised even by her enemies. According to Herodotus, she reportedly advised Xerxes to retreat after realizing the Persians were losing the battle. During the battle, she accidentally rammed and sunk a Persian ship while attempting to flee. This action was interpreted as a deliberate ploy to escape being pursued by the Greeks ships.

Artemisia challenges traditional roles of her times in a society in which women were often marginalized from positions of authority. She rules as a Queen and military leader earning respect and admiration for her accomplishments. In this story, Herodotus gives us insights into the political and military landscape of the time. Artemisia's courage despite being on the losing side, her strategic decisions, and bravery left a lasting impression on both allies and adversaries. The legacy of Artemisia is a reminder of diverse roles that women played in ancient societies.

The reading I decided to read was “From The Histories / Herodotos,” which I picked because it mentioned the Amazons, which I found interesting in the last reading. The Amazon women were interesting even after integrating with other clans, they still were the hunters and fought in combat, even when they were women. I believe the author was trying to show how these women broke societal norms and did things men would relatively do, and were helpful in their way. The place in time was probably when women were a lot less possibly limited and could say things and do things that wouldn't lead to them being shut down. The reading contradicts a lot of the readings, as we usually always read of women being limited and not allowed to do many things, and being kept at home. 

My question would be if women ever rise to a higher position, how do the men feel, and would this lead to an assassination attempt?

The line that stood out to me the most was the line in Eumenides. “ Zeus gives greater honor to a father’s death, according to what you say; yet he himself bound his aged father, Cronus. How does this not contradict what you say?” I struggled to understand Apollo’s response here. But the Furies continue to point out the irony here. This argument that a mother is not a parent is interesting in how unique of an argument it is, but it falls flat. Ultimately a person can not be born without the use of a woman as a mother. That alone should render the argument baseless. Even Athena’s birth isn’t entirely from her father, as her father consumed her mother. From the consumption of her mother she was birthed from her father, but not entirely of him.

"There is a time when fear is good and ought to remain seated as a guardian of the heart," is one line that caught my attention. This quote from Eumenides shows that under pressure, wisdom gained pays off. This comment suggests that, although fear is seen as very negative, fear has a necessary role in maintaining social order and justice. The ancient Greek point of view that societal stability depends on a mix between respect of the law and the penalties of transgression reflects the concept that justice must be feared in order to be respected.

According to the author, justice calls for more prevention of anarchy than only punishment.  Early, primal justice is represented by the Furies based on supernatural punishment and retribution. But Athena's intervention brings in a different kind of justice rooted in human institutions and logical decision-making. From divine vengeance to civic law, the change points Greek civilization from tribal justice to a more ordered legal structure.

The author helped us learn information about the time period and area in which it was written, which was classical Athens. At that time, the city was beginning to define itself by its legal institutions rather than the traditional systems of honor and revenge.  The Areopagus was established as a court of law, which reflects the Athenians' emphasis on orderly administration as opposed to the customary practices of blood feuds and personal retribution that were prevalent at the time.  Despite the fact that justice must be rational, it is not possible for it to completely abolish fear, which is the source of the discouragement of wrongdoing, an important contradiction.

One may argue that Athens was run under laws rather than under fear when this is set against other readings of Ancient Greece and this era. Furthermore, it is directly against the Homeric legacy, according to which heroes like Achilles and Odysseus were expected to personally administer retribution instead than pursue legal redress, therefore defining revenge as a required good in their society. From an honor system based on warriors, Athens was transitioning into a society that was driven by the state and was more legalistic instead of being judged by gods and goddesses. 

Another area of interest for me is how different ancient legal systems recognized justice and fear. Did the Greeks believe their strategy was better than those of surrounding societies as the Persians or Egypt? Furthermore, how did common people view this change? Did personal revenge still exist in daily life or did they really trust the new legal system? 

Though the residual presence of fear reminds us that justice, even in its most civilized form, still depends on the weight of consequence. The publication catches a remarkable change in Greek thought whereby justice moves from the hands of angry gods to the rational decision-making of human institutions.

Artemisia of Halicarnassus in Herodotus’ Histories stood out to me as a compelling exploration of gender and leadership in antiquity. As someone who deeply values intellect and resilience, I find Artemisia’s story both inspiring and sobering. Her ability to operate effectively within, and even leverage, the constraints of her society aligns closely with contemporary discourse on leadership in the face of adversity. Artemisia’s calculated use of guile and pragmatism, exemplified by her decision to sink a Persian vessel to evade Athenian pursuit (8.87), illustrates her command of tactical leadership within a predominantly male domain.

The reading that stood out to me was “Herodotus, from The Histories” the quote “My men have become women, and my women men” When Artemisia won the sea battle, king Xerxes was astonished. Xerxes reflects the gender role of a men a women, even though a woman had won the battle he still comparing the woman success with men. Artemisia couldn't enjoy her success because she’s being labeled. In this quote women was used as an insult because the men were incapable in the battle “became women” meaning being a woman was a sign of weakness or cowardice. 

 The author is literally acknowledging the reversal of roles. He sees a woman do well in battle and now in his opinion “the women have become men.” He sees men not doing so well in a battle and now his opinion is “The men have become women.” Instead of just giving credit to the woman Artemisia, he has to make a comment like this. He will put down the men who were in this battle, because they did not fight as well as the woman. He does this because he cannot bring himself to just honor and praise the woman outright.

The details that jumped out at me was the argument that Apollos made about mother's don't actually contribute to a child's true identity that only the father matters, also where Apollo defends Orestes for killing his mother Clytemnestra when the furies speaks to him. Then Athena favor the young man and establishes a court to settle disputes.

The Author was trying to communicate the historical records of things that happened mixing facts and rumors together, giving us the feel that we were living it, how the political system grow stronger and the tension between the old and new roles for women.

In my opinion this document is telling us about the comparison between archaic and classical Athens where women was force into obscurity in latter period and the curbing of the aristocrats by the democracy, also about the death rituals and more women rights.

The documents support the highlights and complexity of gender roles in ancient world showing how they shape the different political and cultural societies.

What I would like to find out more about is how modern feminist learn from ancient female about empowerment and if the archaeological evidence vs literary sources.

The passage in Aeschylus’s Eumenides that particularly stood out was the priestess’s speech, emphasizing the conflict between the old gods and the new, symbolizing the shift in justice and morality in ancient Greece. This reflection on divine power hints at the major cultural transformations of the era. As I read, it became apparent the author intended to highlight the social and theological evolution at the time. The juxtaposition between old and new deities stresses a broader commentary on changing values and societal structures.

In my view, the document offers insight into the Athenians’ struggles with justice, morality, and societal order during 458 BCE. The depiction of the Furies versus Apollo represents the clash between traditional retributive justice and newer, more progressive forms of legal and moral reasoning. This transition reflects the historical context, wherein Athens was undergoing democratic reforms and grappling with emerging philosophical ideas. The conflict between the matriarchal Furies and the patriarchal Apollo can be seen as a metaphor for the broader societal issues of power and gender, particularly relevant in a society transitioning from tribal retribution to legal adjudication.

Within the broader spectrum of literature from this period, Eumenides supports the common narrative of transformation and intellectual advancement, though it may contradict earlier depictions of divine justice as unchanging and absolute. Aeschylus instead presents a more dynamic ideology that resonates with contemporary thoughts, raising questions about the adaptability and rigidity of societal laws and customs and the human struggle to balance tradition with change. For example, Herodotus’s The Histories and Aeschylus’s Eumenides both explore themes of power, gender, and justice, yet through different lenses. While Herodotus highlights women’s agency through figures like the Amazons and Artemisia, showcasing their defiance of traditional roles, Aeschylus illustrates the transition from vengeance-based justice to structured legal systems, epitomized by the Furies’ transformation under Athena’s guidance. Together, these texts reveal cultural shifts in gender dynamics and legal thought, demonstrating how ancient societies grappled with evolving conceptions of justice and authority.

Curiously, I wish to explore more how such themes of divine justice and moral evolution in Greek literature impacted philosophical discourse in subsequent centuries. It would be enlightening to trace the influence of these early ideas on later thinkers and their contributions to our understanding of justice, morality, and governance. Examining the development and influence of these themes on Western legal and ethical systems would illuminate the lasting impact of classical philosophical ideas.

Good Evening Everyone!

The reading that I enjoyed reading was “Aeschylos, from Eumenides” which introduced a new way of justice, while before Gods could just punish misconducts now they were submitted into a judge in order to establish if they were up to punishment or not. This play was a way to introduce Democracy but still point out the limitations of Women in the public sphere as the way it was to judge Orestes towards his crime against his mother.

My question is: What could happen if Orestes killed his father instead of his mother? Would it be forgiven as well?

The other reading that caught my attention was the collection of different stories from “Herotodos, from The Histories” which I believe highlighted the different abilities and skills of women in different times that impact their time. I think in contrast with the one mentioned before, women's actions were judged harshly while in this reading recognized their intelligence of their character in different situations. I found it very interesting that women were recognized and mentioned in History especially in Ancient Time.

Hello Professor and Classmates,

A detail that jumped out as I read through was, ''"I will return to my home now, after I swear an oath to this land and to your people for the future and for all time to come, that no captain of my land will ever come here and bring a well-equipped spear against them." This line is important as it shows Orestes personal commitment to peace and protection for the land he rules and his people. He also demonstrates the importance of an oath and in making sure that future conflicts are prevented in their community.

In this part of the story the author is simply trying to communicate how these characters find it important to find peace and balance within everybody in their community so no wars or any future conflict occurs. It just shows what each individual felt which is important. In my opinion, this document speaks of a time and place where oaths, divine intervention, and the concepts of respect and nobility were very important to the values and beliefs of these people. It shows a society where personal and collective responsibilities were closely tied to religious and spiritual obligations.

This document shows and references to gods like Athena, Apollo and Orestes which reflects a known theme in Greek literature, where Gods play a role in the fate of their individuals and their nations. This supports the common idea in ancient Greek society where human actions are often shaped by divine will. From this, I would like to find out if Orestes idea of wanting peace, actually worked because they all also wanted this for their town?

One piece that struck me was from the "Sayings of Spartan Women" by Plutarch. A mother tells her son that he should return with his shield or on it. This has an immediate impact on me because I see the emphasis on duty and honor among Spartans, as well as sacrifice. As a mother, I would never ask my child to risk their life for war and honor. This also brings out how women played an active role in shaping these warrior values, not as silent spectators but as participants directly.

Plutarch is emphasizing that Spartans had unrelenting devotion to their city, and they would rather face death in battle than to walk away. This proved that the Spartan society placed greater emphasis on collective power than personal safety. We observe that personal pride is linked to military service. What is interesting is that women too played an important role in sustaining this ethos by effecting sons through their influence.

Through this, we get to see the strict military framework of Sparta, where war was the centerpiece of both life and identity. Unlike Athens, which revered philosophy and engaged in lively political discussions, Sparta placed its entire cultural focus on strict discipline and emphasized the exceptional prowess of warriors in battle. Spartan women’s sayings are quite different from Sappho’s poetry. Sappho’s poetry is soft and talks about love, longing, and personal feelings, while Spartan women’s sayings are more about duty and sacrifice. Hesiod’s "Works and Days" gives a different view of Greek life. It talks more about farming, justice, and everyday problems than war and fame. 

I'd love to learn more about the real experiences of women in Sparta and how much autonomy they truly had. Were the ideals that some claim they embraced mostly genuine, or were they merely a constructed image? Exploring more firsthand accounts and archaeological findings would provide us with a better understanding of how reality aligned with the sentiments recorded.