This week’s readings have a lot to do with how Athens perceived itself. They also end up being pretty revealing in terms of their perception of gender as a component of society.

As you look at the readings for this week, think about the hidden layers. Why does Athena make the arguments she does, in relation to the plot of the play and Aeschylos’s underlying themes? What does Herodotos think is most interesting about Gorgo or the Amazons? What are they telling us about the male and female aspects of the Athenian mindset?

The passage that stood out to me most was Herodotus's story about the Amazons and the Scythians. I found it interesting how he portrayed the Amazons as strong and independent warriors who challenged traditional gender roles in ancient societies. Herodotus's detailed account made them seem both real and legendary, showing his interest in exploring different cultures rather than just recording facts. In my opinion Herodotus wanted readers to understand that human nature and culture alter widely across civilizations. Through thee story of the Amazons, he highlighted how societies define power, identity and gender differently. His curiosity about these contrasts reflects his larger goal of comparing cultures to learn what makes them unique. This document reveals that 5th century BCE Greeks were deeply interested in other peoples and use such stories to understand themselves. It also shows that history and myth often blended together to express cultural values. Compared to other Greek readings, this tale reinforces how identity was shaped through difference, but it also challenges gender expectations by giving women a central, powerful role.

The part that stood out to me was when Athena made a court to judge Orestes in Eumenides. It showed how people were starting to believe in laws instead of revenge. In Herodotus, I liked reading about Queen Artemisia. She was smart and brave and didn’t act how people expected women to act back then.

I think the authors wanted to show change. Aeschylus showed how justice can grow and bring peace and Herodotus showed that power and wisdom can come from anyone, even women.

These writings tell me that Greece was moving from old ideas to new ones from fighting and revenge to law and reason. They also show that women could be important even when men ruled everything.

It connects to other readings where we saw courage and honor but here it is more about fairness and wisdom.

I want to know more about how much freedom women really had in that time and if stories like Artemisia’s were common or rare.

Reading through the passage, Eumenides / Aeschylos, one line that caught my attention was when Athena decides to side with Orestees and says "For there was no mother who gave me birth; and in all things, except for marriage, whole-heartedly I am for the male and entirely on the father’s side.". I found this interesting because although she is a female goddess, she aligns herself with men. To me this moment reveals how the Greek ideas of justice were built around a male oriented world view and law and reason were linked to masculinity at the time.

This week’s passage that was striking to me originates from Eumenides. After The Furies go after Orestes, for killing a parent, Apollo and Athena are mutually trying to excuse Orestes action of killing his mother, Clytemnestra. After the furies go after Orestes, for killing a parent, Athena establishes a civilized form where both parties can explain their justification for their reasoning. The old gods explain how there is no justification for killing a parent, while Apollo and Athena think otherwise. Their reason behind their logic is due to the mother not being the primary parent. Athena emphasizes this justification by indicating her only parent was Zeus. I believe she supports this reasoning because she came out of a male. She did not have a mother figure therefore she would not know anyone who could surpass her father’s role as a parent. Both deities suppose Clytemnestra’s act of killing Agamemnon is far greater than the action of Orestes killing her. I believe the author is trying to show a new way of civilized governance. Instead of disregarding the Furies, Athena initiates of new adaptation where old gods and new gods can form justice together. Instead of total vengeance, Athena introduces legitimacy. I consider this passage informs the way women were portrayed as a role of a parent. There was little importance in what a mother’s duties were. I also believe the passage indicates how the action of a woman during that time, acting out of their roles were considered catastrophic. Although Athena sought justice, she sided with Orestes because Clytemnestra had violated her role as a loyal wife to her husband. The reading also suggests that the establishment of civilized governance ultimately favored men. The rejection of traditional roles is also evident in Herodotus’ The Histories. The men were surprised by the Amazonian women's strong sense of independence. With Athena maintaining the role of a matron as a significant importance, Herodotos also indicates the similarities of a woman’s role with Gorgo. Gorgo’s is looking after her father with the best interest and warns if he steps out of his values. I would like to know more about is how the Greek women viewed the Amazonian women. Were they admired for having such courage to step out of the norm? Or were they afraid of them because the traditional roles of women were being challenged?

The passage I found interesting is “The Amazons” from Herodotus. The part that stood out to me was how the Amazons and Scythians did not speak the same language, yet the women learned the men’s speech.  This shows how the women are adaptable, intelligent, and capable of anything. I think the author was trying to show how a new society developed through the union of the Amazons and the Scythians. The story highlights women’s roles during a male-dominated time, showing that the Amazons lived differently from the usual expectations of women. They chose to be warriors instead of staying at home and raising children. This story contradicts other ancient writings that often describe women as weak and confined to domestic life, as it portrays women here as strong and independent warriors. I would like to learn more about whether the Amazon warrior women truly existed and the history behind the choices they made.

One section of Eumenides that I found particularly fascinating was the reference by the Pythian Priestess to Earth, Themis, and Phoebe, before Apollo. This implies that the oracle was associated with ancient divine power long before the time of Apollo, speaking to complex understandings of Greek Religion, which Themis (justice) is also tied to. Here, Aeschylus seems to be fully aware of the complexities of human punishing other human beings and possibly showing a transition of ideas surrounding punitive justice from personal revenge to having a legal structure. The rest of the play looks at an Athenian woman establishing a legal court to judge Orestes, which suggests that Athens is a general center of law, punishment, and civic order.

In The Histories, I was drawn to the story of Artemisia. She stands as a notable woman who had some militarized and political power during a time of men. Her intelligence and clever, rather useless, strategy during the Persian Wars gave her respect and illustrated the literal possibility of a woman exercising some level of power over men.

These two texts show the transition of justice and power during this period. Eumenides looks at the divine and legal shifts surrounding the concept of justice, while Herodotus illustrates real living persons shaping real-life events. Both texts center women in the narrative, whether goddesses or historical figures, reflecting their importance. I would like to learn more about Athenian responses to Eumenides, as well as how unusual women like Artemisia were in their lives.

The passage I found most interesting was Aeschylos from Eumenides because when Athena created a jury to try Orestes and said that he should be released if the votes are tied. This showed the shift from traditional forms of revenge to a more just view of justice. Aeschylos seems to be showing the change of Greek civilization from punishment and violence to reason and the rule of law. He seems to be arguing that partnerships between people, instead of just angry gods, could bring out justice. It shows that government and courts were beginning to be valued in ancient Athens. It has connections to other Greek works that promote knowledge, balance, and order. I'm curious to know how the actual Athenians felt about this new kind of justice and if this story had an impact on their legal system.

One part that really stood out to me in Eumenides by Aeschylus is when Athena says she supports men more than women because she didn’t have a mother and stands with her father. I thought that was surprising since she’s a goddess, but it shows how even a female goddess follows the male-dominated ideas of Athens. She votes for Orestes because she connects more with men and their power, not women.

I think Aeschylus was trying to show how people in Athens believed men were supposed to lead and make the laws. When Athena creates the first court, she connects law and justice with men’s authority. The Furies, who represent the old way of seeking revenge and are all female, get replaced by a new, male-controlled system. This shows how the city was changing from older female traditions to a more male-centered society. In Herodotus’s stories, we also see these gender differences. The Amazons and Artemisia are strong women, but they’re treated like something strange or different. The Amazons don’t live like Greek women, and Artemisia only earns respect because she fights like a man. That shows how Greeks thought powerful women were unusual or even scary. Together, these readings show that Athens valued quiet, obedient women and respected men who were strong and logical. Women who stepped outside those rules, like Clytemnestra or the Amazons were seen as a threat. What I wonder most is if any real Athenian women ever spoke up or wrote about how unfair these ideas were.

One passage that really stood out to me was when the priestess described the Furies for the first time. The way she talks about them — dripping with blood, terrifying, and unlike anything human — made me feel the weight of old, divine justice in a very real way. Later, when Athena appears and decides to create a court to settle Orestes’ case, it felt like the complete opposite. That shift from ancient vengeance to a more organized, civic form of justice really caught my attention.

I think Aeschylus was trying to show the transition from an older system of revenge to a new system based on law and reason. He wasn’t saying that the old ways were completely wrong, but that society needed to evolve toward fairness and order. The gods themselves are divided, which mirrors how humans struggle with morality and change. Athena’s creation of a trial by jury shows how justice was becoming something shared and public, not just personal or divine.

This tells us a lot about ancient Athens — a society trying to move from family honor and blood feuds to laws and democracy. It also shows how religion and justice were still deeply connected. Even when establishing a court, the Athenians still relied on divine approval, which reflects how new civic ideas were being built on old religious foundations.

Compared to earlier Greek works like The Iliad, where revenge was personal and justified by honor, Aeschylus’s play feels much more about community and responsibility. It supports what we’ve read about how Athens was developing its legal and political systems, but it also reminds us that progress was messy — people were still afraid of angering the gods or breaking sacred traditions.

I’d love to learn more about how the real Areopagus court worked in Athens, and how people at the time reacted to the idea of replacing divine punishment with human judgment. It must have been such a huge cultural change.

A notable detail from Herodotus' account is the story of Artemisia of Halicarnassus, a queen who commanded her own fleet during the Persian invasion of Greece. Her cleverness in battle—especially the incident in which she sank her own allied ship to escape and was praised for that by Xerxes—bespeaks admiration and discomfort toward a woman succeeding in a man's world. I propose that Herodotus was trying to convey both his fascination for the extraordinary and his awareness of how unusual a phenomenon it was for a woman to hold power and shine with distinction over her male counterparts. From this story, we learn that 5th-century BCE Greek society upheld very strict gender roles, and women were rarely seen as leaders; nevertheless, figures like Artemisia made it through precisely because their actions thwarted social norms. The document illustrates how, in its torturous time and place, women's authority was viewed as something "against nature," even when it had gained respect; but even from a modern perspective, the study of it supports re-evaluating women's voices in history and negates the stereotype that women in the ancient world were always either powerless or passive.