amazonian mythology
Karl Hees
this is a serious question, honest!
a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
true? false? references please...
Chris Camfield
Karl Hees (ka...@aloha.net) writes:
> this is a serious question, honest!
> a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
> it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
Herodotus talks about the Amazons, so it could be in his writing; I'm not
sure.
> true? false? references please...
Depends on how you view truth in myth... :-)
Chris
--
Chris Camfield - ccam...@freenet.carleton.ca
[Send me unsolicited commercial email and I WILL raise hell with your sysadmin!
"The urge to discover secrets is deeply ingrained in human nature."
(John Chadwick, _The Decipherment of Linear B_)
Gregoire
In article <32E97D...@aloha.net>, Karl Hees <ka...@aloha.net> wrote:
-> this is a serious question, honest!
-> a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
-> it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
->
-> true? false? references please...
->
Probably a linguistic confusion, the Gk "amazon" resembling the
Gk word for "breastless". There are many fine female bowpersons
today with two complete (occasionally sizable) breasts. The
original word for the female warriors probably only phonetically
resembed "a-mazon".
--
Greg Nixon <mer...@servtech.com>
"Creation is thus nowever, coming straight out of the Voidness of this timeless Moment蟻nd thus creation is not the creation of things, of material, or of substance, but the creation of dualisms."
(Ken Wilber, The Spectrum of Consciousness, p. 100).
"Be cheerful while you are alive."
(Ptahhotpe, 24th century B.C.E.)
Jim Donaldson
Someone more up to date may want to provide further information on this;
but there was a recent article discussing archaelogical finds in
northwestern China that seem to lend credence to a foundation for the
Amazon myths. The evidence points to a matriarchal society in which women
ruled and were the main warriors. Some of the grave sites were supposed to
have held the remains of women clothed and accompanied much the way a
warrior prince of the Bronze or Iron Age would have been laid to rest.
I was planning to try to find more on the research and study of the area
but perhaps someone else has already.
Tammy Jo Eckhart
dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) wrote:
>In article <5cdbkt$a...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
>Chris Camfield <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>>
>>sure.
>>
>women cut off their right breast to prevent it interfering with the
>drawing of a bow, Amazon noblewomen cut off the left to prevent it
>interfering with the use of a shield. (Archers need two hands and can't
>use shields, remember?)
Herodotus only mentions the Amazons twice (4.110-4.117 and 9.27)
and never mentions any type of breast mutilation. The first passage is
really his attempt to explain how a nations called the Sauromatian came
into existance while the other just mentions the Athenian pride at
having defeated the Amazons when they attacked.
Herodotus doesn't really mention much about about Amazon culture
-- that is a later development in mythology. Without getting my books
and notes out Iid say a product of the late Classical period but
primarily the Hellenistic period. If you want, I can list all the
ancient sources I've found so far that discuss Amazons at a later point
(not today, I'm not in the mood to go through my notes at this moment).
>As somebody suggested, this is probably a case of what the linguists call
>"Hobson-Jobson": hear a strange word and interpret it as the word in your
>own language that sounds sort of like it. That's how we got Leghorn,
>Munich and Cairo for Livorno, Muenchen and al-Quahira, for that matter.
>What the word which the Greeks interpreted as "a mazos", without-breast,
>may really have been no one seems to know.
This is exactly what the ancient sources do often. In Herodotus
case he says the Amazons are called "Oiorpata" by the Scythians and says
that it means "Man-slayers" in Greek(4.110).
Tammy Jo Eckhart "The power touches me
tj...@columbia.edu The power helps us see
* I only look sweet * The power holds my hand
* and innocent * The power drives me crazy" -- Amy Grant
Dick Eney
In article <5cdbkt$a...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
Chris Camfield <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>
>Karl Hees (ka...@aloha.net) writes:
>> this is a serious question, honest!
>> a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
>> it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
>
>Herodotus talks about the Amazons, so it could be in his writing; I'm not
>sure.
>
It is Herodotus who tells that tale, with amplification: Amazon peasant
women cut off their right breast to prevent it interfering with the
drawing of a bow, Amazon noblewomen cut off the left to prevent it
interfering with the use of a shield. (Archers need two hands and can't
use shields, remember?)
As somebody suggested, this is probably a case of what the linguists call
"Hobson-Jobson": hear a strange word and interpret it as the word in your
own language that sounds sort of like it. That's how we got Leghorn,
Munich and Cairo for Livorno, Muenchen and al-Quahira, for that matter.
What the word which the Greeks interpreted as "a mazos", without-breast,
may really have been no one seems to know.
-- Dick Eney
Tammy Jo Eckhart
"Jim Donaldson" <myr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Someone more up to date may want to provide further information on this;
>but there was a recent article discussing archaelogical finds in
>northwestern China that seem to lend credence to a foundation for the
>Amazon myths. The evidence points to a matriarchal society in which women
>ruled and were the main warriors. Some of the grave sites were supposed to
>have held the remains of women clothed and accompanied much the way a
>warrior prince of the Bronze or Iron Age would have been laid to rest.
I'm personally very skeptical about all these "proofs" because
they date too late to be the origin of the myth -- the term Amazon, some
classics have argued, appears on Minoan tablets and is thus older than
Homer's work( the first undoubtably Greek written source for the word
probably date to the start of the 8th century BCE) .
>I was planning to try to find more on the research and study of the area
>but perhaps someone else has already.
>
Even though I'm skeptical, I'd be interested in what they've
found. And by the way, it is almost irrelevant whether these relate to
"Amazons" or not. Such a find would challange the common assumptions
about the past and thus better help us understand the whole of human
history and lifeways (to paraphrase a archaeologist I know).
Tammy Jo Eckhart "The power touches me
tj...@columbia.edu The power helps us see
* I only look sweet * The power holds my hand
* and innocent * The power drives me crazy" -- Amy Grant
http://www.columbia.edu/~tje3/
Kim Burkard
In article 1B...@aloha.net, Karl Hees <ka...@aloha.net> () writes:
>this is a serious question, honest!
>a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
>it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
>
I always have thought that the idea of Amazon's lopping off of a
breast because it got in the way of using a bow was silly. Breasts
never stopped me or any of the other women in my family from
using a bow. ;)
Anyways, there was a post a month or three back where someone had
posted a long list of sources on Amazons. If you go visit DejaNews,
you might be able to find the post I speak of.
-kim
---
Kimberly Burkard | _ Everything I needed to know in life, I
Eastman Kodak Company| _____C .._. learned from my ferret:
Rochester, New York | ____/ \___/ Frolic and dance for joy often, have
bur...@kodak.com |<____/\_---\_\ no fear or worries, and enjoy life.
mark mcmanus
Tammy Jo Eckhart wrote:
>
> dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) wrote:
> >In article <5cdbkt$a...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> >Chris Camfield <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
> >>
> >>> this is a serious question, honest!
> >>> a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
> >>> it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
> >>
> >>sure.
In a book I have here is the extract 'There is a scythian race' wrote
Hippoicrates,'dwelling around Lake Maeotis [sea of azov] which differs
from other races. Their name is Sauromatae [greek for sarmatian]. Their
women ride, shoot and throw javelins while mounted. They remain virgins
until they have killed three of their enemies and only then may they
marry once they have performed the traditional sacred rites. A women who
takes a husband may no longer ride unless she has to at times of war.
They have no right breast because when they are babies, their mothers
apply a red hot bronze instrument to the right breast and cauterise it,
so its groth is arrested and all its strength and bulk are diverted to
the right shoulder and arm'
In this passage we hjave the classic motif of the amazon legend. Their
right breast is stunted at birth. It is from this they are supposed to
derive their name a mazos being greek for without a breast. This detail
is repeated by later historians who explain that the breast was removed
to facilitate drawing a bow. There is of course no physical advantage to
be gained from this and the only true explanantion could be a form of
self mutilation. A more plausable suggestion is the name Amazon is
derived from the an Armenian word meaning 'moon women' and refers to
asian priestesses, south of the Caucasian mountains, who worshipped a
moon godess. In their early travels, greeks may have confused
representations of these priestesses with accounts of real women
warriors north of the Caucasion Mountains. It was probably because of
this linguistic confusion that many ancient writers beleived the home of
the Amazons lay in the plains of Themiscyra along the southern Black
Coast of Turkey, west of Armenia.
Don't know if there is a more current answer but this should get you
thinking.
Pegasus
In article <5cgbbp$p1t$1...@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>,
Check out the current Issue jan/feb of Archeology for an article on the
Warrior Women of the Eurasian Steppes.
--
Reading mail from me in a Usenet group does not
grant you the right to send me unsolicited commercial email.
All senders of unsolicited commercial email will be
reported to their postmasters as Usenet abusers.
@>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>--- @>---
The attitude of unhappinesses is not only painful, it is mean and uglyŠ
It but fastens and perpetuates the trouble which occasioned it, and increases the total evil of the situation. -William James-
Laurie E. W. Brandt|Her Ladyship, Pegasus Devona, A.o.A., G.d's.
5814 Gloucester Ln.|Barony of Bryn Gwlad, Kingdom of Ansteorra
Austin, Tx 78723 |Gules, a pegasus rampant to sinister within a
|bordure argent.
|Society for Creative Anachronism #04720
|http://www.wp.com/BRANDTFAMILY
Tammy Jo Eckhart
mmcm...@tpgi.com.au wrote:
>Tammy Jo Eckhart wrote:
>>
>> dick...@access4.digex.net (Dick Eney) wrote:
>> >In article <5cdbkt$a...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
>> >Chris Camfield <ab...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Karl Hees (ka...@aloha.net) writes:
>> >>> this is a serious question, honest!
>> >>> a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to prevent
>> >>> it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
>> >>
>> >>Herodotus talks about the Amazons, so it could be in his writing; I'm not
>> >>sure.
>
>In a book I have here is the extract 'There is a scythian race' wrote
>Hippoicrates,'dwelling around Lake Maeotis [sea of azov] which differs
>from other races. Their name is Sauromatae [greek for sarmatian]. Their
Exactly -- these are not Amazons he is talking about. It's
clear from his other passages concerning Amazons that they as a
nation/tribe are no longer around in his time.
>In this passage we hjave the classic motif of the amazon legend. Their
I think this is an assumption -- if Herodotus meant to be talking
about Amazons, he would have said so.
There are several tribes/nations which Herodotus describes that
have women warriors, but there is a specific group called Amazon. I'd
suggest that the groups should not be confused and that when the story
changes in other writers we are looking at attempts to clarify and
eleborate, not to present an objective and chronologically correct
history.
Dick Eney
In article <01bc0e22$ad0b3100$e2e6...@jpmiller.netcomuk.co.uk>,
Jonathan Miller <jpmi...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>
>I'm not entirely sure about that - your point is valid but which
>civilization would have named the amazons if they were indeed factual?
>Surely the Greeks? Why would they have named them the amazons if not for a
>very good reason.
Same reason we call (say) Livorno, in Italy, "Leghorn"; the real name
sounds vaguely like that word in our language. The Greeks called them
"Amazons" because the name they called themselves sounded vaguely like
those Greek words, and then -- since the words _in_Greek_ mean "sans
breast" -- they made up a story to go with it. Similar logic was applied
by the Puritan clergy when they claimed that the Devil was so called
because he was a great "do-evil".
>Your point about female archers today is valid but in
>the time of the Greeks thee bra had not yet been invented.
>>
This touches on one of those obscure points of historical costuming that I
run across by sheer chance. At the time of the Greeks women -- who didn't
want their breasts sagging or flapping around when they moved, any more
than our lady friends do -- wore a band of soft leather in the appropriate
place. Or rather, one of two appropriate places: right over the breasts
when the Flat Look was in fashion, under them when, uh, ample charms were
the style. An archer could also have used a leather jerkin _over_ a
chiton, as TV buffs can see Xena the Warrior Princess doing, and _she_
certainly is All Present And Accounted For in that area.
-- Dick Eney
Jonathan Miller
Gregoire <mer...@servtech.com> wrote in article
<merk077-2501...@gn2.dan.servtech.com>...
> In article <32E97D...@aloha.net>, Karl Hees <ka...@aloha.net> wrote:
>
> -> this is a serious question, honest!
> -> a friend mentioned that the amazon women cut their breast off to
prevent
> -> it from getting in the way of the bowstring?
> ->
> -> true? false? references please...
> ->
> Probably a linguistic confusion, the Gk "amazon" resembling the
> Gk word for "breastless". There are many fine female bowpersons
> today with two complete (occasionally sizable) breasts. The
> original word for the female warriors probably only phonetically
> resembed "a-mazon".
>
I'm not entirely sure about that - your point is valid but which
civilization would have named the amazons if they were indeed factual?
Surely the Greeks? Why would they have named them the amazons if not for a
very good reason. You point about female archers today is valid but in
Pegasus
In article <5coqfr$g...@access5.digex.net>, dick...@access5.digex.net
(Dick Eney) wrote:
> In article <01bc0e22$ad0b3100$e2e6...@jpmiller.netcomuk.co.uk>,
> Jonathan Miller <jpmi...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >I'm not entirely sure about that - your point is valid but which
> >civilization would have named the amazons if they were indeed factual?
> >Surely the Greeks? Why would they have named them the amazons if not for a
> >very good reason.
>
> Same reason we call (say) Livorno, in Italy, "Leghorn"; the real name
> sounds vaguely like that word in our language. The Greeks called them
> "Amazons" because the name they called themselves sounded vaguely like
> those Greek words, and then -- since the words _in_Greek_ mean "sans
> breast" -- they made up a story to go with it. Similar logic was applied
> by the Puritan clergy when they claimed that the Devil was so called
> because he was a great "do-evil".
>
> >Your point about female archers today is valid but in
> >the time of the Greeks thee bra had not yet been invented.
> >>
> This touches on one of those obscure points of historical costuming that I
> run across by sheer chance. At the time of the Greeks women -- who didn't
> want their breasts sagging or flapping around when they moved, any more
> than our lady friends do -- wore a band of soft leather in the appropriate
> place. Or rather, one of two appropriate places: right over the breasts
> when the Flat Look was in fashion, under them when, uh, ample charms were
> the style. An archer could also have used a leather jerkin _over_ a
> chiton, as TV buffs can see Xena the Warrior Princess doing, and _she_
> certainly is All Present And Accounted For in that area.
>
> -- Dick Eney
Check out the World of Ancient Greek Art. All the Amazon women have both
breasts intack. see the Illo used for Jeannine Davis-Kimball's Article
"Warrior Women of the Eurasian Steppes" in the Jan/Feb 1997 issue of
Archaeology pp.44-48. also the The Amazon History page
(http://www.speakeasy.org/~music/amazon1.html) It shows these women with
fully intact breasts. It makes me wonder what is the real story. i would
tend to belive the art not the verbage.
Pegasus
In article <5ct8tn$bko$1...@sanjuan.islandnet.com>, hor...@islandnet.com wrote:
> The contradiction between the portrayals of Amazons in Greek art and
literature has
> certainly been debated for some time. If one were dealing with a
subject that even
> a few of the artists might have actually seen, I would also think that
the art
> version might be the more valid one. However, as Amazons were just as
> much "legendary creatures" to the artists as they are to us now, it is
commonly
> felt by classicists that matters of artistic "merit" and "taste" played
a major role
> in creating the Amazon "image." Thus, one should note that at least in
Classical
> and earlier art, there are virtually no images of deformed or
less-than-ideal human
> figures (taking into account their tastes, of course): it is quite
comparable to
> modern advertising models. Most statues are of people in the physical
prime of
> their life.
>
> In this context, women warriors that lacked one breast would probably
have been
> deemed "tasteless," "inappropriate," or perhaps simply artisitically
pointless.
> Who'd want to commission such a work of "ugly" art, in a culture that values
> "perfection" over "realism'? However, if "realism" was out (remember,
> few if any people in Greece had ever seen a woman warrior, Amazon or
otherwise),
> they were still a popular subject. So instead, Amazons became a way of
displaying
> how well an artist could portray a female body: the musculature, bold
postures,
> dramatically flowing hair, etc. It may have been a convenient loophole
in cultural
> mores, for it was virtually taboo to portray Greek women (meaning decent
citizen
> women) being physically active (particularly with weaponry). Slave
women were the
> only other alternative in real life, and showing them fighting would
have been quite
> out of the question (let's show the slaves how to rebel, shall we?).
>
> Wouldn't viewers have noticed the glaring error? They probably did, but
they may
> not have cared. After all, most people in Greek art were perfections,
not real. If
> you grow up seeing fake people in art, why quibble about a few Amazons
with too many
> breasts (particularly if you like to oggle breasts, something hardly
forbidden to
> men in ancient Greek society).
>
> So by this line of reasoning, the portrayal of Amazons had far more to
do with the
> Greeks themselves than the actual subjects. Artists could display their
skills
> portraying fabulously fit and active women, doing outrageous taboo acts
(in the eyes
> of Greek men, at least). They could get away with it because they were
Amazons "who
> did those kind of things," rather than decent Greek women or slave women.
> Incidentally, their portrayal in literature displayed equally
unrealistic aspects.
> One finds that for all the prowess of the Amazons, nearly every hero
defeats one or
> two or a hundred of them: they were a necessary hurdle to show that the
hero was a
> HERO. The Amazons rarely are a real threat, when you have a HERO
around. Thus
> realism was never a requirement in any portrayal of Amazons, in art or
literature;
> they had a role to play that served Greek needs which overruled any
concerns for
> accuracy.
>
> Incidentally, the popularity of Amazons in general probably had far more
to do with
> Greek culture than anything else. They represented just about the most
"sinful" of
> women, in the eyes of Greek culture (as defined by the rulers of that
culture, the
> men): they were completely independent, and capable of defending their
> independence. You often find that the greatest fears in a culture are
also the
> greatest obsessions: sort of like a cat staring at a bathtub full of water.
>
> That's my two bits worth.
>
> BB
> Rob
Barbara Gera in her Book _Warrior Women_ mentions that the Amazons beat
the Persians butts anytime they wanted, but couldn't win against the
Greeks.
Tammy Jo Eckhart
pp00...@mindspring.com (Pegasus) wrote:
>Barbara Gera in her Book _Warrior Women_ mentions that the Amazons beat
>the Persians butts anytime they wanted, but couldn't win against the
>Greeks.
And if you check when those accounts were written you'll notice
it corresponds with the war time between Persians and Greeks and
immediately after that time in the context of putting down the barbarian
Persians and promoting the Greek culture.
It is very important to know when and where the source is
written, or as close as you can, so you can understand the motive and
biases any author will have.
Tammy Jo Eckhart
hor...@islandnet.com wrote:
>The contradiction between the portrayals of Amazons in Greek art and literature has
>certainly been debated for some time. If one were dealing with a subject that even
>a few of the artists might have actually seen, I would also think that the art
>version might be the more valid one. However, as Amazons were just as
>much "legendary creatures" to the artists as they are to us now, it is
commonly
The Amazons were just as much unknown to writer as they were to
artists. Note that the earliest images of Amazons pre-date written
sources and that the early written sources do not mention this breast
mutilation at all. It was clearly a later addition and has nothing of
object historic reality to it.
>Wouldn't viewers have noticed the glaring error? They probably did, but they may
>not have cared. After all, most people in Greek art were perfections, not real. If
Oh, the writers comment on the differences all the time at least
in the differences between themselves and other written accounts.
>So by this line of reasoning, the portrayal of Amazons had far more to do with the
>Greeks themselves than the actual subjects. Artists could display
Not just by the line of reasoning you've used, which was good,
but also the very fact that who the Amazons are, what they do, where
they live, and how things happen to and concerning them is constantly
changing over the centuries and from one writer to another clearly
indicates it is not any type of attempt at describing reality.
>Incidentally, the popularity of Amazons in general probably had far more to do with
>Greek culture than anything else. They represented just about the most "sinful" of
>women, in the eyes of Greek culture (as defined by the rulers of that culture, the
I'm not sure I agree with this. In many written sources the
Amazons are praised for their skills and written about without reference
to heroes. They are definately different from Greeks in terms of gender
roles but so were all barbarians to lesser or greater degrees.