Editing Amazonomachy (section)

== Symbolism of Amazonomachy ==
Amazonomachy represents the Greek ideal of civilization. The Amazons were portrayed as a savage and barbaric race, while the Greeks were portrayed as a civilized race of human progress.
According to [[Bruno Snell]]'s view of Amazonomachy:

<blockquote>For the Greeks, the [[Titanomachy]] and the battle against the giants remained symbols of the victory which their own world had won over a strange universe; along with the battles against the Amazons and [[Centaur]]s they continue to signalize the Greek conquest of everything barbarous, of all monstrosity and grossness.<ref name="auto1">DuBois, Page (1982). ''Centaurs and Amazons: Women and the Pre-History of the Great Chain of Being''</ref></blockquote>In [[Quintus Smyrnaeus]]'s ''The Fall of Troy'', Penthesilea, an Amazonian queen, who joined on the side of the [[Troy|Trojans]] during the Trojan war, was quoted at [[Troy]], saying:

<blockquote>Not in strength are we inferior to men; the same our eyes, our limbs the same; one common light we see, one air we breathe; nor different is the food we eat. What then denied to us hath heaven on man bestowed?<ref>Quintus Smyrnaeus. "The Fall of Troy." Translated by Way. A. S. Loeb Classical Library Volume 19. London: William Heinemann, 1913.</ref></blockquote>

According to [[Josine Blok]], Amazonomachy provides two different contexts for defining a Greek hero. Either the Amazons are one of the disasters from which the hero rids the country after his victory over a monster, or they are an expression of the underlying [[Attis]] motif in which the hero shuns human sexuality in marriage and procreation.<ref>[[Josine Blok|Blok, Josine]] (1994). ''The Early Amazons: Modern and Ancient Perspectives on a Persistent Myth''</ref>[[File:Oinochoe MET sf06102161l.jpg|thumb|217x217px|Heracles in the battle against an Amazon, 6th century BC]]

[[Johann Jakob Bachofen|J.J. Bachofen]] understood Amazonian myths as remnants of a prehistoric matriarchy. In other words, as popularized in the 21st century, matriarchy was conceptualized by him through the phrase "Mother Right".<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Bachofen |first1=Johann Jakob |title=Myth, Religion, and Mother Right |last2=Manheim |first2=Ralph |last3=Bachofen |first3=Johann Jakob |date=1992 |publisher=Princeton Univ. Press |isbn=978-0-691-01797-6 |series=Bollingen Series |location=Princeton, NJ}}</ref> He theorized that the Amazons were not merely mythical creatures but were derived from the historical manifestation of a time when women held immense power in society. In his view, society initially revolved around female dominance, which was reflected in the Greeks' engagement with Amazonian motifs in art. However, he believed society transitioned to patriarchy at the dawn of civilization, seeing male domination as necessary for progress.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Bachofen |first1=Johann Jakob |title=Myth, Religion, and Mother Right |last2=Manheim |first2=Ralph |last3=Bachofen |first3=Johann Jakob |date=1992 |publisher=Princeton Univ. Press |isbn=978-0-691-01797-6 |series=Bollingen Series |location=Princeton, NJ |page=109}}</ref>

Bachofen’s thesis was highly influential, and it was incorporated into several schools of thought, including Freudians, Structuralists, and Feminists. At the end of the 19th century, American psychologists interested in Amazonomachy integrated Bachofen’s matriarchy ideals with [[Sigmund Freud]]’s psychoanalytic framework. Schultz Engle argues that Amazon warriors were often depicted riding horses as a response to the incompetence of Scythian males.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal |last=Engle |first=Bernice Schultz |date=1942-10-01 |title=The Amazons in Ancient Greece |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21674086.1942.11925513 |journal=The Psychoanalytic Quarterly |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=512–554 |doi=10.1080/21674086.1942.11925513 |issn=0033-2828}}</ref> She theorized that Scythian men were weakened due to [[orchitis]], a condition causing inflammation of the testicles, which she attributed to spending long hours on horseback. Using Amazonomachy as a sexual and psychological allegory, she then posits that the Amazons, in contrast, derived masturbatory pleasure from riding horses.<ref name=":7" />

Feminists like Page DuBois understood Amazonomachy and its myths as symbols of the feminist struggle against patriarchy. He posits that Amazonian matriarchy was conceptualized as a tool to counter masculine tyranny.<ref>{{Cite book |last=DuBois |first=Page |title=Centaurs and Amazons: Women and the Pre-History of the Great Chain of Being |date=2010 |publisher=University of Michigan Press |isbn=978-0-472-02154-3 |series=Women and Culture Ser |location=Ann Arbor}}</ref> 

Structuralists also expanded on Bachofen’s argument about matriarchy, asserting that the Amazons represented the opposite of the Greek polis, in which male domination shaped society into a "men’s club".<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Vernant |first1=Jean Pierre |title=Myth and tragedy in ancient Greece |last2=Vidal-Naquet |first2=Pierre |date=1990 |publisher=Zone Books |isbn=978-0-942299-19-9 |edition=1st paperback ed., rev |location=New York}}</ref> This binary approach argued that marriage was for women, while war was for men. Later, scholars would apply a binary framework to analyze Amazonomachy and its myths, conceptualizing oppositions such as "barbarians" vs. "civilization" and "masculinity" vs. "femininity".

Critics have challenged the interpretation of Amazonomachy as a symbolic critique of Athenian patriarchy and male anxieties. Mary Lefkowitz pointed out the existence of Amazonomachy in myths predating the strict sex segregation of Athens, so she rejects the notion that the Amazons should be interpreted as a response to gender norms.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last=Lefkowitz |first=Mary R. |date=1985 |title=Women in Greek Myth |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/41211188 |journal=The American Scholar |volume=54 |issue=2 |pages=26–27 |jstor=41211188 |issn=0003-0937}}</ref> In addition, in any battles the Greeks may have had against the Amazons, both men and women would suffer during the conflicts, which contradicts the idea that Amazonomachy functioned solely as a tool against Athenian patriarchy. She also compared the Greeks' battle against the Amazons to their battle against the Centaurs to further highlight the logical flaws in feminist arguments. If, as feminists argue, Amazonomachy symbolizes the suppression of women, then by the same line of logic, Centauromachy should also symbolize the suppression of horses.<ref name=":8" /> However, horses were highly valued and respected in ancient Greece. She highlights that the feminist framework in understanding Amazonomachy interprets it outside its historical and cultural meaning, instead reframing it to suit their own agenda .

Historiography in response to such criticism has shifted the focus towards understanding Amazonomachy as a symbol of ‘otherness'. Andrew Stewart understood it as a complex notion of the other symbolically that the Persians held in reality.<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal |last=Stewart |first=Andrew |date=1995 |title=Imag(in)ing the Other: Amazons and Ethnicity in Fifth-Century Athens |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1773366 |journal=Poetics Today |volume=16 |issue=4 |pages=571–597 |doi=10.2307/1773366 |jstor=1773366 |issn=0333-5372}}</ref> As evident, in the [[5th century BC]], the [[Achaemenid Empire]] began a series of [[Greco-Persian Wars|invasions against Greece]]. Because of this, some scholars believe that in most Greek art of that time, Persians were shown allegorically through the figure of centaurs and Amazons.<ref name="auto1" />

Literature such as [[Lysias]]' ''Epitaphios'' and [[Isocrates]]' ''Panegyrikos'' further strengthen this parallel to the defeat of the Persians, as their versions of the [[Attic War]] similarly climax with the total annihilation of the invading forces.<ref name=":6" />

Stewart asserts that the Amazons served as a metaphor for the Persians, allowing the Greeks to present themselves as superior to the "barbarians". His argument draws from the characteristics of the Amazons as ''parthenoi,'' who were unwed females with no sexual experience.<ref name=":9" /> Unlike the contemporary concept of virginity, the social construct in Ancient Greece referred to their state of femininity as unripe and unfinished. The body of a parthenoi was also more athletic, resembling that of a boy rather than a woman. They could not fully embody the feminine ideals of softness and permeability, yet they were not entirely masculine, lacking sharply defined features associated with hardness and muscles. Hence, the characteristics of parthenoi, wild, untamed, undomesticated, and unrestrained, challenged the norms of the Athenian confined society and traditional expectations of women.<ref name=":9" /> He posits that daughters like parthenoi threatened family stability and the authority of the father, which served as an extended metaphor for society as a whole. He rejects Bachofen’s thesis of matriarchy and instead proposes that Amazonomachy represents a broader threat to Athenian societal order, symbolizing "otherness" in the context of the Persian invasions.

After the [[Greco-Persian Wars|Graeco-Persian War]], there was a rise in Amazonomachies in Athenian art, including a doubling of Amazon scenes on vases around 450 BCE.<ref name=":9" /> The [[Parthenon]] (447–432 BCE), a monument celebrating Athens’ victory over Persia, also featured two depictions of Amazonomachy—one on the west metopes and the other on the shield of Pheidias’ statue of Athena within the temple. Stewart also argues that the rise in Amazonomachy in art was connected to [[Pericles|Perikles]], the leading Athenian statesman, and his Citizenship Law of 451 BCE.<ref name=":9" /> This law defined Athenian identity by restricting citizenship to individuals with two Athenian parents. It was likely a response to the influx of immigrants who settled in Athens after the Graeco-Persian War, making up as much as one-fifth of the population.<ref name=":9" /> Amazons were non-Greek women associated with Asia Minor, who fought like men, and were also enemies of the Greeks.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Mayor |first=Adrienne |title=The Amazons: lives and legends of warrior women across the ancient world |date=2016 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-17027-5 |edition=second printing, and first paperback printing |location=Princeton Oxford}}</ref> Thus, the increase in Amazonomachy to further reinforce the concept of the "other" against the Greeks could reflect Perikles' and the broader Greek society's anxiety over citizenship.

According to Jeremy McInerney, Kleidemos' account of the Attic War was politically connoted in such a way that Theseus' defeat of the Persians not only represented the victory of Athens as a whole, but also reaffirmed certain values of Athenian democracy, likely during a period of political and historical tension in the 4th century BC.<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=McInerney |first=Jeremy |date=1994 |title=Politicizing the Past: The "Atthis" of Kleidemos |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/25011003 |journal=Classical Antiquity |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=17–37 |doi=10.2307/25011003 |jstor=25011003 |issn=0278-6656}}</ref>

Modern interpretations also view the amazonomachy as largely symbolic of the conflict between the ancient Greek patriarchal model of civilization against (the influence of) the foreign, gender-transgressive female. The various amazonomachiai in Greek myths were typically concluded with the triumph of some Athenian male hero (such as Hercules or Theseus) over famous Amazons, who were killed in combat or sexually subjugated by Greek men. According to these modern scholars, the male hero's quintessential defeat of the Amazons in mythology (as well as Amazon grave markers) reinforced and reminded the Greek populace of the supremacy of Athens' patriarchal model of civilization and society.<ref name=":1" />