Talk:Penthesilea

Quotes by Penthesiliea
I am looking for the quote by Penthesilea in the Iliad as she is killed by Achilles. Does anyone out there know this? I am trying to avoid thumbing through an entire book.

kodlozil@comcast.net

iliad only goes up to the part when Hector is bury. since Pethensilea arrived later in the war, the iliad will have nothing about her, nevertheless quotes by her.


 * There are no direct references available. The ancient sources have been lost.  No doubt copies might have existed in the pagan libraries pre the Christian destruction of them. Tashkop 22:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Necrophilia rape by Achilles
I see that unsourced additions to this article concerning the possibility of Achilles raping her dead corpus have been removed. I believe that these are fair comment and should be added, especially since they are not new and date from ancient times. So I have added them back in with a source to Graves.Tashkop 22:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Wetman's edits - March 07
Wetman. Your edits have tidied up the article markedly. It would be presumptuous of me to thank you for them but they are certainly welcome.

One question I have though -

You have added text as follows " a reading that was certainly not supported by the motif carved on the throne of Zeus."

This comment has the effect of diluting the plausibility of Eustathius' interpretation.

If it is to remain in should not the following context also be noted some way or another.
 * 1. Pausanias was travelling in the 2nd century CE.
 * 2. The carving on the throne (I have not read Pausanias so do not know of what he literally speaks) was presumably carved sometime between 1200 BCE and 200 CE.
 * 3. As such the carving represents an interpretation of events, i.e. a point of view, with no means of determining how long after the fact it was created.
 * 4. If the prevalent view in Antiquity was to bowlderise Achilles's (alleged) shameful behaviour then it may simply represent what we would term today as a reconstruction, similar to what Alexander is alleged to have undertaken with respect to the Granicus battle.
 * 5. Presumably in the 12th century CE Eustathius would have been aware of Pausanias and taken that into account?

In those terms - does it have any validity to mention it at all as a dilution of Eustathius' view or has it crossed the line into critique? Tashkop 21:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, dear, so many difficulties! What if it were edited to read The reading was certainly not supported by Pausanias' description of the motif he saw carved on the throne of Zeus in the second century CE. Would that satisfy your POV? Is "certainly" unpleasantly emphatic? Now, what the article does not say, is that "a necrophilic rape of Penthesilea by Achilles could not possibly have been carved on the very throne of Zeus at Olympia. The reading by Eustathius of Thessalonica cannot actually be other than a grotesque travesty, perhaps intentional." That would be most scholars' interpretation. You are using this single, highly eccentric medieval Christian gloss as a lens to view Antiquity, for you say, "If the prevalent view in Antiquity was to bowdlerise Achilles's (alleged) shameful behaviour..."  What do you mean by "Achilles's shameful behaviour?" You seem to accept it as mainstream: have you no critical reservations in your reading of Eustathius' gloss? Have you ever heard of a necrophilic rape in any other instance in European mythology? Anywhere? Surely you don't actually mean to read Antiquity guilelessly through the eyes of a Byzantine archivist of the twelfth century CE? ...And why haven't you read Pausanias' brief account of the sculpture by Phidias at Olympia? What encourages you to presume— you say "presumably"— that Eustathius had Pausanias' description of the sculpture firmly in mind when he made the gloss on Penthesilea? The sculpture had been lost for centuries. Your real issue here is revealed in this: "This comment has the effect of diluting the plausibility of Eustathius' interpretation." That's your problem here, am I right?. Christians are not invariably the most dependable sources for interpreting Greek and Roman myth: look at Arnobius if you doubt me! Now, imagine if you took Heinrich von Kleist's Romantic drama Penthesilea (written in 1808 but also based on Greek sources) and insisted on interpreting the mythic sources through that lens! As a general rule, begin with the standard early texts and images and work your way forward chronologically. --Wetman 03:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that you are misunderstanding me Wetman. Wiki procedure is to cite sources, not to interpret them but your comment does indeed have the effect of diluting the source.  Your opinion (or mine) is not relevant to the article.  it is meant to report, not to interpret.  You are completely correct when you state that my problem is that your comment has an effect of diluting the source.
 * As to your statement that the statue was lost for centuries - presumably Pausanias' work was however extant and there is no reason to make the assumption that Eustathius did not know of it. Even if he did not, he must have been aware that the mainstream view, even at his time, was that Achilles fell in love with a dead body.   That being the case - what I am saying is that should his view (which is what is being cited) simply not stand - without your own 'gloss' being added to it.
 * As to whether or not I have abandoned my critical faculties in assessing the source, can I remind you that i used the word 'IF' and the word 'Alleged'. I could as well argue that you have abandoned your own critical facility in 'guilessly accepting the mainstream view just because it is mainstream.' (please note that I am not accusing you of that.)
 * The point is that your comment introduces your own interpretation and viewpoint, and as such it is not NPOV.
 * By re-including the section on the alleged rape I have been trying to address NPOV, not press my own POV. If I had been trying to press my own POV I would be adding comments, as you have, that affect the readers understanding of the cited sources.  I beleive that I have done the opposite.
 * One last thing. You ask me if I have ever heard of necrophiliac rape in European Mythologhy.  No I haven't - But I've heard of it in real life.  Have you ever heard of Ted Bundy? On the other hand I have never heard of one other instance in european mythology of anyone falling suddenly in love with a dead body either - have you?  Similarly I have never heard of a real life instance of it happening.
 * It seems to me that the 'critical reservations' must abide on the mainstream view as well as Eustathius' don't you think? Tashkop 08:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The statement
 * "Twelfth-century Byzantine scholar Eustathius of Thessalonica postulated a more brutal and literalist reading of the term loved, however, maintaining that Achilles actually committed necrophilia on her corpse as a final insult to her.
 * was given a footnote that implied that Eustathius' aberrant reading was supported elsewhere, viz.: Eustathius on Homer, 1696, Pseudo-Apollodorus Epitome v.1-2, and the medieval Rawlinson Excidium Troie, were noted in this context by Robert Graves, The Greek Myths section 164, London: Penguin, (1955) 1960; Baltimore: Penguin. ISBN 0-14-001026-2. I'm sure this was inadvertent and have corrected the footnote, while adding supported detail to the article.

--Wetman 01:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Changes to footnote. Having moved his subtle pressing of POV from the main article Wetman or someone else has moved it to the references, which I have tidied up.

‘An act of necrophilia is not otherwise attested in any Greek epic’

This statement is not neutral and tells only part of the truth. As discussed earlier, neither is any act of falling in love with a dead body attested in any other Greek epic. However, if we examine real life, which is by definition a more accurate assessment than a myth, Necrophilia is attested, but I know of no case of anyone falling spontaneously in love with a dead body in real life. I’m happy to be corrected on that.

''‘and this alleged act passed without notice by any commentator in Antiquity. ‘''

As is noted in the very next section of the footnote, sources are fragmentary. We are no position to know whether any other commentators in antiquity noted or did not note this interpretation. Leaving this statement as it was created a clear implication that no other commentator supported the Eustathius view. This is of course completely without basis as it cannot be determined. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.14.63 (talk) 20:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Amazonian names
The "reference" for the expanded list of Amazonian names, contributed by User:EldoraLuthiena at 15:18, 19 January 2007, links to this enthusiastic amateur's on-line alphabetized but wholly undocumented list. The commonplace statement that the multiplied names are "poetic invention" was challenged by the argument from ignorance ("we can't know for sure") and suppressed at the article Amazons: see [[Talk:Amazons. What is one to do? --Wetman 01:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Killing by a spear
I have been looking into the killing of Hippolyta with a spear in a hunting accident. It does not seem possible, since the spear, at least the greek spear was a lunging weapon as opposed to the roman spear or the atlatl. This is simply food for thought. Amanniste (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * ...so it couldn't have 'happened'? Rather than applying our own canons of verisimilitude, here's a more fruitful train of thought: the 'accidental' killing of a figure is a running theme in Greek myth, a topos. Starting with Hippolyta, Pallas and Hyacinthus, see how many you can assemble. What is the use being made of these 'accidental' deaths? What is their function?--Wetman (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Nonexistent source?
The source cited for "According to Quintus, Penthesilea was such an effective warrior because, unlike most Amazons who were missing a single breast, Penthesilea had both breasts cut off," in the section "Penthesilea in Quintus Smyrnaeus' Posthomerica" is as follows: "Diana Hyppolite, The Exposed Body in Antiquity (Yonkers: Sarah Lawrence College Press, 1984), p. 113." Not only can I not find this book or its author on WorldCat, I can't find reference to it anywhere on the internet except on web pages about Penthesilea that seem to be citing this Wiki page. Does anyone have evidence that this book exists, and if so, do you have an ISBN number of a library database entry for it? I ask because I think this citation is factually untrue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roofbeams12357 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 26 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I also failed to verify the existence of this source. "Sarah Lawrence College Press" is also not (as far as I can tell) a legitimate publisher. This may mean the source is an unpublished thesis written by a Sarah Lawrence College student, but it seems more likely to me that the source has been fabricated for the sake of the argument (the surname "Hyppolite" also makes me suspicious... and "Diana" for that matter). Based on this, I've removed the source and marked the statement it is supporting as "disputed." If any alternate sources are found, this should be removed as resolved.


 * If anyone can verify this source, please add it back and provide additional details here, and perhaps apologize to Miss Diana Hyppolite for me assuming her very apt Greek goddess/Amazonian queen name was a hoax. — ElfLady64 (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)


 * After looking into other edits (which appear to also be fabricated) made from the IP that added the claim, and failing to find any other sources to support her having "both breasts cut off", I'm going to remove it as a hoax. — ElfLady64 (talk) 21:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

References about settlers 3
Hello, im new here, there is a reference to Penthesilea in the game "the settlers 3 gold edition". There Penthesilea is one of the 4 commanders the player impersonates and commands the Amazon race. She follows the orders of the goddess Q'nqüra, daughter of Helios, wich tries to humiliate and defeat the other three gods ( Horus, Jupiter and Ch'ih-yu) wich command respectively Egyptians, Romans and Asians.--Frostywow (talk) 01:30, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Other Traditions/Misinformation
In the "Other Traditions" section, the author of the article notes that "In a lost poem of Stesichorus, believed to have been published in the 7th or 6th century, Penthesilea rather than Achilles had killed Hector." I have looked at the secondary source cited here (Adrienne Mayor (2014). The Amazons: Lives and Legends of Warrior Women across the Ancient World. Princeton University Press. p. 302. ISBN 9781400865130.), who does not actually tell us where she gets this reference from. The same claim--again made without referencing a primary source--appears also in two books by Paul Chrystal (Woman at War in the Classical World and War in Greek Mythology). Like Mayor, Chrystal says that this variant can be found in Stesichorus. However, I myself cannot find this variant in any of Stesichorus' fragments or in any of the testimonia pertaining to Stesichorus. As far as I can tell, there was never a variant of the Penthesilea myth in which Penthesilea was the one who killed Hector--not in the works of Stesichorus nor of any other ancient author. Perhaps Mayor/Chrystal misunderstood/misremembered/misread some other variant, for example the one (found in Book 3 of Dictys of Crete) in which Hector goes out to meet Penthesilea and is killed by Achilles while doing so, or the (extremely bizarre) variant in which Penthesilea killed Achilles, after which Achilles came back to life and killed her back (apparently in Book 6 of Pomepius Trogus--see Photius' Epitome). Anyway, does anybody know of a PRIMARY source in which Penthesilea is the one who kills Hector? If not, I think the claim in question (about Stesichorus) should be removed from the article.