The Labors of Hercules: Ninth labor, the Belt (Girdle) of Hippolyte an Amazon Queen

Hippolyta was a warrior woman and one of the queens of the Amazons. Ares the god of war gave her a belt of armour. Some sources refer to a belt of leather and others to a golden girdle. Nevertheless, she wore this belt around her upper body and used it to secure her sword and spear.
I could not find much on what made the belt special, but it was important enough for Eurystheus to send Hercules off to find the belt and bring it back to him as a present for his daughter.
This was Hercules’ ninth labour.
Hercules did not undertake this task on his own, and a number of his Greek friends accompanied him, to help out if needed. The Amazon woman were well known for their bravery and fighting skills.
When Hercules arrived in the land of the Amazons their ship was peacefully welcomed by Hippolyta herself, who would have no problems in handing over the belt to Hercules as a gift of love.
This was not what Hera wanted. She then disguised herself as an Amazon woman and spread a rumour that Hercules and his men were there to kidnap queen Hippolyta. To protect their queen the Amazons donned their armour and went to her aid. When Hercules and his men saw the armed Amazons quickly approaching on horseback ready for war, he responded, and a fierce battle took place.
Other sources state that Hercules killed Hippolyta before a battle could take place, and took her belt and weapons from her body.
In any event, Hercules took the belt from her, and returned it to Eurystheus as a gift for his daughter Admete

List of the 12 labors and links to other Heracles posts on this blog here

EDIT on 5 November 2008
After doing the above post I felt that I had not really done justce to the occasion, but published anyway. My argument is to create an awareness and stimulate further reading and finding out.
I received this article from Arras and am posting it as well. Excellently written and really does justice to the occasion. Thank you Arras
Arras said...
The girdle was a symbol of office, like the ceremonial necklaces that mayors still wear today for their inaugurations and parades--a bit of regalia. The point of sending Herakles after it was, as with all the labours, to get him killed. Eurystheus was Hera's agent, and each labour was chosen not so much to test Herakles but to finish him off. The bait to lure him to his death was the promise of immortality if he could succeed at all of them--he may have been a demigod, but he was still fully mortal at the time.

The presumption in this case was that sending him into the Amazon capital to steal their regalia would be an impossible task. So far from home, surrounded by thousands of angry Amazons, he'd surely be slaughtered.

Hera's miscalculation in this case was that she expected Herakles to stupidly barge in and try to steal the girdle, which would have certainly been his undoing. Instead he and his companions were diplomatic and respectful of the Amazons and their customs, and were treated like guests--famed heroes from Athens (Theseus, the slayer of the Minotaur and future King of Athens was with him)--and this set a very different kind of tone.

Herakles and Hippolyte had great respect for one another, from one champion to another, and they hit it off. He explained to her the nature of his labour and what it required, and she willingly gave him the girdle as a token of her respect.

Hera, furious at this clever circumvention of her murderous plot, appeared among the Amazons as one of their number and incited them by claiming that Herakles and his men were about to kidnap the Queen. The Amazons rose up and attacked Herakles and his companions, accidentally killing Hippolyte when she got in the middle.

Badly outnumbered, the men fled to their ship, but they did not leave empty-handed. Herakles had the girdle he came for, and Theseus brought with him Hippolyte's sister Antiope, who had technically become Queen when Hippolyte died. Some versions of the story paint this as a love story, with Antiope having fallen for Theseus and agreeing to return to Athens with him, while others are clear about it as a trophy kidnapping. In any case, it was the event that would spark the Attic War, when the Amazons massed to attack Athens itself to rescue their Queen

What does Thinking Outside the Box Mean: Example and Origin

This is a follow up on two previous posts on lateral thinking.
When the subject of lateral thinking pops up in conversation, odds are there will be someone who will ask for a pen and paper and go through the 9 Dots puzzle to relieve you of your ignorance.
I’m still not sure whether this puzzle attempts to define lateral thinking or if it is a test to determine whether you are a lateral thinker. Maybe a bit of both and a bit of none.
I hate it when someone pushes a puzzle under my nose and says “If you cannot solve this in 10 seconds, your intellect is suspect”. I withdraw immediately and usually get zero for the effort. Similar to working on a PC, and you have a person looking over your shoulder telling you what to do. Meanwhile you now exactly what you are doing, and can do it much better than the spectator.
Anyhow, back to the 9 Dots puzzle.
The puzzle consists of 3 x 3 dots, arranged in a square or box. What you are asked to do is to connect the dots by drawing four straight, continuous lines without lifting the pen.
This puzzle is easily solved but only if you draw the lines outside the boundaries set but the 9 dots that form the “box”. So, you solve the problem by drawing lines “outside” the box, therefore “thinking outside the box”.


The term as far as I can find out originated in the business world during the 60’s or 70’s as a management tools to solve problems. It also gave rise to a multitude of courses by consultants to teach people to think laterally. (Don’t want to go there now)
The concept of the puzzle is much older. The puzzle was published in 1914, “Cyclopedia of Puzzles”, but the dots were eggs. There are further references to Chinese origins hundreds of years ago.
My experience of lateral thinkers are those people who approach a problem with an enquiring mind. One will often hear statements like “what will happen if….?”, “how does this….?”, “When does this….?”.
I don’t believe it is of necessity a function of intelligence, but more of an understanding of the topic in question. If lateral thinking is reserved for the intelligent, what is the measure? Mensa? Cannot be… If that is the measure there would be very few lateral thinkers.
A high level of education and intelligence will enable an enquiring mind to solve complicated issues that a lesser educated or intelligent is unable to grasp. But, but it is often the “uneducated” person who has brilliant insights, as a direct result of not suffering from the constraints of a formal “in the box” education.
Source data : Wikipedia