APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI∗

Maria Vamvouri Ruffy

University of Lausanne
The dialectical relation between literary discourse and historical reality is crucial
for the interpretation of ancient Greek poetry, which was an act of
communication that had a specific audience, took place at a specific time and
place and on each occasion satisfied or put to the test particular political,
religious and poetical demands of the social group for which it was composed.
Similarly, the legendary narratives that we call myths, many of which were the
subject of the ancient poetic texts, are inextricably related to the socio-political
conditions and the historical framework of their performance.1
The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the operation of this dialectic in
the Delphic myth of succession that ends with the establishment of Apollo at
Delphi. Some years ago, in her article “Myth as History: The Previous Owners of
the Delphic Oracle,” Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood studied this myth and argued
that it does not reflect the ritual history of Delphi during the Mycenaean times, as
many philologists and historians of religion had maintained. 2 According to
Sourvinou-Inwood, the narratives of succession are not acurate reflections of the
history of the Oracle but, rather, expressions of “important perceptions about the
Delphic Apollo, the oracle and the cosmos.” 3 They express positive
representations of the oracular shrine and of the god who brought peace in the
area of Delphi and enabled the transition to civilization. Sourvinou-Inwood
distinguishes between myth as ideology and myth as history, whereas I shall
show that this distinction is not so clear-cut. I shall focus on one aspect of the
myth of succession, specifically the relationship of Athena and the city she
protects, with Apollo, as this relationship is depicted in the poetic succession
narratives.4 I shall argue that the nature of Apollo’s relationship with Athena is

∗
Editorial note: The editors wish to express their thanks to Mr. George Paleoyannis
for the English translation and to Prof. Ewen Bowie for polishing it.
1
See Gentili 3–30; Calame 1988: 7–13 and Calame 2000: 47–51.
2
For the view that the ‘Previous Owners myth’ reflects a time when chthonic deities
were the possessors of the oracle, see Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 235, n. 2 with
bibliography.
3
Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 215.
4
Sourvinou-Inwood 1987 focuses mainly on the chthonic deities that appear in the
myth and partly on Athena. She observes that the goddess appears each time as a
522 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

determined by religious and political reality and that in some cases their
relationship in turn affects reality either by idealizing it, or making it stronger, or
criticizing it. Of course, such an analysis requires consideration of the aim of the
narrative, for narrative frequently determines content.
I shall focus on four poetic texts that narrate the installation of Apollo at
Delphi: the Paean to Apollo of Aristonoos and the Eumenides of Aeschylus,
where Athena appears explicitly; the Iphigeneia in Tauris of Euripides and the
Homeric Hymn to Apollo5 where the goddess’ role is implicit.6

1. Apollo, Athena and the Delphic Amphictiony in the Paean of

Aristonoos
The aim of my analysis of Aristonoos’ Paean to Apollo is to show that the plans
of the Delphic Amphictiony in the 4th century to emphasize the importance of the
sanctuary of Athena Pronaia in Delphi and its ritual practice underlie the Paean’s
particular representation of Athena’s relationship with Apollo.

collaborator and helper of Apollo and that her presence in the legendary narratives of
succession is obviously not related to Mycenaean cults.
5
References to the Greek text of Aristonoos’ Paean are to the edition of Furley–
Bremer II: 45–47; of the Eumenides to the edition of Page; of the Iphigenia in Tauris to
the edition of Cropp; of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo to the edition of Allen–Halliday–
Sikes 20–42.
6
There are other narratives of the Oracle’s foundation. Pi. fr. 55 Maehler refers to
the violent and problematic succession at Delphi. According to E. Or. 163–64 and Lucan
5.79–85, Themis was already at Delphi when Apollo arrived. Like Lucan, Hygin. Fab.
140 specifies that Apollo slaughtered the serpent. According to Ov. Met. 1.320–21 and
4.643, the first prophetess was Themis; Ephorus, FGrH 70 F 31 b, asserts that the Oracle
was founded both by Themis and Apollo. He also relates (FGrH 70 F 150) that Poseidon
exchanged the Oracle for Tainaron; Plu. Mor. 402 C–E, points out that the shrine used to
belong to Gaia but later she lost her position and became inferior to Apollo. He also
recounts (Mor. 414 A–B) that it was the desolation of Delphi that attracted the serpent
there; for Theopompus (FGrH 115 F 80) the Oracle belonged to Gaia when Apollo
slaughtered the serpent; Paus. 10.5.6–7 recounts a poem of Musaeus where it is stated
that the shrine belonged not only to Gaia but also to Poseidon. Gaia gave it to Themis and
Themis offered it to Apollo. He then gave Calaureia to Poseidon in exchange for his part
in the Oracle; Alkaios in his Hymn to Apollo (Furley–Bremer II: 21–22) narrates that the
god, instead of going to Delphi as Zeus asked him to do, flew straight to the
Hyperboreans where he stayed a whole year. He finally consented to take up his duties at
Delphi. D. S. 16.26.1–6 recounts an ancient story according to which goats discovered
the Oracle for the first time. Except for Ephorus’ narrative, I will not discuss these
variants because they make no mention of Athena.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 523

The Paean is informed by two different narratives: (a) the purification of

the god in the valley of Tempe, which was evidently performed after the killing
of Python7 and (b) the smooth installation of Apollo in the Delphic sanctuary.
After the invocatio (1–5), the pars media underlines the peaceful atmosphere that
prevailed in the sanctuary when the god arrived there (5–40). The smooth arrival
of Apollo is, in fact, attributed to divine consensus; this is clearly the implication
of the participle peivsa" (21) which indicates that the god convinced the old
chthonic deities to offer him the sacred land. Athena enjoys an important position
in the pars media of Aristonoos’ Paean: an entire strophe is dedicated to the
goddess, relating that Apollo bestows special honours on her as a token of
appreciation for her help in the past: after his purification at Tempe, Athena sent
him to Delphi.8 Since then, the goddess has enjoyed the greatest honours at the
oracle as a reward. Colin and Weil attribute the eminent position of Athena in
Aristonoos’ composition to the poet’s wish to flatter the civic pride of the
Athenians. In their opinion, Athens looms large in the description of Athena’s
special honours.9 Both historians based their arguments on the view that the
Paean was apparently inscribed in one of the walls of the Treasury of the
Athenians, a view that was later challenged by Audiat and Daux.10 In addition,
Weil 11 based his argumentation on the thematic similarities of the Paean to
Aeschylus’ Eumenides, which, however, are not in my view that obvious.12 As
we will see later, in the Eumenides, the Pythia clearly refers to Athens where
Apollo made a stop before reaching Delphi and where he was seen off by the
children of Hephaestus with respect and honours. On the contrary, in Aristonoos’

7
The battle of Apollo with the bloodthirsty serpent was a widespread tradition in
Delphi. The Pythian Nomos celebrated this victory of Apollo and the festival Septerion
entails the reenactment not only of the battle of the god but of his exile at Tempe. See
Poll. 4.84; Str. 9.3.10; Plu. Mor. 293 C, and Theopompus FGrH 115 F 80. Aristonoos’
Paean, silent on the reasons of the purification of the god, implies the tradition, according
to which Apollo killed the female serpent that caused great destruction to the land of
Delphi. Given that Pytho was the daughter of Gaia and therefore of divine descent, her
murder was an act of sacrilege that needed to be purified. For the murder of the serpent,
see Homeric Hymn to Apollo 3.354–74. Cf. also Fontenrose 13–22; Defradas 63–69 and
Furley–Bremer I: 95–97, II: 49.
8
For Athena’s help to Apollo during his installation in various oracular sanctuaries,
cf. Béquignon 61–68.
9
Colin 214 (FD III, 2), Weil 52 and recently Rutherford 29.
10
Audiat 1932: 299; Audiat 1933: 68; Daux 1942–43: 138–39 and Daux 1945: 7.
11
Weil 48–49; Concerning the thematic similarities between the two texts, cf.
Defradas 93–94.
12
Cf. Daux 1945: 10–11 who expresses similar reservations.
524 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

Paean there is no reference to Athens. In my opinion, the collaboration of the

two sibling gods must be interpreted in light of the progressively more and more
important role of the Pronaia at Delphi in the 4th century B.C. To argue this point
I shall discuss the Paean’s date of performance and the plans of the Amphictiony
to privilege the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia at that period through a series of
constructions.13
In the honorary decree offering proxenia to Aristonoos the name of the
archon Damochares is mentioned.14 For the archonship of Damochares various
dates have been proposed: it was initially dated to the 3rd century, between 260
and 230 B.C., but Daux suggested that this date was wrong and came to the
conclusion that Damochares was archon in the 4th century, because his name
appears regularly in the accounts of the treasurers of the sanctuary of that
period.15 Another argument put forward by Daux is that, if the Paean had been
composed in the 3rd century, it would have mentioned the Greek victory over the
Gauls, who in 279 besieged the Delphic sanctuary, a victory which is later
mentioned by Callimachus, Athenaeus and Limenius.16 Finally, he observed that
the formula ejpitimaŸ kaqavper Delfoifl" , used in the honorary decree of proxenia,
is usually found in fourth-century inscriptions. He dated the archonship of
Damochares around 338/7, but, as Pierre De La Coste-Messelière demonstrated,
this date is too early. According to the list of archons reconstructed by De La
Coste-Messelière, Damochares was archon in 334/3.17
Aristonoos’ Paean was performed shortly before this date, most probably
on the occasion of the festival of Theoxenia.18 This is a period of intensive
construction in Delphi. Among other buildings the Delphic Amphictiony decided
to built an hoplotheke, a project that lasted approximately ten years and was
begun along with the other buildings in 335/4, (account 48 I, 32–34).19 Its precise
location in the sanctuary has been the subject of archaeological debate. On the
basis of a decree concerning the repair of many buildings by an architect named
Akidon, among them an hoplotheke, Bousquet maintained that there were two

13
Regarding this hypothesis, cf. Vamvouri Ruffy 206–16.
14
Colin 212 (FD III, 2, 190).
15
Daux 1943: 14–15 (FD III) and Daux 1942–43: 137–40.
16
Call. Del. 171–73; Paean of Athenaeus 22–24 in Furley–Bremer II: 85–86; Paean
of Limenius 31–33 in Furley–Bremer II: 92–94. Cf. also Nachtergael 93–125.
17
De La Coste-Messeliere 1949 and Savn chez 519.
18
Furley, Bremer I: 120–21.
19
Bourguet (FD III, 5). For an account of the construction process from conception
to completion, see Roux 1989.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 525

hoplothekai in Delphi.20 The first was located in the sanctuary of Athena at

Marmaria, the second was none other than the Western Arcade where weapons
were stored. According to him, the fourth-century accounts refer to the
construction of that second hoplotheke and not of the one at Marmaria.21 The
hypothesis of the presence of two hoplothekai did not convince Roux for,
according to him, this hypothesis causes chronological, topographical and
architectural problems.22 He remarks that (a) the Western Arcade was built in the
3rd century and not the 4th, and (b) that the hoplothekai are buildings rarely found
in sanctuaries, a fact that discredits the existence of two such buildings at Delphi.
He also noted that in antiquity arcades were called stoav or pastav" and not
oJploqhvkh, a word that is found in the accounts and refers to a confined place.
The Western Arcade, on the contrary, resembled more astoa with open sides
rather than a confined place that hosted weapons.
Roux locates the hoplotheke mentioned in the fourth-century accounts
within the sanctuary of Athena Pronaia, since it is the only one mentioned in the
inscriptions. According to him, that hoplotheke was used as a storage room for
the armor of the goddess. Indeed, every four years, during the Pythia, the rite of
Lotis23 took place, in the course of which the pilgrims washed the statue of
Athena and dressed it with new armor that was offered by the Amphictyons.
Roux points out that over the years Athena must have received many suits of
armor and weapons. Her sanctuary must have been overwhelmed by such
offerings and at some point there must have been a need for a separate closed
area where the armor of the goddess would be stored and protected. The fact that
during the 3rd century many people were honoured by the Amphictyons for their
care of the armors of the goddess argues in favor of Roux’s hypothesis.24
Even though the existence of the hoplotheke in the sanctuary of Athena
Pronaia is beyond doubt, the edifice has not yet been discovered. Roux assumes
that the hoplotheke was built in an area of the sanctuary that has not yet been
excavated.25 If his assumption is right, this means that in the year of Damochares’
archonship the sanctuary of Pronaia was the center of the Amphictiony’s atten-
tion. In this context, Aristonoos’ Paean, which was performed at approximately
the same time as the building of the hoplotheke at Marmaria was decided and

20
This decree is edited by Flacelière 1954: 210 (FD III, 4, 136, ll. 7–10).
21
Bousquet 167–177.
22
Roux 1989: 55–62.
23
For this rite see Lerat 261 and Roux 1982: 227–35.
24
Cf. Flacelière 1935: 17.
25
This opinion is shared also by Bourguet 178 (FD III, 5), and Flacelière 1935: 16–
17.
526 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

which commemorates the solidarity between Apollo and Athena as well as the
privileged position of the latter at Delphi, acquires new meaning. The coopera-
tion between the two siblings reflects a more general interest in the goddess that
is manifested not only by the festivals in her honour, but also by the building
program that was intended to embellish and enrich Marmaria. If this is the case,
the Paean is inextricably related to the religious, ritual and architectural plans of
the Amphictiony. Idealizing the relationship of the two gods, the Paean offers a
substantial argument that serves and strengthens the plans of the Amphictyons
for the sanctuary of Marmaria.

2. Legendary Past and the Democratic City in the Eumenides of Aeschylus

The relationship between Apollo and Athena in Aeschylus’ Eumenides, as is
reflected in the Pythia’s narration of the myth of succession (1–20), must be
interpreted in the light of the broader aim of the play to link the Delphic Oracle
with the city where the trilogy was staged. The bond between Athens and Delphi
is created already in the opening lines of the play, by means of a new variant in
the prayer of the Pythia, which is emblematic of the direction the plot will take.
The new theme is Apollo’s stop in Athens on his way to Delphi (9–11). This
variant is not attested in the earlier literary tradition. Indeed, our only other
sources are Limenius’ Paean, composed three centuries later, and a fragment of
Ephorus of Cyme, a fourth-century historian. Obviously, Aeschylus and
Limenius opted for this particular itinerary in an attempt to link the god with the
city they wanted to praise. The remark of the scholiast of the Eumenides is in this
respect astute: he observes that Apollo’s stop in Athens is evidently Aeschylus’
invention in order to flatter the Athenians.26 Ephorus says that at the time Apollo
civilized mankind by introducing cultivated fruits and gentle modes of life, he set
out from Athens to Delphi by the future road of Pythais, the one the Athenians
took during their procession to the Oracular shrine. The historian, known for his
pro-Athenian bias, was obviously acquainted with the Athenian version of
Apollo’s journey and aimed to glorify the city’s ritual of Pythaid.27

26
Schol. ad A. Eu. 11 Smith. We find a similar manipulation of the tradition in
Pindar. The ancient commentator of Aeschylus mentions also that according to Pindar,
Apollo went to Delphi through Boeotia, birthplace of Pindar. For Limenius’ version, see
Vamvouri Ruffy 174–79.
27
Str. 9.3.11–12, who reports Ephorus’ fragment (FGrH 70 F 31 b), is very skeptical
towards this narrative. According to him the historian confounds myth and history. He
insinuates that there is nothing more mythical (muqwdevs teron) than Apollo’s travel from
Athens to Delphi.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 527

I will now focus on the textual indications in Pythia’s prayer that reveal
the parallel action of Apollo and Athena respectively, thus highlighting the close
relationship between Delphi and Athens. I will pay attention to the fact that,
according to the prophetess, both Athena and Apollo hold a prominent position in
the Oracle, in contrast to the other gods. I shall then argue that they jointly
accomplish an important civilizing project and that they are both instrumental in
the smooth appropriation of the old by the new, not only the appropriation of the
chthonic element by the Olympian but also of the heroic past by the democratic
present. I shall, therefore, conclude that, by performing basically similar
functions, the two gods strengthen the links between the places in which they
reign.
The Pythia’s prayer brings out the dominant position of Apollo and
Athena in Delphi. Initially, the prophetess refers to the chthonic goddesses that
controlled the oracle before Apollo’s arrival (1–8). The first goddess to give
oracles was Gaia (2), the second was Themis, daughter of Gaia (2–3), and the
third was Phoebe (6–7).28 The last deity to take over the oracle was Apollo, the
grandson of Phoebe, who received Delphi as a birthday present (7–8). Apollo’s
rule is presented as the natural outcome of the smooth succession of the
generations of gods, which was accepted not only by Zeus (17–18), but also by
the people of Delphi (15–16).29 It is noteworthy that of all other gods, it is Athena,
the patron goddess of the Athenians, who occupies a very important position in
the oracular sanctuary. It is beyond doubt that the goddess of the city is identified
here with the Athena of Delphi, given that the name Pallas is used both with
reference to the Pronaia of Delphi (21) and to the patron goddess of the city of
Athens (10). Her eminent position in the Oracle is evident from the fact that the
Pythia mentions the goddess before all other deities who dwell in the area (21
PallaŸ" pronaiva d∆ ejn lovgoi" presbeuvetai). The epithet pronaia as such

28
Sommerstein 81 notes that the presence of Phoebe at Delphi is unique in ancient
Greek literature and that Aeschylus introduced her in order to avoid the topic of the
Oracle’s transfer directly from Themis to Apollo, a most problematic transfer in other
narrations. Phoebe is also presented as Apollo’s grandmother in Hes. Th. 404–406.
According to Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 231, the friendly relationship between Phoebe and
Apollo is “a symbolic counterweight to Orestes’ matricide and Apollo’s role in it and in
its aftermath.”
29
Scholars have noted that the peaceful transition from the chthonic to the Olympian
powers reflects the final reconciliation of the Erinyes, chthonic deities, with Athena who
represents Zeus and the Olympian generation. See Zeitlin 163–66, Finley 277,
Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 231. Cf. also Robertson and Said 1983 on the multiple
analogies between the preface and the final scene of the play.
528 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

also reflects Athena’s prominent position: it means “she who stands in front of
the temple,” highlighting thus the proximity of Athena to Apollo’s seat. Her
position in the Oracle differs from that of the other gods.30 The Corycian cave
(22–23), dwelling place of the Nymphs, or even the stream of Pleistus (27),
dedicated to Poseidon, are far from the temple.31 The same applies to the area
dedicated to Dionysus. The festivals of the Maenads, which are implied in the
names “Bromios” (24) and “Pentheus” (26), were held on Parnassus.32
In addition to their proximity in the Oracle, the two gods protect places,
the common denominator of which is their civilizing aspect. Remarkably, both at
Delphi and Athens, violence and savageness are renounced. The Pythia states
that Phoebe handed over the oracle to her grandson without violence (5 oujdeŸ
proŸ" bivan tinov") and thus the transition from the rule of the chthonic deities to
that of the Olympian powers did not provoke friction, as one might expect.
Similarly in Athens, the city of Athena (10), the citizens tamed the wild earth
(13–14 cqovna / ajnhvmeron tiqevnte" hJmerwmevnhn). 33 The fact that the
Athenians are called children of Hephaestus points up their special ability to
accomplish civilizing deeds.34 The Homeric Hymn (20) to Hephaestus represents
this god and Athena as the ones that enabled people’s transition from savageness
to civi-lization. Whereas people once lived in caves like the wild animals (4),
they now live, thanks to Hephaestus, in a quiet place that belongs to them (7).

30
Defradas 87–90 and Podlecki 1989: 131.
31
For the ritual at the Corycian cave and the relevant ancient sources, see Amandry
1981 and Amandry 1984.
32
These lines allude to the winter festival in honour of Dionysus, which was held in
Delphi every two years and in which the Thyiads, women from Delphi and Athens,
participated. This festival took place in the woods of Parnassus, near the Corycian cave,
where the Thyiads danced in torch light. Regarding the contrast between the cultic reality
of maenadism and the portrayals of maenads in Euripides’ Bacchae, see Henrichs.
Concerning the Thyiads see also M.-C. Villanueva Puig.
33
The act of the Athenians foreshadows the civilizing role that Athena is going to
play when she will succeed in propitiating the Erinyes and convince them to change their
identity. See Said 1983: 105–107.
34
The Athenians are often represented as the descendants of Hephaestus. When the
god attempted to rape Athena, his seed felt on the earth and Erichthonius, the Athenian
hero, was born. On this tale, see E. fr. 925 Nauck; Amelesagoras, FGrH 330 F I; Apollod.
Bibl. 3.14.6; Paus. 1.2.6. Cf. Loraux 57–81, and Parker 1987: 193–96. See also Hom. Il.
2.546–51, where Erechtheus, the legendary Athenian king, is not yet consistently
distinguished from Erichthonius. In Attica, Hephaestus was worshipped together with
Athena: see Delcourt 191–203. According to Paus. 1.14.6, a statue of Athena stood in the
temple of Hephaestus in the Ceramicus.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 529

The change of the living conditions consists not only in the change of people’s
habitat, but also in their comfortable life, as is clear by from terms rJhi>divw",
“easily” and eu[khloi ”without disturbance.” This lifestyle differs significantly
from the scared and defensive conduct of wild animals. We should also bear in
mind that according to one tradition, reported by the lexicographer Istros, it was
Hephaestusnot Prometheus, who gave the fire to mortals. The Athenians, in
particular, says the lexicographer, made sacrifices in honour of Hephaestus at the
Apatouria in commemoration of the god’s important civilizing gift.35 Therefore,
in Pythia’s prayer, exactly as in Delphi, any form of violence and savageness is
abolished; in Athena’s city the Athenians are closely associated with civilization.
The similarity of the two siblings’ actions is evident in their role as
mediators between the old and the new generation as well as between the heroic
past and the democratic present. In Delphi, the installation of Apollo does not
entail the expulsion of the ancient deities from the sacred land. It is indicative
that the Pythia in her prayer praises the ancient deities who ruled over the Oracle
before Apollo. Moreover, his name, Phoebus, a heritage from his grandmother
Phoebe, confirms the genealogical continuity and shows that Apollo does not
represent a break from the previous generations, but a link with them. In Athens,
Athena represents the continuity between the heroic past and the present of
democratic Athens. In verses 397–414 of the tragedy, the goddess appears on
stage having heard uproar in her city.36 She says she came from far away, from
the bank of Scamander. What was she doing there and why does she report where
she has come from? Both the ancient scholiast and modern scholars, e.g. Dodds,
Podlecki, and Sommerstein, have seen an echo of contemporary concerns about
Sigeum, a city near Troy, which had been the subject of dispute around 600 B.C.
between the Mytileneans and the Athenians and for which the latter had a
renewed interest. The ancient scholiast observes that Aeschylus is trying to
persuade the Athenians to occupy Sigeum once again.37

35
FGrH 334 F 2. According to the sophist Protagoras (Pl. Pr. 321d–e), Prometheus
stole fire from Hephaestus and wisdom in the arts from Athena in order to give them to
humans.
36
On Athena’s speeches within the play and the political language she uses, see
Dover 233–35. On the political and moral issues of the play, see also Dodds, Macleod
and Podlecki 1966: 80–100.
37
Schol ad A. Eum. 398c Smith. As Sommerstein 151–52 reminds us, in 465/4 B.C.
the Athenians were fighting at Sigeum, near the city of Troy. Based on inscriptional
evidence, Podlecki 1989: 163–64 explains that in 451/50, namely a few years after the
performance of the Oresteia, the people of Sigeum requested the protection of the
Athenians against an enemy that threatened them. Possibly, according to him, the city of
530 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

In my view, the reference to the banks of Scamander does not only

reflect Athenean interest in Sigeum.38 I think that there is a double reference,
namely (a) to Sigeum and the fight of Athens with Mytilene and (b) to the Trojan
War. The Scamander flows near Troy. The events of the trilogy take place
shortly after the end of the Trojan War and, therefore, Athena implies that she
has come from the conquered city. In other words, the play reflects a bond
between the Athena of Troy and the Athena of Athens and thus links the heroic
past with the historical context of fifth-century democratic Athens. The words of
the goddess, which bear clear traces of democratic values, underline the link
between past and present. When the goddess addresses the Erinyes in verses
408–409, she explains that she “speaks to allalike” (408 paflsi d∆ ej" koinoŸn
levgw). This expression also means that she is speaking in public, thus bringing to
mind public debate on civic issues. With the arrival of Athena the personal
problem of Orestes becomes a public issue. A family crime in a royal house
becomes a crime that falls within the jurisdiction of the city. There is a further
indication of the democratic values of Athens, which underlie the speech of
Athena. In verse 401 the goddess explains that she is not the only one who
benefited from the booty since it was offered to the children of Theseus as well.
In Athena’s words it was a gift to the people of Athens (402 ejxaivreton dwvrhma
Qhsevw" tovkoi"). The same expression is also used in the Agamemnon, not so
much with reference to a common acquisition but rather to a personal gift to the
king.39
Clearly, the temporal distance which separates the Trojan War from
democratic Athens has been elided. This is a clever device, whereby the heroic
past is perceived through the democratic values of the present. Simultaneously,
the present is idealized through the vigour and the heroic values of the past. The
Athenians appropriate the Trojan War in order to highlight the antiquity and

Sigeum was part of the Delian League given that its name appears in the tribute-quota
lists of 450/49 B.C. See also Dodds 47, n. 2.
38
For this view see also Macleod 125.
39
A. A. 954–55 au{th deŸ pollwfln crhmavtwn ejxaivreton / a[nqo", stratoufl
dwvrhm∆, ejmoiŸ xunevspeto. Rosenbloom has shown that Agamemnon represents a world
of individual values that can compromise the city’s common wealth, prosperity and
justice. The Eumenides, on the contrary, transforms the individual into common and
democratic values, profitable for the whole city. Rosenbloom 114 explains also that the
“play validates both the Athenian project of glory through war and what that project
threatens to destroy, the yearning for justice, prosperity and purity in the eyes of the
gods.”
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 531

strength of the democratic values of their city. Thus Athens is represented as heir
to the glorious heroic world which, however, no longer bears despotic traces.
To sum up, Apollo and Athena oversee places which oppose savageness
and are associated through the civilizing actions of their patron gods. The close
ties between the two siblings as well as between the two places serve the needs of
the plot: in order to find absolution, Orestes must travel to Delphi and to Athens.
In a similar manner, his deliverance depends on the cooperation of the two
sovereign gods. In addition to this interpretation, we should not rule out the
possibility of historical and political overtones as well. I find attractive the view
that Aeschylus alludes to the close ties of the Alcmaeonids with Delphi and their
services to the Delphic Oracle, whereby they strengthened the relationship
between Delphi and Athens.40 There are certain analogies between the story of
Orestes and the fortunes of the Alcmaeonids who, banished from Athens, took
refuge in the sanctuary, where they were purified. Indeed, in 586 or 584 B.C.
they left Athens on account of the sacrilege that a member of the family had
committed, namely the murder of suppliants at the altar of the Eumenides. They
settled at Delphi and around 523 they undertook the restoration of the temple that
had been destroyed by fire in approximately 547 B.C. According to Herodotus,
the new temple was much more impressive than the one initially planned. The
Alcmaeonids used Parian marble for the temple’s facade.41 Moreover, verses 12–
14 of the Eumenides refer, in all likelihood, to the foundation act of the Pythaid,
which was depicted on the pediment of the temple that was built by the Athenian
family.42
Such a political interpretation does not necessarily mean that Aeschylus
wished to support Pericles, an Alcmaeonid himself, and, consequently, the
democratic party.43 It could simply mean that Aeschylus lays the foundations of,
and immortalizes through the relationship of Apollo and Athena, the close
relationship between Delphi and Athens that the procession of the Pythaid and
the initiative of the Alcmaeonids kept alive. From this perspective, the succession
myth that the Pythia narrates can be interpreted not only as a “more ethical,
‘civilised’ version of the violent variants, ascribing a higher ethical tone to the

40
See Smertenko.
41
See Hdt. 5.62–63. For the rebuilding of the temple by the Alcmeonids see De La
Coste-Messelière 1946, Parker and Welwei 206–208.
42
See schol. ad. A. Eu. 12 Smith. On the Pythaid, see Boethius 31–38. Cf. also
Plassart and Said 1983: 103.
43
Nevertheless, Smertenko suggests that Aeschylus had Pericles in mind. Dover 236
notes that the Athenian audience probably perceived after reflection that some issues of
the play where in Pericles’ favour.
532 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

oracle (and its god).”44 It can also be interpreted as a response to the Athenian
project to link the city with the panhellenic shrine in order to show that the
“presence” of Athens at Delphi is as old as Apollo’s presence there.

3. From Divine to Human: Apollo/Athena as a Divine Model of

Orestes/Iphigenia in Iphigenia in Tauris
In Euripides’ Iphigenia in Tauris, Athena is represented as Apollo’s associate in
that she helps Orestes carry out the task which the god of Delphi commanded.
Indeed, Orestes not only succeeds in bringing the wooden statue of Artemis from
the land of the Taurians to Athens, as the god has requested, but also delivers his
sister from the barbarians and establishes with her new rituals in the city of
Athens.45 I shall show that in this play Athena guarantees the fulfillment of
Apollo’s oracles and that her actions complement his. I shall also argue that the
relationship of solidarity between them is modeled on the relationship between
Orestes and Iphigenia.
In verses 1234–82 the Chorus of captive women is singing a Hymn to
Apollo,46 while Iphigenia, Orestes and Pylades have already left the stage. The
subject of the Hymn is the problematic succession at the Delphic oracle. The
song presents the god’s beauty and skills (1235–39), narrates the birth of Apollo
at Delos (1235–36), and his arrival at Delphi where he killed Pytho (1245–52),
took over the oracle from Themis (1259–61) and thus provoked the violent
reaction of Gaia. The chthonic deity started sending prophetic dreams to mortals

44
Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 231.
45
The Euripidean plot is different from that of Aeschylus’ Oresteia, according to
which Iphigenia died at Aulis and Orestes was cleared from the charges against him in
Athens. For the relationship between the Aeschylean trilogy and the Euripidean play, see
Caldwell; Sansone; Roberts 102–108; O’Brien; Wolff 328–29; and Cropp 36–37. In
comparison with the Oresteia, the Iphigenia in Tauris is a romantic melodrama according
to Kitto 311 and “clearly not a tragedy” according to Conacher 250. See, however,
Masaracchia 111–23, who shows that the play does not have such a happy ending as
scholars have thought. Cf. also Lanza’s (5–22) important discussion of the function of
Euripides’ innovation in the mythical material.
46
The Hymn of the Chorus does not have the typical structure of a hymn, since it
contains the evocatio (1234) and the pars media (1235–82), but not the precatio. A
number of scholars have considered the hymn extraneous or irrelevant. Nevertheless, as
Furley–Bremer I: 335–36 suggest, this narrative Hymn resembled a nomos. They also
observe (I: 331–32) that this Hymn is an important part of Iphigenia’s fraud. The Chorus
is aware of the dangerous plan of Iphigenia who is, at this very moment, leaving with the
procession. On hymnal structure, see Bremer 1981, Calame 1995, Furley–Bremer I: 50–
63 and Vamvouri Ruffy 27–32.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 533

in an effort to punish Apollo by weakening his oracles (1261–69). 47 Zeus’

intervention proved necessary. At Apollo’s request Zeus finally restored him as
the oracle’s sole prophet (1270–82).48
Athena is not mentioned in this Hymn, but appears on stage a little later.
She is the dea ex machina who convinces Thoas to let Orestes, Iphigenia and the
captive Greek women return to Greece (1435–74).49 Orestes’ actions, Iphigenia
explains, were in keeping with the advice and instructions of Loxias, whose
oracles reveal only what is destined to happen (1438–39 peprwmevnon gaŸr
qesfavtoisi Loxivou / deuflr∆ h\lq∆ jOrevsth"). The statement of the goddess
stresses the truthfulness and inevitability of the Apolline oracles. Athena’s
confirmation is particularly important, since even Orestes had repeatedly
expressed doubts concerning the credibility of Apollo’s oracles (121, 711, 723)
and, moreover, Iphigenia’s dream had endangered the god’s plan.50 After the
recognition scene, however, Orestes changes his mind and seems to trust Apollo
(979–82, 1012–16). Nevertheless, it is Athena who ratifies her brother’s oracles,
once and for all, and makes their meaning clear: the goddess makes Apollo’s plan
to transfer the wooden statue of Artemis to Athens concrete and gives
instructions for the installation of Iphigenia as a priestess of Artemis at Brauron
and the foundation of the temple of Artemis Tauropolos at Halai by Orestes. 51

47
According to Pi. fr. 55 Maehler, Apollo took Gaia’s power by force. For the
Euripidean variant, see Fontenrose 1980: 16–18; Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 230–32;
Burnett 69–71. Panagl 119–39 shows that the poet’s variant reflects his religious
skepticism. Furley–Bremer I: 332 point out that the Apolline success story reflects the
final glory of Orestes who will return home and claim his place to the throne of Argos.
48
Cropp 248 notes that the Hymn expresses the trust of the Chorus in the god (1254,
1281–83) and announces that the two mortal siblings will finally escape.
49
With few exceptions, namely in Hippolytus, Electra and Bacchae, divine
appearances, common in Euripides, have the same structure: the words of the god are
followed by the answer of one of the protagonists and by a choral statement; see Cropp
260.
50
The Hymn confirms the victory of oracles over dreams. Hamilton 283–88 notes
that this conflict exists from the beginning of the drama and challenges the audience’s
expectation. Indeed, while in most Euripidean plays there is a prediction which forecasts
the action, in Iphigenia in Tauris that prediction is qualified because of two contradictory
prophecies, the oracle and the dream.
51
These rites are a compensating substitute for human sacrifice, as Wolff 313–19
and Belfiore 35–36 note. Concerning the historical dimension of the rituals see Brulé
182–87 and 195–97. Cf. also Cropp 50–56. Wolff focuses on the aetiological passages in
the play and on their metathetrical dimension, observing that aitia are here a kind of
bridge between the fictional and the ordinary world.
534 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

Thus, just as Zeus, according to the Hymn of the Chorus, intervened in the past to
reinstate the humans’ trust in his son’s oracles, Athena achieves the smooth
accomplishment of her brother’s oracles. The intervention of the goddess repeats
the pattern of the action required from a god in order to restore the weakened
prestige of Apollo.
Concerning Orestes, Athena completes the work of Apollo. Indeed, while
it is Apollo who urges Orestes to leave the barbarian country and take Artemis’
statue with him, it is Athena who guides Orestes and Iphigenia and makes
possible their safe return to Athens from the land of the Taurians. In the play the
transition from one place to the other appears highly problematic and only the
collaboration of the two gods can effect its realization. On the lexical level, the
verb porqmeuvw, a key-word, signals that the transitions in this play are
adventurous and of an uncertain nature. This is the case in verse 936; when
Iphigenia asks Orestes why he came to the barbarian country, (936 tiv gavr pot∆
ej" ghfln thvnd∆ ejpovrqmeusa" povda;), he answers that it was in obedience to
Apollo’s oracle. A few verses earlier, he had stated that he was essentially driven
away from the land of his fathers by the Erinyes (931). Orestes’ journey is thus
depicted as a result of divine will and of the madness that possesses him, from
which he wishes to free himself. It is not a journey that began under favourable
conditions but an attempt to resolve a serious problem that threatens his mental
and physical integrity.52 The verb is used again in verse 1358, this time with
reference to Orestes and Iphigenia’s journey of return. While Agamemnon’s
children are preparing to escape, the messenger asks them why they are leaving
(1358 Tivni lovgwi porqmeuvete / klevptonte" ejk ghfl" xovana kaiŸ quhpovlou";)
and threatens them by saying that they are in danger on account of a storm that
Poseidon will undoubtedly send to avenge the sack of Troy and Iphigenia’s
disobedience to Artemis (1412–19).53 In the messenger’s view their journey is a
forbidden act that the gods will soon punish.
A little later, however, in verse 1435, Athena makes the problematic
journey possible, by giving new meaning to the verb porqmeuvw. She asks Thoas
why he insists on chasing Agamemnon’s children (1435–36 poifl, poifl diwgmoŸn

52
The verb porqmeuvw is also used in verses 371, when Iphigenia recalls her sacrifice
and her alleged wedding with Achilles (ej" aiJm athroŸn gavmon ejpovrqmeusa" dovl wi). In
this passage the verb is not used to refer to the transition to marriage and bearing of
children, but to slaughter and death. On the metaphoric connection between marriage and
death in Euripides, see Rabinowitz 31–54. In verse 355, Iphigenia uses the word porqmiv"
to indicate that Helen’s arrival will never come to pass.
53
The theft of the sacred statue from the temple is unquestionably an act of sacrilege.
See Parker 1983: 170–90 and Wolff 314–15.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 535

tovnde porqmeuvei", a[nax / Qova";) and announces to him that she has
convinced Poseidon to let them escape in a sea without waves (1444–45 h[dh
Poseidwfln cavrin ejmhŸn ajkuvmona / povntou tivqhsi nwflta porqmeuvein
plavthi).
Without any doubt, the complementary action of the two siblings
strengthens the close relationship the Athenians wanted to maintain with the
panhellenic shrine.54 But I think that this complementary action acquires greater
significance, if we take into account the broader theme of solidarity between
brother and sister which pervades the play. As I have already mentioned, we are
dealing with a divine duet that mirrors the mortal duet of Orestes and Iphigenia.
The relationship of Agamemnon’s children gains strength because it is
represented as the human analogue of the relationship between Athena and
Apollo and is thus idealized. Just as the bonds of the sibling gods are unbreakable,
Orestes and Iphigenia’s bonds appear more powerful than any obstacle.
Burnett has argued in favour of two corresponding pairs of siblings in
this play: Apollo and Artemis on the one hand and Orestes and Iphigenia on the
other. She points out that both brothers rescue their sister. Apollo rescues
Artemis and her image through Orestes and Orestes rescues Iphigenia.55 Wolff
enumerates many features common to Iphigenia and Artemis which indicate that
the former is the heroic counterpart of the latter: “they are both addressed as
potnia, both are called koura/kora. Both have interrelated timai. Both are
dropped on the Taurians out of the sky, and are objects of theft and rescue.”56
The parallelism between Artemis and Iphigenia is undeniable. Yet
Iphigenia shares similar features with Athena as well. It is remarkable that just as
Iphigenia conceives the escape plan from the land of the Taurians, Athena
convinces Thoas and thus makes possible the escape of Agamemnon’s children.
Analogous too is the civilizing role that Athena and Iphigenia play. Thanks to
Athena, Thoas puts an end to the barbaric ritual of sacrificing foreigners who
arrive in his country (1484 pauvsw deŸ lovgchn h}n ejpaivromai xevnoi") and
decides to free the Greek slave women (1482–83).57 Similarly, Iphigenia does not
approve of Orestes’ plan to kill Thoas, saying that it is a terrible thing to murder

54
See supra section 2.
55
Burnett 47–72 demonstrates that the main theme of the tragedy is salvation; the
use of many words associated with the concept of soteiria argues in favor of her thesis.
See also Belfiore 33.
56
Wolff 320. See also Kearns 32–33 and Lloyd-Jones 95–96.
57
Thoas and Iphigenia use the word xevno" differently. For Thoas the word means
“foreigner,” while for Iphigenia “host.” However, as Belfiore 33–34 observes: “the
similarity of language . . . underlines the similarity between the crimes” towards xenoi.
536 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

a host (1021 deinoŸn tovd∆ ei\pa", xenofoneifln ejphvluda") and thus prevents him
from slaying the ruler.58 Iphigenia’s words indicate that she respects the unwrit-
ten laws of friendship and hospitality that delimit the civilized world. In this
respect, her civilizing role is analogous to Athena’s role.59
Another similarity between Iphigenia and Athena is that they both
succeed in making Thoas do what they ask him to do. Iphigenia succeeds through
deceit, Athena resorts to threats. They both characterize their words as muvqo"
whichin my viewis used here with the meaning it has in the Homeric epics.
According to Richard Martin in the Iliad the word mythos “implies authority and
power.” It is an authoritative word which “designates socially meaningful
speech.”60 It is often used by the gods when they command humans or even by
heroes and demonstrates their hierarchy and their antagonistic relationship.61 In a
similar manner, in the play Thoas is the recipient of Athena’s proclamation (1442
proŸ" meŸn s∆ o{d∆ hJmifln muflqo"), in which she stresses the importance of obeying
the will of the gods, thereby implying the danger he will face if he does not
comply with her demands. Her words are in fact an inescapable order that Thoas
will obey thus proving the goddess’s authority. Like the epic heroes who use the
word mythos to express commands, Iphigenia, a mortal who will be heroized
after her death, uses the word in a similar way. As Athena ordains in verses
1464–67, Iphigenia’s tomb at Brauron will be a place of worship, where she will
receive the clothes of the women who died at childbirth as offerings.62 Iphigenia
characterizes her speech to King Thoas as mythos (1049 peivsasa muvqoi": ouj
gaŸr a]n lavqoimiv ge). She attempts to persuade him to let her purify in the sea
Artemis’ statue, which was polluted by the Greeks. This purification is of course
a pretext, which she uses to cover up her escape with Orestes and Pylades. As in
the Iliad, where the speech acts (mythoi) of heroes presuppose their fulfillment,
58
Whereas in verses 53, 336–37, 342–91, Iphigenia is presented as a savage priestess
who shows no mercy to strangers, when she first sees Orestes and Pylades she calls them
poor strangers (479), thus revealing her change of attitude and her reluctance to
participate in human sacrifice. Iphigenia’s conduct toward the two youths does not, of
course, prove that she is not an agent of the barbaric practice. On her ambivalent
participation in sacrifices, see Strachan 131–40 and Sansone 35–47. As Wolff 329 notes,
the Choes aition suggests that the barbarian element is also present in the Greek world.
See also Hall 201–23 and Said 1984.
59
Belfiore 21–38 remarks that the play is “concerned with the avoidance of
bloodshed.” Such a rescue purifies both gods and humans and ends the terrible events in
the house of Tantalus and Pelops.
60
Martin 1992: 22, 48.
61
Martin 1992: 43–77.
62
See Kahil 1977 95–97, Kahil 1988 and Lloyd-Jones 91–96.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 537

the words of Iphigenia have a similar persuasive force. Although the words of the
Greek priestess to Thoas are essentially exhortations, the imperatives she uses
makes them sound like commands (1159, 1207, 1216, 1218). Agamemnon’s
daughter will persuade Thoas, just as Athena does, proving her rhetorical
effectiveness. Thus even though Thoas possesses political power, in comparison
to Iphigenia he seems a naïve ruler.
According to my reading, which takes the Hymn of the Chorus as its
starting point, the special relationship of Athena with Apollo can be understood
in the context of the requirements of the plot: the intervention of the feminine
couple Athena-Iphigenia is necessary for the accomplishment of the plans of the
male couple Apollo-Orestes. The earlier intervention of Zeus to restore Apolline
prestige, which is the subject of the choral song, foreshadows the intervention of
Athena who plays a crucial role in the fulfillment of Apollo’s oracles and in the
establishment of new rituals in Athens.

4. Apollo/Athena—Delphi/Athens in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo

Athena also appears in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, which includes the
narration of the foundation of the oracular shrine by the god. After a detailed
account of the arrival of Apollo at Delphi and the slaying of the female serpent
by the god, in verse 305 the narrative veers off. The subject of the long
digression (305–55) is Hera’s anger against her husband Zeus. Specifically, the
goddess is angry because Zeus gave birth to Athena on his own (314, 323) and,
furthermore, because Zeus’ daughter is preeminent among the immortals (315),
whereas, in contrast, Hephaestus, Hera’s son, was born with a disability. The
wife of Zeus comes to the decision to give birth to a murderous monster that
would be more powerful than Zeus (338). Hera puts her plan into effect and she
produces a terrible creature, Typhaon, whose foster mother is the dragoness at
Delphi (354–55).63

63
This digression is not an interpolation as many scholars maintained. There are
indeed many analogies between the digression and the main narration. The two monsters
mentioned in the two narrations are related because of their demonic violence and of the
disaster they can provoke. They are both described as phflma dafoinovn (304) and phflm a
brotoiflsin (306), as well as disastrous creatures, kakwfl/ kakovn (354). Furthermore, as
Miller 87–88 points out, the digression and the main narration are both relevant to the
encomiastic purpose of the hymn. Indeed, they magnify Apollo’s triumph and his close
relationship to Zeus, since both gods are presented as enemies of disorder. For the
digression as interpolation see the bibliographical references in Strauss Clay 64, n. 145
and Miller 82, n. 212. Miller 82–88, Floratos 305–307, Janko 116–19, Strauss Clay 64–
65, and Aloni in this volume, do not consider the digression to be an interpolation.
538 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

As in the Iphigenia in Tauris, Athena does not play an active role in the
installation of Apollo at Delphi, but is indirectly involved. While in the
Euripidean tragedy Athena contributes to the fulfillment of her brother’s oracles,
Apollo’s slaying of the serpent in the Homeric Hymn constitutes, in essence, an
act of support of Athena as well as a restoration of the threatened balance in the
world of gods. If the female serpent had not been killed, Hera would have
succeeded in weakening Zeus and indirectly Athena. Typhaon would have
certainly become Athena’s serious rival. The slaying of the serpent by Apollo is
the most solid proof of Typhaon’s weakness since he proved unable to defend his
foster mother (367–68).
So, the fortunes of the two siblings are closely related in this poem as
well. Moreover, there is intertextual evidence for their association. In verses 440–
41 it is said that Apollo appeared to the Cretans like a shining star in mid noon
(441 ajstevri eijdovmeno" mevsw/ h[mati). Athena’s epiphany is described in a
similar way in the Iliad (4.75–77 oi|on d∆ ajstevra . . . lamprovn). Besides, the
fact that both Apollo and Athena were considered possible usurpers of Zeus’s
throne bears witness to their association in the Hymn. According to it, when
Apollo appears for the first time on Olympus, the gods are terrified because,
evidently, they consider Zeus’ son violent and dangerous (2–4, 67–69). In a
similar way, Athena in the Theogony was considered a threat to the kingdom of
Zeus. An oracle said that Metis would give birth to a son greater than Zeus (896–
98). For this reason, Zeus swallowed her and gave birth to Athena from his head.
In the end neither Apollo nor Athena posed any threat to the father of gods. On
the contrary, through his oracles Apollo communicates the will of Zeus to
mortals as the Homeric Hymn specifies (132) and Athena shares with her father
the metis of her would-be mother.64
The association of Athena with Apollo’s fortunes must be interpreted in
the light of the general aim of the Homeric Hymns. Panhellenic songs such as the
Theogony aimed at presenting Zeus as the father figure who oversees the balance
on Olympus, always under threat, and who guarantees the peaceful atmosphere
that should prevail there.65 In the Homeric Hymn to Apollo the narration of the
killing of the serpent and that of the unsuccessful revenge of Hera for the birth of
Athena underline the omnipotence of Zeus and his children.

64
Strauss Clay 70 remarks that the repetition of words connected with metis in the
Pytho and Typhaon episode recalls the story of Metis.
65
See Hes. Th. 881–85; Hom. II. 8.31–32; 15.104–106. On the Panhellenic and
patriarchal dimension of the Homeric poetry, see Nagy 1979: 7–9; Nagy 1982: 47 and
Strauss Clay 9–11.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 539

In addition to this interpretation, we should insist on the politics that

underlie the relationship of Apollo and Athena. The thesis of Antonio Aloni
presented in this volume is very attractive. According to Aloni, Hera’s plan and
the birth of Typhaon emphasize the power and determination of the goddess, who
was worshipped on Samos, and aims at flattering the tyrant of the island,
Polycrates, who commissioned the Hymn. For this reason, continues Aloni, the
poet of the Hymn makes Typhaon the son of Hera and does not follow the
version of the Theogony and of Aeschylus’s Prometheus, where the monster is
the son of Gaia and Tartarus.66 By making Typhaon Hera’s offspring the poet
succeeds in linking the goddess of Samos to the Delian Apollo.67
Athena’s presence in the narration of Typhaon’s birth is also politically
motivated. According to Aloni, Athena represents Athens. He remarks that the
allusion to the city is implied in the words kranahv and ajguiav. The adjective
kranah,v which characterizes Delos (16, 26), is often used for Athens. As for the
word ajguiav, mentioned in Thucydides’ version of verse 148 (3.104.5), it refers to
the area where the festival took place and is evidently no other than the Sacred
Way built by Peisistratus. The poet Cynaithos, who in 523/22 performed the
Hymn at the festival in honour of the Delian and Pythian Apollo,68 alludes to the
relationship of Athens and its ruling house, the Peisistratids, both with Delos,
where the festival took place, and with Samos and Polycrates.69
I add that the reference to Athena in connection with the birth of
Typhaon echoes the links of Athens not only with Delos but also with Delphi. It
is not accidental, in my view, that the goddess is mentioned in the Pythian part of
the Hymn. My hypothesis is strengthened by the fact that Athens is referred to as
one of the places where Apollo rules and where Leto begged while suffering
labor pangs (30–44). The Athenian demos is mentioned in the beginning of the
list right after Crete (30) and before many other islands or areas of the Aegean
sea. A great number of these places belong to the Ionian world, the cultural
centre of which at the time was Delos. If we consider that the priests of the god at

66
Hes. Th. 820–22 ; A. Pr. 351–57.
67
Concerning the political powers that influenced Delos during that period, see Roux
1984.
68
The Hymn was performed in Delos at 522 B.C. during the festival, which was
organized by Polycrates of Samos in order to honour Apollo and to celebrate his
dominion over the islands of the Aegean. The festival was dedicated both to Delian and
Pythian Apollo, which explains the content of the Hymn. See Burkert 58–59 and Aloni
35–68. To honour the god, Polycrates dedicated to him the island of Rhenia, which, it
was rumored, he connected to Delos by chain (Th. 3.104.2).
69
Shapiro 48–49.
540 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

Delphi were merchants from Crete, it is clear that Athens is in the middle of the
axis that is formed by the people who are connected either with the Pythian or the
Delian Apollo. Athens occupies a similar position in Aeschylus’ Eumenides and
Limenius’ Paean. In both poetic accounts Athens is in the middle of Apollo’s
route from Delos to Delphi.
Putting forward a number of interesting arguments, Aloni identifies a
latent sarcastic tone towards Delphi in the Pythian part of the Hymn,70 which
expresses the anti-Delphic sentiments of Polycrates, who commissioned the
poem, and of the Peisistratids.71 Yet, in spite of the irony that pervades the first
part of the Hymn, does the composition reflect the rivalry between Polycrates and
Peisistratus on the one hand and the Delphic oracle on the other? There are some
doubts since we know that Peisistratus was a very pious tyrant. The temples in
honour of the Pythian Apollo, which existed or were built in Athens during his
tyranny, bear witness to his determination to propitiate the god of Delphi. Alan
Shapiro suggested that the temple of Apollo Patroos was built in Athens during
Peisistratus’ third tyranny and that Peisistratus’ initiative was not a gesture of
defiance toward the god of Delphi, as has been assumed, but expressed the effort
of the tyrant to honour Apollo.72
In my view it was not Apollo’s sanctuary that was the target of sarcasm
in the Hymn, but the Alcmaeonids, the rivals of the Peisistratids, who exercised
influence over Delphi at the time. In verses 294–99, where the building of the
Delphic temple is mentioned, there is no allusion whatsoever to the contribution
of the Alcmaeonids.73 It is said that Phoebus laid the foundation, that Trophonius
and Agamedes placed on top of it the stone floor, and numerous generations of
people built the temple.74 Through the expression ajqevsfata fufll∆ ajnqrwvpwn
(298), the poet of the Hymn minimizes the role that the Alcmaeonids played, thus
70
Concerning the composition and the question of the unity of the Homeric Hymn
see Förstel 20–62. I am convinced by the arguments of those who support its unity. See
Kakridis; Floratos; Miller 8–9 and 111–17; Strauss Clay 17–19. According to them, the
Homeric Hymn integrates the Delian and Pythian traditions. Nagy 1979: 9 interprets the
two traditions as the reflection of the “social fusion of two distinct audiences.” For
Martin 2000 the poem combines intentionally two different poems. Each of them has
been composed by a poet in competition. For the parallelisms between the two parts, see
West 162; Thalmann 64–73; Förstel 51–52 and Martin 2000.
71
Cf. also Mora 113–15.
72
Shapiro 50–52.
73
For the role of the Alcmeonids at Delphi, see supra section 2.
74
On the different stages in Apollo’s first temple-building, see Sourvinou-Inwood
1979. For Trophonius and Agamedes, the two legendary architects, cf. ibid. 233 n. 11 and
247 n. 84 with bibliography.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 541

foregrounding the people’s contribution in building the temple on a Panhellenic

level.

To conclude: I have examined four legendary accounts in which Athena plays a

more or less significant role in the installation of Apollo in Delphi in light of
their political, narratological and religious aspects. The contribution of the
goddess in Apollo’s installation at Delphi in the Iphigenia in Tauris undoubtedly
strengthens the close ties Athens wanted to maintain with Delphi. At the same
time, it is modeled on the solidarity that characterizes the relationship between
Orestes and Iphigenia. The Euripidean variant shares with the other three
narratives the perception that the cooperation of Apollo with Athena is
instrumental in the transition from savagery to civilization. A similar positive
perception of Apollo and his oracle as civilizing force informs the other three
narratives too, which, however, display highly political motivation as well. In the
Homeric Hymn to Apollo, the episode of Typhaon and its causal relationship to
Athena’s birth links Athens and its rulers on the one hand with Samos and
Polycrates and on the other with the famous Panhellenic sanctuaries of Delphi
and Delos. Similarly, the remarkably close collaboration of Athena with Apollo
in the Eumenides brings out the great antiquity of the ties that bind Athens with
the Delphic Oracle, the instrumental role of its goddess and citizens in the
installation of the god, and therefore the prestige of the city of Athens. The
Paean of Aristonoos shows a similar tendency to foreground the ties of Athena
with Delphi, not from an Athenian point of view, but from the perspective of the
Delphic Amphictiony and its concrete building plans as well as its religious
agenda.
542 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, T. W., W. R. Halliday, and E. E. Sikes. 1936. Eds., The Homeric Hymns.
Oxford.
Aloni, A. 1989. L’aedo e i tiranni. Ricerche sull’Inno omerico a Apollo. Rome.
Amandry, P. 1981. “L’antre corycien dans les textes antiques et modernes.” In
L’Antre corycien I. Athens. 29–93.
_____. 1984. “Le culte des Nymphes et de Pan à l’antre corycien.” In L’Antre
corycien II. Athens. 395–425.
Audiat, J. 1932. “L’Hymne d’Aristonoos à Hestia,” BCH 56: 299–312.
_____. 1933. Topographie et architecture. Le Trésor des Athéniens, FD II. Paris.
Belfiore, E. S. 2000. Murder Among Friends: Violation of Philia in Greek
Tragedy. New York.
Béquignon, Y. 1948. “De quelques usurpations d’Apollon en Grèce centrale
d’après des recherches récentes,” RA 29–30: 61–75.
Boethius, A. 1918. Die Pythaïs. Uppsala.
Bourguet, E. 1932. Les comptes du IVe siècle, FD III, 5. Paris.
Bousquet, J. 1988. Etudes sur les comptes de Delphes. Paris.
Bremer, J. M. 1981. “Greek Hymns.” In H. Versnel, ed., Faith, Hope and Wor-
ship: Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World. Leiden. 193–215.
Brulé, P. 1987. La fille d’Athènes. La religion des filles à Athènes à l’époque
classique. Mythes, cultes et société. Paris.
Burkert, W. 1979. “Kynaithos, Polycrates and the Homeric Hymn to Apollo.” In
G. W. Bowersock, W. Burkert, M. C. J. Putnam, eds., Arktouros. Hellenic
Studies presented to Bernard M. W. Knox on the occasion of his 65th
birthday. Berlin–New York. 53–62.
Burnett, A. J. 1971. Catastrophe Survived: Euripides’ Plays of Mixed Reversal.
Oxford.
Calame, C. 1988. Métamorphoses du mythe en Grèce ancienne. Geneva.
_____. 1995. “Variations énonciatives, relations avec les dieux et fonctions
poétiques dans les Hymnes homériques,” MH 52: 2–19.
_____. 2000. Poétiques des mythes dans la Grèce antique. Paris.
Caldwell, R. 1974–75. “Tragedy Romanticised: The Iphigenia Taurica,” CJ 70:
23–40.
Colin, G. 1909–1913. Inscriptions du Trésor des Athéniens, FD III, 2. Paris.
Conacher, D. J. 1967. Euripidean Drama: Myth, Theme and Structure. Toronto.
Cropp, M. J. 2000. Ed., Euripides: Iphigenia in Tauris. Warminster.
Daux, G. 1942–43. “En marge des inscriptions de Delphes,” BCH 66–67: 137–49.
_____. 1943. Chronologie Delphique, FD III. Paris.
_____. 1945. “Le poète Aristonoos de Corinthe,” RPh 19: 5–11.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 543

Defradas, J. 1972. Les thèmes de la propagande delphique. Paris.

De La Coste-Messelière, P. 1946. “Les Alcméonides à Delphes,” BCH 70: 271–
87.
_____. 1949. “Listes amphictyoniques du IVe siècle,” BCH 73: 201–47.
Delcourt, M. 1982. Héphaistos ou la légende du magicien. Paris.
Dodds, E. R. 1973. “Morals and Politics in the ‘Oresteia’,” In The Ancient
Concept of Progress. Oxford. 45–63.
Dover, K. J. 1957. “The Political Aspect of Aeschylus’s Eumenides,” JHS 77:
230–37.
Finley, J. H. 1955. Pindar and Aeschylus. Cambridge, MA.
Flacelière, R. 1935. “Inscriptions de Delphes du IIIe siècle av. J.-C.,” BCH 59: 7–
35.
_____. 1954. Inscriptions de la terrasse du Temple et de la région Nord du
sanctuaire, FD III, 4. Paris.
Floratos, C. H. 1952. “ JO JOmhrikov" u{mno" eij" jApovllwna,” Athena 56: 286–
309.
Fontenrose, J. 1980. Python. A Study of Delphic Myth and its Origins. Berkeley.
Förstel, K. 1979. Untersuchungen zum homerischen ‘Apollonhymnos.’ Bochum.
Furley, W. D. and J. M. Bremer. 2001. Eds., Greek Hymns. Volume I: The Texts
in Translation. Volume II: Greek Texts and Commentary. Tübingen.
Gentili, B. 1984. Poesia e pubblico nella Grecia antica da Omero al V secolo.
Rome–Bari.
Hall, E. 1991. Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-definition through Tragedy.
Oxford.
Hamilton, R. 1978. “Prologue, Prophecy and Plot in Four Plays of Euripides,”
AJPh 99: 277–302.
Henrichs, A. 1978. “Greek Maenadism from Olympias to Messalina,” HSCPh 82:
121–60.
Janko, R. 1982. Homer, Hesiod and the Hymns. Diachronic Development in Epic
Diction. Cambridge.
Jones, L. A. 1987. “The Role of Ephialtes in the Rise of Athenian Democracy,”
CA 6: 55–76.
Kahil, L. 1977. “L’Artémis de Brauron : Rites et mystère,” AK 20: 86–98.
_____. 1988. “Le sanctuaire de Brauron et la religion grecque,” CRAI: 799–813.
Kakridis, J. T. 1937. “Zum homerischen Apollonhymnos,” Philologus 92: 104–
108.
Kearns, E. 1989. The Heroes of Attica. London.
Kitto, H. D. F. 19733. Greek Tragedy: A Literary Study. London.
Lanza, D. 1989. “Una ragazza, offerta al sacrificio . . .,” QS 29–30: 5–22.
544 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

Lerat, L. 1985. “Les ‘énigmes de Marmaria’,” BCH 109: 255–64.

Lloyd-Jones, H. 1983. “Artemis and Iphigenia,” JHS 103: 87–102.
Loraux, N. 1981. Les enfants d’Athéna. Idées athéniennes sur la citoyenneté et la
division des sexes. Paris.
Macleod, C. W. 1982. “Politics and the Oresteia,” JHS 102: 124–44.
Maehler, H. 1989. Ed., Pindari carmina cum fragmentis. Pars II: Fragmenta.
Indices. Leipzig.
Martin, R. P. 1992. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the
Iliad. Ithaca, NY.
_____. 2000. “Synchronic Aspects of Homeric Performance: The Evidence of the
Hymn to Apollo.” In A. M. Gonzavl ez de Tobia, ed., Una nueva visiovn de la
cultura griega antigua bacia el fin del milenio. La Plata. 403–32.
Masaracchia, E. 1984. “Ifigenia Taurica: Un dramma in lieto fine?,” QUCC 47:
111–23.
Miller, A. M. 1986. From Delos to Delphi. A Literary Study of the Homeric
Hymn to Apollo. Leiden.
Mora, F. 1983. “Policrate e il sanctuario du Delfi.” In M. Sordi, ed., Sanctuari e
politica nel mondo antico. Milan. 105–116.
Nachtergael, G. 1977. Les Galates en Grèce et les Sôtéria de Delphes.
Recherches d’histoire et d’épigraphie hellénistiques. Brussels.
Nagy, G. 1979. The Best of the Achaeans. Concepts of the Hero in Archaic Greek
Poetry. Baltimore.
_____. 1982. “Hesiod.” In T. J. Luce, ed., Ancient Writers. I: Homer to Caesar:
Greece and Rome. New York. 43–73.
Nauck, A. 1964. Ed., Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, Supplementum.
Hildesheim.
O’Brien, M. J. 1988. “Pelopid History and the Plot of Iphigenia in Tauris,” CQ
38: 98–115.
Page, D. 1972. Ed., Aeschyli septem quae supersunt tragoediae. Oxford.
Panagl, O. 1967. Die “dithyrambischen Stasima” des Euripides. Untersuchungen
zur Komposition und Erzähltechnik. Vienna.
Parker, R. 1983. Miasma: Pollution and Purification in Early Greek Religion.
Oxford.
_____. 1987. “Myths of Early Athens.” In J. N. Bremmer, ed., Interpretations of
Greek Mythology. London. 187–214.
Plassart, A. 1940. “Eschyle et le fronton Est du temple delphique des
Acméonides,” REA 42: 293–99.
Podlecki, A. J. 1966. The Political Background of Aeschylean Tragedy. Ann
Arbor.
 APOLLO, ATHENA AND ATHENS AT DELPHI 545

_____. 1989. Ed., Aeschylus: Eumenides. Warminster.

Rabinowitz, N. S. 1993. Anxiety Veiled: Euripides and the Traffic in Women.
Ithaca, NY.
Roberts, D. H. 1984. Apollo and his Oracle in the Oresteia. Göttingen.
Robertson, D. S. 1941. “ The Delphian Succession in the Opening of the
Eumenides,” CR 55: 69–70.
Rosenbloom, D. 1995. “Myth, History and Hegemony in Aeschylus.” In B. Goff,
ed., History, Tragedy, Theory. Dialogues on Athenian Drama. Austin. 91–
130
Roux, G. 1982. “Lôtis: le bain rituel d’Athéna à Delphes.” In L. Hadermann-
Misguich and G. Raepsaet, eds., Rayonnement grec. Hommages à Charles
Delvoye. Brussels. 227–35.
_____. 1984. “Politique et religion: Delphes et Délos à l’époque archaïque.” In J.
Harmatta, ed., Proceedings of the VIIth Congress of the International
Federation of the Societies of Classical Studies. Budapest. 97–105.
_____. 1989. “Problèmes delphiques d’architecture et d’épigraphie. I: les selides
du temple. II: l’Hoplothèque. III: l’oikos double d’Athéna,” RA N. S. 1: 23–
64.
Rutherford, I. 2001. Pindar’s Paeans. A Reading of the Fragments with a Survey
of the Genre. Oxford.
Said, S. 1983. “Concorde et civilisation dans les Euménides. (Euménides, vv.
858–866 et 976–987).” In Théâtre et spectacles dans l’Antiquité: Actes du
Colloque de Strasbourg, 5–7 novembre 1981. Leiden. 97–121.
_____. 1984. “Grecs et barbares dans les tragédies d’Euripide,” Ktema 9: 27–53.
Savnchez, P. 2001. L’Amphictionie des Pyles et de Delphes. Recherches sur son
rôle historique, des origines au IIe siècle de notre ère. Stuttgart.
Sansone, D. 1978. “A Problem in Euripides’ Iphigenia in Tauris,” RhM 121: 35–
47.
Shapiro, H. A. 1989. Art and Cult under the Tyrants in Athens. Mainz am Rhein.
Smertenko, C. M. 1932. “The Political Sympathies of Aeschylus,” JHS 52: 233–
35.
Smith, O. L. 1976. Ed., Scholia graeca in Aeschylum quae exstant omnia, Pars I.
Leipzig.
Sommerstein, A. H. 1989. Ed., Aeschylus: Eumenides. Cambridge.
Sourvinou-Inwood, C. 1979. “The Myth of the First Temples at Delphi,” CQ N.S.
29: 231–51.
_____. 1987. “Myth as History: The Previous Owners of the Delphic Oracle.” In
J. Bremmer, ed., Interpretations of Greek Mythology. London. 215–41.
Strachan, J. C. G. 1976. “Iphigenia and Human Sacrifice in Euripides’ Iphigenia
546 M. VAMVOURI RUFFY

Taurica,” CPh 71: 131–40.

Strauss Clay, J. 1989. The Politics of Olympus. Form and Meaning in the Major
Homeric Hymns. Princeton.
Thalmann, W. G. 1984. Conventions of Form and Thought in Early Greek Epic
Poetry. Baltimore.
Vamvouri Ruffy, M. 2004. La fabrique du divin: Les Hymnes de Callimaque à la
lumière des Hymnes homériques et des Hymnes épigraphiques. Liège.
Villanueva Puig, M.-C. 1986. “A propos des thyiades de Delphes.” In
L’association dionysiaque dans les sociétés anciennes. Actes de la table
ronde organisée par l’Ecole française de Rome, Rome 24–25 mai 1984.
Rome.
Weil, H. 1902. Etudes de littérature et de rythmique grecques. Textes littéraires
sur papyrus et sur pierre. Paris.
Welwei, K.-W. 1992. Athen. Vom neolithischen Siedlungsplatz zur archaischen
Grosspolis. Darmstadt.
West, M. L. 1975. “Cynaethus’ Hymn to Apollo,” CQ 25: 161–70.
Wolff, C. 1992. “Euripides’ Iphigenia among the Taurians: Aetiology, Ritual,
and Myth,” CA 11: 308–34.
Zeitlin, F. 1978. “The Dynamics of Misogyny: Myth and Mythmaking in the
Oresteia,” Arethusa 11: 149–84.