Accelerat ing t he world's research.

“Apollo in Greek Tragedy: Orestes

and the God of Initiation”, in: J.
Solomon (ed.), Apollo. Origins and
Influenc...
Anton Bierl

Want more papers like

this?

Download a PDF Pack of

related papers

Search Academia's catalog of

22 million free papers

Downloaded from Academia.edu 
 Apollo in Greek Tragedy:

Orestes and the God of Initiation

Anton Bierl

[For William M. Calder III on his 60th birthday]

Apollo has often been characterized as the most 'Greek' of the gods. Guthrie´s opinion
is paradigmatic, designating him "the very embodiment of the Hellenic spirit. Everything that
marks off the Greek outlook from that of other peoples, and in particular from the barbarians
who surrounded them - beauty of every sort, whether of art, music, poetry or youth, sanity
and moderation - all are summed up in Apollo."i For Nietzsche, Apollo is primarily the god of
visual art and subsequently the god of dreams, appearance, and illusion, the principle of an
Apolline Bilderwelt and principium individuationis standing in sharp antithesis to Dionysus.ii
But these statements seem to be the result of nothing more than the ongoing expression of
Winckelmann´s idealistic view of Apollo as a god of serenity in his Belvedere form.
In tragedy, however, Apollo appears to have a completely different characterization.
Only in cultic scenes, where the chorus praises the god, does the idyllic view shine through in
a rather opaque way. But wherever else he is mentioned and reflected upon, whether through
the voice of tragic characters or when he himself appears on the stage, he is an awful, horrible
god who lacks all the measure generally attributed to his Delphic aspect of µηδὲν ἄγαν
(nothing in excess). At the very least he is ambivalent, as are all the gods in tragedy. Standing
beyond the sphere of humanity, they cannot be comprehended within human categories. As a
result, instead of being a permanent resource for help in the tragic play, they tend to become a
terrible threat for mankind. Apollo in particular forces some characters into tragic situations
and then, even when he participates in the action, seems to be strangely detached, remaining
as ever the 'God of Afar,' as he was justly designated by Walter F. Otto.iii
Suprisingly there has been little research done on the specific function of individual
gods in Greek tragedy. While many interpreters discuss the tragedians´ apparent hostility
towards Apollo, especially in the case of Euripides, and others, in articles on such dramas as
Eumenides, Ion and Orestes, understand his role as key to the interpretation of the entire
play,iv there are to my knowledge only two relevant studies which try to provide insight into
Apollo´s nature in tragedy. Winfried Elliger, in the Festschrift for the 65th birthday of his
teacher Wolfgang Schadewaldt, discusses Apollo in Sophocles.v In his opinion, the Sophoclean
Apollo -- not as an anthropomorphic figure but as an ethical (Apolline) principle -- is the
dominant god, decisively operating through the process of purification and knowledge. In a
neo-idealistic way, all negative signs of the god, even if there are not so many in the work of
Sophocles, are neglected.
In contrast is the work of Deborah Roberts. Although concentrating on The Oresteia, she
tries briefly to treat the subject as a whole.vi Her analysis puts a strong emphasis on the
ambiguity of Apollo. Observing our shifting views of the god caused by the contrast between
an optimistic future and the devastating, tragic present, between human expectation and final
outcome, she finds the ambiguity to be "in large measure a function of his oracular role."vii
Unfortunately, Roberts does not base her argument on "Religionsgeschichte." There is no
doubt that Apollo in tragedy is mainly the god of the Delphic oracle, but that is not his
exclusive role. Therefore, her unilinear explanation of Apollo´s ambivalence confuses one
particular aspect of the god´s appearance with his whole nature. I believe that Apollo is
fundamentally ambivalent not only as oracular god, but, as all gods in tragedy, in his entire
personality. The bow and the lyre symbolize the παλίντροπος ἁρµονίη in him.viii In a very
similar way, the character of his alleged opposite, Dionysus, floats between extreme polarities.
He can be violent and at the same time gentle, dark and bright, old and new, polluting and
purifying, far and near, outside and inside, infecting and healing, devastating and
integrating.ix
Apollo is also in other respects comparable to Dionysus. As god of the Muses, choral
dance, and music, Apollo is also responsible for the dramatic process as a whole, a function
that Dionysus as the patron of drama could borrow from him. Especially in this dramatically
self-referential aspect, they are almost interchangeable and very often mentioned together.
This applies above all to the type of choral songs which express ecstatic happiness in sharp
contrast to the catastrophe which follows immediately.x This inner tension was apparently
available to the tragedians as a dramatic device. In cult, Dionysus and Apollo are both
supposed to create idyllic happiness, and that is why dramatic characters who are closely
linked to the cult of one of these gods cannot understand when their actual tragic experience
conflicts with their positive expectation. Cassandra in Agamemnon as well as Antigone in
Phoenissae worship these gods but cannot grasp how allegedly joyous gods can do them any
harm.xi
These complementary gods are also used in apparent antithesis. In Phoenissae the
expectation of an idyllic atmosphere at Delphi is contrasted with the horrible circumstances in
Thebes, where Dionysus reigns. The dramatic tension in Ion is enhanced by the contrast
between Apollo and Dionysus. The chorus sings of an alleged idyll in Delphi under the
auspices of Apollo, whereas he projects violence and nothing but a negative aspect on
Dionysus and his bloody rites on Mount Parnassus.xii The ambivalence of the Delphic
landscape is actually part of Apollo´s own ambivalence. Thebes and Delphi are comparable
since the Olympian gods are linked with chthonic monsters in both places.xiii The idyll is
always on the verge of catastrophe.
Complementary to Apollo´s positive cultic perception stands the potentially negative
reflection by the mythical tragic characters. As long as Ion judges his god from the perspective
of worshipper and cultic servant, Apollo is idealized as his Olympian master, but as soon as
the mythical complexity of the rape of his mother Creusa becomes active, Apollo is confronted
with increasingly critical questions. Moreover, whenever Apollo appears directly on the tragic
scene, he is far from being the "embodiment of the Hellenic spirit." To the contrary, he is
immoderate, one-sided, irritable, rough, and rude. Despite his responsibility, he seems far
away from the human characters. Even when he is present, he seems to leave them alone. He
has little sympathy towards their suffering, which very often is the result of the oracular god´s
interference in their world. In some tragedies he simply acts in an unjust way -- he cannot
forgive and is responsible for Neoptolemus´ death -- or does not really help his supplicants --
Orestes, Oedipus. But in others we hear that he does not even shrink back from sexual
harassment and rape, in the cases of Cassandra and Creusa.
How can these negative features be explained? Where a negative portrayal of Apollo in
Greek tragedy has been recognized at all, it has often been linked with the historical situation
of the the fifth century BC. The political animosity of Athens towards Delphi and Sparta
(Amyclai) has been held responsible for this tendency.xiv However, even if the historical
situation encouraged such a portrayal, it is hardly the only reason for it. Even if sources
outside tragedy validate this theory, it is still rather questionable whether ephemeral
developments could have had such an influence as to characterize a god as exactly the
opposite of what he is supposed to be.xv
We therefore need to find other motives. I suppose Apollo´s ambivalence can be
explained in part by the literary genre itself. That is, whereas the god is described positively in
the work of Pindar, he repeatedly shifts between extremes in tragedy.xvi But a better approach
to answering our question can be found in investigating a different Apolline feature, wherein
my main thesis is to link these patterns of negative behavior with Apollo´s major function as
the god of the ephebic initiation.
Walter Burkert, in a very persuasive article published in 1975, revived this old but
completely neglected theory already developed at the turn of the century.xvii Apollo´s Doric
name Apellôn should be connected with the Doric month Apellaios and with the Apellaia, a
feast in which young men (ephêboi) were ceremonially introduced into the male community
which gathered in a special assembly (Apellai -- in Sparta the name of an assembly of people)
for this occasion. But it was particularly Jane Harrison in her book Themis who stressed this
ephebic aspect of Apollo. By looking at iconographic representations in which Apollo is
shown with unshorn hair -- the cutting of the hair was sign of the rite de passage, the farewell
to boyhood -- she interpreted Apollo as "the arch-ephebos, the Megistos Kouros," and "youth
just about to be initiated."xviii
Though disregarded for more than half a century, this theory has now been thoroughly
revived in part through Burkert´s Greek Religion,xix and today it seems to be commonly
acknowledged. A recent article by Versnel, which is perhaps the best and most up-to-date
survey of work on Apollo, goes even beyond Burkert and succeeds in demonstrating that
many disparate aspects -- lustrations and purifications, his role as leader of colonization, his
distance, and even his fundamental ambivalence -- can all be linked with his main character as
an ephebos-god.xx
The initiation approach or its inversion has already in some fashion been applied to
Greek literature, in particular to figures in epic and tragedy, egg. Orestes, Neoptolemus,
Hippolytus, Pentheus, Ion,xxi as well as Theseus, Telemachus, and even Odysseus, Philoctetes,
and other Trojan heroes.xxii I on the other hand now wish to apply this theoretical insight on
the nature of Apollo directly to tragedy.xxiii I hasten to add that I am well aware that the
institution of initiation practically did not exist any more in classical Athens and had been
transformed to a period of military service for the polis.xxiv But traits of the ritual scheme could
have survived in myth, the material of tragic plot. Moreover, I have to agree as well with
Versnel, who warns against an excessively uncritical use of the pattern for figures in Greek
mythology. The narrative structure of many simple stories, especially of folktales, can be too
simplistically linked with the general, three phase model of Gennep's rite de passage --
separation, transition, and incorporation. We should not deduce an initiatory pattern merely
on the basis of signals that can -- but must not necessarily -- be relevant elements in a scheme
of puberty rites.xxv
Nevertheless, I propose that a specific link with Apollo, the god of initiation, can at least
indicate a possible ephebic interpretation, so I will concentrate in the following on Orestes who
is without question linked to Apollo. I want to show that Apollo and his protégé, whom the
god leads to initiation, are presented in a negative light specifically because the tragic actions
focus on Orestes during his transitionary state of liminality. This phase of marginality is
characterized by the inversion of the fixed order and role-reversal. In tragedy the expected
final integration is often delayed, is perverted, or does not happen at all. Therefore, Orestes
begins to express his doubts concerning the god who is supposed to lead him. From his point
of view, Apollo becomes ambivalent and negative. From a different perspective, in Eumenides
the god of initiation appears to be unfair and one-sided because he fights exclusively for his
initiate.
Let us give a brief survey of the signals which corroborate Orestes´ initiatory status. In
Attic tragedy, Orestes is an adolescent on the threshold of manhood and participating in a rite
de passage with its three characteristic phases. One indication for this is the terminology used
to describe his status; it shifts between παῖς, τ™έκνον and ἀνήρ.xxvi His ephebic status is
additionally revealed by the sacrifice of a lock of his hair (Choeph. 6-7).xxvii Apollo is then
unquestionably his strong authoritative leader, even if in Eumenides he cedes his role in the
final phase to Athena. This is certainly a specifically political concession to Athenian ideology
destined for the Athenian public. Elsewhere he is integrated in Athens (in Eumenides and
Iphigeneia Among the Taurians), but it is Athena who gives "the "arcane wisdom" or "gnosis"
pertaining to social and political realities couched in mythic and symbolic form, especially
theogonic and cosmogonic material, as well as "instruction in ethical and social obligations, in
law and kinship,"xxviii which is usually dispensed by the male leader. Only in Euripides´
Orestes does Apollo also perform this task as a very questionable deus ex machina. Like other
ephebes, Orestes is exiled and remains outside the polis in the wilds wandering astray in the
nature, a feature that may be referred to in his name.xxix In order to reach his goal of
reintegration, he has to undergo a severe crisis of identity and endure ordeals and trials which
demand that he face death and overcome it.xxx
Zeitlin has previously attempted to describe Aeschylus' concern with Orestes´ ephebic
status. She correctly avers that Orestes´ case is not just a simple initiation but an initial
inversion of the scheme followed by other remnants of the pattern:xxxi
The boy, prior to his entry into adulthood, must separate himself from the attachments of
home and childhood to serve out his military term on the wild frontiers, where he is
situated temporarily in a savage state, in a liminal space as befits his liminal position. But
Orestes, the exile banished in childhood by his mother, returns at puberty to his home,
that space made savage and undomesticated by his mother´s action in order to undertake
the most savage act of all.
In fact, in order to effect that separation he must commit a crime, the crime of
matricide, and far from releasing him from his mother and her influence, the Erinyes now
sing a binding song over him to draw him into their domain and keep him there.
Orestes´ true initiatory experience begins only after his second expulsion from the palace
in Argos and is terminated when, reincorporated into society in the third stage of rite de
passage, he returns to Argos now as lawful ruler and successor to his father.
The poet uses the ritual pattern only as basic material. He then embellishes it by giving it a
more complicated structure to convey his own message. This culminates in the pacification of
the two warring parties by the means of peitho ("persuasion"). But Zeitlin, interested in the
"dynamics of misogyny," touches upon the pattern only slightly and does not consider at all
the divine side of the process and the connection with Apollo.
There is an emphatic idea, reintroduced throughout the trilogy, that Apollo leads Orestes,
that he is responsible for him, and that he even forces Orestes into his role by threatening hard
punishment if he does not obey.xxxii In Eumenides the god of initiation is in a double sense the
"leader." He is both lawyer (ἐξηγητής) in Orestes´ trial, his "wise teacher" (σοφὸς διδάσκαλος
Eum. 279) who enlightens him on how to behave, as well as his guide for a limited colonizing
expedition (ἀρχηγέτης).xxxiii
As far as his juridical role is concerned, he can be either the representative of oath laid
before the court as part of the evidence or the court itself, depending on whether more stress is
laid on the transitional or on the integrative aspect. Aeschylus models his Apollo once again
from socio-cultic realities. Apollo Delphinios had a court (ἐπὶ ∆ελφινίῳ), where at least in the
classical period confessed murderers were tried for justifiable homicide under a Draconian
distinction.xxxiv Moreover, this is also the place where full citizenship was granted to young
Athenians after being sworn by oath. In the myth of Theseus, the Athenian ephebe par
excellence, it is the place where Aigeus recognizes his son who returns home from his
wanderings abroad and establishes him legally as royal successor.xxxv
Aeschylus transfers this court to the more politically realistic court of the Areopagus and
gives all the integrative authority of judge and διαλλακτής (mediator) to Athena, whereas
Apollo is seen as the pettifogging lawyer who represents only one party.xxxvi Thus, Aeschylus
gives away the integrative part to Athena, leaving Apollo the completely ambiguous part of
the initiatory transition.xxxvii Therefore, as soon as his mission as lawyer is over, or rather, at the
moment when Athena uses her own decisive vote as judge to declare Orestes not guilty (Eum.
752-53), Apollo disappears. After giving thanks and swearing the oath concerning the treaty
between Argos and Athens (Eum. 777), Orestes goes off stage as well. The end of the play sees
the integration of the other party obtained through Athena´s peithô.
The Erinyes experience their own initiation. The final procession is their rite de passage
from Erinyes to Eumenides. Athena, as the leading deity of this process -- she symbolically
leads the procession as well (Eum. 1003) -- assumes the role of authority and teacher of the
initiates in their social and ethical obligations. She gives instructions in social behavior to not
only the chorus but also to the public, the assembled body of the Athenian community.xxxviii
Already at line 431 the chorus accepts Athena´s competence and wisdom and begs her to teach
them.xxxix Later on in the famous speech in which she establishes the Areopagus as the court
for all cases of murder, she extends her teaching to the entire Athenian people (Eum. 681 ff.).
The purpose and success of her political initiation is to find political solutions to inner conflicts
and not to give in to civil war but to integrate opposition, strengthen the unity of the city, and
concentrate on foreign enemies (esp. 858-67).
On the other hand, as we said, Apollo is the leader of Orestes insofar as he represents a
founding mission of "territorialization." The model of initiation might overlap here with
another function of Apollo as the founder of cities (κτίστης). In specific emergency situations
for a city, a certain number of people were consecrated to the god and had to leave their
country to found a colony somewhere else. As ἱεροὶ τοῦ θεοῦ (Strabo 6.1.9 [260]) they received
a special status of ambivalence -- being holy but at the same time damned and exiled like
φαρµακοί (ritual scapegoats), structurally comparable with murderers.xl But in this case, we
face an inversion of the pattern as well. Orestes does not settle somewhere else but is
reestablished into his own city. However, the act of going away from the city into the wild
and finally being reintegrated again is exactly that of initiation. When Athena finally absolves
him, he gives thanks with words that allude very much to this territorial aspect: ὦ Πάλλας, ὦ
σώσασα τοὺς ἐµοὺς δόµους,/ γαίας πατρῴας ἐστερηµένον σύ τοι/ κατῴκισάς µε (Eum. 754-56).
Through Athena´s actions he is 'repatriated' into Argos. Running parallel to this repatriation is
Orestes´ activity -- also in this case assisted by Apollo -- to establish the eternal coalition
between Argos and Athens. One of Aeschylus´ political intentions is certainly to promote this
treaty; therefore it was much more effective to show Athena as the god who was actually
responsible for it.
For other initiatory and ambivalent elements in the behavior of Apollo and Orestes, let us
look more closely at the events of the Choephori and Eumenides. Orestes does not arrive
alone at Argos. Pylades is on the one hand his equal on the ephebic expedition, but, on the
other hand, he functions as the mortal substitute of Apollo. He comes from the Phocean
vicinity of Delphi and seems like a loyal servant to the Delphic god. He remains silent
throughout the play until precisely the moment when Orestes hesitates to execute the
matricide before the naked breast of his mother. It is then Pylades who warns Orestes that the
order of the god should be fulfilled (Choeph. 900-02).
In the Eumenides, Pylades is excluded altogether because Apollo is present himself.xli
Especially after the recognition of the siblings, the function of the sacrifice of the Choephori is
radically reversed. Instead of appeasing the revenging ghosts, they are called for assistance.
All chthonic forces, even the Erinyes, are still on the side of Apollo, only in the Eumenides we
find now the radical antinomy between Olympian and Chthonic following from the radical
one-sidedness of Erinyes and Apollo in favor of mother or father. The terrible, dark side of
Apollo´s extreme, ambivalent nature becomes evident in the awful threats with which he
compels his agent to fulfill his will (Choeph. 269-96). That is exactly what Marcel Detienne in a
recent article has labeled "L´Apollon meurtrier et les crimes de sang."xlii
In the course of this trilogy and particularly in other tragedies dealing with the myth of
Orestes, the undependable nature of Apollo becomes evident. Despite the purification he
gives to Orestes at the Delphic shrine, he cannot really save Orestes. Although Apollo´s agent
obeys his will, he still has to reckon with the threats of punishment. At the end of Choephori,
Orestes is driven crazy and is in a state of mania. In the Eumenides he is directly confronted
with monstrous Erinyes who threaten him with pestilence and then murder him and drink his
blood. All these visualized threats are in the same way symbolic expressions of the perils
which occur to the ephebes during their state of liminality. As long as the adolescents are
outside, the orders of the god of initiation seem to be cruel and horrible. Once they are
reintegrated, the god is praised. On the other hand, Apollo, the imprudent mentor of Orestes´
matricide, after having killed the dragon Python, is reported to have been as terror-stricken,
maniacal, and fugitive as Orestes himself.xliii
Orestes is a vivid double of the Megistos Kouros Apollo on the Attic stage. The
resemblance is suggested clearly by certain signals. Both wear long hair, meaning they are
both young. The attribute νέος becomes for the old Erinyes a key word for their complaint
about Apollo´s indecent behavior. To be old means to be just (δίκαιος) and to deserve
respect.xliv As Meier puts it:xlv "The argument in favor of the old has thus not lost its force."
But Apollo is new not only in comparison to the Erinyes, if we refer to the myth of divine
dynasties wherein the generation of Zeus overthrows that of Kronos to which the chthonic
Erinyes belong;xlvi he is also young because he is the projection of the ephebes. As such, he is
as ambivalent, one-sided, marginal, and isolated as the initiants under his guide. Both Apollo
and Orestes resort to cunning and trickery.xlvii The chorus call him ἐπίκλοπος (Eum. 149), the
members being outraged because Apollo obviously gave them something to drink (wine) and
succeeded in making them fall asleep. Thus they lost trace of their prey, Orestes, and saved
him from an immediate death by sparagmos. On another occasion Apollo is portrayed
performing a similar action. When his young host, Admetus, whom Apollo had to serve on
earth, was destined to die, his divine guide tricked the Moirai (Μοίρας δολώσας Eur. Alc. 12)
by making them drunk with wine.xlviii The chorus of Erinyes, themselves deities of fate, refer to
this as an attack against the normal order as well (Eum. 723-28).xlix
The role apatê ("trickery") plays in the liminal phase of the initiates is reflected in the
behavior of Orestes. It might even have a decisive impact on the Euripidean development of
the typical mechanêma, or trick. In fact, perhaps this complex and intellectually appealing
element is simply a survival from ritual, originally derived from the pattern of initiation but
further developed as a method for the artist. Apatê, particularly in all other Orestes tragedies,
is certainly a dominant theme. In the Choephori we have the first mechanêma-scenes in extant
Greek tragedy.l Orestes enters his home in disguise and deceives the servants and his mother
by reporting his own death. In some primitive cultures the initiate is considered dead, and
when the neophytes come home after their period in the wild, mothers do not recognize their
sons.li Here the element of deceit coincides with another characteristic sign of the pattern --
death and rebirth. But as a neophyte, Orestes has to free himself from his maternal ties; in the
specific case of the Oresteia he has to kill Clytemnestra in order to avenge his father.lii To
become free from the mother and take the side of the father is the exact same process as that in
puberty initiation.
In this context, we have to reconsider the famous Cilissa-scene. Because the nurse
functions here as a messenger, the scene was often considered an addition by the poet. Critics
often praised the naturalistic touch and the humanity of her speech, and some stressed even its
almost comic nature.liii All these descriptions have certain validity, but it must be restated that
the scene is not an invention of the tragedian; it stems from the tradition in which mythic plots
reflect elements of an initiatory pattern.liv Without doubt, Cilissa is a preparation and contrast
to the following encounter with the real mother Clytemnestra.lv
But if our reading of the Oresteia with regard to its initiatory aspects is correct, we can
determine the function of Cilissa with a little more precision. She is a substitute for the real
mother. She, instead of Clytemnestra, cared for Orestes, and in her speech Cilissa lays all
emphasis on the elementary care of the former baby. During his liminal phase Orestes, though
close to reception into male society, is seen as a baby. Both Cilissa and the real mother do not
recognize the son when he returns home. They believe him to be dead, but his nurse is finally
informed about the deceit and participates in the mechanêma. In order to become a man he
must kill his mother; when Orestes stands in front of his mother to kill her, she appeals to him
as mother and resorts to the significant gesture of revealing her bare breast to her son. The
initiate is reduced again to the suckling baby.lvi He is unable to speak and hesitates to carry
out the command of the god. His comrade must interfere and remind him of Apollo, and this
compels him finally to kill Clytemnestra. Her gesture fails because the bare breast he is
confronted with did not feed him.
Both Apollo as well as Orestes reflect the problematic separation from the mother and the
female in general.lvii In order to gain admittance into male society, Apollo forces his protégé to
kill his own mother and thereby to negate the importance of the female in the process of
generation. As Patrôos, his ideology is to promote patrilinearity. Therefore he shows a blatant
hostility towards women. It is in this context that we must reconsider his famous
argumentation before the Athenian court (Eum. 657-66).lviii His ideology stands for the
dominance of the male. The threat of the mother with her power in the process of procreation
must be denied. Mothers should be exchangeable (the substitute mother for Orestes is Cilissa),
and fathers should have the decisive part in the act of procreation. Women should be merely
vessels of the male sperm which carries all the genetic information. They are destined only to
feed the fetus and nurse the baby until it is mature enough to become part of male society.
But both god and mortals cannot overcome the female principle completely. Apollo left
his mother when he was an infant and came to Delphi, where he had to kill the female
dragon.lix But his crime has to be expiated. Therefore, he must serve Admetus for eight years.
A lyric song in Euripides Iphigeneia Among the Taurians (1234-82) reports that the female
could not be exterminated. Themis creates dreams and almost destroys Apollo´s position as
god of the oracle. He cannot solve the problem on his own but has to appeal to Zeus who
installs him in his former position. Orestes kills his mother and is immediately sued by the
incarnation of the revenging female principle -- by the ghost of his mother and by the Erinyes.
The god who gave the order should help him, but, after all, the god is rather powerless. Real
help and integration can come only from Athena, the incarnation of the male female.
In obtaining their revenge, Orestes and Electra assume the violent character of Apollo. In
reporting the threats of punishment by Apollo, Orestes gives a terrifying picture of his guiding
god (Choeph. 269-96). He is as cruel as the female Erinyes and linked to them through their
desire for the revenge of the father (Choeph. 283). This passage shows that Apollo cannot
deny his "female side" and that the horrible and the uncivilized belong to him as an integral
part of his ambivalence. Electra describes the character of Orestes and herself: λύκος γὰρ ὥστ᾿
ὠµόφρων ἄσαντος ἐκ µατρός ἐστι θυµός (Choeph. 421-22). It is as wild as that of a cruel wolf,
but the wolf is also distinctively represented in Apollo´s epithet Λύκειος or Λύκιος. In other
words, having decided to take over the pursuit of revenge, they become human agents of
Apollo Lykeios. But at the same time, the origin of the cruel, violent aspect of the siblings is
projected upon the mother, as the Apolline wildness lies in the integration of the female
monster Delphyna. Shortly later, Orestes, interpreting the horrible dream of his mother,
assumes the role of the blood-suckling dragon. The Erinyes, themselves seen as wild animals,
particularly as hunting dogs, speak of Orestes as their animal prey. In other words, for the
ephebe the distinction between beast and man fades away.lx
Another important initiatory element in the Orestes myth is the trial. First the initiate has
to face the test to kill his own mother.lxi Then Orestes is not reintegrated, but on the contrary
he has to wander around and his liminal period begins again. In Eumenides Orestes
encounters another form of the typical Jünglingsprobe. During the initiation the boys often
have to fight against a group of elders. In other cultures they are often attacked by spirits or
ghosts.lxii According to Brelich´s description, these figures can be theriomorphous, threatening
to tear the boys apart and eat them or suck out their blood.lxiii The spirits of Clytemnestra and
the Erinyes form exactly such a group. They are said to be extremely ambivalent. Here, beside
all the wild connotations, they represent at the same time the norms of the city and of justice
(dike - esp. Eum. 507-65). This immanent ambiguity is the reason for their ultimate
transformation to benevolent spirits, the so-called Eumenides.lxiv Moreover, by Athena´s
initiative the trial in the Eumenides is transformed into a civilized trial in front of the
institutionalized court of the Areopagus.
Despite his help and direction, Apollo, the god of initiation, is not able to bring Orestes´
initiation to an end. He seems to be the prototype of the initiate who, in spite of the help of the
responsible god, is on the threshold of failure and has to endure an everlasting liminal phase.
His integration in Aeschylus´ Oresteia seems to be the most optimistic scenario among all the
variants of the Orestes myth. In most other versions the focus is completely on the liminality
of the hero. Despite the famous Aeschylean scene and the celebrated acquittal by Athena --
Orestes is said to leave for his home in Argos -- he elsewhere has to remain in Athens and
shows all signs of transitional ambivalence. For example, in popular belief Orestes is reported
to have continually strolled the streets of Athens by night as a drunkard and a clothes thief
who terrifies passers-by.lxv And none of the other tragedies dealing with Orestes ever bring
him on stage as a reestablished man of male society. This becomes evident in both the
Euripidean and Sophoclean Electra which rework the story of the Choephori.
 Let us examine, however, what develops after the terrible slaughter of his mother
Clytemnestra, for Euripides questions the positive outcome of the Eumenides in two other
works which dramatize first the events after (Iphigeneia Among the Taurians) and then before
(Orestes) the famous trial. In Iphigeneia Among the Taurians, Orestes gives a report of the
aftermath of Athena´s famous decision. Contrary to the Eumenides, where all Erinyes are
finally persuaded to give up their protest, Orestes tells us that the group of avenging ghosts
splits up; Aeschylus´ unanimous consensus is criticized as an ideologic illusion. Whereas one
part acknowledged Athena´s authority, the other part continued chasing their victim.
Obviously the integration failed. And the story of flight and wandering out in the wild starts
again. First, the initiate not initiated goes back to where he comes from. He takes refuge again
at Delphi, but the guiding god does not seem to feel responsible any more for his adolescent.
The longer the liminal phase lasts, the more Orestes has to doubt the authority of Apollo. The
failed initiate feels left alone and only by threatening a hunger strike in the temple can he
extort any further guidance by Apollo. Thus the god gives a new order to go to the wild,
barbaric land of the Taurians to steal Artemis´ statue and bring it to Athens. Only then could
Orestes be rescued, that is, reintegrated (IT 965-78).
Compared to the Oresteia, the signals of the initiatory liminality are somewhat enhanced.
The hero is described as enduring a severe attack of mania, the quintessential state of
ambivalence normally under the domain of Dionysus.lxvi The trial with the ghosts is not
visualized but (as in Orestes) internalized in the form of a mental crisis; in the vivid
presentation of the messenger speech, he is reported to be attacked by female phantoms (IT
281-314).
Pylades functions again as an equal ephebic comrade and at the same time as an Apolline
substitute on earth who helps Orestes to overcome his doubts and follow the orders of the god
of initiation (IT 104-22, 716-22).lxvii And this time it is, in fact, a journey from the Delphic
civilization into wilderness. On the savage island the human code symbolized by the animal
substitute of the sacrificial victim is perverted. There human sacrifices take place in honor of
Artemis and Iphigeneia, Orestes´ sister, who was believed to be killed in the famous sacrifice
in Aulis but was actually saved and brought there by Artemis to function as priestess in this
barbaric rite. According to Artemis´ order, all foreigners arriving at the island have to die.
Orestes´ mission to the Eastern end of the world at the behest of Apollo is essentially a
κατάβασις (descent) to the land of the dead. As with many heroes linked with the initiatory
pattern, "he must face and overcome death."lxviii Therefore we encounter as well the
continuous concern with death and rebirth. Iphigeneia actually had a dream in which she
believed she foretold the death of Orestes. Then she almost consecrates her brother as a
sacrificial victim in the barbaric cult, except that the doomed youth springs to life in front of
her to complete the ingenious plot of anagnorisis. But in the Iphigeneia Among the Taurians
the poet did not simply apply the pattern. In an artistic way he intertwined a male and a
female initiation in one play.lxix
The ephebos wandering in the wilds must live like the hunter. Killing animals, he often
comes into conflict with Artemis, the mistress of animals, and he eventually has to die. In
myth this is often linked with aggressive sexuality. Many mythical hunters transgressing
Artemis´ chastity are killed by her.lxx As adolescents develop their male sexuality, they
experiment and transgress the norms during the liminal phase. They are not yet ready for
bisexual partnership in marriage but enjoy sexual freedom, participate in orgies, have
incestuous intercourse, rape women, or have homosexual adventures.lxxi In doing so they
offend Artemis who is specifically linked with the initiation of young maidens.
Orestes and Iphigeneia as brother and sister correspond to Apollo and Artemis.lxxii Virgin
Iphigeneia at the threshold of womanhood was sacrificed at Aulis but taken away by Artemis
to the land of the Taurians where she had to endure a prolonged state of separation.lxxiii The
younger brother during his difficult puberty initiation is guided precisely to this place by
Apollo with the order to carry home the statue of Artemis. He does not know about the
existence of his sister there, believing she is dead, and she is unaware of his presence,
supposing the same of him. The story up to the point of the anagnorisis is one of double death
and rebirth.lxxiv In the rest of the plot, the two motives of initiation are combined in a single
path leading towards achieving reintegration, that is to say, to succeed in fleeing from the
barbarian tyrant and coming home to Argos. Orestes' esteem for Apollo varies according to
the confidence he has in the successful outcome of his trial. Considering the almost
impossible command in Iphigeneia Among the Taurians, Orestes doubts the authority of his
guiding god considerably.lxxv Similar criticism against the goddess comes from Iphigeneia (380
ff.); after the anagnorisis there had been reason for hope that the gods of initiation would
actually help them reach their goal (1012-16). We even expect the appearance of one of them
on the theologeion, but that does not happen.
Orestes and Iphigeneia have to act by themselves. Orestes fails, however, so it is his
sister who has to take charge.lxxvi She invents her mechanêma, the famous mock-ritual. But her
plan to steal the wooden statue by trickerylxxvii in order to reach the end of their separation
makes them resemble Artemis and Apollo. Moreover, the pseudo-ritual she contrives is
specifically Apolline because it is based on purification.lxxviii However, not even when the
flight seems to fail because of the mysterious wave that drives them back to the shore, do
either Apollo or Artemis, though implored by Iphigeneia (1398-1402), come to help. It is again
Athena who takes over the part of the integration.lxxix The final proof that this drama has to do
with initiation is the aetiological installation of two sanctuaries and the corresponding rituals
for Artemis in Attica. Orestes is ordered to found the male initiation cult of Artemis
Tauropolos at Halai Araphenides, and very close by at Brauron Iphigeneia is to institute the
female initiation cult of Artemis Brauronia and to become her priestess.lxxx
Our interpretation also gives a possible answer to Hartigan´s (95) question, "Why should
stealing the agalma [statue] of the Taurian Artemis appease the Furies dissatisfied with the
vote at Athena´s court?" One has to recall that Artemis, in the same way as she is goddess of
the hunter and the hunted, can both cause and cure madness. Orestes is driven mad by the
Erinyes and, in one version of the myth, did not seek protection from Apollo but found refuge
in a sanctuary of Artemis at Oresthasion, or Oresteion in Arcadia.lxxxi With Artemis´ approval
the siblings steal the wooden statue which, as a substitute of the goddess herself, has the
magical power to free Orestes from his attacks of mania symbolized in the hunting Furies and
allow him to come home. All that marks the end of the terrible period of liminality and finally
brings the long desired entry into male and female, respectively, society. The sufferings
Orestes and Iphigeneia had to endure along their burdensome path to initiation in the reality
of myth is ritualized and "replaced"lxxxii in a Greek cult.
A brief glance at Orestes, the plot of which occurs before the mythical events in
Eumenides, corroborates our results as well. Orestes is again the double of Apollo. Indeed, in
this tragedy, besides having Apolline youth and long hair, Orestes even carries the Apolline
bow.lxxxiii The signals of his marginal status during the initiatory process are highlighted by
Euripides. Most emphasis is laid on his mania and disease. He is isolated in this tragedy not
outside in the wilds but inside his native polis, which takes on the aura of barbarian savagery
because of the maniacal behavior by the terrorist gang of Orestes, Pylades, and Electra.
Pylades is now the male ephebic comrade (ἰσάδελφος ἀνήρ [Or. 1015]), who shares the destiny
of the friend. Not Iphigeneia, but his other sister Electra, takes over the part of the female role
in the process of initiation.lxxxiv
In Orestes Euripides shifts the interest away from the traditional action towards the
"effect upon the agent of this god-directed crime".lxxxv In their marginal phase Orestes and his
two associates are left completely alone by Apollo whose order to murder Clytemnestra is the
trigger for the crisis. Therefore, this drama is particularly critical of the god who was
supposed to save them.lxxxvi At the moment when there is no hope for escape, the initiates do
not bother with the god any more and, in their despair, start to act on their own free will. But
the marginal mania turns into an uncontrollable outburst of terrorist violence.lxxxvii There is
great irony here in that Apollo acts as deus ex machina only in this violent play. In all the
other Orestes tragedies he was expected to appear and accomplish the act of reintegration of
the initiates, but as ‘God of Afar’ he was not present. Now he is present, but to what benefit? I
agree with most of the modern critics not to take this epiphany seriously. He is not the god of
salvation; his appearance is so quick and his orders so absurd that he is only "part of the crazy
and chaotic world Euripides has created in the Orestes."lxxxviii
Let us briefly sum up our results: we offer a structural morphology of Orestes as a typical
example of the young, ambivalent ephebe on the threshold to adulthood. He is a double of
Apollo, the projection of the ephebes and the god responsible for initiation. Tragedy, which
emphasizes marginality, tensions, and ambiguities, focuses on the liminal phase of this
process, when all human values are reversed. Apollo´s own ambivalence is mirrored in the
process of initiation: whereas the phases of separation and marginality are negative
experiences, the final integration into male-society is a positive act because it puts an end to
the ephebes´ sufferings.
Unfortunately, Orestes never seems to be able to overcome this status of liminality,
whereas the god who directs him does not seem to be able to bring the process to its successful
end. Here is the reason for Apollo´s negative portrayal in tragedy: on the one hand, as long as
the human hero has to suffer, he puts into question the authority of his protecting god; on the
other hand, Apollo either is not able to attain his goal, though striving in a one-sided way for
the reintegration of his protégé, or, even worse, seems detached from the destiny of his double
and leaves him alone. Either the successful integration of the initiate is not granted, or the
responsibility for it is taken away from Apollo and given to another divinity, in most cases
Athena, the eponymous city-goddess of Athens.
If ephebic status was really a main topic of tragedy, as recently suggested by Winkler,lxxxix our
observances concerning the role of Apollo and the initiatory elements in the Orestes myth can
also contribute to the understanding of Athenian tragedy as an anthropological phenomenon.
In this case, Apollo´s ambivalent and rather questionable role in Greek tragedy would not be
an expression of an anti-Delphic or anti-Spartan political movement but part of the tendency
to illustrate the problematic status of young Athenians on the threshold of becoming active
members of the democratic society and of their concentration on themes of proper or improper
male citizenship.

MODERN SOURCES CITED

Auffarth, Christoph Der drohende Untergang. "Schöpfung" in Mythos und Ritual im Alten
Orient und in Griechenland am Beispiel der Odyssee und des Ezechielbuches Berlin/New
York: De Gruyter 1991 (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 39).
Beye, Charles R. "Alcestis and her Critics." Greek, Romane and Byzantine Studies 2 (1959):
109-27.
Bierl, Anton F. H. Dionysos und die griechische Tragödie. Politische und ´metatheatralische´
Aspekte im Text. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 1991 (Classica Monacensia 1).
Bradley, Edward M. "Admetus and the Triumph of Failure in Euripides´ Alcestis." Ramus 9
(1980): 112-27.
Brelich, Angelo Paides e Parthenoi I. Roma: Edizioni dell´Ateneo, 1969 (Incunabula Graeca
36).
Bremmer, Jan "Heroes, Rituals and the Trojan War." Studi Storico Religiosi 2 (1978): 5-38.
Burkert, Walter (Bing, Peter, trans.) Homo Necans. The Anthropology of Ancient Greek
Sacrificial Ritual and Myth. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of Calfornia Press, 1983
[original German version: Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 1972 (Religionsgeschichtliche
Versuche und Vorarbeiten 32)].
Burkert, Walter "Die Absurdität der Gewalt und das Ende der Tragödie: Euripides´ Orestes."
Antike und Abendland 20 (1974): 97-109.
Burkert, Walter "Apellai und Apollon." Rheinisches Museum 118 (1975): 1-21.
Burkert, Walter (Raffan, John, trans.) Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1985 [German original version: Griechische Religion der
archaischen und klassichen Epoche. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1977)].
Burnett, Anne P. Catastrophe Survived. Euripides´ Plays of Mixed Reversal. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1971.
Calame, Claude Les chœurs des jeunes filles en Grèce archaïque I. Roma: Edizioni
dell´Ateneo, 1977.
Calame, Claude Thésée et l´imaginaire athénien. Légende et culte en Grèce antique. Lausanne:
Éditions Payot Lausanne, 1990.
Detienne, Marcel "Apollon Archégète. Un modèle politique de la territorialisation." in
Detienne, Marcel (ed.) Tracés de fondation. Paris: Peeters Louvain 1990 (Bibliothèque de
l´École des Hautes Études. Section des Sciences Religieuses 113): 301-11.
Detienne, Marcel "L´Apollon meurtrier et les crimes de sang." Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura
Classica 51 (NS 22,1) (1986): 7-17.
Eliade, Mircea (Trask, Willard R., trans.) Rites and Symbols of Initiation: The Mysteries of
Birth and Rebirth. New York: Harper & Row, 1975.
Elliger, Winfried "Sophokles und Apollon," in Flashar, Hellmut and Gaiser, Konrad (eds.)
Synusia. Festgabe für Wolfgang Schadewaldt zum 15. März 1965. Pfullingen: Neske, 1965: 79-
109.
Farnell, Lewis R. The Cults of the Greek States IV. Oxford: Clarendon, 1907.
Garvie, A. F. Aeschylus, Choephori. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Gennep, Arnold van (Vizedoni, M. B. and Caffee, G. L., trans.) The Rites of Passage. London
1960; Chicago: Chicago University Press 1961, 19772 [French original version: Les rites de
passage. Paris 1909].
Graf, Fritz "Apollon Delphinios." Museum Helveticum 36 (1979): 2-22.
Graf, Fritz "Kultur als Macht und Schutzmacht. Zum wissenschaftlichen Werk von Walter
Burkert." Neue Züricher Zeitung Nr. 21 (26./27. Jan. 1991): 69.
Gregory, Justina "Euripides´ Alcestis." Hermes 107 (1979): 259-70.
Guthrie, W. K. C. The Greeks and their Gods. London: Methuen & Co, 1950, repr. 1968.
Harrison, Jane E. Themis. The Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religion Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1912, 19272.
Hartigan, Karelisa V. Ambiguity and Self-Deception. The Apollo and Artemis Plays of
Euripides. Frankfurt a. M. etc.: Peter Lang, 1991 (Studien zur klassischen Philologie 50).
Henrichs, Albert "Namenlosigkeit und Euphemismus: Zur Ambivalenz der chthonischen
Mächte im attischen Drama." in Hofman, Heinz with Harder, Annette (edd.) Fragmenta
Dramatica. Beiträge zur Interpretation der griechischen Tragikerfragmente und ihrer
Wirkungsgeschichte. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991: 161-201.
Hölscher, Uvo Die Odyssee. Epos zwischen Märchen und Roman. München: Verlag C. H.
Beck Verlag, 1988, 19892.
Homolle, Th. "Inscriptions de Delphes. Règlements de la phratrie des LABUADAI." Bulletin
de Correspondance Hellénique 19 (1895): 5-69.
Jameson, Michael "Apollo Lykeios in Athens." Archaiognosia 1 (1980): 213-36.
Jeanmaire, Henri Couroi et Courètes. Essai sur l´éducation spartiate et sur les rites
d´adolescence dans l´antiquité hellénique. Lille: Lille Bibl. Univ., 1939.
Kilpatrick, Ross S. "´When a God Contrives´: Divine Providence in Alkestis and Ajax."
Dionysius 10 (1986): 3-20.
Lesky, Albin Die tragische Dichtung der Hellenen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
19723.
Lloyd-Jones, Hugh "Artemis and Iphigeneia." Journal of Hellenic Studies 103 (1983): 87-102.
Lloyd-Jones, Hugh "Erinyes, Semnai Theai, Eumenides." in Craik, Elizabeth M. (ed.) ´Owls to
Athens´: Essays on Classical Subjects Presented to Sir Kenneth Dover. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1990: 203-11.
Meier, Christian (McLintock, D., trans.) The Greek Discovery of Politics. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1990 [German original version: Die Entstehung des Politischen bei
den Griechen. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1980].
Müller, K. O. Aeschylos, Eumeniden. Göttingen: Verlag der Dieterichschen Buchhandlung,
1833.
Nielsen, Rosemary M. "Alkestis: A Paradox in Dying." Ramus 5 (1976): 92-102.
Nietzsche, Friedrich (Haussmann, WM. A., trans.) The Birth of Tragedy in Levy, O. (ed.) The
Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche I. New York: Russel & Russel, 1964 [German original
version: Die Geburt der Tragödie aus dem Geiste der Musik. Leipzig: Verlag von E. W.
Fritzsch, 1872; critical edition in Colli, Giorgio and Montinari, Mazzino (eds.) Nietzsche
Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe III.1. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 1972: 17-152].
Otto, Walter F. Die Götter Griechenlands. Das Bild des Göttlichen im Spiegel des griechischen
Geistes. Frankfurt a. M.: Verlag Gerhard Schulte-Bulmke, 19473, 19564.
Parke, H. W. and Wormell, D. E. W. The Delphic Oracle I. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1956.
Roberts, Deborah H. Apollo and His Oracle in the Oresteia. Göttingen: Vandenhoek &
Ruprecht, 1984 (Hypomnemata 78).
Sansone, David "The Sacrifice-Motif in Euripides´ IT." Transactions of the American
Philological Association 105 (1975): 283-95.
Segal, Charles "Transition and Ritual in Odysseus´ Return." La Parola del Passato 116 (NS 22)
(1967): 321-42.
Segal, Charles Dionysiac Poetics and Euripides´ Bacchae. Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1982.
Seidensticker, Bernd Palintonos Harmonia. Studien zu komischen Elementen in der
griechischen Tragödie. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1982 (Hypomnemata 72).
Silk, M. S. and Stern, J. P. Nietzsche on Tragedy. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press,
1981.
Sourvinou-Inwood, Christine Studies in Girls' Transitions. Aspects of the Arkteia and Age
Representations in Attic Iconography. Athens: Éd. Kardamitsa, 1988.
Sourvinou-Inwood, Christine "Ancient Rites and Modern Constructs: On the Braurian Bears
Again." Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies of the University of London 37. London,
1990: 1-14.
Spira, Andreas Untersuchungen zum Deus ex machina bei Sophokles und Euripides.
Kallmünz: Verlag Michael Lassleben, 1960.
Thomson, George The Oresteia of Aeschylus (with notes by Headlam, Walter), Text and
Commentary. I. Amsterdam/Prague: Adolf M. Hakkert/Academia, 19662
Tierney, M. "The Mysteries and the Oresteia." Journal of Hellenic Studies 57 (1937): 11-21.
Turner, Victor W. The Forest of Symbols. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967.
Vernant, Jean-Pierre (J. Lloyd, trans.) Myth and Society in Ancient Greece. Brighton/Sussex:
Harvester Press, 1980.
Vernant, Jean-Pierre "Tensions and Ambiguities in Greek Tragedy," in Vernant, Jean–Pierre
and Vidal-Naquet, Pierre (J. Lloyd, trans.), Myth and Tragedy in Ancient Greece. New York:
Zone Books, 1988: 29-48 and 417-22.
Vernant, Jean-Pierre "Artemis and Rites of Sacrifice, Initiation, and Marriage," in Vernant,
Jean-Pierre (Zeitlin, Froma I., ed.) Mortals and Immortals. Collected Essays. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1991: 207-19.
Versnel, Hendrik Simon (van Caspel, P. P. J., trans.) "What´s Sauce for the Goose Is Sauce for
the Gander: Myth and Ritual, Old and New," in Edmunds, Lowell (ed. and introd.)
Approaches to Greek Myth. Baltimore/London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1990:
25-90 [Dutch original version: "Gelijke monniken, gelijke kappen: Myth and Ritual, oud en
nieuw." Lampas 17 (1984): 194-246].
Versnel, Hendrik Simon "Apollo and Mars One Hundred Years after Roscher," Visible
Religion: Annual for Religious Iconography: 4/5 (1985/86) Approaches to Iconology. Leiden:
Brill, 134-72.
Vickers, Brian Towards Greek Tragedy: Drama, Myth, Society. London: Longman, 1973.
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre "The Black Hunter and the Origin of the Athenian Ephebeia."
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 194 (NS 14) (1968): 49-64 [French original
version: "Le chasseur noir et l´origine de l´éphébie athénienne," Annales ESC 23 (1968): 947-
64; revised English version in Gordon, R. L. (ed.) Myth, Religion and Society. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1981 147-62 and in (Szegedy-Maszak, Andrew, trans.) The
 Black Hunter: Forms of Thought and Forms of Society in the Ancient Greek World.
Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1986: 106-28].
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre "Hunting and Sacrifice in Aeschylus' Oresteia." in Vernant, Jean–Pierre
and Vidal-Naquet, Pierre (J. Lloyd, trans.), Myth and Tragedy in Ancient Greece. New York:
Zone Books, 1988: 141-59 and 439-52 [French original version: "Chasse et sacrifice dans
l´Orestie d´Eschyle." La Parola del Passato 129 (NS 24) (1969): 401-25]
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre "Les jeunes: le cru, l´enfant et le cuit." in Le Goff, Jacque and Nora, Pierre
(edd.) Faire de l´histoire. 3: Nouveaux objets. Paris: Gallimard, 1974: 137-68.
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre "Sophocles' Philoctetes and the Ephebeia." in Vernant, Jean–Pierre and
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre (J. Lloyd, trans.), Myth and Tragedy in Ancient Greece. New York:
Zone Books, 1988: 161–79 and 452-64.
Vidal-Naquet, Pierre "The Black Hunter Revisited." Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological
Society 212 (NS 32) (1986) 126-44.
Winkler, John J. "The Ephebes´ Song: Tragôidia and Polis." in Winkler, John J. and Zeitlin,
Froma I. (eds.) Nothing to Do with Dionysos? Athenian Drama in Its Social Context.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990: 20-62.
Zeitlin, Froma I. "The Dynamics of Misogyny: Myth and Mythmaking in the Oresteia."
Arethusa 11 (1978): 149-84.
Zeitlin, Froma I. "Mysteries of Identity and Designs of the Self in Euripides´ Ion." Proceedings
of the Cambridge Philological Society 215 (NS 35) (1989): 144-97.

i
See W. K. C. Guthrie, The Greeks and their Gods (London 1950) 73.
ii
F. Nietzsche (WM. A Haussmann, trans.), The Birth of Tragedy (New York 1964) §§ 1 ff., pp.
21 ff., esp. § 1, pp. 24-26. See M. S. Silk and J. P. Stern, Nietzsche on Tragedy (Cambridge 1981)
170-71 and 406, n. 89.

iii
W. F. Otto, Die Götter Griechenlands 4 (Frankfurt a. M. 1956) 77.
iv
In these plays especially, much discussion has arisen about how to explain the contrast
between a questionable portrayal during the play and an ultimately happy ending. Whereas
some tend to see the outcome as the final proof of the integrity of the god (e. g., A. Spira,
Untersuchungen zum Deus ex machina bei Sophokles und Euripides [Kallmünz 1960]), others
want to characterize the irony of the ending as the inevitable result of what has come earlier.
v
W. Elliger, "Sophokles und Apollon," in H. Flashar and K. Gaiser, eds., Synusia. Festgabe für
Wolfgang Schadewaldt zum 15. März 1965 (Pfullingen 1965) 79-109.
vi
D. H. Roberts, "Apollo and his Oracle in the Oresteia," Hypomnemata 78 (1984) 73-120 and
passim.
vii
Ibid. 84.
viii
Heraclitus 22 B 51 D.-K. The most recent treatment of Apollo in the plays of Euripides by
K. Hartigan, "Ambiguity and Self-Deception. The Apollo and Artemis Plays of Euripides,"
Studien zur klassischen Philologie 50 (Frankfurt a. M. 1991) passim, seems to share the basic
conviction of a total ambiguity of Apollo, though the author does not base her argumentation
on "Religionsgeschichte" either.
ix
For the ambivalence, see H. S. Versnel, "Apollo and Mars One Hundred Years after Roscher,"
Visible Religion 4/5 (1985/86) 142. On the complementary character of Apollo and Dionysus,
see A. F. H. Bierl, "Dionysos und die griechische Tragödie. Politische und ´metatheatralische´
Aspekte im Text," Classica Monacensia 1 (1991) 91-99, and C. Calame, Thésée et l´imaginaire
athénien. Légende et culte en Grèce antique (Lausanne 1990) 364-69.
x
Cf. Soph. OT (1086-1109), esp. 1089-1102, Trach. 205-24, where Apollo is mentioned together
with his sister Artemis, herself master of female choruses, and HF 673-700. The tragic paian,
the rejoicing song of jubilee in Apolline cult, very often integrates Dionysus, as in the second
and third passages cited here. See also the Paean of Philodamus, Coll. Alex., ed. Powell, 165-
71.
xi
In the case of Cassandra, the chorus as a cultic group cannot understand it either and "holds
Apollo alien to the realm of lamentation." See Roberts (n. 6) 65 and n. 22 with reference to
Stesichorus (PMG fr. 55) for a similar view. For Cassandra, see esp. Aesch. Ag. 1072 ff. To her
lamentations the chorus answers: τί ταῦτ᾿ ἀνωτότυξας ἀµφὶ Λοξίου;/ οὐ γὰρ τοιοῦτος ὥστε
θρηνητοῦ τυχεῖν; (1074–75). Roberts (84) puts the contrast as follows: "Various of the god´s
other aspects are contrasted (sometimes by the characters themselves and sometimes through
a juxtaposition in the text) with what the oracular Apollo has done or appears to have done;
the god´s actions are contrasted with what might have been expected of him in his oracular
role." For Antigone in Eur. Phoen. 1485 ff., see Bierl (n. 9) 160-62.
xii
For a detailed interpretation along similar lines, see Bierl (n. 9) 103-10.
xiii
For the composite character of Delphi see Eur. IT 1234-57 and the prologue of Aesch. Eum. 1-
19; for Thebes see the myth of foundation in Phoen. 202-60.
xiv
See, for example, H. W. Parke and D. E. W. Wormell, The Delphic Oracle I (Oxford 1956) 165-
202.
xv
For a critical view on this thesis, see also Roberts (n. 6) 82-84.
xvi
Recent research on tragedy, especially by the French school inspired by Jean-Pierre Vernant,
repeatedly emphasizes the various tensions and ambiguities which are a feature of all tragic
texts. See J.-P. Vernant, "Tensions and Ambiguities in Greek Tragedy," in J.-P. Vernant and P.
Vidal-Naquet (J. Lloyd, trans.), Myth and Tragedy in Ancient Greece (New York 1988)] 29-48
and 417-22.
xvii
W. Burkert, "Apellai und Apollon," Rheinisches Museum 118 (1975) 1-21. Burkert did not
reduce the god to a scheme, but acknowledged his polyvalent and complicated nature. The
first editor of the inscription of the Labyadai in Delphi, Th. Homolle, Bulletin de
Correspondance Hellénique 19 (1895) 44-45, linked Apollo with Apellai, as did L. R. Farnell,
The Cults of the Greek States IV (Oxford 1907) 98-99.

Themis. The Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religion2 (Cambridge 1927) 439-44;
xviii

citations at 441. As the subtitle of Themis suggests, Harrison followed Émil Durkheim´s
method of explaining religious phenomena through societal events. For criticism on
Harrison´s approach and a complete oblivion of her theory on Apollo, see Burkert "Apellai" (n.
17) 11-12.
xix
The German original, Griechische Religion der archaischen und klassischen Epoche
(Stuttgart 1977) was published in 1977 . It was then translated (with revisions) by J. Raffan into
English in 1985. For Apollo, see Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical (Cambridge, Mass.
1985) 143-49. Along similar lines, see also, F. Graf, "Apollon Delphinios," Museum Helveticum
36 (1979) 2-22.
xx
H. S. Versnel "Apollo" (n. 9) 134-72, esp. 143-45.
xxi
For Orestes in the Choeph., see M. Tierney, "The Mysteries and the Oresteia," Journal of
Hellenic Studies 57 (1937) 11-21; G. Thomson (with notes by W. Headlam), The Oresteia of
Aeschylus2 I (Amsterdam 1966) 46–47., where there is reference not to tribal but, respectively,
to Orphic and Eleusinian mystery initiation. Such ephebic elements as hunt and ruse were
seen by P. Vidal-Naquet, "Hunting and Sacrifice in Aeschylus' Oresteia," in Myth and Tragedy
(n. 16) 141-59, 439-52. For Orestes, see F. I. Zeitlin, "The Dynamics of Misogyny: Myth and
Mythmaking in the Oresteia," Arethusa 11 (1978) 149-84, has applied the pattern in the most
consequent way. For Neoptolemus in general, see J. Bremmer, "Heroes, Rituals and the Trojan
War," Studi Storico Religiosi 2 (1978) 7-9; and for Neoptolemus in Sophocles´ Philoctetes, see P.
Vidal-Naquet, "Sophocles' Philoctetes and the Ephebeia," in Myth and Tragedy (n. 16) 161–79,
452-64. For the failed initiation of Hippolytus, see C. Segal, Dionysiac Poetics and Euripides´
Bacchae (Princeton 1982) 187; and of Pentheus, see ibid. 158-214. For initiatory parts in
Dionysus, see ibid. 158-214; and in Ion, see ibid. 186 and F. I. Zeitlin, "Mysteries of Identity and
Designs of the Self in Euripides´ Ion," Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 215
(ns 35) (1989) 144-97.
xxii
For Odysseus, see C. Segal, "Transition and Ritual in Odysseus´ Return," La Parola del
Passato 116 (ns 22) (1967) 321-42; Bremmer (n. 21) 15-23; H. S. Versnel (P. P. J. van Caspel,
trans.), "What's Sauce for the Goose Is Sauce for the Gander: Myth and Ritual, Old and New,"
in L. Edmunds, ed., Approaches to Greek Myth (Baltimore and London 1990) 56-58 (with 83–
85 [Dutch version: "Gelijke monniken, gelijke kappen: Myth and Ritual, oud en nieuw,"
Lampas 17 (1984) 218-24 (with 242–44)]. For Telemachus, see J. J. Winkler, "The Ephebes´
Song: Tragôidia and Polis," in J. J. Winkler and F. I. Zeitlin, eds., Nothing to Do with Dionysos?
Athenian Drama in Its Social Context (Princeton 1990) 28; and U. Hölscher, Die Odyssee. Epos
zwischen Märchen und Roman2 (München 1989) 251-58 and 344-45. Hölscher uses the same
method I will propose, i.e. to link the pattern of initiation directly to Apollo (referring to
Burkert as well) in order to demonstrate ephebic elements in the structure of Odyssey. He lays
emphasis on the fact that the choice of a new husband and the famous bow-trial for
Telemachus (a reflex of the "Jünglingsprobe") was fixed on the feast of Apollo by Penelope.
See also, C. Auffarth, "Der drohende Untergang. "Schöpfung" in Mythos und Ritual im Alten
Orient und in Griechenland am Beispiel der Odyssee und des Ezechielbuches,"
Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 39 (Berlin / New York 1991) 427–29. For
Telemachus, 420-29 and 440-46. For Theseus, see H. Jeanmaire, Couroi et Courètes (Lille 1939)
227-375, and the list in Calame Thésée (n. 9) 461, n. 77 (with 432-35). For Achilleus, see Burkert
"Apellai" (n. 17) 19 ("Spiegelbild des Gottes in der unauflöslichen Polarität des Opfers") and
Bremmer 7, n. 12. For Philoctetes, see Bremmer 9-15.
xxiii
Concentration on the topic of ephebic initiation is part of a revolutionary change in
"Religionswissenschaft" towards a social and anthropological science in the Durkheimian
sense. Fritz Graf, in a newspaper article about his teacher Burkert ("Kultur als Macht und
Schutzmacht. Zum wissenschaftlichen Werk von Walter Burkert," Neue Züricher Zeitung
26./27. Jan. 1991, Nr. 21, 69) called this phenomenon "Paradigmenwechsel." In addition to J.-P.
Vernant and W. Burkert (P. Bing, trans.), Homo Necans (Berkeley/Los Angeles 1983
[originally: Berlin 1972]), Graf mentions A. Brelich, Paides e Parthenoi (Rome 1969), the
modern standard-work on initiation. Other relevant works are A. van Gennep, The Rites of
Passage2 (Chicago 1961 [originally Paris 1909]); H. Jeanmaire, Couroi et Courètes (Lille 1939);
V. Turner, The Forest of Symbols (Ithaca, NY 1967), esp. 93-111; P. Vidal-Naquet, "The Black
Hunter and the Origin of the Athenian Ephebeia," Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological
Society 194 [ns 14] (1968) [originally Annales ESC 23 (1968) 947-64] 49-64; and "The Black
Hunter Revisited," Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 212 (ns 32) (1986) 126-44;
Burkert Greek Religion (n. 19) 260-64, 448-49; C. Calame, Les chœurs des jeunes filles en Grèce
archaïque I (Rome 1977); and the critical survey by H. S. Versnel (n. 22) 25-90, esp. 44-59 (with
78-85); and Auffarth (n. 22) 429-40.

xxiv
See P. Vidal-Naquet, "Les jeunes: le cru, l´enfant et le cuit," in J. Le Goff and P. Nora, eds.,
Faire de l´histoire. 3: Nouveaux objets (Paris 1974) 137-68, esp. 157.
xxv
Versnel (n. 22 - 56-58), stresses his point with the almost humorous remark that he could
offer proof "that Alexander the Great is a "superinitiation candidate." (58)
xxvi
παῖς: Choeph. 759, 896; τέκνον: Choeph. 757, 896, 910, 912, 922; ἀνήρ: Choeph. 169, 687, 736;
Eum. 225, 752. φῶς: Eum. 231.
xxvii
Some may object that this belongs only to the ritual of mourning and that the lock serves
later on merely as a signal for recognition between brother and sister. But if we look more
closely, he seems to have cut two locks from his long hair, one for the metonymic river
Inachos, that is, for the polis to which he has just returned after a long absence and as a thanks
for his education there (θρεπτήριον), and the second to function as a sign of his grief
(πενθήριον). In the following lines (Choeph. 168–69 and 226), however, the lock is referred to
only as a signal of mourning. That there were two signals for anagnorisis, hair and foot-prints,
has often been criticized in the past. Could it not be possible that the poet borrowed the hair-
sacrifice as a traditional part of a myth showing the tribal initiation of a boy? The recognition
by the lock is not an invention by Aeschylus, but belongs already to the tradition; see POxy
2506, fr. 26, ii, fr. 40 P. The foot-prints, on the other hand, are motivated by dramatic reasons,
for once she recognizes the hair on the tomb of Agamemnon, Electra becomes anxious as to
whether her brother really has come or if he has only sent the lock from abroad. Then, Electra
sees the fresh footprints and realizes immediately that her brother must be very close. Orestes
can therefore come out of his hiding place.
For a similar interpretation see A. F. Garvie, Aeschylus Choephori (Oxford 1986) 86-88.
For the cutting of hair as a sign of puberty rite with the ritual reflection at Koureotis, the third
day of the Ionic Apatouria, the feast where the adolescents are received into the phratries, see
Burkert (n. 17) 18 and Vidal-Naquet, "Black Hunter" (n. 23) 50–51. In general, see van Gennep
(n. 23) 166–67 and Brelich (n. 23) 71-72, n. 59 and 80-81, n. 88.
xxviii
See Zeitlin "Dynamics" (n. 21) 167 citing Turner (n. 23), esp. 100. For the learning of secret
formulas, see Brelich (n. 23) 30 and 69, n. 57.
xxix
The name may be derived from ὄρος, mountain, symbol of the wild uncivilized nature.
xxx
See M. Eliade (W. K. Trask, trans.), Rites and Symbols of Initiation: The Mysteries of Birth
and Rebirth (New York 1975) passim; Index, s.v. death.
xxxi
Zeitlin "Dynamics" (n. 21) 161. See further her criteria ibid. 167.
xxxii
For Apollo directing Orestes, see Ag. 1667, Choeph. 269 ff. and 940-1, and Eum. 64-66, 85-87,
232, 576-79, and 595; for threats of punishment see Choeph. 269 ff., 276-96, and 1030-32, and
Eum. 466-67.
xxxiii
For the ἀρχηγέτης, see Versnel "Apollo" (n. 9) 140-41 and M. Detienne, "Apollon Archégète.
Un modèle politique de la territorialisation," in M. Detienne, ed. Tracés de fondation (Paris
1990) 301-11. For the ἐξηγητής, see K. O. Müller, Aeschylos, Eumeniden (Göttingen 1833) 162-
64.
xxxiv
E.g. Andoc. 1.78, Demosth. 23.74, Arist. Ath. Pol. 57.3. See Graf "Apollon" (n. 19) 14 (with n.
110).
xxxv
See Graf "Apollon" (n. 19) 16 (n. 127).
xxxvi
Apollo calls himself φόνου ... καθάρσιος / καὶ ξυνδικήσων αὐτός (Eum. 578-79). See
especially his often criticized defense at Eum. 657ff. Cf. infra, n. 58.
xxxvii
Aeschylus acts in this case contrary to Athenian tendency. See M. Jameson, "Apollo
Lykeios in Athens," Archaiognosia 1 (1980) 231-32: "... Apollo Lykeios at Athens conspicuously
represents the culmination of the initiatory, integrating process. He is the god of the adult
males, ho[pl]ites who have passed their tests and have been fully accepted."
xxxviii
This aspect becomes particularly important if we accept Winkler´s (n. 22) interesting thesis
that the members of the chorus consisted of ephebes in symbolic military training.
xxxix
πῶς δή, δίδαξον· τῶν σοφῶν γὰρ οὐ πένῃ.
xl
See Versnel "Apollo" (n. 9) 140-41. For the wandering of the initiants, see Brelich (n. 23) 30
and 67, nn. 50-51. The exiled Orestes is addressed as ξένος in Choeph. 674, 680, 684, 703, 734,
741, and 840, and Eum. 436; as φυγάς in Choeph. 940; as φεύγων in Choeph. 136; and as
ποτιτρόπαιος in Eum. 176.
xli
See Müller (n. 33) 131-32.
xlii
M. Detienne, "L´Apollon meurtrier et les crimes de sang," Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura
Classica 51 (ns 22, 1) (1986) 7-17. Apollo´s threats include mania, disease, and attacks by
Erinyes.
xliii
See Paus. 2.7.7-9; 2.30.3, and Detienne (n. 42) 14-15.
xliv
For pejorative statements referring to the new, see Eum. 150, 162, 490, 731, 778-79, and 808-
09. Cf. judgments referring to old in Eum. 172, 778-79. 808-09, 838, 847-48, and 882-83.
xlv
C. Meier (D. McLintock, trans.), The Greek Discovery of Politics (Cambridge, Mass. 1990)
100. See also, ibid. 195-96.
xlvi
Meier (n. 45) 98-101, shows that Aeschylus, in exploiting the antinomy of old-new, used the
myth of the divine dynasties to emphasize the opposition between the contending parties.
xlvii
For tricky behavior (ἀπάτη) as typical for the ephebes see Vidal-Naquet "Black Hunter" (n.
23) 53-54, 61-62, and Vidal-Naquet "Philoctetes" (n. 21) 161-62.
xlviii
Apollo repeatedly concerns himself with cheating the fates and rescuing his young protégés
from the death which threatens the initiants during the phase of liminality. The direct
exchange between Apollo and Thanatos in the prologue of Alcestis reveals this concern quite
accurately. After the first trick, Apollo tries to cheat destiny a second and third time. Apollo
makes a deal with the Moirai which allows Admetus to give a substitute for himself; and
finally when his wife is ready to die for her husband, Apollo wants to save her from death as
well. We witness again a young god on stage who shamelessly acts against the honor of an
older colleague.
 Among those critics who question the goodness of Apollo in this play are R. Nielsen,
"Alkestis: A Paradox in Dying," Ramus 5 (1976) 92-102; J. Gregory, "Euripides´ Alcestis,"
Hermes 107 (1979) 259-70; and Hartigan (n. 8) 19-36. More favorable towards the god are C.
Beye, "Alcestis and her Critics," Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 2 (1959) 109-27; and E.
Bradley, "Admetus and the Triumph of Failure in Euripides´ Alcestis," Ramus 9 (1980) 112-27.
An entirely positive portrayal of the god is given by R. Kilpatrick, "´When a God Contrives´:
Divine Providence in Alkestis and Ajax," Dionysius 10 (1986) 3-20.
Apollo announces to Thanatos that this time the destined victim will be saved from the
hands of death by force. But he does not do this dirty job himself. After the prologue, the ´God
of Afar´ disappears from stage. The whole tragedy develops in consequence of what Apollo
offers to the mortals and the obvious discrepancy between the announcement of a rescue on
the one hand and his absence and the actual death of Alcestis on stage on the other. But this
tragedy, produced as the fourth play in the tragic agon, normally reserved for a satyr-play, has
a happy end. We could interpret the entire play as a reflection of an initiation into marriage,
the female counterpart to the reception into the world of military and polis in the case of male
ephebes. See J.-P. Vernant (J. Lloyd, trans.), Myth and Society in Ancient Greece
(Brighton/Sussex 1980) 23.
This might contain the quasi-satyr reversal of the normal pattern. Apollo finds a
substitute for his role of director, that is, Heracles, whose appetite is often portrayed in
comedy. In the phase of liminality and mourning for his wife, Admetus receives Heracles who
enjoys eating and drinking in his house. But as soon as he hears about the fate of his host he
takes over the role of the hero, who rescues the woman from the underworld and gives her
back to the husband. Admetus and Alcestis are initiated into the mysteries of love and
marriage at the same time. Birth and rebirth, a feature of initiation, play a relevant role. Wife
and husband are associated with the specific sacrifice of their hair; see Alc. 76 (Alcestis), 512
and 827 (Admetus).
Admetus wears his hair differently as a signal for his mourning. Thus, the funeral
ritual is again overlapped by the signal of initiation. There arises the question why Heracles
steps in for Apollo, but certainly Heracles is the hero fit to wrestle with Thanatos because he
has fought already with many other monsters and even descended into the underworld.
But Jane Harrison (n. 18 - 380) leads us again to a different path connected with male
initiation. Heracles, like Apollo, is a Megistos Kouros: "He is the prototype, the projection, of
the initiate youth, he as Alexikakos defends the boy in his rite de passage to and through the
perils of manhood." In the mythic plot there might again be a reflection of the actual cult of
Athens. Before the lock of hair of the ephebes was cut, a libation of wine was poured out for
Heracles (Hesychius, s.v. οἰνιστήρια [ο 326 Latte]). Admetus´ hospitality, especially in light of
Heracles' excessive wine drinking, may reflect these οἰνιστήρια. And just as does Apollo, both
Heracles and the initiant Admetus resort to trickery. Admetus succeeds in denying the death
of Alcestis in front of Heracles (Alc. 509-41, esp. 518 ff.), and Heracles deceives his host by
persuading him to receive the veiled Alcestis into his house (1009-36, esp. 1020 ff.). Like the
ephebes, the drinking Heracles is portrayed by the servant as πανοῦργον κλῶπα καὶ λῃστήν τινα
(Alc. 766).
xlix
In their refrain in front of Athena, the Erinyes complain about the δόλοι of the (Olympian)
gods (Eum. 846, 880). They interpret πειθώ as deceit.
l
Garvie (n. 27) 174-75.
li
Van Gennep (n. 23) 75.
lii
Van Gennep (n. 23 - 39-40) shows that the vendetta itself has the structure of a rite de passage.
 E.g. A. Lesky, Die tragische Dichtung der Hellenen3 (Göttingen 1972) 121, in this context
liii

speaks of "schlichten Herzenstöne" and "Töne reiner, unmittelbar empfindender

Menschlichkeit." For tragi-comic tones, see B. Seidensticker, "Palintonos Harmonia. Studien zu
komischen Elementen in der griechischen Tragödie," Hypomnemata 72 (1982) 71-74.
liv
Garvie (n. 27) xxi-xxiv and 243.
lv
Garvie (n. 27) 243.
lvi
In his interpretation of Clytemnestra´s dream, Orestes says he is the serpent-baby suckling
blood from the breast of his mother (Choeph. 540-50). See also the emphases on the word
τρέφειν at Choeph. 750, 754, 762, and 908.
lvii
See Zeitlin "Dynamics" (n. 21) 160-71.
lviii
This argument has been labelled "rhetorical," "meaningless," "frigid," or "absurd." See the
list in B. Vickers, Towards Greek Tragedy (London 1973) 414, 435, n. 47.
lix
There are several names for a dragon reported, e.g. Python and Phoibos. Older sources
speak of even two dragons, one male, the other female. The real enemy of the male Apollo
was the female dragon Delphyna, which etymologically has to do with the uterus.
lx
Cf. e.g. Eum. 111-12, 131, 139, 147-48, 231 with 243 ff. In the same way the prosecutors
consider themselves animals.
lxi
To kill someone is one of the most extreme trials; see Brelich (n. 23) 74, n. 68.
lxii
See Brelich (n. 23) 35-36 and 82-83, nn. 94-95.
lxiii
See Brelich (n. 23) 36; for the sparagmos and omophagia in the initiatory death, see Brelich
(n. 23) 89-90, n. 113; for the theriomorphous character, see supra, n. 60 and Brelich (n. 23) 90, n.
115; for the threat to drink the blood of their victims, see Eum. 264-66, 302. For the assimilation
to mythic maenads who are notorious for the sparagmos and the omophagia, see Eum. 499-500
and Bierl (n. 9) 90, n. 146.
lxiv
For the inherent ambivalence and the change from Erinyes to Eumenides, see A. Henrichs,
"Namenlosigkeit und Euphemismus: Zur Ambivalenz der chthonischen Mächte im attischen
Drama," in H. Hofman and A. Harder, eds., Fragmenta Dramatica. Beiträge zur Interpretation
der griechischen Tragikerfragmente und ihrer Wirkungsgeschichte (Göttingen 1991) 161-201;
and H. Lloyd-Jones, "Erinyes, Semnai Theai, Eumenides," in E. Craik, ed., "Owls to Athens":
Essays on Classical Subjects Presented to Sir Kenneth Dover (Oxford 1990) 203-11.
lxv
See Ar. Ach. 1162-67 and Av. 712, 1490-93. Behind this hero Orestes stands also a historical
figure (see scholia and Eup. fr. 179 K.-A.) which overlaps with the mythical figure of the
Choes. See Henrichs (n. 64) 192 with n. 67. The myth of Orestes the drunkard serves also as an
aetiology of a specific Athenian ritual of the Choes. When arrived at Athens, but not yet
having been acquitted by Athena, Orestes is not received hospitably, but has to eat and drink
wine silently on a single table in its perverse pure form (Eur. IT 947-53). This paradox situation
is another expression of his marginal position: he stands between civic participation and
isolation from the community. See further Burkert Homo Necans (n. 23) 222.
lxvi
For the mania as a characteristic of the abnormal condition during initiation, see Brelich
(n. 23) 85-86, n. 104.
lxvii
He is also husband of Orestes´ sister Electra, which means he has lead her to her initiation;
see IT 915, 922. Moreover, he is Orestes´ only real friend (918) and his σωτήρ (923).
lxviii
See Hartigan (n. 8) 95-96. In n. 26 she pleads for "a serious quest" in Orestes´ mission and
protests against the statement by A. P. Burnett (Catastrophe Survived. Euripides´ Plays of
Mixed Reversal [Oxford 1971] 75): "[...] this journey became for him one of those fairy-tale
trials of endurance by which a hero wins a throne." But Burnett felt instinctively the initiatory
character of this version. For initiatory death and rebirth, see Brelich (n. 23) 79-80, nn. 80-85.
For initiation and marriage linked with Artemis as pivotal features of interpretation of IT, see
J.-P. Vernant, "Artemis and Rites of Sacrifice, Initiation, and Marriage," in F. I. Zeitlin, ed.,
Vernant, Mortals and Immortals. Collected Essays (Princeton 1991) 207-19.
lxix
For the initiatory element in IT, see H. Lloyd-Jones, "Artemis and Iphigeneia," Journal of
Hellenic Studies 103 (1983) 87-102, esp. 98-101. I am greatly indebted to Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones´
interpretation of IT, which considers cult and myth in literary criticism. The common feature
of initiation is only another indication for the parallelism between Orestes and Iphigeneia
which has often been recognized; see Arist. Poet. 1455a7, Burnett (n. 68) 47-48, and esp. the
excellent analysis by D. Sansone, "The Sacrifice-Motif in Euripides´ IT," Transactions of the
American Philological Association 105 (1975) 283-95.
lxx
See Lloyd-Jones "Artemis" (n. 69) 99.
lxxi
See Brelich (n. 23) 83-85, nn. 99-100.
lxxii
See IT 1398-1402.
lxxiii
See also her concern with marriage, which would mean her successful initiation; see
Vernant Myth (n. 48) 23 and Brelich (n. 23) 39 and 96, n. 133. With the promise of marrying
Achilleus, she was tricked to come to Aulis. But instead of being married, she was sacrificed.
The events at Aulis are comparable to a failed initiation; see IT 214 ff., 364 ff., 818-19, and 856
ff. The quintessence of her isolation is at IT 220: ἄγαµος ἄτεκνος ἄπολις ἄφιλος.
lxxiv
Iphigeneia as dead (IT 27, 207 ff., 564, 770-71, and 831); reborn (IT 772 (καταθανοῦσ᾿ ἥκει
πάλιν); between death and life (771); supposedly dead but alive (IT 641, 770-71, and 773);
forced to die (IT 774, 998, and 1002); Orestes as dead (Iphigeneia´s dream - IT 56 ff., 143 ff., 230
ff., 349, and 374 ff.); doomed to death, together with Pylades (IT 102, 643-4, 650, 651ff., 674, 689-
718 and all other references to the sacrifice); Orestes "lives" (IT 568); almost dead, murdered by
his sister (IT 866 ff.); Orestes and Iphigeneia in peril of their lives (873 ff. and 1008 ff.; wanting
to share their destiny (IT 1017 and 1420-21 -- after the mysterious wave drives them back to the
Taurian shore.
lxxv
See IT 77 ff., esp. 77-78: ὦ Φοῖβε, ποῖ µ᾿ αὖ τήνδ᾿ ἐς ἄκρυν ἤγαγες/ χρήσας ... (as ephebic hunter
Orestes sees himself caught in a net like the prey or like his father Agamemnon), 570 ff., 711 ff.,
esp. 711 (ἡµᾶς δ᾿ ὁ Φοῖβος µάντις ὢν ἐψεύσατο·). After the anagnorisis Orestes adopts a positive
view of the gods. He realizes that everything has been guided by Artemis and Apollo (1012-
16).
lxxvi
Orestes remains passive; he implores Iphigeneia to save him at IT 979-80 and 984 ff.; see
also 1004-05 and 1318. By becoming Orestes´ σωτήρ, Iphigeneia practically takes over the part
of the guiding god/goddess. Only in the greatest peril, after the wave was sent to impede
their flight, does Iphigeneia implore her goddess Artemis with similar words to save them
(1398-1402, esp. 1399).
lxxvii
Artemis took Iphigeneia from the altar in Aulis by the same means (IT 28 ἐξέκλεψεν; cf.
Apollo as ἐπίκλοπος Eum. 149). For robbery, see Brelich (n. 23) 85, n. 101. For trickery, see IT
101, 112 (µεχανή), 1029 (ἐξεύρηµα), 1032 (εὑρίσκειν τέχνας), 1031 (σόφισµα), and supra, nn. 47
and 49.
lxxviii
The keyword is καθαρόν (IT 1037).
lxxix
Therefore, I fundamentally agree with Hartigan (n. 8 - 104, n. 50) against Burnett´s tendency
to defend Apollo´s role in this play. The only way to "see how Burnett ([n. 68] 72) can claim
that the IT is based on 'Apolline salvation'," is to recognize the Apolline character of the
contrived ritual, which is concerned with pollution and purification, and the Apolline
behavior, insofar as the siblings use trickery. But the point is that the mechanema consists of a
mock-ritual. Thoas´ answer to Iphigeneia´s remarks that there is need of purification because
the stranger has murdered his mother, has an almost ironic effect against Apollo: Ἄπολλον,
οὐδ᾿ ἐν βαρβάροις ἔτλη τις ἄν. (1174)
lxxx
For further information, see Lloyd-Jones "Artemis" (n. 69) esp. 91-102; Brelich (n. 23) 242-46;
and C. Sourvinou-Inwood, Studies in Girls' Transitions. Aspects of the Arkteia and Age
Representations in Attic Iconography (Athens 1988) passim, and C. S.–I., "Ancient Rites and
Modern Constructs: On the Braurian Bears Again," BICS 37 (1990) 1-14. Artemis is normally
responsible for female, Apollo for male initiation. In some places the rites for both sexes in
honor of Artemis and Apollo can be linked in one festival, as at Sikyon (see Calame Chœurs I
[n. 23] 204 ff.), sometimes this clear distinction is broken. In Sparta Artemis Orthia is
responsible for the ceremonies for males, though females play a certain role as well (see
Calame (n.23) 276 ff.), or, in our case, the initiation takes place in two separate ceremonies for
the single divinity of Artemis.

lxxxi
Pherecydes FGrHist 3 F 135, with Jakoby ad loc. (Ia, 424); for further information, see Lloyd-
Jones "Artemis" (n. 69) 96-97. For the Arcadian Oresthasion or Oresteion, see also Or. 1643-47
and Eur. El. 1273-75.
lxxxii
Orestes´ death has to be replaced by a bloody cult in which a sword scratches a man´s neck
(τῆς σῆς σφαγῆς ἄποιν᾿ ἐπισχέτω/ δέρηι πρὸς ἀνδρὸς αἷµα ἐξανιέτω IT 1459-60).
lxxxiii
This argument can be added to Hartigan´s (n. 8) discussion (133, n. 24) of the question
whether the bow was real or only an expression of Orestes´s delusion. Ion, another double of
Apollo on stage, carries the Apolline bow as well (Eur. Ion 173).
lxxxiv
The telos of her initiation is the marriage with Orestes´ friend Pylades; see El. 1284-87 and
Or. 1658-59. During her liminal phase she complains of not having reached marriage and of
not having born children (Or. 205-06). In Orestes it is not Artemis but Apollo who guides male
and female initiation. Furthermore, he orders also the marriage of Orestes with Hermione.
How problematic this act of integration is, is indicated by the fact that some moments before
Orestes has kidnapped the girl and threatened to kill her with a knife. Also, several individual
themes, always mentioned by critics of this drama, are linked with the topic of initiation. The
theme of hunting characterizes the hero in his ephebic state, the concern with aging
demonstrates the problem of understanding between the generations, and philia underlines
the community of those who have to endure the initiatory process. For literature on the
individual themes, see Hartigan (n. 8) 128, n. 6.
lxxxv
Hartigan (n. 8) 132.
lxxxvi
See Or. 276, 285-87, 416-20, and 591-601 (Orestes); 28, 161-65, 191-93 (Electra), 76 (Helena);
and 955-56 (messenger). For a similar critical view of Apollo in Electra where the siblings are
as well in the marginal phase (here Electra takes over the role of Pylades to remind Orestes of
the orders of the god), see El. 971-81 [Orestes vs. Electra]). Cf. the judgment of Apollo after the
deed at 1296-97, 1302 (Castor), and 1303-04 (Electra).
lxxxvii
See W. Burkert, "Die Absurdität der Gewalt und das Ende der Tragödie: Euripides´
Orestes," Antike und Abendland 20 (1974) 97-109.
lxxxviii
Hartigan (n. 8) 155; for the issue, see 154-56 and Burkert "Absurdität (n. 87) 100. A
positive view of this scene is given only by Spira (n. 4) 144, who speaks of religious "epiphany"
and "σωτηρία," and by Burnett (n. 68) 220-22, who consistently believes in the benevolence of
the god.
lxxxix
Winkler (n. 22) 20-62.