As usual I read your tags always and so you said Apollo did not ask for resurrection of Asclepius and Hyacinthus so i just wanted to share this. About Asclepius death I read it on theoi.com, that earlier authors don't make him resurrect as a god but that's a later development mentioned only by Roman authors like Cicero, Hyginus and Ovid. But still Apollo has a role in Ovid's version
Ovid, Fasti 6. 735 ff (trans.Boyle) (Roman poetry C1st B.C. to C1st A.D.) : Clymenus [Haides] and Clotho resent the threads of life respun and death's royal rights diminished. Jove [Zeus] feared the precedent and aimed his thunderbolt at the man who employed excessive art. Phoebus [Apollon], you whined. He is a god; smile at your father, who, for your sake, undoes his prohibitions [i.e. when he obtains immortality for Asklepios].
So here it is actually because of Apollo the decision was taken to resurrect him as god. And with Hyacinthus, I don't think I've read about Artemis playing the primary role. I know in Sparta there was a picture of Artemis, Athena and Aphrodite carrying Hyacinthus and his sister to heaven.
This is not on theoi.com but I saw on Tumblr it's from Dionysiaca by Nonnus
Second, my lord Oiagros wove a winding lay, as the father of Orpheus who has the Muse his boon companion. Only a couple of verses he sang, a ditty of Phoibos, clearspoken in few words after some Amyclaian style: Apollo brought to life again his longhaired Hyacinthos: Staphylos will be made to live for aye by Dionysos.
So since he is singing inspired by amyclean stories it probably means in that place it was believed Apollo was the one to bring back his lover to life.
Apollo as god of order was very important so i think it shows how special these people (and admetus too) were to him that he decided to go against the order for them 🥺
ANON!! Shakes you like a bottle of ramune!! BELOVED ANON!!!!! I'm littering your face with kisses, I'm anointing you with olive oil and honey - you absolutely made my night with this because, not only did I get the pure serotonin shot of having someone interact with my tags (yippee, wahoo!!) I also got to have that wonderful feeling of "oh wow, have I misunderstood something that was integral to my understanding of this myth/figure this whole time or is this a case of interpretational differences?" which is imo vital for my aims and interests as someone who enjoys mythological content and literature.
I'll preface my response with this: Hyacinthus is by far the hardest of these to get accounts for because his revival itself, as you very astutely point out, is generally accounted for in painting/ritual format which muddies the waters on who interceded for what. I wasn't actually familiar with that passage from the Argonautica - and certainly didn't remember it so thank you very much for bringing it to my attention!
That said, what I've come to understand, both about Hyacinthus and about Asclepius is that in the accounts of their deaths, Apollo's position is startlingly clear.
For Hyacinthus, it is established time and again that Apollo would have sacrificed everything for him - his status, his power, his very own immortality and divinity. Ovid writes that Apollo would have installed him as a god if only he had the time:
(Ovid. Metamorphoses. Book X. trans. Johnston)
Many other writers too speak of how Apollo abandoned his lyre and his seat at Delphi to spend his days with Hyacinthus, but they also all agree that when it came to his death - he was powerless. Ovid gives that graphic account of Apollo's desperation as he tries all his healing arts to save him to no avail:
(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book X. Apollo me boy, methinks him dead. trans Johnston)
Bion, in one of his fragments, writes that Apollo was "dumb" upon seeing Hyacinthus' agony:
(Bion, The Bucolic Poets. Fragment XI. trans Edmonds)
Even Nonnus in the Dionysiaca speaks constantly of Apollo's helplessness in the face of Hyacinthus' fate where he writes that the god still shivers if a westward wind blows upon an iris:
and when Zephyros breathed through the flowery garden, Apollo turned a quick eye upon his young darling, his yearning never satisfied; if he saw the plant beaten by the breezes, he remembered the quoit, and trembled for fear the wind, so jealous once about the boy, might hate him even in a leaf...
(Nonnus, Dionysiaca, Book 3. trans Rouse)
And the point here is just that - Apollo, at least as far as I've read, cannot avert someone's death. He simply can't. Once they're already dead - once Fate has cut their string - all Apollo's power is gone and he can do nothing no matter how much he wants to. And this is, as far as I know, supported with the accounts of Asclepius as well!
Since you specifically brought up Ovid's account, I'll also stick only to Ovid's account but in Metamorphoses when we get Ovid's version of Coronis' demise, he writes that Apollo intensely and immediately regrets slaughtering Coronis. He regrets it so intensely that he, like he does with Hyacinthus, does his best to resuscitate her:
(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book Two. Apollo's regret)
And like Hyacinthus, when it becomes clear that what has happened cannot be undone, Apollo wails:
(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book Two. Apollo wept.)
Unlike his mother, Asclepius in her womb had not yet died and so, with the last of Apollo's strength, he does manage, at least, to save him.
(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book Two. Apollo puts the 'tearing out' in Asclepius.)
But it goes further than even that because Ocyrhoe, Chiron's daughter, a prophetess who unduly gained the ability to directly proclaim the secrets of the Fates, upon seeing the baby Asclepius, immediately prophesies his glory, his inevitable death and then his fated ascension:
(Ovid. Metamorphoses, Book Two. Ocyrhoe's prophecy. trans Johnston)
Before she too succumbs to her hubris and is transformed by the Fates into a horse so she can no longer speak secrets that aren't hers to share.
These things ultimately are important because it establishes two very important things: 1) Apollo can't do anything in the face of the ultimate Fate of mortals, which is, of course, death and 2) even when Apollo is Actively Devastated, regretful, yearning, mournful, guilty or some unholy combination of all of the above, when someone is dead, he accepts that they are gone. Even if he is devastated by it, even if he'll cry all the rest of his days about it - if they're dead? Apollo lets them go. In Fasti, when Zeus brings Asclepius back, he does not say Apollo asked him to - Zeus, or well, in this case Jove, brings Asclepius back because he wants Apollo to stop being mad at him.
(Ovid, Fasti VI. Apollo please come home your father misses you. trans. A.S Kline)
Even Boyle's translation which you used above in your findings hints that Zeus made Asclepius a god because he wanted Apollo to stop grieving. (i.e 'smile at your father', 'for your sake [he] undoes his prohibitions')
And like, Apollo was deeply upset by Asclepius' death - apart from killing the Cyclops in anger, in book 4 of the Argonautica, Apollonius writes that the Celts believe the stream of Eridanus to be the tears Apollo shed over the death of Asclepius when he left for Hyperborea after being chastised by Zeus for killing his Cyclops:
But the Celts have attached this story to them, that these are the tears of Leto's son, Apollo, that are borne along by the eddies, the countless tears that he shed aforetime when he came to the sacred race of the Hyperboreans and left shining heaven at the chiding of his father, being in wrath concerning his son whom divine Coronis bare in bright Lacereia at the mouth of Amyrus.
It all paints a very clear picture to me. Apollo did not ask for either of them to be brought back. Though bringing them back certainly pleased and delighted him, they are actions of other gods who are moved by Apollo's grief and mourning and seek to mollify him. Him not asking doesn't mean he didn't want them back which I think is a very important distinction by the by, but it simply means that Apollo knows the natural order of things and, even if it hurts, he isn't going to press his luck about it.
Which, of course, brings us to Admetus. And I'm really not going to overcomplicate this, Admetus is different because, very vitally, Admetus is not dead. Apollo can't do a thing once Fate has been carried out and Death has claimed a mortal but you know what he absolutely can do? Bargain like hell with the Fates before that point of inevitability. And that's what he does, ultimately for Admetus and Alcestis. He sought to prolong Admetus' life, not revive him from death or absolve him from death altogether and even after getting the Fates drunk, he's still only able to organise a sacrifice - a life for a life - something completely contingent on whether some other mortal would be willing to die in Admetus' place and not at all controllable by Apollo's own power.
All of these things, I think come back to that point you made - that Apollo's place as a god of order is very important and therefore these people are very special to him if it means he's willing to go against that order but, I also wish to challenge that opinion if you'd let me. Apollo's place as a god of order is very important and therefore, I would argue, that it is even more important that it is shown that he does not break the divine order, especially for the people that mean the most to him. The original context of my comments which started this conversation were on this lovely, lovely post by @hyacinthusmemorial which contemplated upon Asclepius from the perspective of an Emergency Medical personnel and included, in their tags, the very poignant lines "there's something about Apollo letting go when Asclepius couldn't that eats my heart away" and "you do what you can, you do your best, but you don't ever reach too far" and I think that's perfectly embodied with the Apollo-Asclepius dichotomy. Apollo grieves. He wails, he cries, he does his best each and every time to save that which is precious to him but he does not curse their nature, he does not resent that they are human and ultimately, he accepts that that which is mortal must inevitably die. There is nothing that so saliently proves that those who uphold rules are also their most staunch followers - if Apollo wants to delight in his place as Fate's mouthpiece, he cannot undo Fate. And, if even the god of healing and order himself cannot undo death, what right does Asclepius, mortal as he is, talented as he is, have to disrespect it?
The beauty of these stories isn't that Apollo loved them enough to bring them back. The beauty is that Apollo loved them enough to let them go.
47 notes
·
View notes
The myth of Apollo (2)
This is a loose translation of Alain Moreau's article "The Antique Apollo: Shadow and Light".
II/ The ambiguous god
The mystery that shrouds Apollo’s origins, this enigma that disconcerts the scholars, had the advantage to allow the artists a freedom of imagination: since the shape of the primitive character of the god is drowned and blurred, he can be depicted as either a god of light, or a god of shadow and death; However, even within the most clear-cut portraits, his complexity remains. Apollo is never a god entirely just and good ; but he is never fully aligned with malevolent powers.
According to the beginning of the Iliad, Homer chose to depict the dreaded aspect of the go. Apollo, angered against Agamemnon’s army, hits them with a terrible disaster, (nousos, loimos), the plague: “A terrible sound came out of the silver bow. He first attacked the horses, like fast dogs. Then, it is men that are hit by his sharp arrow, and the funeral pyres burn hundreds ceaselessly.” Fervent enemy of the Greeks, it is Apollo that throws against the Achaean wall all the rivers of the Mount Ida ; it is also him that hits Patroclus in the back and offers him unarmed to the spear of Hector. And yet, this terrible god is also the one that brings a painless death, and then the cruel arrows become the “soft arrows”. He is hostile to the Achaeans, but he brings a tireless protection to the Trojans. Aeneas, Glaucos, Hector are all helped by him. He constantly assists them, recomforts them, stimulates them, saves them. If his shot brings death, it can also repel evil. Apollo is “the one that preserves” (hekaergos). Throughout the centuries, many epiclesis will attest this trait: alexikakos, apotropaios, epikourios…
In a reverse way, the “Homeric Hymn”, which is all about the glory of this conquering god who is eternally young and beautiful, oes not hide his “boundless pride”, and he is shown easily tricked. Young Apollo does not have the same temperance and moderation that will become the fundamentals of the Delphi wisdom, engraved on his very temple (“Know thyself”, “Never too much”) ; and young Apollo also lacks the omniscience of his father Zeus.
But with Pindar, at the beginning of the Classical age (5th century), he gains omniscience: in the “Pythics” he is described as “knowing the fatal term of all things and all the paths they take”, as “being able to count the leaves the earth grows during spring, and the grains of sand that roll under the waves of the sea or the river, and the flows of the wind” ; and as “you who sees clearly the future and its origin”… As a generous god, he also offers to humanity benevolent gifts, and maintains peace: “It is him that gives to men and to women the remedies that heal cruel diseases ; he gave us the cithara ; the Muse inspires those that please him ; he places in the hearts the love for concord and the horror of civil war. He rules the prophetic sanctuary.” As a son of Zeus, he himself becomes the embodiment of the divine, of the unnamed, of the celebrated “theos”. But Pindar didn’t go as far as to erase the other Apollo, the cruel god of destruction. Apollo takes his revenge over an unfaithful Coronis by sending Artemis, a merciless and blind executioner, to kill her with a brutal death – and so will perish numerous innocents whose sole crime was to live near the culprit.
Aeschylus’ Apollo, contemporary to the one of Pindar, brings a halt to the evolution of the god – and even a regression. In his tragedies, we have a bloodthirsty god that massacres with his arrows all of Niobe’s sons: his wrath is unflinching. Laios disobeyed the oracle: at the seventh door, the god will cause the fratricide of his grandsons Eteocle and Polynice (The Seven Against Thebes). Cassandra did not keep her promise: she will be mocked, captured and murdered. But the god, just like the perjury girl, does not hold his promises: after predicting to Thetis that all the gods will protect her bloodline with all of their love, he kills her son Achilles (The Judgement of Weapons). He is a god that scares people: “Phoibos” is close to “phobos”, fear and scare (The Persians). “Apollon” is close to “apollôn”, “he who destroys” (Agamemnon). The justice Apollo offers is an archaic justice, a vendetta logic: kill the one that killed. When he fights the Erynies within the play “The Eumenids”, he is not above them in any way: they have the same violence, the same bad faith, the same contradictions. And yet… this god is invoked by the messenger of Argos as the savior and the healer (Agamemnon). This imperfect god is the ambassador of Zeus, as it is highlighted many times during “The Eumenids”. This conquering god settles with pacifism on the ancient throne of Delphi: within “The Eumenids”, no murder of any dragon is mentioned. The god of darkness keeps some traits from the god of light.
The regression of Apollo within Aeschylus’ plays is explained by the turmoil of a world that was building: the Greek city was being born among a set of social and political tensions that impacted the way the thinkers saw the cosmos. Euripides’ own regression of Apollo can be explained by a world that is falling apart. The cities are fighting with each other, beliefs are weakening, the gods are falling from their pedestal and are lowered to the same level as mankind. It is the Dioscuri that absolve Orestes of the death of Clytemnestra. And the culprit of the crime is designated as Apollo, which gave “an unwise order” (Electra). A god full of grudges, he never forgives any offense. It is within his own sanctuary, in a treacherous way, by the arms of a thousand men, that he takes his revenge upon Pyrrhus, right as the latter was coming to make amends: “Here is how the Lord that gives oracles, the arbitrator of the law for all humankind, treats the son of Achilles as he was offering reparation! Just like a wicked man, he remembered old feuds. How could he then be wise?” (Andromache). Another proof of his lack of wisdom: he rapes Creusa. “Ah! Do not act in such a way ; if you have the power, practice the virtue! Because anyone who is wicked is punished by the gods. Then, how can we stand that yourselves, that make laws for the humans, be recognized of violating those laws? (Ion).
And yet, the Apollo of Euripides can also be as shining as the god of Pindar and of the Homeric Hymn: “How beautiful are the children of Leto, that she of Delos birthed in the fecund vales of the Isle – the golden-haired god, knowledgeable lyre-player, and the goddess proud in her talent at shooting with a bow!” (Iphigenia in Taurid). The bloodthirsty god can preach for peace: “Go you way, and may the most beautiful goddess, Peace, be in your home with honor.” (Orestes). And, while the poet is very critical of the god’s actions during “Ion”, he still sings the luminous and cosmic beauty of Delphi which, according to him, would have never been as great as it is if it wasn’t for the grace of its god: “Here is the brilliant four-horse chariot: Helios, already, sheds light upon the earth. And the stars flee the ether that is enflamed among the sacred night. The untouched peaks of the Parnassus, drowned in light, welcome for mankind the disc of the day.”
The ambiguity of the god, tied to his origins, is maintained as much within the works of those that criticized him, as in the texts of those that admired and respected him.
32 notes
·
View notes