Ipfamque in pectore Divæ Gorgona defecto vertentem lumina collo. (Æn. 8. v. 438.) The only variation between Euripides and Paufanias is, that the Poet mentions Gorgons in the plural number, but the Antiquary speaks of Medufa alone; nor am I able to fhew, by any other parallel inftance of hiftorical teftimony with this of our Poet, that other Gorgons furrounded this Delphick ftone: The fame Author, Paufanias', speaks of the winged fifters of Medufa, or thefe Gorgons, as reprefented on the curious cheft of Cypfelus in a temple of Juno within the territories of Elis: This circumftance proves the confecrated quality of fuch images. We may easily admit, that the Medufa at Delphi was accompanied with her fifter Gorgons: or that Euripides here indulged himself with the poetical li cence of ufing the plural, inftead of the fingular number: Here then we must reft fatisfied, having already proved the Garlands of the Delphick ftone, the images upon it, and the Medufa within the fhrine fupporting a' ftone. The Reader, who is confcious of the difficulty of tracing historical anecdotes and local circumftances, which illuftrate the defcriptions of ancient poetry, will perhaps wonder that we have already been fo fortunate in a point of this nice investigation, and not rigorously expect any additional evidence: I fhall conclude with remarking, that if the horrible images of Gorgons were placed around to avert the unhallowed touch from this confecrated ftone, no epithet could poffibly be more adapted than the boy of Sophocles which the Scholiaft there explains by απροσπέλαςον unapproachable. ΙΟ 9 L. 5. c. 18. F. 423. 10 Oed. Tyr. v. 916. N° XVII. Verse 229. Muxòv. 221. The recefs. 2 I THE received acceptation of this word applies to the inmost recefs of the temple; which, as Ion here informs the Female Chorus, was liable to be vifited at Delphi, after certain preliminary facrifices: But Dr. Musgrave has attempted to qualify the general fenfe of this expreffion for the fame reason, that in another note he supposes a distinction between xgnsngiov and vάos; the former according to his idea may imply the oracular recefs of the fhrine, and the latter the whole temple: His object is to reconcile the express testimony of Euripides with that of Plutarch; who mentions it as a problem to be folved, why no woman was ever permitted to advance to the xgnsgov, or the place, where the Oracle was delivered:" It is therefore from this alone, and not from the temple itself, that the Oxford Editor imagines, that Females by the Law of Delphi were prohibited: Confequently the word μuyo must not here imply the recefs, which would militate against that interpretation: But this supposed distinction between the words xensgov, as the oracular fhrine, and vaos the whole temple, cannot avail Dr. Mufgrave in this inftance: because Ion in the fequel of the play ■ In his note on v. 233. of his edition. 2 On v. 244. of his edition. 3 Καί τὸ μηδεμιᾷ γυναικὶ πρὸς τὸ χρησήριον εἶναι προσεῖναι. (Εἰ apud Delph. ed. Xylan. vol. 2. p. 385.) expressly exprefsly afks Creufa, whether he comes with her husband, or alone, to confult the xgnsng, or oracular shrine, Σὺν ἀνδρὶ δ ̓ ἥκεις, η μόνη χρηςήρια, (ν. 299.) And Xuthus in another line informs her, that neither himfelf nor she will return home from the xensngiwv of Apollo according to Trophonius without children: Therefore Euripides and Plutarch must be admitted to be irreconcileable in regard to this circumstance. Ido not believe that the policy of Delphi ever excluded Vifitants of either fex from approaching the inmost recefs; nor can I imagine that our Poet would have offended against a custom which must have been univerfally known, had it been established in his time: No other historical paffage, except this of Plutarch, I believe can be produced to confirm the fuppofed exclufion of Females from the oracular recefs of this temple at Delphi: The only instance, which I ever remember to have read in all Antiquity, and which tends to countenance fuch a notion, occurs in Silius Italicus, who obferves that Females were to be prohibited from vifiting the inmoft recefs of the temple of Hercules at Gades, Tum, quis fas & honos adyti penetralia nôffe, (L. 3. v. 22.) Perhaps we may fuppofe, that the cuftom in the days of Plutarch was different in this refpect at Delphi, than in those of Euripides: Or it might perhaps be a diftinguished privilege, conferred on Ladies of Creufa's royal dignity, to vifit the oracular farine, while Women of inferior quality were 4 V. 409. ex excluded: Thus Ion afterwards' addreffes the Chorus, as stationed round the edge of the temple, expecting their royal Master: But this partial idea of admittance is founded only on conjecture; and the expreffion here is general, addreffed to the whole Chorus unqualified: We also know that Females administered to the fervices of the God by the authority of our Poet; for the Chorus in his Phoeniffe confifts of Phonician Captives, who were fent into Græce, as confecrated spoils or offerings to Apollo, in order to attend his temple, as the deλo μλágwv, or the Servants of it. It seems therefore ftrange to imagine, that where a Priestess prefided as Pythia, and where there were female Attendants, Vifitants of their own fex fhould be excluded from the confecrated recefs of the oracle. 6 Verfe 278. Παρθένες. N° XVIII. 270. He flew the Virgins. THESE Пάρevo, or Virgin Daughters of Erechtheus, were called "Tanívida, or the Hyacinthides, as we learn from Demofthenes: And Suidas informs us, that the reafon of this appellation was derived from Hyacinthus, a diftrict in Athens, where they were facrificed: He has given us their feveral names; and he makes them to be fix in number; of which according to him the two eldest were victims: Cœlius s V. 510. • Phon. v 211. See alfo v. 213. 222. 229. & 289. In Epitaph Orat. Græci, ed. Reiske, vol. II. pars 1. p. 1393. 2 Vox Πάρθενοι. Rho 3 II 4 7 Rhodiginus correfponds in the fame account: It also appears from a Greek Proverb hence derived, that these Virgins were fix in number. Other Authors, befides Euripides in this paffage, and Suidas, fpeak of more than the facrifice of one Daughter: Thus Cicero', Repetunt ab Erectheo, cujus etiam filiæ cupidè mortem expetiverunt pro vitâ civium : And again, Mortem quam etiam Virgines Athenis Regis opinor Erechei filiæ pro patriâ contempfiffe dicuntur: But our Poet in the Play of his Erechtheus mentions a single Daughter, as the object of this facrifice: And with him in this refpect correfpond Lycurgus, Plutarch, and Ariftides 10. Apollodorus and Hyginus 12 will fortunately ferve to reconcile this variation; fince they inform us, that the Sifters having engaged in a folemn oath to die together, after the facrifice of the youngest according to the Oracle, which demanded only one, the others committed fuicide: But Stobaus13 afferts, that it was the eldest Daughter, who was facrificed: We may conclude that in one inftance the Authors allude to the original facrifice, and in the other to the fatal confequences, which followed it. There is also a variation. in regard to the number of thefe Daughters of Erechtheus; for Hyginus affirms, that he had four: And we may collect from Euripides 14, that at the time of the facrifice there were only three: But if to these we add the infant Creuifa, 3 Lect. Ant. L. 13. C. 7. 4 Παρθένοις ἐξ ἐφάμιλλος. (Apoft. Cent. 15. 84. Sce alfo Meurs, de Reg. Athen, 1. 1. c. 9.) 5 Tufc. Difput. 1. 1. c. 48.) 6 Pro Sextio, (c. 21.) 7 Ed. Barnes, p. 467. v. 67 & 97. See alfo the Preliminary Effay on the 8 Orat. Contrà Leocratem. Orat. Græci, ed. Reiske, Ion, (p. 4.) vol. 4. pars 2. p. 202. 10 In Panat. 9 Paral. ed. Xylian, Bibliot. 1. 3. p. 134. 12 Fab. 46 & 238. 13 Serm. 38. cwoes. (ed. Barnes, p. 468. v. 100.) vol. 2. p. 310. ed. Spolet, 1555. he |
