The cult and myth of Pyrros at Delphi

79 Pages·1960·4.489 MB·English

by  Joseph Fontenrose

THE CULT AND MYTH OF
PYRROS AT DELPHI
BY
JOSEPH FONTENROSE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
BERKELEY AND LOS ANGELES
1960
UNIVERSITY OF C.U.n:oaNIA PUBLICATIONS IN Cl..AsslCA.L ARCHAEOLOGY
EDrroas (BD1tELl!:Y): W. C. Hn.MaoLD, D. A. AMYX, J. K. ANDEUON, JOSEPH FoNTENROSF.
Volume 4, No. 5, pp. 191-266, plates 18--19,2 figures in text
Submitted by cditon January 22, 1960
Issued December 29, 1960
Prioe, $2.50
UNIVDIITY OP CALIPoaNIA Pu.ss
BltllEUY AND Los ANCUZS
CAuf"OllN I A.
CANBl.lDCE UNJVBSITY PRESS
LONDON, ENGLAND
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF A~fF.RICA
PREFACE
Taouou THE CULT OF PYRROB will have its proper place in the book on the cults of
Delphi upon which I am now engaged, so many problems concerning both the cult
and the myth of this hero have presented themselves that a separate treatise has
seemed necessary. The full exploration of these problems involves the careful study
of much material that would be inappropriate or even irrelevant to a work that des.ls
with all the cults of Delphi, and would demand an inordinate amount of space in it.
Adequate consideration of the history of the cult, of the Gallic invasion, of Pindar's
sixth Paean and seventh Nemean ode, of the messenger's speech in Euripides'
A ndromache, of the mythical background of the Delphic Pyrros legend, and of
cognate legends, justifies a single work devoted to the cult and myth of Pyrros at
Delphi.
Having adopted the practice of directly transliterating, instead of Latinizing, all
Greek names except a few which are f a.miliar to everyone in their Latinized forms
(see Python viii), I have decided to write Pyrros rather than Pyrrhos, which is
usually adopted by those who shun Pyrrhm. I feel that the his as much a Latinizing
touch as is the us, and that rh bas no more value than r for indicating the Greek
phoneme which is written with rho (the name of the letter in this form is part of
English vocabulary). Of course the ancient Greek r was different from ours; but
though the French, Spanish, and Russian r's are also different from ours, we always
represent them by r alone. There is no more need to represent in transliteration the
rough breathing that is written over initial rho and sometimes over the second of
two rho's than there is to represent iota subscript.
Throughout this treatise I use the abbreviated title Python to refer to my book
Python: A Study of Delphic Myth and lt8 Origins (Berkeley, Los Angeles: University
of California Press, 1959), which contains the basic material needed for a study
of the Pyrros legend, preflenting the arguments for much that I must leave unargued
here. The abbreviation PW stands for H. W. Parke and D. E.W. Wormell, The
Delphic Oracle, volume II: The Oracular Respomes (Oxford: Blackwell, 1956); the
number which follows is the number of the response.
I am grateful to the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation for the grant
of a fellowship, and to the University of California for the grant of sabbatical leave,
that allowed me to undertake a study of the cults of Delphi during the academic
year 1958-59 in Greece and particularly in Delphi itself, which is as exciting to visit
the tenth time as the first, such are the beauty, majesty, and historical memories
of that site, and the archaeological wealth of its ruins. This treatise is the first fruit
of their generosity.
I am also grateful to the American School of Classical Studies in Athens for grant
ing me the use of its library and facilities for the nine months that I spent in Greece,
and to its staff and members for much help given. I must also give thanks to Eva
Topping and to Elroy Bundy for reading the manuscript of this work and making
many valuable comments, in particular for giving me the benefit of their intimate
knowledge of Pindar; to Georges Daux, Director of the Ecole Fran9Rise d'Ath~nes,
for allowing me to copy the map of the Delphic sanctuary which appears here as
figure 1, and for helpful suggestions; to Miss Athanasiades for the drawing of figures
[ iii J
iv Preface
1 and 2; to Nikolaos Galatos, pr~wphylax of the Delphi Museum, my Delphian
proxenos and long-time friend, for hie generous and never-failing helpf ulnees and
hospitality during my visits to Delphi; to ProfeBBOHr .J. Rose for his interest in my
study of the cults and myths of Delphi and for his suggestion that I might find in
the story of Xanthos and Melanthos an interesting parallel to the Delphic myth of
Pyrros and Machaireus-Orestes; to my son Robert Fontenrose for the photographs
which appear in plates 18, a, and 19; to my daughter Anne Fontenrose for the photo
graph which appears in plate 18, b; to my colleagues, the Editors of the University
of Calif omia Publications in Cl&88icalA rchaeology, for their careful and critical
reading of my manuscript and many valuable suggestions; finally to Miss Helen
Travis of the Editorial Department of the University of California Press for careful
editing of the manuscript and for removing a number of lapses and inconsistencies
of style and expression.
JOSEPH FoNTENROSE
Berkeley
April 12, 1960
CONTENTS
Part I. The Cult 191
The Worship of Pyrros 191
Gauls, Persians, Phlegyans 198
Pyrros, N eoptolemos, Achilles 206
Part II. The Myth . 212
N eoptolemos at Delphi 212
Murder in the Temple 213
Knife and Knifer . 219
The Mountaineer . 225
The Fair e.nd the Black 233
The Brothers' Quarrel 246
Epilogue . 257
Appendix. Index of Themes 259
Plates . 265

THE CULT AND MYTH OF PYRROS AT DELPHI
BT
JOSEPH FONTENROBE
PART I. THE CULT
w
THE ORSHIP OJ' PYRROB
LEFTWARDS PROM THE ENTRANCE to Apollo's temple at Delphi, as one leaves the
temple, Pausanias came upon an enclosure (pen.ooloa)in which be saw the tomb of
Achilles' son, Pyrros or Neoptolemos. To this hero, says Pausanias, the Delphians
made annual sacrifices: he uses the verb enagizein, usually employed for the conse
cration of whole victims to a hero or chthonian deity.1 To the northeast of the temple
of Apollo, on the next higher terrace, a site that fits PansaniSB' indications, the
French excavators found a rectangular structure, which with fair certainty they
identified with Pyrros' sanctuary. It lies just behind the so-called Corcyraean base
and the Acanthian treasury, flanked to the west by the Thessalian monument, the
structure which contained the famous sculptures of the Daochos group, and to the
east by the portico of Attalos.' The periboloaw as open to the sky; there was no
roofed temple in it. Against the north wall the remains of an altar base are visible.
The present walls date from the fourth century B.c., no doubt erected during the
reconstruction of Apollo's temple and sanctuary which took place then. Under
neath, the excavators have found traces of earlier structures, the earliest of which
is Mycenaean; a pithoa, filled with ashes and animal bones, seems to be a bothros
and indicates that this was a cult site in Mycenaean times.
According to Pausanias, the Delphians instituted annual enagismala in Pyrros'
bonor immediately after the defeat of the Gauls who invaded Greece under Brennoe
in 279/78 B.c. and reputedly attacked Delphi, meeting defeat at the very borders
of town and sanctuary. As Pausanias tells the story, fearful shapes of armed warriors
fought in the Hellenic ranks against the foe; they were identified with Hyperochos
and Amadokos, whom Pausanias calls Hyperboreans, Pyrros, and Phylakos. Dio
doros and others include Apollo himself and the White Maidens, sometimes identi
fied with Athena and Artemis, among the supernatural defenders of Delphi. 1
We must notice carefully what Pausanias says about Pyrroe' cult at Delphi:
because of the aid which the hero gave the Delphians against the Gauls, they began
to make heroic sacrifices to him (in another place he says that they did so every
year), though previously they had held even his tomb in disesteem, considering him
an enemy. That is, he already had a tomb at Delphi, though before 279/78 he did
1 Paua. 10.24.6.
t See_plate 18 and figure 1; E. Bourguet, Lu Ruinu de lklpha (Pam: Fontemoing, 1914)
195 f.; F. Schober, s.v. Delphoi, RE mppl. 6.134 f.; for the latest excavations of Pyrroe' temenoe
eee L. Lerat, "Fouillea de Delphes (1934-1935): Rapport preliminaire," &v. Arch. aer. 6, 12 (1938)
183-2'2'7.
a..a,,.,
1 Paua. 1.4.4., ... &lµaT"ciT 't ~T'a.t'T'O orXiT"cuT "oisf japfj6.po.s· T'OVTf.wTa 'C.M,µ ,b,,r, -~, 'Trtp/Jopa,,,
Ar)"OIIO"Uv., hu, 'TdpoxOII" cal 'Aµa.&oco., TW & T'pl-ro,,I llip,oo,, el,,cu 1'011 'Ax,>.>.ews· .. & ciri T"aim,s
&>..,ol ri;s O'VJll'a.xtIalu.1pp tfl r,,bryo,, lxol'T'tt In ci.aporro >.tµlou cal T"Oµ ,,ijµa b, iinµl~_l0.23~2, quoted on
p. 202, below. 10.24.6, •al ol .ccm1h ot ba-y£C·ow"' ol 6,eXipolF. or Apollo and the White Matdena eee
Diod. 22.9.5; Val. Max. 1.1. ext. 9; Cic. Div. 1.37.81; Pomp. Trog. ap. Jwrt.in. Epit. 24.8.4-9.
l 191 I
192 UmtJerlity of California PubUcatiom in Claslical Arc1t.aulogy
not receive the annual enagiBm,ataw hich the Delphiana instituted at that time: ao
far u his worship is concerned, apart from Delphia.n attitudes toward him, Pau
Moiu Mys no more than that. Scholars, however, have understood him to mean
that a Delphic cult of Pyrroe was instituted for the first time in or about 278 B.c.
Hence most of them have supposed Pausanias to be mistaken, since Pindar in his
seventh Nemean ode, after alluding to Pyrros' death in Apollo's sanctuary, has
this to MY about him:
. , . expij,
6f T&Jl1 b,&o,, 0.ve, 1"Cl).c:uTAT(fl
Altu'.i&u «pel,nw, TON X'l'O'IlIµ µoa.,
Beorvap ' eln-eixea8 1,µo-,,,) pwLcus8 i roµra'i:s
8tµ(.(lllbro1o1! a:e,,,M, vTa.r o).ulJirrou4 .
That is, two centuries before the Gallic invasion Pindar called Pyrros a resident
overseer of right (themi&kopos)f or (or at) heroic processions which were accom
panied by abundant sacrifices. This looks like good evidence for a Delphic cult of
Pyrros in the early fifth century. Ziegler, however, will not have it so; interpreting
Pausanias' words as others have done, he maintains that their testimony must be
accepted: Pyrros had no cult at Delphi before 278. Pindar's words, he argues, do
not indicate a cult of Pyrroe; rather, they are meant, as Aristarchos had interpreted
ahem, to appease the Aeginetans for Pindar's harsh remarks about Neoptolemos,
tcion of the Aeginetan Aiakidai, in his sixth Paean.• There Pindar, as he has usually
been interpreted, presented the hero as an offensive brawler to whom the god
jUBtly brought death through his ministers; now the apologetic Pindar says that
it was fated that an Aeacid should dwell forever beside Apollo's temple as guardian
of good order at the Theoxenia; hence somebody stabbed him with a knife in a
quarrel over meat, an occurrence which the Delphians regretted exceedingly. That
is, since Pynos had been killed during a brawl over sacrificial meats, his Delphic
tomb was meant to be a constant reminder to the throngs of celebrants at Delphic
festivals of the unfortunate consequences of disorderly behavior on festive occa
sions.
0
Pyrros, Ziegler thinks, was a guardian spirit of good order and nothing more in the
years before 278, when, though he had a tomb, the Delphians held him in dishonor.
So Ziegler must perforce believe that for at least two centuries and a quarter, and
probably much longer, Apollo's temenos contained a hero's tomb without cult. Can
any instance be found of such a phenomenon? Remember that this was not an
obscure grave in a Delphic cemetery, though even the grave of a humble citizen
would receive the honors of family cult. This grave was reputed to hold the body of
an ancient hero and was therefore bound to receive public cult. We do not, in fact,
need to rely on probability only: we can point to the incontrovertible fact of the
• Nern. 7.44-47. I accept Schroeder's full atop at the end of 47.
• K. Ziegler, e.v. Neoptokmoa, RE 16.2454-2457; U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Pindaro,
(Berlin: Weidmann, 1922) 130 f. For the other view eee C. Robert, Die Gmd&iacheH dden.11ageII I
2.2 (4th ed.; Berlin: Weidmann, 1926) 1459 note 2; Jean Defradas, Lu Themu de la propagaruk
Delphique (Paris: Klincksieck, 1954) 149-152.
• Defradas agrees that Pyrros served as an example, not only of quarreleome behavior at Delphic
fem.vale, but also, "il est mort ~ur avoir commie un premiere aacrilege, en ne reapectant pas le
droit du aupQ_liant rAfugie pree dun autel." He refers to the slaughter of Priam at Zem's altar. One
gathers that Pindar and the Delpbians considered Pyrroe a bad example of brawler until, to appe&IWI
the Aeginetans, Pindar subtly shifted his role to that of unfortunate victim of brawlers.
: :,::
. .,
........
1,}1,,.,._.. .....
_...,~,,.•_·" f':
. ., ,('A,-·. ,.t-r'~ ~-
·• ~,·--
·--
,,...
Fig. I. Map of Apollo's temenoa at Delphi. (1) Temple of Apollo Pythios. (2) Chian altar. (3)
Shrine of Pyrroe. (4) Tbeeealian offerings of Daochos. (5) Stoa of Attaloe. (6). So-ealled Cor
cyraean baae. (7) So-called Acaothiao treasury. (8) Temple of Poeeidoo. (9) Cnidian lucM. (10)
Shrine of Ge and MIJ.888.
194 Univerlily of Cali/omto Publicaliom in Clamcal Archaeologr
periboloaa nd altar, eacred to Pyrros, near the Pythian Apollo's temple. Although no
inscription to clinch the identification has yet been found, the site can be nothing
other than the enclosure of Pyrros' tomb, attested by Pindar, Euripides, and Phere
kydes in the fifth century B.c.7 It fits Pausanias' indications: it lies to the left as one
leaves Apollo's temple and below the Cniclian lelCM.1 It ie flanked by the dedications
of Thessalians and Attalids, both of whom had good reason to honor Pyrroe-Neop
tolemos, since both he and his father Achilles were ThP,888.li&hne roes, and the
At talids claimed descent from Pyrros' son Pergamos. • In fact, these dedications may
indicate that Pyrros had a larger area as hie own temenos, a subprecinct in Apollo's
precinct, around the peribolo, which enclosed his tomb. This pen"boloa,c ontaining
an altar and existing for nearly a century before 278 in the shape which the excava
tions have revealed as its final state, was plainly a cult pla.ce. But even if one relies
upon the very slim chance that this was not the site of Pyrros' tomb, is it conceivable
that a hero's tomb could have been maintained solely as a warning to potential
~breakers and violators of sanctity? "Here lies Pyrros, who made a row at the
sacrifices; see what happened to him." Although Defraclas grants that Pyrros re
ceived worship at Delphi before 278, he too accepts the bad~xample theory. The
hero-god of the tomb, he thinks, once the principal deity of the Delphic sanctuary,
later eclipsed by Apollo, was identified with Achilles' son by a poet whom the Del
phic clergy had commissioned to recount the origin of the hero's temenos and tomb;
from that time (early sixth century?), though Pyrros received some kind of worship,
the Delphians considered him Apollo's enemy, who had once attacked the shrine or
disturbed the sacrificetl, and they treated him mainly as a guardian of good order
(a rather negative one) at festivals. The Delphians, it seems, had even forgotten the
name of the ancient hero whose tomb occupied such a prominent place beside
Apollo's temple.10
Can we believe that the Delphians could forget the name of their principal hero?
Every great god had a hero beside him, closely associated with him, worshiped in
the same temenos (or near by): Zeus Olympios had Pelops, Apollo Didymeus had
Branchos, the Delian Apollo had Anios, Apollo at Sparta had Hyakinthos, P06eidon
on the Athenian acropolis had Erechtheus-to mention a very few examples. Some
of these heroes are probably the original deities of their sanctuaries, shrinking in
stature before the great gods who took over-but a single explanation will probably
not suit every instance of the phenomenon. It is interesting to observe that Pelops'
hh'~on was placed in roughly the same relation to Zeus's temple as was Pyrroe' hh-&m
to Apollo's temple, that is, to the north, though rather more to the northwest: to
the right of the entrance to Zeus's temple as one enters, says Pausanias (compare his
indication of the position of Pyrros' peribolos). In particular we should notice that
Zeus's altar was placed directly to the east of Pelops' shrine, as though it had
originally served that rather than Zeus's temple. Pausanias tells us that Pelops was
1 Pind. Nem. 7.44-47; Eu.r. Andr. 1239-1242; Pherek. J3.64, ap. Scholl. Vett. in Eur. Andr.
1240 et Or. 1655.
1 PaUB. 10.24.6, 26.4. On Pyrro11'p eribol-08s,e e Bourguet, Schober, looc.c it.; Lerat, op. cit. 201;
Defr&daa, up. cit. 147 f.
• Paus. 1.11.2. The Atta.lids were, moreover, victors over the Gaul11.
10 Defradas, op. cit. 154-156.