^{page 284 note 1} The words (206–7) clearly imply that the Gigantomachia is portrayed as a single group, and not as three separate scenes.

^{page 284 note 2} On the pedimental sculptures on the Alcmaionid temple of Apollo see Ch. Picard and de la Coste-Messelière, P., Fouilles de Delphes, iv, fasc. 3, pp.16–32Google Scholar (west pediment), pp.33–62 (east pediment). The Herakles-Hydra and Bellerophon-Chimaira scenes are identified as metope sculptures on the west side of the temple by Homolle, T., ‘Monuments figurés de De1phes’, BCH 26 (1902), 591–2Google Scholar; note also the identical use of the verb in Euripides' descriptions of all three scenes (191, 203, 218).

^{page 284 note 3} Owen, A. S., Euripides: Ion, pp.82–3Google Scholar, provides a brief survey of several such alternatives.

^{page 284 note 4} See Burnett, A. P., Catastrophe Survived: Euripides' Plays of Mixed Reversal, pp.103–4.Google Scholar

^{page 285 note 1} In their song the chorus repeatedly uses words for seeing (190, 194, 201, 206, 208, 209, 211, 214), reminding us that they are describing scenes which they are viewing at the moment they describe them; these words for seeing also suggest that the audience is to ‘see’ these same details too, i.e. it is to imagine them on the stage backdrop.

^{page 285 note 2} The arrangement is Euripides' and was not dictated by the actual ornamentation of the temple which had on its west side more than two metopes and more than six pedimental figures, none of which was paired in the same way in which we find them in this ode (see Picard and de la CosteMesselière, op. cit., pp.16–32.

^{page 285 note 3} The use of (192) shows that Herakles is amputating the heads (on as an amputating instrument see West, M. L., Hesiod: Theogony, ad 175).Google Scholar The use of (194–5) shows that Iolaos and Herakles are part of the same scene and not in two separate scenes. For the slaying of Hydra see Apollod. 2.5.2 and additional sources cited by J. G. Frazer, Apollodorus: The Library, ad loc. Here and elsewhere sources for the different myths discussed in this paper are cited by way of illustration, and no attempt has been made at exhaustive documentation which may be found in the standard handbooks of Greek mythology.

^{page 285 note 4} The upper half of Echidna's body was that of a young girl, the lower half that of a snake (Tb. 297 ff.); according to Hesiod (ibid. 823 ff.), Typhon had snakes growing from his shoulders (for other serpentiform representations of Typhon see West (above, n.3), ad 306).

^{page 285 note 5} According to the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (3.305 ff.) Typhon was the son of Hera. In this account Typhon still has serpentine associations (Hera gave him to the Pythian serpent to be reared) and chthonic associations (his conception resulted from Hera's invoking Earth, Heaven and the Titans underground, and from her striking life-giving Earth with her hand). Something of this version was also known to Stesichoros (see frag. 62 Page).

^{page 286 note 1} According to Hesiod (Th. 316–18), the slaying of Hydra also had Olympian associations, being accomplished ; cf. Athena standing by Herakles as he shoots his bow at Hydra on the chest of Kypselos, as described by Paus. 5.17.11.

^{page 286 note 2} On the infant Herakles and the serpents see Apollod. 2.4.8 and the sources cited by Frazer, op. cit., ad loc. These serpents, like Hydra (cf. Th. 314 ff.), were sent by Hera against HeraIdes. We are told that Hera did so out of jealousy for the infidelity of Zeus which produced Herakles, but it is also possible that these snakes were, in the first instance, the instruments of the less than Olympian Hera whom we have seen elsewhere (above, n.5, p.285) associated with snakes, and that they were only later rationalized by the tale of jealousy.

^{page 286 note 3} The text of Hes. Th. 319 ff. is ambiguous and open to either interpretation (cf. West op. cit., ad 319). Apollodoros' interpretation (2.3.1) is that Hesiod said the parent was Echidna.

^{page 286 note 4} Cf. the genealogy of Hydra given above.

^{page 286 note 5} Cf. schol. vet. ad Pind. Olymp. 13.69^b which cites the similarity of BellerophonPoseidon-Glaukos and Herakles-Zeus Amphitryon. Glaukos' wife, Eurynome, was the daughter of Nisos, son of Pandion, and so an Athenian like Kreusa. This is but one of several parallels between the stories of Bellerophon and Ion. Both Bellerophon and Ion are children of Olympians, and both are passed off as sons of their mothers' mortal husbands (in Ion's case this occurs in the course of the play), and both husbands are themselves descendants of Aiolos (for Xuthos, cf. Ion 292).

^{page 286 note 6} In the same passage Pindar calls Bellerophon since he was accepted as the son of Glaukos and his successor in the royal line.

^{page 286 note 7} There are also some associations of Poseidon with Pegasos. According to Hesiod (Cat. frag. 43a M.-W., v. 84) Poseidon gave Pegasos to Bellerophon (Hesiod does not explain how Poseidon came by Pegasos). Again, just before describing the ‘birth’ of Pegasos and Chrysaor (Th. 280–1) Hesiod tells how Poseidon had lain with Medusa (278–9). Apollodoros (2.4.2), paraphrasing and expanding on Hesiod's account, apparently concludes from the juxtaposition of these statements that Poseidon was the father of Pegasos. If Poseidon is his father, this would account for Pegasos' horse shape since the horse is regularly associated with Poseidon.

^{page 287 note 1} Unlike Hydra, Chimaira, et al., however, the Giants were not serpentine. The notions of earthborn and serpentine are frequently reciprocal, and later sources do attribute snake-like lower extremities to the Giants, but the earliest evidence for such attribution is a lekythos dated to the beginning of the fourth century (see Vian, F., La Guerre des gèants, pp.13–16).Google Scholar

^{page 287 note 2} Although perhaps with prompting from some Olympian; see above, nn.1 and 7, p.286.

^{page 287 note 3} Our play follows the more primitive tradition of the single Gorgon (cf. 989) from which the tradition of the three Gorgones developed. On the origin of the Gorgon(es) see Harrison, J., Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion³, pp.187 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 287 note 4} This version may well be Euripides' own invention. Elsewhere it is not found at all before Euripides, and after Euripides it occurs only, in a slightly varied form, in Diod. 4.70.3–6.

^{page 287 note 5} For Apollo slaying the serpent Python cf. h. Ap. 3.300 ff., Eur. I.T. 1244 ff., Apollod. 1.4.1, Paus. 10.6.5–6. Pausanias says only that Python was a serpent set by Earth to guard the oracle, but at I.T. 1248 Python is called . Earth preceded Themis who preceded Apollo as holder of the oracular seat at Delphi.

^{page 288 note 1} See also above, n.5, p. 286.

^{page 288 note 2} The normal genealogy (given, e.g. by Apollod. 3.14.6 ff., marm. Par. 10–15) is Erichthonios-Pandion-Erechtheus-Kreusa. I would suggest that Euripides eliminated Pandion since he could contribute nothing chthonic or serpentine to the play. See also following note.

^{page 288 note 3} The simplest interpretation of is ‘(your) ancestor, the father of your father.’ Note also the direct transmission of the Gorgon's blood from Erichthonios to Erechtheus to Kreusa (1007–9). Both these passages could be construed, albeit somewhat unnaturally, to allow room for Pandion between Erichthonios and Erechtheus (cf. Owen, op. cit., ad loc.). However, since Pandion is never mentioned in the play, there is no need to accommodate him in the genealogy, and both these passages may be taken in their more natural sense which makes Erichthonios father of Erechtheus.

^{page 289 note 1} One thinks naturally of the oracle at Delphi (the oracle is so identified by Lyc. in Leocr. 99, introducing a quotation from Euripides' Erechtheus; Apollod. 3.15.4 does not specify).

^{page 289 note 2} There is considerable confusion in our sources between Erichthonios and Erechtheus arising from the fact that Erichthonios was, in origin, merely a doublet of Erechtheus (who had himself evolved from an epithet for Poseidon); see Harrison, J. in Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens, pp.lix-lx.Google Scholar

^{page 289 note 3} Euripides' language can be read to suggest that Erechtheus did not die but continued to live underground. Such an interpretation would dovetail nicely with the belief that the , the snake which guarded the Acropolis, was Erechtheus/Erichthonios (re)incarnated (on the confusion between Erechtheus and Erichthonios see preceding note; on the see RE s.v. oikuros 2).

^{page 289 note 4} Erechtheus may also be considered something of a in that he slew Poseidon's son, for which transgression he was punished. The details of this myth are rather obscure, and it is far from certain that Erechtheus was required to slay Eumolpos in order to defeat the Eleusinians.

^{page 289 note 5} Somewhat inconsistently, Hermes says that Kreusa gave birth (16). Given its context, (344) means nothing more than ‘exposed’, and does not imply that the child was born at home.

^{page 289 note 6} At 964–5 Kreusa says that she expected Apollo to care for Ion after she exposed him, but at this point Kreusa is only transferring as much blame as possible from herself to Apollo, thus subjectively justifying her attempt, against Apollo's will, to slay Ion. Later Kreusa herself will confess that she intended Ion to die (1494 ff.), as Hermes had already told us in the prologue (18,27). On Kreusa's different versions of the exposure of Ion see also Burnett, op. cit., p.124.

^{page 289 note 7} Cf. Kreusa's identification of Ion's death with going ‘beneath the ground’ (1441–2) to be ‘reared in the house of Hades’ (953).

^{page 290 note 1} Strabo 9.2.11; Bosquet, J., ‘Delphes et les Aglaurides d'Athenes’, BCH 88 (1964), 663–4.Google Scholar

^{page 290 note 2} Whereas in the prologue Kreusa is referred to more frequently by her own name (11, 18, 57, 63, 65, 72), after she identifies herself to Ion (260) her name is not mentioned again until the messenger speech (1123, 1216), and she is identified instead only in terms of her family relations. Later she is also addressed by name by Athena (1572).

^{page 290 note 3} A similar effect is produced by the analogous references to the Athenians as (296), to (589–90), and to the cave where Kreusa lay with Apollo as (936–7; cf. , 1400). It is possible that the whole group of caves on the north slope of the Acropolis was said to be ‘of Kekrops’ inasmuch as they were in the ‘Kekropian cliffs’ (cf. Owen op. cit., ad 1400), while the cliffs may have been called ‘Kekropian’ because they were in the general vicinity of Kekrops' tomb (on the locations of the Long Rocks and the Kekropeion see Hill, I. T., The Ancient City of Athens: Its Topography and Monuments, pp.99 ff., 177 f.).Google Scholar

^{page 290 note 4} The text at 721 ff. is corrupt and something has probably been lost (for some suggested emendations see Owen, op. cit., ad loc.). Whatever the exact reading of 721 ff. may be, it is clear that the chorus wishes Ion, the foreigner, to die (719–20), and that in this context the particular event in Erechtheus' life to which the chorus alludes must be his repulse of the Eleusinian invasion of Attica (indirectly referred to above at 277–8). Unfortunately the corruption of our text and our imperfect knowledge of this myth prevent us from telling whether Euripides intends the chorus's allusion to imply a contrast between Kreusa and Erechtheus who operated in accord with the oracle, or if he means it to suggest an ill-omened parallel between Kreusa who would slay Apollo's son Ion and Erechtheus who slew Poseidon's son Eumolpos (cf. above, n.4, p.289).

^{page 291 note 1} Following Kirchhoff's transposition, 992–3 are to be read after 997 so that they describe the snaky appearance of the Gorgon on Athena's aegis (, 993).

^{page 291 note 2} We must assume that she habitually wears the poison since there is nothing in the play to suggest that she had put it on for this special occasion. The fact that Kreusa has the poison so ready to hand and is actually wearing it would suggest to the audience that the poison is almost a part of herself. The poison was originally fastened by Athena to Erichthonios' body with golden bands (1006–7), just as it is now fastened to Kreusa's body in a golden bracelet (1009, 1030). Besides the parallel with Kreusa's attire, the golden bands of Erichthonios also indirectly suggest the golden snakes worn by later Athenians in his honour (cf. 20 ff.).

^{page 291 note 3} This she does despite the evidence of the oracle that Xuthos' ‘discovery’ of Ion is Apollo's will.

^{page 291 note 4} See further Burnett, A. P., ‘Human Resistance and Divine Persuasion in Euripides’ Ion', CPh 57 (1962), 97.Google Scholar

^{page 291 note 5} Although Kreusa may not see that exposing Ion is against Apollo's plan, the audience at least should recognize this when they are informed by Hermes in the prologue (67 ff.) of Apollo's intention to propagate the Ionian race through Ion.

^{page 291 note 6} This similarity between Kreusa and the Aglaurides may account for the prominence of the Aglaurides in our play (they are mentioned three times in all, 23–4, 270–4, 1163).

^{page 291 note 7} Cf. also Kekrops, half-snake king of Athens, like a silent witness to the attempted murder, embroidered with his daughters on a tapestry at the entrance of the tent erected by Ion (1163–4).

^{page 292 note 1} We have been prepared for Ion's unwillingness to pollute Apollo's shrine with Kreusa's blood by his unwillingness in the prologue to shed the blood of the birds on Apollo's temple (cf. 179–80). There, as here, he tries threats to get the offenders to leave (158 ff.).

^{page 292 note 2} Note that even after the entry of the Pythia and up until 1334 Ion continues to contemplate killing Kreusa on the altar.

^{page 292 note 3} That this is Apollo's plan is in effect confirmed by Athena at 1563 ff.

^{page 293 note 1} The distribution of these lines seems to be faulty in the manuscripts which continue the stichomythia down to 1432. The best sense for these lines is obtained by following Grègoire, who transposes 1428–9 to after 1431 and assigns all three verses to Kreusa.

^{page 293 note 2} On Ion as a second Erichthonios see also Burnett, , Catastrophe Survived, p.105.Google Scholar

^{page 293 note 3} Ion must actually turn towards the temple in order to see Athena on the attached to the rear stage building. Ion's movement visibly emphasizes his choice to rely on divine guidance.

^{page 294 note 1} Cf. also 1500 where Ion parallels his own actions to Kreusa's earlier attempt to kill her son by exposing him at birth.

^{page 294 note 2} Cf. also her invocation of Athena as (1478).