PRUEBA DE HIPÓTESIS: PRIMERA HIPOTESIS ESPECÍFICA

We have seen in the preceding section how Kreousa's monody marks an important step in the transition her character undergoes in the course of this play. She moves in this scene from silence to speech, from victim to aggressor, from speech to action, etc. But in fact Kreousa's character is in a state of flux and transition in many regards, and not only in this scene of the play. She moves from maidenhood to motherhood, from being a fervent opponent of Apollo to being his pious follower, from her fixation with the past to having expectations for the future.

When we see her in this play, Kreousa's most important transition, from maiden to mother — the transition that secures her an important place in the mythology of Athens — is already behind her. But she has performed this transition badly: the baby to whom she gave birth is seemingly dead, she hates the god who violated her rather than accepting the gift of his favour. Perhaps the two features most firmly established by her account in the monody are her willingness to resist Apollo, due to her easily understandable failure to grasp the full implications of the divine grace which has been bestowed upon her - a defect that for a long time will continue to prevent her from recognising the divine providence in events as they unfold - , and her portrayal as a woman of a peculiar kind of courage which arises from fear (898). Earlier this courage led her to commit an 'dôÎKTipia' after her rape by exposing her baby and leaving it to die in order to avoid the shame her unfortunate intercourse with Apollo entailed; later it was further exemplified in the ensuing action in her attempt to kill Ion, as a result of her fear for the elimination of the Athenian autochthonous race, prompted

by the apparent intrusion of her husband's illegitimate son and his usurpation of the Erechtheid throne

When Kreousa's assassination attempt on Ion fails, the princess is advised by the chorus women to seek asylum from the outraged Ion and his Delphian followers at Apollo's altar (1255, 1258). It is then (1306) that Kreousa as a suppliant becomes entirely dependent on Apollo (1285: iepov TO oüjpa Twi OewL 6i0wp ’ ex^Li''), just as the virgin bride through the marriage rites centred around the hearth of her husband's house becomes entirely dependent on her new master. This action forms, in my opinion, the turning point to Kreousa's 'Geopaxia' against A p o l l o . I t is from this altar that she will rush to embrace Ion, her lost son. By the end of the play, Kreousa's transition from theomachos to theosebes, from being full of hatred for Apollo (cf. her monody), to recognising the wisdom of Apollo's plan (of. 1540-45), is visually indicated by her clasping of the ring upon the temple-door before

The motivation in terms of preserving the purity of the Athenian race and the lengths to

which Kreousa and the old man have to go to exact punishment from the intruders have a

strong Euripidean flavour of irony since they may be seen as a covert criticism of the

Athenians' rigid views about purity of race. Whitman on lines 161-69, which focus on Ion's

obsession with the purity of the temple, remarks that 'purity involves bloodshed' (1974: 75),

i.e. a crime which pollutes the city. Euripides seems to be pointing out this paradox in his play.

Kreousa, though 'twice-wedded', remained in her natal family and by becoming an

epikleros, undertook the obligation of the male members of the family to reassure the purity of the race. It is only after she becomes a suppliant at Apollo's altar that she finally leaves the natal hearth and by being attached to her peculiar conjugal house, she is allowed to resume

her female identity and become a mother for her 'common' children with Xouthos. See also

above 1.4., text before n. 214.

^ Prior to that, it seems that it was important for her to have re-lived her past experience in

her monody - speech has a known psychotherapeutic effect - , but perhaps in this case her

dwelling on the past so intensely has not cured her, but misdirected her into mistaken

she departs to Athens (1609-13), a gesture which, perhaps, inverts the involuntary clasping of her hand by Apollo (891).

Kreousa will make her transition from past to future successfully, when she recognises her son and acknowledges the omnipotence of Apollo.115 Then, she will re-interpret the incident of rape and accept it as a sacrifice for the benefit of the autochthonous Athenian line; Apollo had to use benevolent violence to meet the need of supplying a divine offspring for the Athenian autochthonous race. Kreousa had to learn to accept her past if she were to receive a future; she had to go back and complete her transitioniiG through a series of events which repeated her past experience, but with a significant difference. Her sufferings will now turn to permanent blessing, she is told by Athena (1603). A harmony may, at last, preside over the Erechtheid palace; Kreousa breaks away from Ffi, accepts Apollo's providence and will henceforth be able to produce children with Xouthos ('kolvov yevog', 1589).

115 Prior to that, it seems that it was important for her to have re-lived her past experience in

her monody - speech has a known psychotherapeutic effect - , but perhaps in this case her

dwelling on the past so intensely has not cured her, but misdirected her into mistaken

violence.