APPENDIX IV
The Meaning of the E at Delphi
Plutarch wrote a fascinating essay entitled 'The E at Delphi',1
actually in the form of a dialogue, featuring Plutarch himself and
several other speakers. It is to be remembered that Plutarch was a
close personal friend of Clea, the Delphic priestess of his day, and
he knew much and always sought to learn more about the nature and
history of the oracles not only of Delphi but elsewhere as well.
He
was, however, most interested of all in Delphi itself, for he was
one of the two priests of Apollo there.
The central subject of the discussion is the letter E which was a
prominent inscription at the Delphic shrine. (That is, the letter E
was carved in stone quite on its own at Delphi and was a subject of
much curious speculation to the classical Greeks, who retained no
tradition of the meaning of the ancient inscription of this single
letter.)
F. C. Babbitt, in his Introduction to the dialogue, says:2
Plutarch, in this essay on the E at Delphi, tells us that beside the
well-known inscriptions at Delphi there was also a representation of
the letter E, the fifth letter of the Greek alphabet. The Greek name
for this letter was El, and this diphthong, in addition to being
used in Plutarch's time as the name of E (which denotes the number
five), is the Greek word for 'if, and also the word for the second
person singular of the verb 'to be' (thou art).
In searching for an explanation of the unexplainable it is only
natural that the three meanings of El ('five', 'if, 'thou art')
should be examined to see if any hypothesis based on any one of them
might possibly yield a rational explanation. . . .
Plutarch puts
forward seven possible explanations of the letter. . . . Attempts to
explain the letter have been also made in modern times by Gottling .
. . and by Schultz . . . Roscher . . . C. Robert . . . O.
Lagercrantz . . . W. N. Bates, in the American Journal of
Archaeology xxix (1925), pp. 239-46, tries to show that the E had
its origin in a Minoan character E . . . later transferred to
Delphi. Since the character was not understood, it, like other
things at Delphi, came to be associated with Apollo. This character
has been found on the old omphalos discovered in 1913 at Delphi in
the temple of Apollo.
Interesting are the two coins reproduced in Imhoff-Blumer and P.
Gardner, A Numismatic Commentary on Pausanius, plate X nos. xxii and
xxiii (text p. 119}, which show the E suspended between the middle
columns of
the temple. Learned scholars should note that the letter represented
is E, not Ei: therefore such explanations as are based on the true
diphthong are presumably wrong.
The second explanation offered by Plutarch is in fact the correct
one.
This is how Plutarch suggests it:
Ammonius smiled quietly, suspecting privately that Lamprias had been
indulging in a- mere opinion of his own and was fabricating history
and tradition regarding a matter in which he could not be held to
account. Someone else among those present said that all this was
similar to the nonsense which the Chaldaean visitor had uttered a
short time before: that there are seven vowels in the alphabet and
seven stars that have an independent and unconstrained motion; that
E is the second in order of the vowels from the beginning, and the
sun the second planet after the moon, and that practically all the
Greeks identify Apollo with the Sun.
The facts that Delphi is the second descending centre in the
geodetic octave, and that it is symbolized by the second vowel E,
would seem to go well together. The seven vowels (each corresponding
to one of the oracle centres) were uttered in succession as the holy
'unspeakable' name of God by Egyptian priests.
Demetrius of Phalerum, the student of Aristotle's Lyceum and who founded the
famous great library of Alexandria when later in life he was exiled
to Egypt, tells us in his surviving treatise On Style: 'In Egypt the
priests sing hymns to the gods by uttering the seven vowels in
succession, the sound of which produces as strong a musical
impression on their hearers as if flute and lyre were used.'
In Chapter XVI of The White Goddess, Robert Graves discusses this
too, and there quotes Demetrius. Graves also refers to an
eight-letter version of the sacred name. It may be that if one wants
to count the base oracle centre (which in musical analogy is the
octave expression of the top centre) one should have an eight-letter
version.
This version of the name is:
JEHUOVAO.
Note that E is the second letter.
We are faced with archaeological evidence that the second vowel, E,
was prominently associated with the second oracle centre in
descending order. (See Plate 12 of this book.) And we know from
Herodotus that Dodona, the top oracle centre, was said to be founded
by Egyptian priestesses from Thebes in Egypt. We also know that
certain Egyptian priests sang the seven vowels (or eight vowels,
including an aspirate) in succession.
We have already seen
that the geodetic oracle centers seem to have an octave structure.
And as this book went to press a discovery became known which
demonstrated the existence of the heptatonic, diatonic musical scale
in the ancient Near East. We may even make a presumption that the
uttering of the seven vowels in succession may possibly have
corresponded to the seven notes of the octave (but we may never know
that for certain).
And it is most important to emphasize that,
however bizarre to us, the association of a vowel with an oracle
centre is not our invention or surmise. The E may not only be read
about in Plutarch but seen on ancient coins and on the omphalos
stone itself (for both of which see Plate 14). And this association
of the second vowel with Delphi has never been explained by anyone.
So granted all the above, what follows? If each oracle centre had a
vowel
associated with it, then the second vowel being associated with the
second centre would seem to imply a corresponding arrangement for
the other centers. And if that is the case, it would seem that the
entire system would be associated with and actually comprise a
geodetic spelling-out, over eight degrees of latitude, of the
unspeakable holy name of God, known commonly to the Hebrews as
'Jehovah'.
It is most important that anyone intrigued by this possibility
should keep a wary eye for any further evidence. We should be on the
lookout for representations of or associations of other vowels at
the other centres. These may already be known to specialists in the
field or there may be evidence of this sort languishing unclassified
and unexplained in the basement of some museum. Or this sort of
evidence may come to light at any time in the future.
One place to
begin looking would, it seems to me, be with an examination of the omphalos stone from Delos, which is to be seen in Plate 12 of this
book. Does this omphalos stone have a single letter inscribed on it
similarly to the Delphi omphalos stone ? And what of all the other
omphalos stones, such as the one from Thebes in Egypt (see Plate
12). Are any of these well enough preserved to show a puzzling
single hieroglyph of a vowel ? I have not carried out any
investigation of this sort myself at the present time.
In closing, it would seem that the E at Delphi must fall into some
coherent system of the kind I suggest, and the explanation of the
enigma must be connected with Plutarch's lightly advocated second
explanation - that to do with E being the second vowel.
(Babbitt's
exclusion of the diphthong on the basis of the ancient coins to be
seen in Plate 14 of this book is therefore crucial and to my view
conclusive.)
Back to Contents
Notes
-
The dialogue 'The E at Delphi' is to be found in English in
Volume V of Plutarch's Moralia (altogether 15 vols) published in the
Loeb Classical Library series; London: William
Heinemann Ltd., and U.S.A.: Harvard University Press. The volume
first appeared in 1936, and the translation is by Frank Cole
Babbitt. Other works of Plutarch in the same volume are 'Isis and
Osiris', "The Oracles at Delphi No Longer Given in Verse', and 'The
Obsolescence of Oracles'.
-
Ibid. See Plate 14 of this book.
|