DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT AN ANCIENT GREEK SCHOLAR. FOR THE FULL DISCLAIMER, READ HERE.
Noblest? Of course the noblest, who will argue that?
What shall the wife be who surpasses her? And how
could any woman show that she loves her husband more
than herself better than by consent to die for him?
The Maid; lines 152-55
Introduction
I am finally onto my fifth author in my journey through the Western Canon: Euripides.
Euripides (c. 480 BC – c. 406 BC) is the last of the “Big Three” Greek tragic poets along with Aeschylus and Sophocles. Euripides is different from the other two in at least three major ways:
19 of his plays have survived mostly or fully intact. Aeschylus and Sophocles only have seven plays each that have survived. This is because Euripides, over time, became more popular than the other two.
Euripides was more controversial than the other two in his day. He would today be seen more like a “progressive” compared to Aeschylus and Sophocles (not in the political sense, but in the way someone pushes art in a particular direction—for better or for worse). He would become influential in changing the way plays were composed—like how characters were portrayed, how the gods were viewed, and the themes that were pondered.
Euripides is fond of ending his plays with a deux ex machina event. Basically, a god or a hero appears and makes things right again—or as good as they could be considering the circumstances. You will see what I mean with Alcestis. For a poet who was considered pointed and brooding, he sure liked his happy endings.
Euripides would be lumped in with Socrates as someone who shook things up and became something of a poster child for society’s and the theater’s declining standards. Unlike Socrates though, Euripides would not be executed for his ideas. Instead, he would just be mocked and ridiculed. For example: Aristophanes, the famous comic poet and himself a more traditional man, made fun of Euripides in his plays The Frogs and Thesmophoriazusae. Both plays are hilarious (especially The Frogs) and I can’t wait to get to Aristophanes (who I will covering after I get through Euripides, Thucydides, and Hippocrates).
If you have not read any of Euripides’ plays, be prepared for a wild ride. The themes he covers are themes that we are dealing with today in our culture. In fact, I’m kind of surprised some of his plays have not come to the attention of some of the subcultures on the rise today. For example, Hippolytus (the fourth play I will cover) is about a man who wanted nothing to do with women or marriage and just wanted to spend his days hunting with his buddies. The goddess Aphrodite takes offense to this and puts into motion a course of events that leads to Hippolytus being falsely accused of rape and dying as a result.
Why isn’t the Manosphere all over this play? Do they not see the awesomeness that is ancient Greek literature?
Anyway…
Alcestis is the earliest of Euripides’ plays to survive. It touches on many questions related to death ans sacrifice: If you have the chance to prolong your life at the cost of someone else’s, should you take it? Is it noble to lay down your life for someone else? Should parents be willing to die for their children? Should husbands be willing to let their wives die instead of them?
The only references to Alcestis (or her husband Admetus) that I have found in everything I have read so far are in the Iliad and in The Eumenides by Aeschylus.
In the Iliad, their son Eumelus (possibly the son who appears in the play), is the leader of those who came from Pherae (the city where Admetus ruled Thessaly). Homer describes Eumelus as “Eumelus, son of Admetus, whom Alcestis bore to him, loveliest of the daughters of Pelias” (Book 2; Samuel Butler translation). Later on, in Book 23 during the funeral games for Patroclus, Eumelus participates in the chariot race. When Apollo steps in to help Eumelus by messing with Diomedes, Athena (who is fond of Diomedes) responds by breaking the yoke of Eumelus’ chariot, taking him out of the race. Apollo helping Eumelus makes sense considering his friendship with Admetus.
In The Eumenides, the Furies (the Chorus) provide more details about how Apollo tricked the Fates:
Chorus: You did such things also in the house of Pheres, when you persuaded the Fates to make mortals free from death.
Apollo: Is it not right, then, to do good for a worshipper, especially when he is in need?
Chorus: It was you who destroyed the old dispensation when you beguiled the ancient goddesses with wine.Lines 723-28; Herbert Weir Smyth translation
A change I am making for my blog is that I will be focusing on modern translations from here on out. It was a tough decision to make because public domain translations, being older, meant a reduced chance they’ll be infected with modern political correctness. Plus, I liked the challenge. However, reading through Herodotus really took it out of me. I was demoralized by how long it took me to get through his work. I think if I had been reading a modern translation, it might have gone a little faster (A. D. Godley’s translation was not too difficult, but there were moments I had to reread some sections because I wasn’t sure if I was misunderstanding the text).
Also, I don’t plan on turning my blog posts into books anymore and thus don’t care as much about copyright. I have book ideas, to be sure, but I’m not just going to copy and paste my blog posts onto one like I’ve done in the past. The time and energy I would be spending putting a book together I would rather spend on my blog or my church Bible study (the Bible study was not something I was doing when I first started my blog).
Lastly, modern translations are easier to cite. I won’t have to approximate line numbers anymore.
For Euripides, I will be reading his plays from The Complete Greek Tragedies series. Originally edited by David Grene and Richmond Lattimore, the current Third Edition is edited by Mark Griffith and Glenn W. Most.
Alcestis was translated by Richmond Lattimore.
Summary
The god Apollo is getting ready to leave the house of his friend, the mortal Admetus. Apollo was forced by Zeus to serve Admetus as hired labor as a punishment. Apollo had killed the Cyclopes, the makers of Zeus’ lightning bolt, in retaliation for Zeus killing Apollo’s son Asclepius. Asclepius was so good at medicine he was raising people from the dead and Zeus couldn’t allow that to continue. During his punishment, Apollo and Admetus became good friends.
When Apollo learned that Admetus was fated to die young, he tricked the Fates into allowing Admetus to find someone to die in his place and thereby prolong his life. However, no one, not even Admetus’ parents, were willing to do so. The only one willing to take his place was his wife Alcestis.
Now that it is the day Alcestis is to die, Apollo can’t stay in the house any longer. Just as he is about to leave, he crosses paths with Death. After a heated exchange, Apollo leaves and Death enters Admetus’ house to claim Alcestis’ life. Before Apollo leaves though, he prophesies that a man is about to come visit Admetus—a man strong enough to force Alcestis away from Death.
The Chorus, citizens of Pherae (the city where Admetus lives and rules Thessaly), approach Admetus’ house wondering what the news is about Alcestis. A Maid comes out and informs them that Alcestis is close to death and has requested she see the sun one more time before she dies.
Right then, Alcestis exits the house, carried on a stretcher, with Admetus by her side. She pleads with Admetus to not take another wife out of fear their children will be mistreated and Admetus promises he won’t. Alcestis then says her goodbyes to Admetus and her children and dies.
While everyone is mourning, Heracles shows up to the house of Admetus looking to be received as a guest. He is on his way to Thrace to accomplish the eighth of his famous Twelve Labors for the king Eurystheus: steal the man-eating horses from the king of Thrace. Admetus goes to greet Heracles and Heracles wonders why everyone is in mourning. Admetus remains intentionally vague about who died and Heracles is unable to read between the lines. Heracles then decides to find someone else to stay the night at, but Admetus is absolutely insistent Heracles go nowhere else for hospitality and a room is prepared for him.
After this, Admetus’ father Pheres shows up with gifts for Alcestis’ burial, but Admetus firmly rejects them. He calls Pheres a coward and publicly disowns his parents because they could have died in his place instead since they were old and only had a few years of life left. Pheres retorts that he is not obligated to die for his son, nor anyone else, calls Admetus a coward for allowing a woman to die in his place, and proclaims that Alcestis was stupid for her decision. Pheres then leaves and Admetus goes to prepare for Alcestis’ funeral.
A Servant then appears and complains about Heracles. He is unable to read the room that everyone is in mourning, nor can deduce that it was Alcestis who died. Worse, he’s endlessly demanding and is now drunk and singing silly songs. However, all the servants in the house have to maintain their composure under orders from Admetus.
Heracles stumbles out of the house and demands to know why the Servant is not doing his job properly. Heracles tells him that death comes for everyone and he shouldn’t be so torn up about it that it affects his duties. The Servant finally reveals to Heracles that it was Alcestis who died and that is why everyone is in mourning. Heracles is both angry at Admetus for not saying anything and ashamed of himself for how he was acting in Admetus’ house. After getting directions, Heracles leaves for the mound where Alcestis is buried in the hopes of getting a jump on Death and forcing him to let Alcestis go.
Admetus returns from burying his wife and is in a deep depression. He wonders if he’ll ever be happy again. His house no longer looks the same and he doesn’t want to go inside it. He even wonders if it he would have been better off single and childless his whole life. The Chorus tries to console him, telling him that he isn’t the first man to lose a wife. Others who have experienced tragedy have been able to continue living their lives, so he can too.
Just then Heracles returns to Admetus’ house escorting a woman wearing a veil. He chastises Admetus for not telling him the truth about Alcestis and demands he take the woman into his house. Admetus outright refuses at first, saying that she reminds him too much of his late wife and that having her around would bring him nothing but sorrow, but eventually caves in to Heracles’ demand. Heracles then insists Admetus be the one to take her by the hand and escort her inside. When Admetus does, he realizes the veiled woman is Alcestis. Heracles tells Admetus to take care of her before leaving to continue his quest to steal the man-eating horses.
The Consequences of Messing With Fate
Death is an obligation that we all must pay.
There is not one man living who can truly say
if he will be alive or dead on the next day.
Fortune is dark; she moves, but we cannot see the way
nor can we pin her down by expertise and study her.Heracles; lines 782-86
Admetus is yet another character in Greek mythology who tried to fight his fate and paid the price for it. Two famous examples we have seen so far, if you’ve been with me on my journey for the past year or more, are Achilles and Oedipus.
Achilles was fated to die young during the Trojan War. At one point, he removed himself from the war due to the commander Agamemnon dishonoring him in front of all the Greek leaders. This ultimately led to the death of his best friend Patroclus. Achilles reentered the war in anger and revenge and his fate was played out.
Oedipus found out he was fated to kill his father and have children with his mother and ran away from home. What he didn’t know is that the couple he knew as his parents were not his real parents. His real parents, Laius and Jocasta, the king and queen of Thebes, had had him left to die of exposure as an infant, but the servant tasked with doing it didn’t have the heart and gave the infant to a childless couple. Oedipus ended up killing Laius while on his travels, due to Laius’ provocation, saved the city of Thebes from the Sphinx, and married Jocasta. No one involved found out the truth until many years later—after Oedipus and Jocasta had four children together.
With Admetus, he was fated to die young. Apollo tricked the Fates into extending Admetus’ life, but only if Admetus found a substitute. Admetus readily agreed to the condition and went to find someone to take his place. However, no one was willing to do it—not even his aged parents. The only one who agreed to do it was his wife Alcestis.
Because of Admetus’ desire to defy his fate, he ended up losing the love of his life (although it only ended up being temporary) and having a falling out with his parents.
This play touches on the desire most people have to extend their lives as long as possible. Some, like Admetus, would go so far as to have someone die in their place so that they could live longer. This is going to be more important to think about in the years to come. What lengths would you go to avoid death? What medicines would you take? What surgeries would you undergo? If uploading your brain to a computer became possible, would you do that? If a machine was invented to regenerate your body, would you use it?
For a Christian, like myself, artificially extending your life (beyond just treating a disease or replacing a failing organ) means avoiding Heaven, avoiding the full presence of God, avoiding those who died before you… or it could mean God’s judgment. Would it be Christian to artificially extend your life?
On a side note: it isn’t clear to me in the play whether Admetus could have backed out of the agreement once it became clear his wife would be taking his place. If he couldn’t back out, then it’s just Admetus making a hasty and foolish decision which tragically backfired. If he could have backed out at any time, then his father’s accusations of cowardice were well justified (even if his father’s worldview was a bit warped).
It Really Is About Who You Know…
And if I had driven from my city and my house
the guest and friend who came to me, would you have approved
of me more? Wrong. My misery would still have been
as great, and I should be inhospitable too,
and there would be one more misfortune added to those
I have, if my house is called unfriendly to its friends.Admetus; lines 551-58
Admetus could be accused of being a coward for not facing his death properly or for allowing his wife to die in his place (if he was able to back out of the agreement to find a substitute but didn’t). This was a flaw on his character.
However, one of Admetus’ strengths was his ability to make friends. Admetus was a paragon of congeniality in Greek mythology. It’s why he was able to make friends with a god like Apollo or a famous and powerful hero like Heracles.
Apollo is a more interesting case because him and Poseidon were forced to serve a mortal as a punishment before the events of Alcestis—Laomedon, the king of Troy and King Priam’s father (Priam was the king when the Trojan War happened). Laomedon ended up exploiting the two gods for their labor (you can find a reference to the story in the Iliad, Book 21, during the exchange between Poseidon and Apollo). So, for Admetus to win Apollo’s friendship, while Apollo was forced by Zeus to be Admetus’ personal shepherd, is all that more incredible and a testament to his character.
Anyway, it was Admetus’ friendship with Apollo that gave him the opportunity to extend his life. Even more, it was his friendship with Heracles that led to him getting Alcestis back from the dead.
Admetus’ story is a great example of the benefits of knowing powerful or well-connected people. “It’s not what you know, but who you know.”
It’s also a lesson about playing into your strengths to the fullest. Admetus may have been a coward. And who knows if he was warrior material like Achilles, Odysseus, or Heracles. However, Admetus found what he excelled at and leaned into it. Doing this also allowed him to make connections with other people that he may not have otherwise.
Parent of the Year
I gave you life, and made you master of my house,
and raised you. I am not obliged to die for you.
I do not acknowledge any tradition among us
that fathers should die for their sons. That is not Greek either.
Your natural right is to find your own happiness
or unhappiness. All you deserve from me, you have.Pheres; lines 681-86
You read Pheres’ statement and you know something is off about his worldview.
It goes beyond the obvious. We can debate about whether Pheres, or his wife (Admetus’ mother), should have been willing to die in Admetus’ place. They were old. They maybe had a few years left to live. They practically got to live a full life. It was their own son, their own flesh and blood, who was going to die young. Their only son who was to carry on their family’s legacy and inheritance.
On the other hand, it was Pheres’ life and he could do with it whatever he wanted.
And this is where the rub comes in. This is that uncomfortable line between the individual and the group (in this case, a family) that modern man has a conflicted attitude toward. On the one hand, obligating a parent to die for his children has its own set of problems—even if it would be moral or logical to do so. It would violate that parent’s right to live his life how he chooses. It would mean the family or community has more power over whether he lives or dies than he does. Obligating someone to sacrifice his life, with consequences if he refuses, could be morally questionable.
On the other hand, refusing to die for his children could diminish his standing in the community. He could be viewed as morally reprehensible. He could lose connections and business. Fewer people would be willing to do him favors.
But that’s only if the community believes it’s a moral obligation for a parent to sacrifice his life for his children. I looked it up and I couldn’t find any information about whether Pheres suffered any repercussions for his decision aside from Ademtus cutting ties with him. It could be that that information did not survive or Pheres was correct when he said fathers dying for their sons was not a Greek tradition.
However, Admetus, Alcestis, and the Chorus all condemned Pheres for his decision. Was their condemnation due to self-interest? Or, was Pheres actually committing a social taboo and Admetus, Alcestis, and the Chorus were reflecting what the community (or ancient Greeks in general) thought?
I’m all over the place. The main point I wanted to make is that Pheres communicates this coldly rational, but selfish, individualism. Here’s another quote from him:
Admetus: Is it the same thing to die old and to die young?
Pheres: Yes. We have only one life and not two to live.Lines 711-12
Also during the exchange, Pheres said he would have made a mistake to die in Admetus’ place (710). And then, as I mentioned in the Summary, he says that Alcestis was stupid to give up her life for Admetus (727-28). However, earlier in the exchange, Pheres was glad that Alcestis took Admetus’ place because it meant he wouldn’t be childless (620-21).
You see what I mean by a cold, rational, but selfish, individualism? On the one hand, Pheres rejects sentimentality. On the other hand, he seems to only think about himself. He’s not concerned about any notion of “the greater good.”
I understand that this idea of “the greater good” has been abused in the modern world. However, we have to make the distinction between the stranger and the neighbor when thinking about this idea. If someone is trying to convince you the “greater good” is to sacrifice for the sake of strangers (this is what globalism tries to do), that’s evil and should be avoided. But, if the “greater good” is your family, your neighborhood, and perhaps your town, then it should be weighed more carefully and with more of an open mind.
The mindset of Pheres has infected our society and we are seeing the results of it. Individualism has spiraled out of control, no longer reigned in by the ties people used to have to their ancestors, traditions, and lands. It’s no mistake that people are making memes that make fun of the mindset “But how does that affect you personally?” This was the philosophy of the last few decades—and the impact has been devastating.
“Live and let live.” “You do you.” “As long as it doesn’t hurt anyone.”
Look at what these platitudes have done to our culture… if we can even call it a culture anymore.
That's all for Alcestis by Euripides.
May your days be filled with grace.
-Andronikos Anodos
Click here for the reading list I am going through.
Thumbnail: Hercules snatches Alcestis from Thanatos, the god of the dead, and takes her to Admetus by Johann Heinrich Tischbein, c. 1780. Public domain.