The Afterlife in the Classical and Italian Traditi

Congrats to a successful dialogue, Kathleen and Chester. I definitely agree with your overall theme of prophets being marginalized and that they neither can fit comfortably within regular mortals or gods

In relation with this, I found that it was interesting that in Oedipus Rex, Oedipus stated “but no living man can hope to force the gods to speak against their will” when the Chorus proposes that Phoebus (Apollo) should answer the riddle of the murder that he gave through his oracle at Delphi (I don’t actually have the lines since I have a print-out of the text). It is almost like a ploy technique to use prophets so that the Gods don’t have to directly answer the questions/orders they present (despite their knowledge of everything). It is true that the prophets are a tool/mouthpiece to provide the necessary information, but the information is sometimes unwanted (and as Professor Gosetti-Murrayjohn stated, they have no barrier or shield to block out disturbing knowledge), thus, the prophets are then marginalized as a result of their speaking truths that the community is abhorrent to hearing or is unable to understand. I guess I am getting at the fact that this marginalization is due to the will of the Gods, since it is within their power to punish mortals with forsight (take Cassandra for example, since Apollo made it so that no one would believe her, not matter the truth of her words), as well as (I think) it is within their power to make it so that the community of man could believe them.

Then again, if the Gods intervened with every single aspect of mortal life (as seen in the literature), there would be no sense of divine mystery (as a result of the distance created between the mortals and the gods) that the prophets could convey.

[Now with illustrations!]

Understanding societies of a different time and place is further complicated by the impossibility of “translating” culture and values between what one knows and what one is studying: some things have no simple parallels.

In Classical Athens, what many people think of as the most liberal polis of the era, women were very much marginalized. They were housed separately within living quarters, limited in their permission to be in public spaces, and absolutely devoid of political power. Certainly there are differences between how women were treated in different societies of that era, and within the legends and myths from that era, but we must note the differentiation between reality and fantasy. The powerful women from Homeric epic may have been acceptable as characters within an epic poem, and perhaps well loved in such a role, but do not mistake that as an acceptance of them into an actual society.

So, hopefully, I’ve established that within the Greek society, women were marginalized to begin with, despite being half the population.

Here’s a list of characteristics that marginalize the Sibyl and the Oracle:
Women. (i.e. Not a man.)
Having no father/husband.
Living in a cave (apart from society).
Powers of prophecy (only through possession by (usually male) gods).
Political clout (via men).

In the Latin tradition, many of these rules still apply, since the Aeneid is set in the ancient past, more within the time frame of the Homeric subjects than within early Imperial Rome.