Thread by @Apotheiite

— Hesiod's Theogony: a thread. —
I beckon thee, o divine Muses; ye sacred bringers of holy harmony and concord, to ye I raise my prayer: bear in me thy fruits most righteous, mould my thoughts to thy beauty, allow thy light illumine my mind, so all that I say may attest to truth.

There will be two threads (due to Twitter's limitations), split into three parts.

1st thread:
1. Myth as theological allegory.
2. Modern difficulty interpreting Hesiod.

2nd thread:
3. The theology of Hesiod's divine succession.

Check the first tweet's QRT for the 2nd thread.

1. I have long held the position that myth is allegorical and always has been. While it is impossible to generalise all myths, some occasionally more legitimate than others, most often this allegory is used to convey theology. This has long been known within Hellenic tradition.

Detractors argue that, in their effort to desacralise the mythic tradition, allegorical interpretations are merely foisted upon the myths, that the myths hold no intrinsic theology or meaning beyond their literal telling. Christians, atheists, and even pagans have argued this.

I needn't spend much time on this question. Rarely does evidence change their opinions, each having their own special reason to strip myth of its worth. However, what must be noted foremost is myth's perfect congruence with Platonic thought, even that of Hesiod's.

Plotinus himself gave several exegeses of Hesiod, alongside many other Platonist writers who wrote relating to theogony, particularly the succession of Uranus to Saturn then to Jupiter. We also see Plato give his own exegesis multiple times regarding several myths in his works.

It was also the established theology within the Eleusinian, Dionysian, and Orphic mysteries; so too was exegesis common among the Pythagoreans. All this should be enough to show Hellenic exegetic tradition was both well established and accepted.

So we can dismiss the allegation that theology by mythic allegory is a modern retcon, but rather has always been present within myth and has always been known within Hellenic tradition to be present; that to the contrary, the retcon is in stripping it of its intrinsic theology.

2. Having said all this, it's become clear that among moderns is a difficulty with reconciling Hesiod. Despite Plotinus' guidance (Enn. V-1), there is still some confusion brought on likely by common modern misconceptions regarding the Titans, the Gods, and the Titanomachy.

It has led to many outright rejecting the relevancy of Hesiodic myth—a conclusion which only serves to weaken our tradition—or has resulted in egregious interpretations alienated from the truth of the historic tradition. This proliferated ignorance sullies the beauty of the cult.

The primary issue seems to be rooted in a vital misunderstanding of theological myth, particularly in the use of theogonies and how to reconcile these with other myths which suggest a different divine order. To approach myth so rigorously is to miss its underlying theology.

To state it simply: within theological myth, any described theogony/descendance is to express the principles which form the essential-act of the described god or goddess. Plotinus (from Plato) gives the example of comparing the two Aphrodites worshipped- Ourania and Pandemos.

Aphrodite Ourania (or "Heavenly") is born solely from Ouranos after Kronos' castration of him. She is pure and represents unmingled divine beauty, deduced by fact of her pure birth and high descendance.

Aphrodite Pandemos (or "All Peoples"), on the other hand, is a lower and more earthly beauty, begotten from Zeus and Dione. Dione is literally "She-Zeus", a representation of Aphrodite Pandemos being a very high beauty but nonetheless a beauty of the All-Many, not the All-One.

As a general rule, theogonies and mythic parentages are provided by writers for the purpose of conveying to the reader the nature of the god the poet intends. This is why myths can seem to "contradict" in their parentages- there is no true contradiction, but merely hypostases.

And this is what is most frequently missed by those today: gods and goddesses have a multitude of inner hypostases, the unity of whom produces the essential-act of the god or goddess. It is in not acknowledging this that some have come to ignore or misunderstand mythology.

It is most important to remember that theological myth has not occurred in time or space. The theology is eternal, so there is no "time" at which Kronos was king and Zeus was not, nor any "time" when Kronos was overthrown. This is theological allegory, not history.

So by acknowledging that myth does not take place in space-time, that among the gods there is a holistic and harmonic participation in unity with the supreme divine essence, identifying and recognising how gods are intertwined becomes far easier.

-----------------------------------
The third part will be in a separate thread which will be posted soon. I'll reply to this tweet a link and quote retweet the first tweet when it's posted.
-----------------------------------