uranus/gaia, oceanus/tethys, cronus/rhea
plato in timaeus 40.e.5 – 41.a.3 says: γῆς τε καὶ οὐρανοῦ παῖδες ὠκεανός τε καὶ τηθὺς ἐγενέσθην, τούτων δὲ φόρκυς κρόνος τε καὶ ῥέα καὶ ὅσοι μετὰ τούτων, ἐκ δὲ κρόνου καὶ ῥέας ζεὺς ἥρα τε καὶ πάντες ὅσους ἴσμεν ἀδελφοὺς λεγομένους αὐτῶν, ἔτι τε τούτων ἄλλους ἐκγόνους, from gaia and uranus were born oceanus and tethys. from them came phorcys, cronus, and rhea, and all those born along with them. from cronus and rhea came zeus and hera, and all those whom we name their brothers, and other descendants of theirs.
proclus on timaeus book v, 171.21-172.25 and 174.18 explains that just as the visible cosmos, although it possesses multiplicity and variety because it has imaged the intelligible order of the forms, contains within itself these two extremes, uranus and gaia, of which the one has the role of father and the other of mother, in the same way we must also consider that within each element of the cosmos these two principles exist, uranus and gaia: in an airy manner within air, in a watery manner within water, in an cthonian manner within earth, and according to all the modes mentioned before, so that each thing may be a perfect cosmos, ordered by its corresponding principles. since even man is said to be a small cosmos, how much more must each element, in its own appropriate way, possess everything that the whole cosmos possesses universally ? for this reason plato, immediately after referring to gaia and uranus there, presented his theory concerning gaia and uranus here, beginning from earth and heaven. because the here is analogus to there. but those there are in a universal way the causes of the things now produced, while these here, in analogy with those, exist both in the whole of heaven and in the whole of earth, and certainly in each element according to the order of that element, for example in an airy, watery, or cthonian manner, as we have said. there is heaven in earth and earth in heaven: here uranus exists in a cthonian manner, while there gaia exists in a heavenly manner. orpheus called the moon heavenly earth. and we should not question. and we should not be surprised by these things, nor wonder how heaven exists on earth. how else does each of the intelligible forms carry out its procession from above all the way down ?
firstly, we shall recall again that the discussion concerns the sublunary gods, and that all of them exist everywhere, and that they have come forth in analogy with the intelligible and intellectual kings.
then, having faith in these principles, we will maintain that, just as the first heaven (primum mobile) is the limit and container of the intellectual gods, holding together the measure that begins from the agathon itself and from the intelligible gods and descends to the intellectual worlds, in the same way this heaven below is the limit and container of the generative gods. it holds together within one boundary the creative measure that began from the uranian gods and reached as far as the gods who received generation as their allotted domain, and it links these gods with the uranian sovereignty of the gods. just as the creator is analogous with the agathon itself, so too the single divinity of this heaven here has an analogy with the intellectual heaven. just as there the measure and limit descend from the agathon and, through uranus, reach all the intellectual gods, so here too the limit reaches as far as the generative gods and the higher kinds, descending from the creator and from the summit of the encosmic gods, by which i mean from the connective middle point of the visible heaven. because heaven, proceeding everywhere, has received this order: in one place in a unified and cryptic manner, in another in a manifest and divided manner. in one place the limit is set to souls, in another to the works of nature, in another to other things, each time in a different way: primarily in air, secondarily in the watery orders, and lastly in gaia and in the chthonic works. there exist bonds among these. the divine within air is one thing, and the daemonic upon the earth is another. in some cases, the mode is different within different levels, and in others, the mode is different within the same region.
after uranus then, let us turn to gaia; and having entreated her to assist us in interpreting her, let us present her definition from her first appearance. since she appeared among the middle triads of the intellectual gods together with uranus, the container of all the intellectual gods, she proceeds by analogy with the intelligible gaia, which we found to be the first of the intelligible triads. and, as is fitting for the life-generating orders, she is assimilated to the first unlimited and is the ἐκδόχιος κόλπος of the generative divinity of uranus, and the middle centre of his paternal goodness, since she reigns together with him and is the power of him who is father. the earth that corresponds to her, and that presides over sublunary matter, is something like the fertile power of uranus. she reveals his paternal, boundary-setting, measuring, and connective providence, and extends herself to all things through her fertile powers, herself generating the whole infinity of sublunary matter, just as uranus, which provides limit and boundary to the lower things, generates the order of limit. this limit and boundary, then, determines the existence of each matter, according to which daemons, gods, souls, and bodies are held together, and it unifies those things that imitate the single ennead of the universe. the unlimited multiplies the powers of each thing. for there is much limit in all sublunary beings, and much unlimited too, which extends into the divine region and into the region of all beings that follow after the gods.
we have, then, these two orders which generate the divine and daemonic processions within all classes of beings and within all the elements. we also have their single sovereignty, just as there is among the intelligible gods. from these two orders proceeds the second dyad, oceanus and tethys. yet this generation does not occur through any generative union, nor through the coming together of things already separated, nor through division or severance, but through an indivisible union and conjunction of powers, which the theologians call marriage, because marriage belongs properly to this level. thus he calls gaia the πρώτην νύμφην, and the union of gaia and uranus the primordial marriage. marriage does not exist among those realities that are united in the highest degree, hence there is no marriage of phanes and nyx, who are united with one another in an intelligible manner. marriage, rather, appears among those things which, together with their unity, also display a distinction of powers and energies. and it seems for these reasons that marriage is appropriate to this heaven here and this earth here, insofar as they are images (ἐνεικονιζομένοις) of that heaven and that earth above. this, certainly, was known to the institutions of the athenians, who ordained the celebration of the marriage of uranus and gaia, and keeping these gods in mind during the eleusinian rites, they would look upward to the sky and cry, ὕε (rain), and looking downward to the earth they would cry, κύε (conceive), because they knew that all things receive their generation from these two as from father and mother. through this union, the union accompanied by distinction, and through their goodness, they produce oceanus and tethys. in the higher realm, they do not generate oceanus and tethys immediately, but before them come two monads, two triads, and two hebdomads, within which oceanus and tethys are contained. the monads together with the triads remain near the father, while within the hebdomads oceanus and tethys both remain and proceed simultaneously, whereas the others have advanced into another divine cosmos. such is the order of things above. down here though, the account omits the causes that remained wholly within the father, and transmits only those that both proceeded forth and yet remained, because the present discourse concerns the generative gods, and with these gods are appropriately associated procession, motion, diversity, and the conjunction of female and male, so that generation may occur and the ordering of matter, which is adorned by the forms, and of diversity, which is interwoven with identity. for this reason, it begins from a dyad, proceeds through a dyad, and will ultimately return to a dyad. in speaking of the dyad, it begins from gaia. for this is more fitting to the realm of generation.
of course, the causes of these two, oceanus and tethys, exist both among the noetic gods and within this cosmos. because oceanus must distinguish the primary orders from those beneath them, just as the poets, not unreasonably, call oceanus the one who marks the boundary of the earth. oceanus is also the cause of motion, procession, and power, since he implanted into the noetic lives vigor and fertile abundance, into the souls swiftness in their energies and purity in their generations, and into bodies mobility. and into the gods he provides the cause of motion and providential energy, into the angels the revelatory and noetic swiftness, into the daemons, active and operative power, and into the heroes, he is the giver of a life that flourishes and reaches excellence. but also within each element, the aerial is the cause of every change occurring in the aerial matter and of the cycle of celestial phenomena, as aristotle also says in meteorologica (346b), the aquatic gives substantial existence to fertility, mobility, and powers of every kind, when the chthonic is the creator of perfection by which the earth generates and differentiates forms, as well as of the processes of genesis and death. if there are any chthonic life-generating and creative orders, it is oceanus who distinguishes them. and if there are any cohesive powers of the earth, which oversee the logical principles and the genesis, oceanus awakens them, multiplies them, and sets them in motion. as for tethys, it is proper to regard her, as her name suggests, the eldest and ancestress of the gods, just as rhea is their mother. the theologian had already called another goddess μαῖα before her: μαῖα, θεῶν ὑπάτη, νὺξ ἄμβροτε, πῶς τάδε φράζεις;, nurserer, highest of the gods, immortal nyx, why do you speak these ? according to cratylus (402.c), one would characterise tethys πηγαία θεά. her name is an indication for the pure, the undefiled and the filtered. even though oceanus creates everything and sets all motions, γένεσις καλεῖται θεῶν, tethys separates the unified cause of those motions into primary and secondary movements. for this reason plato said that she got her name from the verbs διαττᾶν and διηθεῖν. there words separate like the verbs ξαίνειν and κερκίζειν, as plato remarks in the sophist (226.b). so as oceanus generates collectively every kind of motion, divine, noetic, psychic, and physical, tethys, who distinguishes internal from external motions, is called tethys because διαττῶσα καὶ διηθοῦσα, separating material motions from immaterial ones. naturally division belongs to the female, just as unity belongs to the masculine. such, then, is what plato would maintain concerning these divinities, and he expressed it clearly in the cratylus. on the other hand, according to the interpretation of iamblichus, tethys must be defined as the bestower of foundation and permanence. to summarise all that has been said, one must regard tethys as the cause of stabilisation, permanence, and the establishment within herself of those motions that proceed outward. in general, oceanus is the cause of every motion, divine, noetic, psychic, physical, for all the lower, tethys is the cause of differentiation of the streams which come from oceanus, giving each one of them the proper clarity of motion based on their nature. whether it moves itself or moves others, does so in its own distinctive manner. in fact, the theologians state that oceanus is the giver of all motion when they say that he sends ten streams out of which nine move to the sea, because from the motions nine are somatic and only one belongs to the essence that is separate from the other bodies (laws, 894.c). so, all the divinities that oceanus and tethys generate, oceanus sets them in motion and tethys separates them, preserving the purity of the generative causes and establishing the means within those energies that are prior to the generated beings themselves.
as we have said, the genesis of oceanus and tethys from the preceding gods, uranus and gaia, cannot be accomplished through a union such as occurs among sensible beings, nor through a union such as we observe among the intelligible gods, nyx and phanes, it is reasonable that their offspring should be distinguished from one another analogous to their progenitors, yet both have also received a likeness to both of their parents. oceanus as the male, he is assimilated to the paternal cause, but as the giver of motion, he is assimilated to the maternal cause, which is the cause of processions. likewise, tethys as the female, she is assimilated to the fertile cause, but as the one who brings the stable establishment of productive causes within their own lives, she is assimilated to the creative cause. the male corresponds to the monad, while the female corresponds to the dyad. since one dyad has arisen from another, and in its entirety has been assimilated to the dyad that generated it, it differentiates its causes and the whole numerical order that follows, so that we must everywhere attribute the principle of differentiation to the order of oceanus and tethys. for this reason the tradition speaks of many oceanuses, since we observe that the order of gods constituting this differentiating divine series possesses many forms and manifestations.
in the case of the preceding genesis, one dyad was generated from another dyad, the generative and motive dyad arose from the dyad that brought things to completion and imposed limits upon them. in the second genesis, however, from a dyad there arises a multitude which returns to its causes through a triad and manifests the complete procession. this multitude itself is divided into that which corresponds to the limit and that which corresponds to the unlimited. the triad represents the element of limit within this group, whereas the unnamed number represents the unlimited within it. and within the triad itself, one part corresponds to the monad and to the limit, while another corresponds to the dyad and to the unlimited. and in the previous procession the offspring came into being solely according to the principles of the limit and noetic determination, whereas in this procession there is also the intervention of indeterminacy. because after the boundary constituted by the triad there is added the phrase, and all those who were born together with them, which indicates the fullness of procession and the differentiation of these three orders, so that the genesis of this group is triadic by virtue of the principle of reversion, but dyadic because of the introduction of the unlimited and of indeterminacy into the process.
but since we want to regurgitate its intelligible causes, like we have done with the previously mentioned orders, and since in the preceding levels oceanus and tethys are described as the siblings of cronus and rhea rather than as their parents (for the procession of these gods also derives from uranus and gaia, and the entire order of the titans proceeds from them), let us examine why plato here derives phorcys, cronus, and rhea from oceanus and tethys. one might think that in saying this he is not following the orphic traditions, because there they are described as siblings, not as the offspring of oceanus and tethys. gaia secretly bears children to uranus, as the theologian orpheus says (fr. 114): ἑπτὰ μὲν εὐειδεῖς κούρας, ἑπτὰ δὲ παῖδας ἄνακτας· θυγατέρας μὲν θέμιν καὶ εὔφρονα τηθύν, μνημοσύνην τε βαθυπλόκαμον θείαν τε μάκαιραν, ἠδὲ διώνην τίκτεν ἀριπρεπὲς εἶδος ἔχουσαν φοίβην τε ρείην τε, διὸς γενέτειραν ἄνακτος, seven beautiful daughtes and seven sons kings. she bore the daughters themis and gracious tethys, long-haired mnemosyne and blessed theia, and dione who had glorious beauty, phoeby and rhea, the mother of king zeus. and as many sons: κοῖόν τε κροῖόν τε μέγαν φόρκυν τε κραταιόν καὶ κρόνον ωκεανόν θ᾽ υπερίονά τ᾽ ιαπετόν τε, coeus, great crius, mighty phorcys, cronus, oceanus, hyperion, and iapetus.
and even though these things have long been recorded by the theologian, how is it that timaeus derives cronus and rhea from oceanus and tethys ?
we have already assumed that that oceanus and that tethys stand above cronus and rhea as intermediaries between them and their parents, and as ὁροφύλακας, guardians of the boundaries, between the two pairs, like they are customarily praised. and when these points have been established, we must respond to the objection first by saying that it is not surprising that the same beings, because of the superiority of their rank, should be called both the siblings and the parents of certain others. the first offspring, together with their causes, produce the offspring that come after them. therefore all souls are sisters with respect to the one creative cause and with respect to their life-giving principle and source. yet the divine souls, cooperating with the creative intellect and the life-generating causes, give existence to particular souls, because the divine souls arose first and remain within the wholeness of their source, having received the power to generate beings like themselves. the same is true even among the gods themselves. all the descendants of cronus are siblings as they proceed from the one monad that generated them. nevertheless, zeus is called father both by hera and by poseidon in the divine poet: ζεῦ πάτερ, ἀργικέραυνε, ἔπος τί τοι ἐν φρεσὶ θήσω, zeus father, shiningbolted, and later, ζεῦ πάτερ, ἦ ῥά τίς ἐστι βροτῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀπείρονα γαῖαν, zeus father, is there any mortal upon the boundless earth..
because in one case poseidon and in the other hera call ζεῦ πάτερ. and it is not at all strange, though oceanus and tethys are called siblings and and parents of cronus and rhea, that way they preserved the parental character among their siblings.
then, we must say that, within the two hebdomads of the titans, oceanus both proceeds and remains static, having united himself with the father and never withdrawing from the paternal kingship. the others, however, because they delight in procession, are said to carry out the will of gaia and to plot against their father, separating themselves from his sovereignty in order to advance into another order. maybe though, amongst the celestial genuses some remain solely within their principles, exactly like the first two triads (because as orpheus says, when uranus perceived that they: ἀμείλιχον ἦτορ ἔχοντας καὶ φύσιν ἐκνομίην, ῥῖψε βαθὺν γαίης ἐς τάρταρον, had unyielding heart and lawless nature, he cast them into the depths of tartarus of the earth, concealing them, therefore, in invisible regions because of the superiority of their power), and others both remain and process like oceanus and tethys. because as the other titans rush to conspiracy against their father, oceanus refuses the commands of his mother and hesitates. ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ωκεανὸς μὲν ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἔμιμνεν ὁρμαίνων, ποτέρωσε νόον τράποι, ἢ πατέρα ὅν γυιώσῃ τε βίης καὶ ἀτάσθαλα λωβήσαιτο σὺν κρόνῳ ἠδ᾽ ἄλλοισιν ἀδελφοῖς, οἳ πεπίθοντο μητρὶ φίλῃ, ἢ τούς γε λιπὼν μένοι ἔνδον ἕκηλος. πολλὰ δὲ πορφύρων μένεν ἥμενος ἐν μεγάροισι, σκυζόμενος ᾗ μητρί, κασιγνήτοισι δὲ μᾶλλον, then oceanus remianed in his halls pondering which way he should turn his mind, whether he should deprive his father of power and impiously injure him together with cronus and his other brothers, who obeyed their dear mother, or whether he should abandon them and remain quietly within. long did he deliberate, sitting in his halls, displeased with his mother and even more with his brothers.
oceanus both remains and proceeds with tethys, who is connected to him from the very first genesis. the other titans, however, hasten toward differentiation and procession, and their leader is mighty cronus, as the theologian says. that cronus is indeed superior to oceanus has also been declared by the theologian, who says that cronus occupies heavenly olympus and, having been enthroned there, reigns over the titans, whereas oceanus received the entire middle allotment. oceanus dwells in the θεσπεσίοις ῥείθροις, which lie beyond olympus, and that he governs uranus that is there, not the highest as the myth relates, but the uranus that has fallen away and has been established there.
as these things are, oceanus and tethys remain and are united with uranus, jointly producing with him the sovereignty of his offspring, cronus and rhea, but as they are established in the abiding power of their mother, they jointly produce with her phorcys. gaia generates phorcys, having mingled in love with pontus, and besides him she also produces nereus and thaumas. this is not the phorcys of gaia, but the phorcys of pontus, as is clear from theogony (237). and as tethys is filled with the power of gaia, she is in a certain sense herself gaia; and for this reason she may be said to generate this phorcys together with oceanus. likewise, oceanus contains within himself the intelligible pontus. tethys, as she participates in the nature of gaia, and oceanus, as he is pontus as the cause of pontus, give subsistence to this god, just as they also give subsistence to cronus and rhea.
if, however, some myth indicates that in the higher realm cronus stands above oceanus and rhea above tethys, we must answer that there the order is according to essence. because the causes of intellection hold sway over the causes of motion. here below by contrast, all things exist within motion and change. therefore, it is fitting that oceanus, as the source of motion, should be placed before cronus, and tethys before rhea. this way the difficulty may be resolved from another perspective as well. and if oceanus and tethys are superior to cronus and rhea because the former remain united with the father, whereas the latter are joined to the mother and separate themselves from the father, then we should regard oceanus and tethys as occupying an intermediate position and as preserving, in relation to cronus and rhea, a certain paternal superiority. but if they are of the same rank as, or even inferior to, cronus and rhea, one might instead say that, because the causes of motion exercise predominance within sublunary realities, oceanus and tethys have received a higher position than cronus and rhea insofar as the latter are understood according to this particular mode of existence.
