As we struggle to wonder just how much of this ancient idiosyncratic literature is factual, and how much is not, amongst the Satires, travestic works whose very name is associable with Satyrium, an ancient name for orchids, perhaps these observations can help us sort the facts from the tongue in cheek. We may see where early writers, through the use of allegory and personification, were far more concerned with keeping natural history than with keeping social history, which readily accounts for countless idiosyncracies and other peculiarities of these ancient works.

Additionally, as highly complicated, ornate plants, they are eligible for a great deal of scrutiny as to expressions of their purposes or uses, through the ancient Doctrine of Signatures. One immediately notable suggestion which seems to fit this pattern is that the natural products once derived from these orchids seem to have included anti-depressants; to the ecclectic or Signaturist this might be immediately obvious, owing to the gaping grins that a great deal of the figurines possess.

Only a very few of these orchids are shown below, and only a few brief comments are given for each specie. Much, much more could be said about them, and may well have been said about them throughout the ages.

All things considered, it may be that the single purpose that inspired the ancient genera of satires may have been to comment on the humorous Signatures that appear in these flowers, and to bring them to the attention of the general populace in their functional form-as Signatures. Such a process not only helps find substitutes so that these rare plants do not have to be utilized economically (they are presently covered by the Berne convention, in fact), but helps create understanding of the same Signatures in other plants when they occur in other plants, but less obviously or less flamboyantly.  

Ophrys apifera

Athena or Helen. The upcoming image from the publication of the American Orchid Society's articles on Ophyrs demonstrates that the incredible unlikelihood that the highly peculiar icon of giving birth on a board or plank, which is found in Greek mythology, and is also, as demonstrated by the photo, amazingly, found in the icons of Orchids!

While it takes some imagination to read "birth" out of this image (that's pretty much the point, isn't it, it takes some imagination!), the connection may be most easily made by noting that Signaturism benfits from communicating birth by referring dramatically to a possible danger thereof, blood loss, as well as a key point in menstrual concerns and healthy recovery from birthing, the need for materials to build new blood.

The "plank" formed by the top sepal seems exceedingly rare in not only the genus but in orchids in general, and in fact the mythological reference is really quite graphic if you turn the image upside down in your mind; the two tepals quite easily and convincingly appear to be bare legs straddling the plank.

Many other elements from mythology are much easier to find in these orchid forms and colors; one of them is Apollo's ride on dolpins to found Delphi, several dolphin like forms are found in Ophrys orchids and may inevitably have markings that could tend to resemble footprints. They may have at one time proved as an invaluable teaching aid in reminding people that if they are stranded on a desert island, dolphins can be transportation- friendly rescuers!- rather than the folly of using them as food.

Oedipus. Not easily found in reference works, there is some reference to actual species which fit the description that follows. Oedipus is closely involved with Egypt a number of times (his father's return from Thebes, his encounter with the Sphinx, etc. etc.). This may largely recount that the species in question is one of those whose features recount the Egyptian uraeus, the serpent-symbol which protrudes from the forehead of many Egyptian figures. The positioning of many of the figurines may substantiate a notion that this particular parent of "Oedipus" is one of the species of Ophrys which resembles the position of a charioteer.

The inappropriate and unsavory predicament of Oedipus, accidentally killing his father and accidentally marrying his mother and bearing children with her, is quite a different thing in botanical terms. It is in fact routine, with the exception of plants normally having the scandalous aspect of being hermaphrodites.

There is also a subtle wry irony woven into this. Most of us would assume we would avoid Oedipus' fate because we would notice a family resemblance. Emphasize "family resemblance", because this is of paramount importance in recognizing the heredity of the orchids in question.

As a vegetation allegory, the story of Oedipus would describe a specie or subspecies of Ophrys whose rarity and endangered status is made even more severe by the predicament of self-sterility. That is, unable to fertilize itself, this certain orchid would only bear seed if pollenated by a fertile plant which is in close physical proximity, probably the plant it came from, i.e., it's "mother".

Such a plant therefore can only be progated vegetatively, and largely artificially, to protect it.

The allegorical description of this predicament is intriguing. The eyes of the figurines are represented by pollen organs, and having these absent is representable by way of allegory through a blind character. While amazingly, and accordingly, Oedipus is in fact blinded- he gouges out his own eyes- the story performs another humorous twist by reversing the logical sequence of events and placing the event at the end, rather than the beginning of the story.

Ironically, a commentator on the story with the least amount of appropriate sagacity is obviously going to want to interject that Oedipus had to be blind from the beginning to have missed the family resemblance between himself, his father, and his mother.

Travesty also occurs in the rendering in more subtle forms. The complex turns of fate of the story actually aren't quite as scandalous as the unaltered vegetable allegory. Because the "eyes" of the figurine that Oedipus is lacking are male pollen organs, "he" is actually a "she", and his mother, a hermaphrodite!

Our connection between the Ophrys and the Egyptian head-dresses continue. There is some possibility that the Egyptian uraeus is inspired by the Greek orchids, or that the genus was once indigenous to Egypt. The latter may be discouraged by the content of Hindu mythology, which seems to fit as closely as the Greek to the context of the Ophryrs icons, even though if the genus had been significantly indigenous to India, it might easily remain.

There is also some possibility that reference to "Egyptians" in Greek literature are references to Ophrys orchids. Solon's encounter with the Pharoah (the correct contrivance in context), for example, where he is told that the Egyptians' history recalled four great deluges occuring to the world may both recount a correct age of Egyptian civization but perhaps more correctly, an estimated date for the age of the orchids.

So... to what extent did these incredible specie influence ancient peoples, apart from apparently being candidates for having inspired the religions of the times?

First of all, their conservation may have been coordinated with the establishment of Greek temples. These orchids are calciphiles, limestone-loving, which is one of the transparent clues of the Spartae appearing from the sowing of teeth, which are also calciferous. Incidentally, it evidences or implies the ancient Greeks were aware of the chemical composition of both limestone (calcium carbonate) and teeth (calcium phosphate), although of course we are taught differently by neocentric thought. Hence, not only is the appearance of these plants an indicator of limestone in the soil, and possible locations for limestone quarries, but it is also expeditious to base their cultivation on an abundant source of finely chopped lime- the leftovers from building temples.

Indeed, although it is not clear what was grown in them, it is clear that quite often, ancient temples had boxed planters built into the stone around them. Likewise, the overly accommodating steps of temples leave ample convenient places for clay pots.

In view of a connection between orchid icons and deity identities, it is likely that Ophrys orchids were cultivated around these temples, in accordance when anyone could observe the icons of a particular orchid were somehow appropriate to the resident deity. It could then be grown at the temple, where poets, storytellers, shaman and healers, and others could all observe its icons, and their interpretations, and report them to the resident priests or priestesses. Likewise, all of these persons could freely congregate and discuss amongst themselves their interpretations of these icons, converge to involve themselves in cultivation techniques, etc., along with the other normal social functions of the temples.

The installation of temples in possible proximity to certain orchid populations would also mean that the resident priests could oversee and protect any populations which may have been endangered.

Such a view of ancient peoples as greatly concerned and tireless conservationists sets the stage for a possible better understanding of certain ancient historical structures such as Hadrian's wall or the Great Wall of China, which make negligible protection against driven and determined human beings, but do make formidable protection against migrating ruminants which may have threatened native populations of plants though grazing. These animals at times have only migrated through scarcity of water. This is especially apparent in the case of the former, Hadrian's wall. Scholars are easily puzzled how such a structure could present any obstacle to invading human armies whatsoever, and seem equally puzzled that the moat that surrounds it is so shallow in addition.

Obviously, its nature does not conform to its expressed purpose. My own conclusion of course is that it was intended to prevent grazing animals from wandering and devastating limited populations of essential wild medicinal plants, and equipping it with a shallow watering moat allow animals merely driven by thirst to drink and thereby be discouraged from trying to pass the wall, standing only a mere several or a few feet high.

Additionally, the markings apparent in large samplings of Ophrys images, and in the periphery of ancient literature, suggest a possible origin for the written language of the Greeks. Any appreciable handbook on Mediterranean orchids should constitute a collection of images wherein the entire Greek alphabet can be found as floral markings.

Such a feature is forthcoming on this site.

The connection to the alphabet also connotes the genus Ophrys as being to some degree interchangeable with, and illuminated by, the botanicals of the related stories of Echo and Narcissus, and of Apollo and Hyacinths.

While references such as Baumann's "The Greek Plant World in Myth, Art and Literature" contain a number of specie that may be originally referred to as "the" plant which Hyacinth became, marked with a cry of grief or lament with the Grecian letters, "AI", it would not only be unfortunate but nearly preposterous not to overlook the astounding set of alphabetical markings that grace these orchids. Likewise, and accordingly, when there is reference to ethnobotanical use of these orchids, they have been used as anti-depressants.

Still, the craft of Signaturism is important to their conservation, for seeing them as figurines with gaping grins can often provoke mirth and cheer without resorting to physically utilizing or harvesting the plant, and for this purpose of course imitations of these flowers are perfectly suitable.

We can seen their possible role in the ancient Chronia, for the festival celebrating the return from the shortest days of the year, those days which can cause the most serious degrees of Seasonal Affective Disorder may traditionally involve the use of wine as a celebratant. Still, from a medical or shamanic point of view, the use of a depressant to ward off depression is dubious. These is some evidence that a variety of materials were added to celebratory wines, which may coincidentally both help offset the risk of increasing depression resulting from the use of alcohol, while simultaneously preventing the occurance of hangover. Ophrys may have been amongst them, although it may have been quickly replaced for the sake of conservation.

What would be reasonable is that during this celebration, facsimiles of the Orchids would have been fashioned. They may fail to exist any longer because of having been fashioned of biodegradable materials, such as paper mache, and yet such small, colorful, cheerful figurines may be the predecessors of Christmas-tree ornaments and angels. (Note also the particular way in which the sepals and tepals of some of these orchid figurines causes them to appear winged.)

What we have to contend with, all told, is that a primary portion of the architecture and mythology of ancient Greece, like other ancient structures whose most obvious role is conservation, may have been devoted to the public awareness and preservation of what may be the world's most amazing genus of plants, in addition to diligently trying to obtain the benefits of the plants in question without exploitation. The temple that may have been erected to stand as a guard post against the extinction of a specie is certainly both a far cry from what we have been previously told, and from the meager provisions and efforts we currently employ to ward against the extinction of specie. There is no ranger tower to stand guard over each population of an endangered specie, whose score of inhabitants is ready to take immediate and decisive action if necessary. Perhaps there should be, and particularly in retrospect. Once, this degree of dedication to living creatures probably prevailed.

It's a far cry from the stereotypical "simple Greek shepherd"- but what that approaches reality isn't? Just as today's seed collectors lament the devastation of specie because shepherds have allowed their animals to graze countless rare and precious specie, so too would the tragedy of devastation of the Ophyrs by ruminant in all likelihood never have been allowed.