In the context of a dictum advising against disparagement of those who are auspicious (l. 610), i.e. the prophets, seers, and oracles who deliver the gods’ auspices, the “worthy friend” whom one should not “lay aside” might be that auspice bearer. The implication, then, is that Oidipous has denigrated an auspice-bearer or the god for whom he speaks (or both) and so alienated the god’s valuable (ἐσθλόν) friendship. Oidipous is denigrating both Kreon, who served him as an ambassador to Delphi, and Teiresias, upon whom he called to serve him as prophet. Throwing away such supports, Kreon says, amounts to throwing away one’s own life. [Mi] [Mw] This again suggests that Oidipous may have brought ruin upon himself by alienating the god. There is a problem, however, with the sequence, for Oidipous’s denigration of Teiresias and Kreon has just occurred, while the actions that led to his ruin lie in the distant past. The cause should not follow the effect. Surely, then, Oidipous must have done something long ago to denigrate an auspice bearer and so to alienate the god and bring ruin upon himself. Given both Delphi’s signal role in this myth and the possible parallel with Athens, the auspice bearer in question would be Delphi, past denigration of whose prophecies may, according to Kreon’s homily, cost the city its life. Athenians may find an example of such denigration in its own actions, when it forcibly reassigned management of the sacred precinct at Delphi. [Mipi] [P] [Aj]