#peraona art | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

katerinaaqu · 21 hours ago

Note

The phrase was undoubtedly common by the time historiographers like Pausanias were alive. One common trait between people like Pausanias or previous sources like Apollodorous is that they quote a lot on the sources they gather from local traditions and different telling. Which is why pausanias as well as Apollodorous etc always say "I heard" or "others say" etc. The adittion to the myth roughly at Augustean times (potentially further back too although we do not know for sure) were already famous at that time and already part of beloved narratives or in this case a proverb. The proverb of Diomedes Necessity could even apply to the essence that Diomedes joins the war even if he is not part of the oath of Tyndareus (unless you take Apollodorous as a source. Then things are different) or at how he had to kill members of his family in the war of Epigonoi etc. By the time Pausanias collects information this adittion was already a thing.

Yes it is possible that as it happens with other stories of people who claim to follow the Epic Cycle or the lost scripts of Nostoi etc they often confuse the local tradition to the actual myth. But even if it is indeed part of Little Iliad still the reasoning behind it could differ. But either way all of the said parts of Epic Cycle are also not fully compatible to Homer or even with each other (classic example how Little Iliad mentions Neoptolemus as the killer of Astyanax briefly while Iliou Persis mentions Odysseus. Ironically most recently the version of Iliou Persis gained popularity especially with the dislike of Odysseus as a character by post homeric sources especially Roman, but in ancient art the most frequent version is Neoptolemus and his death is implied on different ways than than throwing off the walls)

Other traditions such as the infamous scene where Odysseus throws his shield on the beach and lands on it to outsmart Protesilaus are also not that much mentioned by the sources which always speak highly on the bravery of protesilaus and even speak on how he jumps at the same time as Achilles and just happens to land first etc.

Oh I wouldn't speak on that because of Pausanias because as I said above Pausanias seems to be gathering information and not comment on them or show his preference to them. I mostly speak on Conon's adition to the story or rather the detailed description of betrayal upon betrayal between the two heroes that were known to interract very well so unless Conon was aware of some parts of Little Iliad or even before like Aithiopis etc which indicates some detrimation between the two heroes (something that other writers like Quintus didn't mention to their work of Posthomerica) then this version seems more like an added tradition fired up more by the anti-odysseus wave of the time. What is more Attic tradition was also generally against Odysseus as a persona even from classical times by writers such as Eurypedes. Even Sophocles who generally is one of the most fair writers in regards to the complexity of Odysseus oftentimes makes him almost the antihero of his work (for example Philoctetes). My estimation is that at classical times when Athens and Sparta rivalry was on their peak, Odysseus as a peraona fitted more to the aspects that Athenenas placed upon Spartans; fight and theft. An Athenean propaganda that wanted to differentiate themselves from the other city states and claim how honorable and righteous they were, wouldn't much allow space for characters like Odysseus being posed in a positive light and instead that was used as an example not to follow or as a symbol for what happens under the table in a war.

If I also dare to expand it further from Epic Cycle like Telegony Odysseus is associated with the area of Thesprotia which was an ally to Philip or Alexander and the Macedonian kingdom was not good news to the Atheneans which wouldn't help the projection of Odysseus as anti-hero. So all and all I am not surprised if especially in Roman times such proverbs with this context would be famous in Roman Athens and even combine them with local traditions and such and given how the Palladium Heist is memorized by ancient art but never in a negative light makes me more convinced that this is a later adittion that was aflame by local traditions etc.

I am not sure if the theft of the Palladium specifically fires so much controversy given how there was also the prophecy indicated that they needed it. Unless they wanted to use it to imply that "Odysseus was ready to do anything to win" the theft itself is presented by the Epic Cycle as a necessary evil. I would say Athenean anti-odysseus wave is mostly linked to Odysseus methods and their propaganda against war in general and against Sparta in particular that drove this. Odysseus was a controversial figure even in antiquity given how his methods opposed the ideal of the time of straightforward fight. Not to mention that Odysseus was also married to a spartan princess which I am sure for a fanatic patriot Athenean would be an interesting controversy hahaha 😆

Heyo!

I don't know how exactly to phrase this but I was wondering if you know anything about Odysseus trying/planing to kill Diomedes while they were stealing the Palladium. I have heard some people say that Odysseus did try to kill Diomedes while doing so but Diomedes noticed him so Odysseus stopped.

This feels so strange to me as Odysseus and Diomedes aren’t antagonistic in the Illiad and Diomedes is loved by Athena like Odysseus so betraying him, especially for hubris, seems like a good way to end up on Athena's bad side.

Also the translated summaries of Little Illiad I know don't mention it either but I know those translations can be missing out context. I suspect the Odysseus Betrayal is a "later adition" to the Epic Cycle but I am not that confident on that opinion.

Yes absolutely and I understand completely what you say. That is because the Palladium Heist betrayal story was peobably not part of the original epic cycle but rather a later adittion. More specifically through the work called Bibliotheca by Photius I, the ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinopole in 9th century seems to be mentioning in his work a Roman mythographer named Conon.

Conon lived and created during the times of Augustus. It seems that he is one of the oldest if not the oldest mythographer to ever mention this story. So the story quoted by Photius goes as such;

Basically after the revelation of Helen's Diomedes and Odysseus enter the city. Odysseus helps Diomedes on his shoulders so that he could climb but when he reaches out his hand Diomedes doesn't take him in and goes for the Palladium himself. When he comes back apparently Odysseus asks him on it and, according to Photius who quotes Conon, Diomedes "knows his cunning" and says that he didn't find it. That a spirit stole it and that he has another one. Odysseus realizes he is lying so he eventually draws his sword to kill Diomedes and take the Palladium to the Greeks himself. Apparently as he goes to stab Diomedes in the back, his sword casts a shadow by the moonlight or the glint of the weapon, Diomedes sees it and deflects him. He draws his own sword and threatens Odysseus with it wishing to "punish him for his cowardice" but eventually he decides otherwise (arguably knowing that the war needs him) and thus he drives him back to the camp while hitting him on his back with the flat of his sword. And according to Photius this is what gave the famous phrase to Greek language διομήδεια ανάγκη (Diomedes Need) which basically means "do something unpleasant out of necessity for the greater good"

So as you see the story does seem pretty bizarre. First it implies mutual distrust and rivalry between the homeric heroes for Diomedes doesn't take Odysseus in the temple, Odysseus asks him on the Palladium obviously with intention to steal it and Diomedes lying to him and of course the actual act. For starters Odysseus ready to kill Diomedes for the sakes of fame (while he literally saves his life in the Iliad) and not only that, be greedy and stupid enough to hold a sword to the moonlight. So it holds many contradictions to the entirety of Epic Cycle even Iliou Persis which also shows a more unpleasant side of Odysseus.

My guess is that the story is mostly linked to traditions of later years especially Roman sources and is not directly linked to the Epic Cycle. Even art of later years doesn't depict the Palladium Heist as a negative aura between the two heroes. If anything they seem to be cooperating just fine. And as I said this myth as told by Conon shows BOTH Diomedes and Odysseus as rivals and equally antagonizing and deceiving each other which doesn't usually appear to the Epic Cycle. Although of course we cannot be 100% sure given how the Epic Cycle is lost, it seems to me more like a roman legend that usually depict Greek heroes of Troy in general and Odysseus in particular, in the most negative light possible given how Odysseus is known for taking Troy, the mythical city of origin to the Romans (given how Aeneas who barely escapes with his life from Troy is the ancestor of the founders of Rome)

I hope this answers your question; to summarize it seems to me that this story of the Palladium Heist has as much connection to the Epic Cycle as Ovid has to Medusa legend; seems more like a version either created or told by Conon based on traditions of his time and the general anti-Odysseus climate.

#yeah although the poems are lost and we only have their retellings by later weiters or scholia from later writers #but as i mentioned before Odysseus was generally pictured in a negative light in almost all post-homeric sources with some exceptions #many people spoke about him in that light which is why i mostly compare homeric poems and their transactions in art #misquoting was indeed common and also many writers oftentimes quote sources to make their theories or beliefs more believable #tagamemnon #greek mythology #odysseus #the palladium #the palladium heist #the epic cycle #trojan war

70 notes · View notes