Disclaimer: I am not an ancient Greek scholar. For the full disclaimer, Read here.
“Fear not, Diomed, to do battle with the Trojans, for I have set in your heart the spirit of your knightly father Tydeus. Moreover, I have withdrawn the veil from your eyes, that you know gods and men apart. If, then, any other god comes here and offers you battle, do not fight him; but should Jove’s daughter Venus come, strike her with your spear and wound her.”
Iliad, Book 5; Samuel Butler translation
Book 5 Summary
Diomedes, a warrior fighting for the Achaeans, is blessed by the goddess Athena, making him near unstoppable on the battlefield. He slays many Trojans and Trojan allies until he is wounded by Pandarus with an arrow. Diomedes prays for the chance to have revenge and Athena grants him new strength. Diomedes slays Pandarus and almost kills his companion Aeneas, son of Aphrodite. When Aphrodite tries to shield Aeneas and whisk him away, Diomedes wounds her. When Aphrodite drops Aeneas, Apollo catches him and begins to carry him away. Diomedes then tries to fight Apollo, but Apollo warns him to back off or suffer the consequences of fighting against a god. Diomedes backs off and Apollo takes Aeneas out of the battlefield long enough to be healed of his wounds.
Other notable warriors mentioned in this chapter are Idomeneus, who fights for the Achaeans, and Sarpedon, a son of Zeus, who fights for the Trojans. Sarpedon ends up slaying one of the sons of Hercules but is wounded in the confrontation.
Meanwhile, Hector enters the fray with the blessing and protection of Ares (much like the same blessing Athena placed on Diomedes), and he begins to dominate the battlefield. Since Diomedes can distinguish between man and god, he warns the Achaeans that Ares is fighting alongside Hector. This keeps the Achaeans from directly confronting the Trojans, leading to a stalemate.
When Hera and Athena see this, they realize they have to intervene. They both enter the battlefield where Hera spurs the Achaeans on while Athena chides Diomedes on his reticence to fight. When Diomedes reminds her that he was instructed not to fight any other god save Aphrodite, she takes the reigns of his chariot, and they charge off into battle. The book concludes with Athena guiding one of Diomedes’ spears at Ares, wounding him and forcing him off the battlefield.
For a list of the major characters, with Greek and Latin names, go here.
Diomedes And The Unseen World
Book 5 focuses on a character who hasn't gotten much attention before this point: Diomedes. We learn a little about Diomedes’ family history in the Iliad, specifically his father Tydeus during the siege of Thebes. Aeschylus wrote a trilogy about the siege of Thebes, but only the third play survives in tact (Seven Against Thebes); and Sophocles’ play Antigone, one of his three Theban plays, takes place in the aftermath of the siege against Thebes. Antigone is by far the better play, so even if you decide to stop reading my commentary or go through a different reading list, make sure Antigone is on that list! You won’t regret reading it.
However, as shown in the quote above, something very interesting happens to Diomedes while on the battlefield. Athena lifts a veil from Diomedes’ eyes so he can see the gods. I love stuff like this in ancient works for two reasons: 1) It gives you a glimpse into the worldview of the culture the work came from; and 2) It shares similarities with the beliefs of other cultures that were around about the same time.
In this instance, it reminds me of a similar concept in the Bible, particularly the Old Testament (which I will get to after I go through the ancient Greeks). There are numerous references to individuals having their “eyes opened” and seeing things they normally couldn’t, especially in the unseen realm. One of the more notable stories is that of Balaam the prophet in Numbers 22 (specifically verses 22-35) where his donkey could see a dangerous sword wielding angel but Balaam couldn’t until the LORD opened his eyes.
It’s interesting to me that, across cultures, there is this concept of an unseen realm going on which requires divine intervention to make the mortal aware of what’s happening in this unseen realm. It’s always fascinating to see how the Old World viewed things before the scientific method, before scholasticism, even before Aristotle.
Pandarus—A Victim Of Divine Machinations Or His Own Pride?
Pandarus is the Trojan archer who shot Menelaus in Book 4 after Menelaus’ default win against Paris in their duel. I have very mixed feelings about Pandarus. It you were to take divine intervention out of the Iliad, this would be his story:
While standing there after Paris disappeared in the middle of his duel with Menelaus, the Trojan archer Pandarus begins to think he could win some accolades if he shot and killed Menelaus right there. Convincing himself that this is a great idea, he shoots Menelaus but fails to kill to him. Pandarus has now made himself, and by proxy the Trojans, oathbreakers.
War breaks out due to Pandarus’ foolish action and people begin dying. On the battlefield, Pandarus sees another opportunity to shoot and kill a major Achaean leader—Diomedes. He shoots Diomedes and fails to kill him as well.
Pandarus blames the gods or bad luck for his failure to kill Menelaus and Diomedes. It’s obvious he is full of himself, but even he recognizes that he should have taken the advice of people back home and brought more than just his bow with him to the war.
Diomedes, who is miraculously still active on the battlefield, spots Pandarus and confronts him in battle. Diomedes kills Pandarus in brutal fashion, getting revenge for not just himself, but also Menelaus.
If this were all to Pandarus' story, it would be a typical example of a hotshot biting off more than he can chew (and costing many lives as a result). However, with the added element of divine intervention the story is quite different. We still have a Trojan archer who is full of himself and wants accolades. At the same time, Athena is the one who tempted him to fire on Menelaus. As a result, we’ll never know for sure if Pandarus would have shot Menelaus on his own volition. Also, Athena powers up Diomedes after he’s been wounded and guides his spear to Pandarus’ face. Again, we’ll never know if Diomedes could have continued fighting and successfully kill Pandarus by his own strength.
This is what makes me unsettled about the situation. Athena coaxes Pandarus into shooting which makes him an oathbreaker (and breaking oaths is a really big deal as I highlighted at the end of my entries on Book 3 and Book 4), causes him to fail to kill someone twice, and then help Diomedes kill Pandarus in one of the more brutal death scenes in the Iliad.
Trying To Make Sense Of Homer's Worldview
You may be thinking—perhaps for a while now—that I’m taking the Iliad way too seriously. And I probably am. I do keep reminding myself it’s just a story and applaud Homer for getting me so emotionally invested in the story he’s telling.
I think my taking the Iliad too seriously stems from my lack of knowledge of ancient Greek culture. All the divine intervention: did the ancient Greeks think their gods meddled in their affairs, to this extent, all the time? Or did the gods use to, but no longer? Or just in this event, the Trojan War, but hardly any other time in their history?
When Homer says a god caused a weapon to hit or miss its mark, was he being literal or was it a figure of speech? What about when a god protects a mortal and keeps them alive? What about when a god coaxes a mortal into doing something or not doing something which has dire consequences for themselves or others?
If these divine interventions are not figures of speech, then my taking the story seriously is my attempt to wrap my head around such a worldview. Obviously, I’m very biased. I’m an outsider being very critical of this worldview, probing it for flaws and contradictions. I’m just baffled by how… Tyrannical? Fatalistic? Chaotic? this way of looking at the world is. It’s one thing to think everything happens by chance or due to human action. It’s another thing to think there are intelligences behind a lot of the goings on. And these intelligences defy the same logic and norms and morals they put in place because they are petty and want things to go their way. It sounds like a stressful worldview to me. It’s no wonder the Greek philosophers wanted to look for natural explanations of the world. It's no surprise that Plato has Socrates ban the reading of the Iliad for the ruling elite during his explanation of his ideal city-state in The Republic.
On that note: I wonder what people would say about our worldview in a few thousand years?
The Doomsday Prophecy Was Real
This is Hera to Athena after Ares joins the battle on the Trojans’ side:
“Alas, daughter of aegis-bearing Jove, unweariable, the promise we made Menelaus that he should not return till he had sacked the city of Ilius will be of no effect if we let Mars rage thus furiously.”
Iliad, Book 5; Samuel Butler translation
First the reader was told about the prophecy in Book 2 where the Achaeans would sack Troy in the tenth and final year of the war. However, that relied on strange omens and guesswork by a respected prophet. Here in Book 5, we are told explicitly that Menelaus was promised his revenge by the two goddesses.
It’s interesting that Menelaus was promised by the goddesses he would sack Troy, but in Book 3 was willing to settle for ending the war with a duel between him and Paris. Either Menelaus forgot this promise, or he just has a bone to pick with Paris and doesn’t care if he has to sack Troy to get his revenge or not. Sacking Troy does not seem to be as important to Menelaus as it is to Hera and Athena.
However, because Hera and Athena are the divinities in this situation, it seems they’re going to make sure Menelaus can only get his revenge by sacking Troy. This is another reason why I wonder if the gods, even though they are on different sides, are working together to make sure a particular result occurs.
Agamemnon Saving Face?
Agamemnon says this to the troops:
They that shun dishonour more often live than get killed, but they that fly save neither life nor name.
Iliad, Book 5; Samuel Butler translation
It sounds like Agamemnon is saying that you’re more likely to survive if you stay and fight. However, if you run from the battle, you’re not only going to lose your life, but ruin your reputation as well.
On the one hand, this could be good advice. You have to fight if you want to ensure your survival. Giving up not only ensures failure, but it may cost you your current reputation and keep you from earning future reputation. The enemy—whether a person or something more abstract—will not sympathize with you if you give up and run away.
On the other hand: what else is a weak leader like Agamemnon suppose to say to an army who are not on the battlefield by choice?
A Brief Word About Aeneas
Aeneas is briefly introduced in the Catalogue of Armies in Book 2, but gets much more attention here in Book 5. We see three different sides to him: a pitiful one where he’s wounded, almost fatally, before he can do much on the battlefield; a divine side where he is recognized as a son of Aphrodite and her and Apollo save him from being killed; and a flattering side where Homer states he would have killed Menelaus if they had confronted each other on the battlefield—showing that, perhaps, he is a better warrior than Menelaus.
Aeneas is important because he is the focus of the Latin poem Aeneid by Virgil, which is about Aeneas leading the survivors of the Trojan War out of Troy and into a new land. Their settlement would eventually become the Roman Republic. I’ll be getting to the Aeneid when I get to the ancient Latin literature.
That’s all for Book 5 of the Iliad.
May your days be filled with grace.
-Andronikos
The booklist I am going through can be found here.
If you want to learn a little more about the Iliad, I have a page devoted to it.
Find me on social media.
Thumbnail: Diomedes Attacking Aeneas While Aphrodite Stands Behind Him. Public domain.