|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Diomedes in Chaucer's "Troilus and Criseyde"
Of course, this isn't authorotative at all, as Chaucer was simply working off of (and frequently revising) the works of writers who came before him, but Diomedes does indeed play an important role in this work. After Criseyde (here the daughter of traitor, gone to Greece) is exchanged with Antenor (a Trojan soldier who later turns traitor, as well), Diomedes swoops in and essentially cuts Troilus off from his long-distance love affair. Troilus later stabs Diomedes, who earns Criseyde's heart with the wound. Anyway, I'll check back here at some point, if you guys think this is interesting/useful I'll try to write something more informative.
It was Philoctetes not Palamedes that Ulysses/Diomedes went to fetch. Palamedes was already dead by the machinations of Ulysses.
I took out the whole Hesiod "Little Iliad", because he did not write it is ascribe to Leeches. Anyways in the Little Iliad, Aeneas gets captured and given to Achilles' son as a slave. Check out the Post Homer Epic cycle fragments, the Loeb classical Library has it.
I will also edit out his death, because according to Larrouse's Encylopedia og mythology, I think it was the name (i'll check it) he does get killed by the doings of Danaus, but I will get the proper source before making that edit. I will also come back to check out the whole article. Ronsin1976 20:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I have entered almost all the information I could gather about the Hero. Please correct any mistake you find.
Dr. Yasas Bandara. 18/07/2007
This is all presented as if it were a "biography" of the hero, divorced from any sources. The sub-sections show a series of themes that gather round the mythic figure, which provides a better framework than a "biography". --Wetman 22:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Too much information?
It's comprehensive and I apperciate that, but I'm not sure it's necessary. None of the other articles on mythological greek characters contain this much information, including those who were much more important than Diomedes. I think this article needs to be chopped down to a bit.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The article also seems really biased. Do all sources build up Diomedes like this? Most Greek heros I'm familiar had notable flaws, but Diomedes sounds like an ancient example of a Marty Stu.--220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree. too loaded of words on Diomedes and also unsourced. I have edited it back to an older source that seems a little less bias
I have studied ‘The Iliad’ and this article certainly has LOTS of information about the character ‘Diomedes’. I feel it’s alright because 1. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia article 2. It’s very helpful in academic level studies and 3. Only a few people know about this important character. A lot of people have seen Hollywood movies like ‘Troy’ and believe he never existed.
Also there are HUGE articles for comic book characters like Superman, Hulk, Spiderman etc. they serve no academic purpose whatsoever.
I agree that the article is long (longer than that of Hercules) but it gives information that no other article can give. For an example, it contains a nearly complete list of cities founded by the hero.
As for the claim that Diomedes is less important than other heroes, that’s subjective. Only a handful of Greek heroes ended up as immortals in Mythology.
I disagree that it is devoid of sources. It mentions 1. The Iliad 2. Other epic cycle stories 3. Apollodorus 4. Fall of Troy 5. Aeneid. It’s difficult to find written material related to his life before the Trojan War and his life in Italy. Therefore, several different versions are mentioned for one incident (ex- killing Palamedes, betrayal of Aegialia, fate of Palladium)
Also, Diomedes was not an immaculate hero. Some readers may feel like that because the larger portion of this article is dedicated to describe the character according to the epic ‘Iliad’. In that epic, the hero is nearly flawless. The few notable flaws are- attacking Apollo, disregarding Athena’s advice, refusing to turn back in spite of Zeus’ anger, showing no mercy to enemies, ‘the end justifies the means’ attitude etc. All these are mentioned in the article.
If you resort to other sources, you can find many questionable/dishonorable acts – luring Agamemnon’s daughter to death, helping Odysseus to murder a fellow Greek, stealing the Palladium etc.
The article is not biased because these flaws are clearly mentioned. To give an example, Diomedes never insulted dead bodies of his enemies (like Achilles) and he never scolded dead enemies (like Agamemnon) in the epic. But the article mentions a story where he throws the dead body of Penthesileia into a river. This is out of character(granted Achilles did killed his cousin out of spite because of said body) and this story is not supported by the sources like ‘Fall of Troy’ or ‘Epic Cycle’. If the article is biased, why mention it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
"His paternal uncle Heracles (...)"
Agree with this 100% show me one shred of proof that Heracles was Diomedes paternal uncle. This would mean that Heracles was a brother of Tydeus which he clearly wasn't. Take this out its incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:43, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
This is actually correct Hercules' married Deianira, who is Tydeus' sister. So Hercules would be Diomedes Paternal Uncle-in-law. Fbiuzz (talk) 02:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
A bit biased maybe
This article seems really biased to me. It builds Diomedes up too much. And also I'm not sure about some of these statements, like I don't recall him "vanquishing" Hector twice. I thought only Achilles was better than Hector.Excelsus (talk) 03:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)ExcelsusExcelsus (talk) 03:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
He defeated Hector in Book8 (Zeus saved Hector) and in Book11 (Hector was stunned by the blow but managed to run away and save his life). This article doesn't 'Build' Diomedes. The problem is Hollywood garbage like 'Troy' build up Hector waaaay too much and completely forget heroes like Diomedes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Diomedes was one of the few Greeks heroes who was worshiped as a divine being. You can't 'build him up' anymore than that, can you? Also the philosophy of Iliad doesn't care who's the better warrior. Fate is superior to all. No matter how good Diomedes is, he was never able to kill Hector. Hector was fated to be killed by Achilles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
In fact, Diomede and Hector nevert fought each other ! During their first encounters, there is no fight (Zeus intervene and Diomede withdraw). And during the second, Diomede only throws a spear at Hector's head (which is stopped by Hector's helmet). So there isn't any actual fight between them. And Hector has killed more heroes than Diomede did. Though I have to give credit to Diomede for never having really fled or being afraid (even Hector and Achilles are scares at some points : Hector when facing Achilles, and Achilles when attacked by the river).
I don't know if it's biased, as much as it reads like a comic boy fanfic rather than an analysis of Hellenic mythology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dondoolee (talk • contribs) 22:29, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
"All had then been lost and no help for it, for they would have been penned up in Ilius like sheep, had not the sire of gods and men been quick to mark, and hurled a fiery flaming thunderbolt which fell just in front of Diomedes' horses with a flare of burning brimstone."(Samual Butler's translation) - Both Hector and his driver could have been killed by Diomedes if Zeus didn't intervened. These Hector fans just cannot realize that Diomedes is a far better warrior. In Iliad philosophy, fate is superior to all. The Diomedes or Ajax could never kill Hector is because Hector was always fated to be killed by Achilles. So, it really never mattered who the best warrior was. Remember the only thing Diomedes say about Achilles; "he will fight"-it was fated to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Also, Hector ran away and hid himself among the other Trojans in the second encounter. Diomedes fought in one of the two biggest wars in ancient heroic age tradition; Epigoni war and Trojan war. He probably killed more than Achilles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Diomedes was not immaculate.
Here is a list of his flaws mentioned in the article; 1) Sacrifice of Iphigenia, deceiving her using Achilles’ name and luring her to her death 2) Palamedes’ murder; one version says that Diomedes helped and another version says that he did nothing to prevent it 3) Continuing to attack Aeneas even when he knew that Apollo is protecting him 4) disregarding Athena’s advise and trying to attack Apollo 5)Injuring immortals 6) Diomedian swap-cheating Glaucus with a bronze armour 7)Attempting to go against Zeus’ will 8) Dolon- letting him believe that he will be taken prisoner and killing him after milking him 9)Killing 12 men in their sleep 10) Penthesileia's body – one version says that Diomedes tossed the body into a river 11) stealing Heracles’ bow 12) stealing Palladium after killing priests
So, Diomedes has two sides. On one hand, he is the honourable, fair, humble warrior and on the other hand, he’s cunning, unmerciful and dangerous. Which is kinda expected for a warrior. Also all these "flaws" are flaws from a modern prospective. In ancient Greek these are all the signs of a smart and intelligent warrior.
Now, I cannot recall any article that mentions ALL these flaws. If this article is biased, it could have omitted negative versions of stories while mentioning positive ones only. While this article is comprehensive, it states all virtues as well as all flaws of the hero. So, it is not biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 15:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
The article is essentially right. Diomedes was an important mythical hero of the ancient Greece, and its figure is very important not only because of his deeds as a warrior King (like Achilles or Odysseus) but also as a foundational cultural figure (like Heracles). Also, he was indeed one of the best warriors (arguably way better than Hector), and a great strategist. He is the closest or one of the closes humans to the most important cultural greek god(or goddess), Athena. His figure had its own mythical cycle, of which unfortunately we know very little but he did managed to become a divine (or semi-divine) and he is actually one of the few heroes that go undefeated through his battles -something that cannot be said about already exceptional heroes like Ajax, Achilles, Odysseus, Aeneas, Hector --even Heracles, all of them are defeated eventually in one way or another. People who speak about Achilles, Odysseus or Aeneas have to understand that we know about them because their cycles haven't been lost, unlike some other that seem to have been of equal importance. I think that the article isn't biased, but a bit confusing. It needs to be polished up in its organization for a better reading. It throws a lot of information but it doesn't seem to be well articulated with clear subsections. Also, I appreciate the quotes from the Iliad but perhaps those parts could be summarize to avoid the excess of walls of text. Maybe these are the reasons why people is seeing the article as biased (i.e. excess of 'wording' and quotations to describe the figure of the hero and lack of organization/not clear connections between the sub-sections). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 07:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
I have got to agree with the author of the initial note in this section. Diomedes is certainly one of the more "heroic" figures in The Iliad, being not only a valiant fighter but one whose personal courage never fails him, even when it comes to standing up to Agammenon and telling him to his face that Agammenon may possess nobility and power but is lacking in just such personal courage. But it is also true that Diomedes is not without fault. His murder of Dolon -- it really can't be called anything else -- a cowardly opponent who has been captured without a fight, has revealed every bit of information demanded of him, and who has just offered to be taken prisoner, tied up and held for ransom and whom Diomedes then dispatches with a stroke of his sword, is not the most heroic of actions. And his killing of twelve sleeping soldiers for the sole purpose of stealing their horses is certainly more characteristic of Odysseus, whom Homer never lets us forget is, while also courageous, a sly and cunning trickster who is the worthy descendant of his grandfather, the most accomplished thief of his time, than of Diomedes, who has basically followed Odysseus's suggestion in doing so.
Frankly -- none of the Acheans in The Iliad comes off as entirely without blemish. Achilles is the deadliest and strongest fighter but goes running to his Mommy in tears when Agammenon steals his "prize" and actually prays to Zeus for his own allies to fail and - also sacrifice twelve trojan boys to the fire at his friend's funeral. Odysseus, as mentioned above, is not above lying and stealing to gain his ends. Agammenon is a terrible commander whose idea of building up morale is to insult each of his lieutenants. Nestor can never dispense his "wise" counsels without first spending several pages reminding everyone how valiant a warrior he used to be in similar circumstances in the past. Ajax is strong but too proud, and was actually planning to kill his Agammenon due to a argument over Achilles'armor. And so on and so forth. Diomedes is the best out of all them without a doubt, but he's not perfect. Partnerfrance (talk) 14:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Achilles is 15 at the start of the war, and must therefore surely be younger than Diomedes (who is 15 when he goes to Thebes, some years before the war); I suppose, as his father is alive, Achilles is best described as a prince rather than a king, but I'm sure he is referred to as king several times.--126.96.36.199 (talk) 01:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Calculating exact ages for mythological figures is a hopeless enterprise. Better to observe how the Iliad and other sources characterize Diomedes; Homer depicts him as younger you (and less confident/authoritative) than Achilles, no matter how illogical this might seem. And all of the heroes are basileis, you can translate this as king or prince according to your lights. --Akhilleus (talk) 04:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Achilles never ruled a kingdom before the war(he was living in some island disguised as a princess by his own divine mother), during the war, or after the war (he died). Therefore, he cannot be called a king. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 09:50, 10 September 2012 (UTC)