Diomedes' aristeia

[Bart]

I took up reading the Iliad again after a period of one and a half month (real life intervened, no time for Homer alas). I'm closing down on book V. I read about the bracketing of book X, with one of the arguments being that there is little connection between what is described in that book and the rest of the epic. But as far as I can see now, the same could more or less be said about book V. Is there any reason to think that book V is a later interpolation or maybe the remnant of a diffferent epic about the feats of Diomedes?

I plan a more in depth reading of book VI using the Cambridge commentary by Barbara Graziosi. Any other suggestions?

[Paul Derouda]

That's the sort of thing real life unfortunately does...

It's years since I've read Iliad book V or really given it attention otherwise, so I can't help much. The basic idea I think is that the Achaeans must be given some success first to contrast with their bad fortune later on. I'm not aware of a particular discussion of book V being an interpolation, but since about every single line in Homer has been suspected by somebody, I wouldn't be surprised if one existed. Personally I don't think it's interpolated. Book X is another matter. It's the only book you could just drop out without noticing any discontinuity in the narrative. There are also linguistic problems, but I'm not a competent judge.

I haven't read Graziosi's commentary but I've heard it's good. Personally, I plan to have it around for my long-planned (and long-postponed) re-reading of the Iliad. If you want a modern commentary, what alternatives do you have for book VI? You have the Cambridge commentary for books V-VIII by Kirk but I'm not sure it's very good. Then you have Graziosi. And there's one volume in the German "Gesamtkommentar" that covers book VI, but I don't know anything about it – could be just as good or better than Graziosi.

[Bart]

That's the sort of thing real life unfortunately does...

It does, doens't it.

Btw, I found the entire set of Ameis-Hentze-Cauer in the edition by Hakkert of both the Iliad and the Odyssey. Thanks for helping me out there.

[Scribo]

Yeah obviously the Basil kommentar is much superior to Haubold and Graziosi, the latter being a commentary for school students and somewhat meant to be paired with another book of theirs, "the resonance of epic", on how epic "worked".

It would be impossible to extricate the Diomedes episode because a) there aren't really any red flags philologically (the only important thing imo) and b) Diomedes hyperfialismos if I may be so bold is imperative to the story and is wholly consistent with his portrayal on several levels but this since this is getting too close to my thesis I'll say nothing and not shoot myself in the foot.

It's a world apart from X. Though it must be said X is interesting in its own way.