Epitome

When the war had already lasted ten years, and the Greeks were despondent, Calchas prophesied to them that Troy could not be taken unless they had the bow

After the death of Alexander, Helenus and Deiphobus quarrelled as to which of them should marry Helen; and as Deiphobus was preferred, Helenus left Troy and abode in Ida.[*](Compare Conon 34; Serv. Verg. A. 2.166. The marriage of Deiphobus to Helen after the death of Paris was related in the Little Iliad. See Proclus in Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. G. Kinkel, p. 36. Compare Tzetzes, Posthomerica 600ff.; Tzetzes, Scholiast on. Lycophron, 143, 168; Eur. Tro. 959ff.; Scholiast on Hom. Il. 24.251, and on Od. iv.276; Dictys Cretensis iv.22. The marriage was seemingly known to Hom. Od. 4.276.) But as Chalcas said that Helenus knew the oracles that protected the city, Ulysses waylaid and captured him and brought him to the camp;

and Helenus was forced to tell how Ilium could be

On hearing these things the Greeks caused the bones of Pelops to be fetched, and they sent Ulysses and Phoenix to Lycomedes at Scyros, and these two persuaded him to let Neoptolemus go.[*](As to the fetching of Neoptolemus from Scyros, see Hom. Od. 11.506ff.; the Little Iliad of Lesches, summarized by Proclus, in Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. G. Kinkel, pp. 36ff.; Pind. Pa. 6.98ff.; Soph. Phil. 343-356; Philostratus Junior, Im. 2; Quintus Smyrnaeus, Posthomerica vi.57-113, vii.169- 430; Tzetzes, Posthomerica 523-534. Apollodorus agrees with Sophocles in saying that the Greek envoys who fetched Neoptolemus from Scyros were Ulysses and Phoenix. According to Quintus Smyrnaeus, they were Ulysses and Diomedes. Ulysses is the only envoy mentioned by Homer, Lesches, and Tzetzes; and Phoenix is the only envoy mentioned by Philostratus. Pindar speaks vaguely of “messengers.” In this passage I have adopted Wagner's conjecture πείθουσι < αὐ> τὸν νεοπτόλεμον προέσθαι, “persuaded him to let Neoptolemus go.” If this conjecture is not accepted, we seem forced to translate the passage “persuaded Neoptolemus to venture.” But I cannot cite any exact parallel to such a use of the middle of προΐημι. When employed absolutely, the verb seems often to convey a bad meaning. Thus Demosthenes uses it in the sense of “throwing away a chance,” “neglecting an opportunity” (Dem.19.150, 152, μὴ πρόεσθαι, οὐ προήσεσθαι). Iphicrates employed it with the same significance (quoted by Aristot. Rh. 2.1397b διότι προεῖτο). Aristotle applied the verb to a man who had “thrown away” his health (Aristot. Nic. Eth. 3.1114a 15, τότε μὲν οὖν ἐξῆν αὐτῷ μὴ νοσεῖν, προεμένῳ δ’ οὐκέτι, ὥσπερ οὐδ’ ἀφέντι λίθον ἔτ’ αὐτὸν δυνατὸν ἀναλαβεῖν). However, elsewhere Aristotle uses the word to describe the lavish liberality of generous men (Aristot. Rh. 1.1366b, εἶτα ἡ ἐλευθεριότης: προΐενται γὰρ καὶ οὐκ ἀνταγωνίζονται περὶ τῶν χρημάτων, ὧν μάλιστα ἐφίενται ἄλλοι). In the present passage of Apollodorus, if Wagner's emendation is not accepted, we might perhaps read <μὴ>πρόεσθαι and translate, “persuaded Neoptolemus not to throw away the chance.” But it is better to acquiesce in Wagner's simple and probable correction.) On coming to the camp and receiving his father's arms from Ulysses, who willingly resigned them, Neoptolemus slew many

Afterwards, Eurypylus, son of Telephus, arrived to fight for the Trojans, bringing a great force of Mysians. He performed doughty deeds, but was slain by Neoptolemus.[*](As to the single combat of Eurypylus and Neoptolemus, and the death of Eurypylus, see Hom. Od. 11.516-521; the Little Iliad of Lesches, summarized by Proclus, in Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. G. Kinkel, p. 37; Quintus Smyrnaeus, Posthomerica viii.128-220; Tzetzes, Posthomerica 560-565; Dictys Cretensis iv.17. Eurypulus was king of Mysia. At first his mother Astyoche refused to let him go to the Trojan war, but Priam overcame her scruples by the present of a golden vine. See Scholiast on Hom. Od. xi.520. The brief account which Apollodorus gives of the death of Eurypylus agrees closely with the equally summary narrative of Proclus. Sophocles composed a tragedy on the subject, of which some very mutilated fragments have been discovered in Egypt. See The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, vol. i. pp. 146ff.; A. S. Hunt, Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta Papyracea nuper reperta (Oxford; no date, no pagination).)

And Ulysses went with Diomedes by night to the city, and there he let Diomedes wait, and after disfiguring himself and putting on mean attire he entered unknown into the city as a beggar. And being recognized by Helen, he with her help stole away the Palladium, and after killing many of the guards, brought it to the ships with the aid of Diomedes.[*](These events were narrated in the Little Iliad of Lesches, as we learn from the summary of Proclus (Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. G. Kinkel, p. 37), which runs thus: “And Ulysses, having disfigured himself, comes as a spy to Troy, and being recognized by Helen he makes a compact with her concerning the capture of the city; and having slain some of the Trojans he arrives at the ships. And after these things he with Diomedes conveys the Palladium out of Ilium.” From this it appears that Ulysses made two different expeditions to Troy: in one of them he went by himself as a spy in mean attire, and being recognized by Helen concerted with her measures for betraying Troy to the Greeks; in the other he went with Diomedes, and together the two stole the Palladium. The former of these expeditions is described by Homer in the Odyssey (Hom. Od. 4.242ff.), where Helen tells how Ulysses disfigured himself with wounds, and disguising himself in mean attire came as a beggar to Troy; how she alone detected him, wormed the secrets of the Greeks out of him, and having sworn not to betray him till he had returned in safety to the ships, let him go free, whereupon on his way back he killed many Trojans. Euripides also relates this visit of Ulysses to Troy, adding that Helen revealed his presence to Hecuba, who spared his life and sent him out of the country (Eur. Hec. 239-250). These two quite distinct expeditions of Ulysses have been confused and blended into one by Apollodorus. As to the joint expedition of Ulysses and Diomedes to Troy, and the stealing of the Palladium, see further Conon 34; Quintus Smyrnaeus, Posthomerica x.350-360; Scholiast on Hom. Il. vi.311; Malalas, Chr. v. pp. 109, 111ff., ed. L. Dindorf; Zenobius, Cent. iii.8; Apostolius, Cent. vi.15; Suidas, s. vv. Διομήδειος ἀνάγκη and Παλλάδιον ; Hesychius, s.v. Διομήδειος ἀνάγκη ; Eustathius on Hom. Il. x.531, p. 822; Scholiast on Plat. Rep. 6, 493b; Verg. A. 2.162-170; Serv. Verg. A. 2.166; Dictys Cretensis v.5, 8ff. The narrative of Apollodorus suggests that Ulysses had the principal share in the exploit. But according to another and seemingly more prevalent tradition it was Diomedes who really bore off the image. This emerges particularly from Conon's account. Diomedes, he tells us, mounted on the shoulders of Ulysses, and having thus scaled the wall, he refused to draw his comrade up after him, and went in search of the Palladium. Having secured it, he returned with it to Ulysses, and together they retraced their steps to the Greek camp. But by the way the crafty Ulysses conceived the idea of murdering his companion and making himself master of the fateful image. So he dropped behind Diomedes and drew his sword. But the moon shone full; and as he raised his arm to strike, the flash of the blade in the moonlight caught the eye of the wary Diomedes. He faced round, drew his sword, and, upbraiding the other with his cowardice, drove him before him, while he beat the back of the recreant with the flat of his sword. This incident gave rise to the proverb, “Diomedes's compulsion,” applied to such as did what they were forced to do by dire necessity. The proverb is similarly explained by the other Greek proverb-writers and lexicographers cited above, except that, instead of the flash of the sword in the moonlight, they say it was the shadow of the sword raised to strike him which attracted the attention of Diomedes. The picturesque story appears to have been told in the Little Iliad (Hesychius, s.v. Διομήδειος ἀνάγκη ). According to one account, Diomedes and Ulysses made their way into the Trojan citadel through a sewer (Serv. Verg. A. 2.166), indeed a narrow and muddy sewer, as Sophocles called it in the play which he composed on the subject. See Julius Pollux, ix.49; The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, ii.36, frag. 367. Some affirmed that the Palladium was treacherously surrendered to the Greek heroes by Theano, the priestess of the goddess (Scholiast on Hom. Il. vi.311; Suidas, s.v. Παλλάδιον ); to this step she was said to have been instigated by her husband Antenor (Malalas, Chr. v. p. 109, ed. L. Dindorf; Dictys Cretensis v.5, 8). As to Theano in her capacity of priestess, see Hom. Il. 6.297ff. The theft of the Palladium furnished a not infrequent subject to Greek artists; but the artistic, like the literary, tradition was not agreed on the question whether the actual thief was Diomedes or Ulysses. See Frazer on Paus. 1.22.6 (vol. ii. pp. 264 sq.).)

But afterwards he invented the construction of the Wooden Horse and suggested it to Epeus, who was an architect.[*](As to the stratagem of the Wooden Horse, by which Troy is said to have been captured, see Hom. Od. 4.271-289; Hom. Od. 8.492-515; Hom. Od. 11.523-532; Lesches, Little Iliad, summarized by Proclus in Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. G. Kinkel, p. 37; Arctinus, Ilii Persis, summarized by Proclus, in Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. G. Kinkel, p. 49; Quintus Smyrnaeus, Posthomerica xii.23-83, 104-156, 218-443, 539-585, xiii.21-59; Tryphiodorus, Excidium Ilii 57-541; Tzetzes, Posthomerica 629-723; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 930; Verg. A. 2.13-267; Hyginus, Fab. 108; Dictys Cretensis v.9, 11ff. The story is only alluded to by Homer, but was no doubt fully told by Lesches and Arctinus, though of their narratives we possess only the brief abstracts of Proclus. The accounts of later writers, such as Virgil, Quintus Smyrnaeus, Tryphiodorus, Tzetzes, and Apollodorus himself, are probably based on the works of these early cyclic poets. The poem of Arctinus, if we may judge by Proclus's abstract, opened with the deliberations of the Trojans about the Wooden Horse, and from the similarity of the abstract to the text of Apollodorus we may infer that our author followed Arctinus generally, though not in all details; for instance, he differed from Arctinus in regard to the affair of Laocoon and his sons. See below. With the stratagem of the Wooden Horse we may compare the stratagem by which, in the war of Independence waged by the United Provinces against Spain, Prince Maurice contrived to make himself master of Breda. The city was then held by a Spanish garrison, which received its supply of fuel by boats. The master of one of these boats, Adrian Vandenberg by name, noticed that in the absence of the governor there was great negligence in conducting the examination to which all boats were subjected before they were allowed to enter the town. This suggested to Vandenberg a plan for taking the citadel by surprise. He communicated his plan to Prince Maurice, who readily embraced it. Accordingly the boat was loaded in appearance with turf as usual; but the turf was supported by a floor of planks fixed at the distance of several feet from the bottom; and beneath this floor seventy picked soldiers were placed under the command of an able officer named Harauguer. The boat had but a few miles to sail, yet through unexpected accidents several days passed before they could reach Breda. The wind veered against them, the melting ice (for it was the month of February) retarded their course, and the boat, having struck upon a bank, was so much damaged that the soldiers were for some time up to their knees in water. Their provisions were almost spent, and to add to their anxieties one of their number was seized with a violent cough, which, if it had continued, would inevitably have betrayed them to the enemy. The man generously entreated his comrades to kill him, offering them his own sword for the purpose; but they as generously refused, and happily the soldier's cough left him before they approached the walls. Even the leak in the boat was stopped by some accident. On reaching the fortifications the boat was searched, but only in the most superficial manner. Still the danger was great, for the turf was immediately purchased and the soldiers of the garrison set to work to unload it. They would soon have uncovered the planks and detected the ambush, if the ready-witted master of the boat had not first amused them with his discourse and then invited them to drink wine with him. The offer was readily accepted. The day wore on, darkness fell, and the Spanish soldiers were all drunk or asleep. At dead of night Harauguer and his men issued from the boat, and dividing into two bodies they attacked the guards and soon made themselves masters of two gates. Seized with a panic, the garrison fled the town. Prince Maurice marched in and took possession of the citadel. These events happened in the year 1590. See Robert Watson, History of the Reign of Philip the Second, 4th ed. (London, 1785), bk. xxi. vol. iii. pp. 157-161.) Epeus felled timber on Ida,