The laboured character of the description of the shield is an argument—though not, perhaps, a very striking one—for the independent origin of the poem. But the arguments on which I am disposed to lay most stress lie nearer the surface. Scarcely anyone, I think, can have read the description of the shield without a feeling of wonder that Homer should describe the shield of a mortal hero as adorned with so many and such important objects. We find the sun and moon, the constellations, the waves of ocean, and a variety of other objects, better suited to adorn the temple of a great deity than the shield of a warrior, however noble and heroic. The objects depicted even on the Ægis of Zeus are much less important. There is certainly no trace in the ‘Iliad’ of a wish on Homer’s part to raise the dignity of mortal heroes at the expense of Zeus, yet the Ægis is thus succinctly described:— Fring’d round with ever-fighting snakes, though it was drawn to life, The miseries and deaths of fight; in it frown’d bloody Strife, In it shone sacred Fortitude, in it fell Pursuit flew, In it the monster Gorgon’s head, in which held out to view Were all the dire ostents of Jove.—_Chapman’s_ Translation. Five lines here, as in the original, suffice for the description of Jove’s Ægis, while one hundred and thirty lines are employed in the description of the celestial and terrestrial objects depicted on the shield of Achilles. Another circumstance attracts notice in the description of Achilles’ armour—the disproportionate importance attached to the shield. Undoubtedly, the shield was that portion of a hero’s armour which admitted of the freest application of artistic skill. Yet this consideration is not sufficient to account for the fact, that while so many lines are given to the shield, the helmet, corselet, and greaves are disposed of in four.