Melantho indeed, the most conspicuous offender, is called in the Eighteenth Odyssey[746] καλλιπάρῃος. But it seems probable, that he followed a local tradition concerning her; for, if she had been simply a creation of his own, he certainly would not have represented her as the daughter of the old and faithful Dolius[747], who, with his six sons, bore arms for Ulysses. [746] Od. xviii. 321-5. [747] Od. xxiv. 496. ~_Treatment of the beauty of Paris._~ So also the beauty of Paris was an inseparable incident of the Trojan tale. Yet it is remarkable how little it is brought into relief. Where he is called beautiful, it is by way of sarcasm and reproach[748], [748] Il. iii. 39. Δύσπαρι, εἶδος ἄριστε. The only passage, in which his beautiful appearance is described at all, is from the mouth of Venus[749], to whom Homer never intrusts anything, to be either said or done, that he wishes us to regard with favour. [749] Ibid. 391. Compelled, however, to set off the imposing exterior of this prince, if only for the purpose of heightening the contrast with his cowardice in action, he introduces him flourishing his pair of spears at the commencement of the Third Iliad; and what is more, when he again goes forth in his newly burnished arms at the close of the Sixth, bestows upon him one of the very noblest of his similes, that of the stall-kept horse, high fed and sleek in coat, who having broken away from his manger rushes neighing over the plain[750]. [750] Il. iii. 18. and vi. 506. It was necessary, in order to make up the true portrait of Paris, that his exterior should be thus splendid, and his movements imposing; and it was also a part of the subtle plan, by which Homer made use of words and appearances to bring up the Trojan chieftains and people to some kind of level with the Greek. Yet there is something singular in the fact that Homer, who does not, I think, repeat his similes in any other remarkable case, reproduces the whole of this splendid passage in the Fifteenth Iliad for Hector[751]. There is here, we may rely upon it, some peculiar meaning. Possibly he grudged the exclusive appropriation of so splendid a passage to so despicable a person. There is also another singularity in his mode of proceeding. The simile is given to Hector without addition, and the poem proceeds [751] Il. xv. 263. ὣς Ἕκτωρ λαιψηρὰ πόδας καὶ γούνατ’ ἐνώμα. But where he applies it to Paris, immediately after the conclusion of the noble passage he subjoins (Il. vi. 512.), ὣς υἱὸς Πριάμοιο Πάρις κατὰ Περγάμου ἄκρης τεύχεσι παμφαίνων, ὥστ’ ἠλέκτωρ, ἐβεβήκει.