Iliad 5.179-327: the odd story of how Pandoaras came to Troy without his horses, apparently thinking they would suffer hardship there, and how the theme of horses under-girds the whole encounter between Pandoras-Aeneas and Diomedes. In broad outline:
I. Pandoras, the archer, laments having left his horses in his homeland, which has indirectly resulted in him wounding and angering, but failing to kill, both Diomedes and Agamemnon.
II. Aeneas and Pandoras deliberate whether Aneneas will drive the chariot into battle and Pandoras attack Diomedes or if Pandoras will drive and Aeneas attack. Aeneas commends his horse’s abilities on their native plains; Pandoras says horses should stick with a familiar driver.
III. Diomedes, meanwhile, not only declines his own companion’s suggestion that they flee on their chariot but says he will meet Aeneas and Pandoras on foot and hatches a plan for capturing Aeneas’ special horses, which he describes. (It is curious that Aeneas himself has not told us of their special provenance.)
IV. Diomedes kills Pandoras with a cast spear and disables Aeneas with a large stone. His companion makes off with their horses’ as they’d planned, and they’re taken back to the ships.
No conclusions about it, more thinking it through. One thing I’m wondering about is why Pandoras, leaving his horses behind, means he has to to be an archer. I suspect the answer there is that hand-to-hand combatants needed chariots to move into and out of combat situations quickly.
I would also say there is an idea here that Pandoras was an animal lover.
.i`` * ^ / . . . . . ` `~ 