Laomedon
Trojan king, son of Ilus
In Greek mythology, Laomedon (; Ancient Greek: Λαομέδων, romanized: Lāomédōn, lit. 'ruler of the people' or 'lord of the people') was a Trojan king, son of Ilus and thus nephew of Ganymede and Assaracus.
Laomedon was variously identified with different parents and siblings, as well as numerous children, including Priam and Tithonus. His possible wives were Placia, Strymo, Zeuxippe, or Leucippe. Laomedon owned magical horses with divine parentage, a gift from Zeus to his grandfather Tros in compensation for kidnapping Tros's son Ganymede.
Zeus sent Poseidon and Apollo to serve Laomedon as punishment for a conspiracy against Zeus. The two gods built walls around Troy, but Laomedon refused to pay them, leading to a pestilence and a sea monster attacking the city. To end the calamities, Laomedon had to sacrifice his daughter Hesione to the sea monster. Heracles arrived and agreed to save Hesione in exchange for the magical horses, but Laomedon went back on his promise, causing Heracles to wage war on Troy.
Heracles eventually conquered the city, killing Laomedon and his sons, except for Podarces. Hesione was given to Telamon as a war prize, and she ransomed her brother Podarces, who then became known as Priam.
“Laomedon” enters the record as trojan king, son of Ilus. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Laomedon, Trojan and king can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Laomedon” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Laomedon, Trojan and king provides the most credible route into that argument.
Biographical claims are most persuasive when dates, appointments and relationships can be traced to records created close to the events described. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 17, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q332324. VIAF identifies the subject as 1140148947847454950003. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Later biographies can compress uncertainty and repeat inherited reputations, so apparently settled claims may still require comparison. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Laomedon”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Laomedon primary sources, Laomedon archive and Laomedon research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Laomedon”?
- Which primary records establish identity, chronology and institutional ties?
- Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Laomedon” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.