Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Ancient History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Ancient History Ancient History Forum - Greece, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and all other civilizations of antiquity, to include Prehistory and Archaeology discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 14th, 2017, 09:42 AM   #1
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: England
Posts: 784
The Real Location of Troy


What do you guys think of this article: the real Troy discovered

Just to be clear, this isn't one of those radical "Troy was actually in England" theories. It's just a suggestion for a relatively slight adjustment of the understanding of where exactly the city of Troy was. Here's the summary at the end:

"To recap, this theory suggests that Hisarlik was part of the first defences of a Trojan homeland that stretched far further inland than is fully appreciated now and probably included the entire valley of the Scamander and its plains... That doesn’t mean to say that most of the battles did not take place on the Plain of Troy near Hisarlik as tradition has it but this was only the Trojans ‘front garden’ as it were, yet the main Trojan territory was behind the defensive line of hills and was vastly bigger with the modern town of Ezine its capital – the real Troy."

You really need to read the full article to see why this guy concludes what he does and what evidence he points to, but that quote is just so that you know roughly what it's about.

Any thoughts?
Calebxy is offline  
Remove Ads
Old September 14th, 2017, 09:49 AM   #2

David Vagamundo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 3,166

You're not really saying Troy was in a different place--just that it was larger than what we think of today. It would have had to have been pretty large to furnish the economic basis for fighting with the "Greeks" and their allies.

BTW--the link is to the website "Briton's Hidden History". Don't know what Troy has to do with Briton, unless the site argues elsewhere of some link between Troy and what is now the UK.
David Vagamundo is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 11:24 AM   #3
Archivist
 
Joined: Jul 2017
From: England
Posts: 197

I believe the name 'Troy is related to 'Tyre, therefore Troy might have being a Phoenician colony, that are often Walled, like Carthage ' New City of Tyre ' and they are many other Phoenician colonies that bear that name but the name 'Tyre itself means Walled City.

Tyrrhenia and Etruria (Etruscan ) are also related words and they appears to be a Phoenician presence in those areas, after all, the Greek Alphabet came from the Phoenician Alphabet , where-ever that Alphabet came from is debatable, but evidence suggests from Cretan Hieroglyphs, into Linear B/A into Phoenician, then into the Latin/Greek Alphabet.

If Troy derives from /צֹר/ then it's a descriptive word for a Walled City, Homer's Troy was known as
Ilion , therefore 'Troy Ilios' together means 'Walled City of Ilios' and 'Ilion is a northern suburb of Athens.

If Troy = Athens, then the Trojan War was a Civil War entirely set in Greece, perhaps Dorians vs Attics.

There is evidence that Athens might have being a Walled city.

Quote:
1400 BC the settlement had become an important centre of the Mycenaean civilization and the Acropolis was the site of a major Mycenaean fortress, whose remains can be recognised from sections of the characteristic Cyclopean walls, Unlike other Mycenaean centers, such as Mycenae and Pylos, it is not known whether Athens suffered destruction in about 1200 BC, an event often attributed to a Dorian invasion

Last edited by Magus; September 14th, 2017 at 11:43 AM.
Magus is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 12:01 PM   #4

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,112
Blog Entries: 2

If "Troy" represents a vast territory with multiple urban centers, instead of a single city - doesn't that sort of render the entire Iliad obsolete? As I understand it, the author(s) of the Iliad do have an understanding that Troy is a city, and there are other entities at play. Dardania for one is mentioned. Other regions with settlements are also mentioned. That suggests that when the authors say Troy is a city rather than a region of cities, they know what they're talking about.

If the Iliad is infact rendered obsolete, in that its depiction of Troy as a single city is flawed, then wouldn't that render this whole excercise of a "real" Troy moot? Sort of like a circle of refutation? How can there be a real "Troy" if the source of our knowledge of said entity is itself flawed?
tornada is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 12:05 PM   #5

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,112
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus View Post
I believe the name 'Troy is related to 'Tyre, therefore Troy might have being a Phoenician colony, that are often Walled, like Carthage ' New City of Tyre ' and they are many other Phoenician colonies that bear that name but the name 'Tyre itself means Walled City.

Tyrrhenia and Etruria (Etruscan ) are also related words and they appears to be a Phoenician presence in those areas, after all, the Greek Alphabet came from the Phoenician Alphabet , where-ever that Alphabet came from is debatable, but evidence suggests from Cretan Hieroglyphs, into Linear B/A into Phoenician, then into the Latin/Greek Alphabet.

If Troy derives from /צֹר/ then it's a descriptive word for a Walled City, Homer's Troy was known as
Ilion , therefore 'Troy Ilios' together means 'Walled City of Ilios' and 'Ilion is a northern suburb of Athens.

If Troy = Athens, then the Trojan War was a Civil War entirely set in Greece, perhaps Dorians vs Attics.

There is evidence that Athens might have being a Walled city.
So Theseus kidnapped Helen and kept her in Athens, and then the Greeks somehow had her going to Athens again but this time called it by a different name? I know the timelines are a bit screwy given that it is mythology, but given that Theseus is somehow associated with the foundation of Athens, it suggests that the Greeks were conscious about Athens and Troy being totally different.

Plus one of the Kings of Athens participated in the war. Sent some ships too. So Athens sent ships to attack itself? And why bother with the rigmarole of a thousand ships? Why "cross" the Aegean, which involves human sacrifice to placate the seas allowing for the crossing, if it was a Peninsular civil war? Why not just march around all that land? If the "Trojan" war was basically a rehash of the Peloponnesian war as you seem to suggest, why bother with massive fleets and ships at all? How do you explain the various Trojan Allies in Anatolia? If the Dorians have the massive fleet, how exactly does Athens hold out for 10 years? No Army, no Fleet, allies across the Aegean - This hardly seems like an epic war - more like a two day conflict.

Last edited by tornada; September 14th, 2017 at 12:10 PM.
tornada is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 12:10 PM   #6

Matthew Amt's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: MD, USA
Posts: 2,293

Quote:
Originally Posted by tornada View Post
If "Troy" represents a vast territory with multiple urban centers, instead of a single city - doesn't that sort of render the entire Iliad obsolete? As I understand it, the author(s) of the Iliad do have an understanding that Troy is a city, and there are other entities at play. Dardania for one is mentioned. Other regions with settlements are also mentioned. That suggests that when the authors say Troy is a city rather than a region of cities, they know what they're talking about.

If the Iliad is infact rendered obsolete, in that its depiction of Troy as a single city is flawed, then wouldn't that render this whole excercise of a "real" Troy moot? Sort of like a circle of refutation? How can there be a real "Troy" if the source of our knowledge of said entity is itself flawed?
Yeah, have to agree with that. This new theory bears no relation to any descriptions we have. There has been a suggestion that Troy was actually a different site down the coast from Hissarlik, apparently still fitting enough of the descriptions to be feasible plus being larger overall.

Seeing "walls" and other features on Google Earth is all well and good, but any of that could be from vastly younger than the Late Bronze Age. Trying to relate the modern English word "angled", whatever it may really be in Homer's Greek, to what look like WWI trench lines is kind of a stretch...

Matthew
Matthew Amt is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 12:29 PM   #7

Todd Feinman's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2013
From: Planet Nine, Oregon
Posts: 3,217

IMO, the Iliad is basically a bardic digest of a series of raids over time, ending with the destruction of Troy VIIb. The ship lists, Pylos and the other places that were gone before the fall of Troy.. The arms and armour descriptions from the Geometric Period.. These all conspire to suggest that the first written poem was an agglomeration of events over time, and therefore the Iliad isn't going to be extremely useful, as Troy changed over time too.
Todd Feinman is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 12:45 PM   #8

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,112
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd Feinman View Post
IMO, the Iliad is basically a bardic digest of a series of raids over time, ending with the destruction of Troy VIIb. The ship lists, Pylos and the other places that were gone before the fall of Troy.. The arms and armour descriptions from the Geometric Period.. These all conspire to suggest that the first written poem was an agglomeration of events over time, and therefore the Iliad isn't going to be extremely useful, as Troy changed over time too.
My understanding is that Troy being a single and fairly fixed center is a fundamental part of the Iliad and of the general tradition of Trojan War literature. If we're going to challenge something so fundamental, how can we even assume any center such as Troy existed? If we toss aside the idea of a single city, why would the entity be stable? And if the entity is unstable to the point that we cannot assume it to have even a remote mooring in historicity, then how can we claim to have identified a Troy? Or any Troy? All we have are sites (like Hissarlik) affected by warfare.

Simply put - If Troy isn't a city, then the very fundamental elements of the Trojan War narrative are debatable, not just secondary characteristics. The entire narrative itself. In that case, why work with the assumption that Troy existed? If we can't possess that assumption - then how can we have found a Troy?

The Trojan War narrative cannot be so unstable as to not be an Epic at all. The notion of Epic literature is that in general core fundamentals it is historical. Geography is notable in this. The Example of the Mahabahrata or Ramayana in India for instance, whether individuals or the described scope of events are historical or not, the centers of Hastinapura, Mithila, Ayodhya are real and still generally located in the same regions as they are today.

In Troy's case, claiming that Troy is NOT a single city strikes at the heart of the narrative. It would render the bardic tradition mythology rather than Epic. If Mythology, then we can no more claim to have knowledge of Troy than that of Erebus, Tartarus or Elysium. The whole story would be a fantasy, which in turn would mean that we cannot have any presumption of historicity. Which in turn renders all claims of a historical Troy meaningless. Its a perfect tautology of disproof.
tornada is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 12:58 PM   #9

Aristodemus's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Mar 2007
From: Philadelphia
Posts: 216
Blog Entries: 1

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing.

Makes sense in light of the fact that archeologists have always been disappointed by the small size of Hisarlik.

Let's hope that this article inspires someone to start doing some digging around Neander.
Aristodemus is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 01:14 PM   #10

AlpinLuke's Avatar
Knight-errant
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Lago Maggiore, Italy
Posts: 20,467
Blog Entries: 19

In Italy an engineer has gained a lot of kudos sustaining that Troy was in Scandinavia [and actually he has gained a lot of kudos also in Scandinavia!].

Take a look at this WIKI article about what Felice Vinci sustains: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ba...27s_Epic_Tales
AlpinLuke is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Ancient History

Tags
location, troy



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Real-life Helen of Troy Fenestella Speculative History 13 November 5th, 2015 02:55 PM
Age of Troy? esa Ancient History 7 July 6th, 2011 10:20 AM
Troy juliaainscow100 History in Films and on Television 42 August 31st, 2009 07:37 AM
Troy Commander Ancient History 58 October 14th, 2008 11:26 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.