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 February 13th, 2011, 07:37 PM   #111
Citizen
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
From around 1200 to around 800-750 the greeks had no alphabet, no writings. A lot of northern unliteral tribes migrated south and assimilated during these era into the Greeks. So the gap is around 400 years. This is a very long time for a oral tradition. I am convinced, that a lot of the myth, the hellenes wrote down is historical. Alone this, is a wonder. But I am also convinced, that a lot of their myth is just invented. That's why I spoke about hellen, aiolos, doros, graecus and others. They are fiction. Their myths may describe historical movements or incidents, but I suppose the historical value is quite low. This may be different at the catalogue of ships. Here we have some things that seem to be mycenian. So e.g. do we have town, that were already unknown to Homer. he just know the names, but nothing more. But e.g. he also gave as the names of troians. Paris/Alexandros, Hektor, Priamus. We have hethitian sources about Wilusa, which seems to be Ilion/Troy. There is no hektir, no priamos, no Paris, the only Aleksandru we have is 100 years too early.

To us 400 years seems a long time for an oral tradition but in a society with no written language that would be the sole means of conveying history. Whatsmore, the ancient warrior culture was obsessed with glory and would no doubt have taken pains to ensure that future generations knew of their heroic deeds.
How often has Homer been contradicted by archaeology? It seems to me that he has earned the benefit of the doubt in regards to these questions, especially considering that there is no other way we will ever know for sure. His contemporaries certainly placed great value in his account.
I do not maintain that the Iliad is complete fact. Obviously it incorporates a significant amount of myth but it also contains an impressive amount of detail which lends credability.
Quiksilverfish is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 13th, 2011, 08:57 PM   #112

Richard Stanbery's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: Tennessee
Posts: 8,298

Are there sources (Non-Greek) that tell of the Trojan War? One would think that it would be a pretty big regional deal.

As to the Sea Peoples...I have no answers for that. But only one question...and that is why did the Sea People go after more than one powerful civilization (3 I think) and yet leave the Phoenecians alone? If not an alliance, then possibly a trading relationship? They needed Phoenecian tin and didnt know where to get it? I dont know, Im just casting bread upon the waters with that one.

The word "Achean", does that term just mean "allies"? If so, then Homer is talking about an alliance, but not specifically naming them as Greeks?

Or, perhaps, could there be some tie, or relation to the words "Aegean" and "Achean"? They sound similar. Perhaps this is a clue to the word modifiers and conjegation of a term or word from an earlier source not related to ancient Greek?
Richard Stanbery is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 02:32 AM   #113

benzev's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Scotland
Posts: 267

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiksilverfish View Post
To us 400 years seems a long time for an oral tradition but in a society with no written language that would be the sole means of conveying history. Whatsmore, the ancient warrior culture was obsessed with glory and would no doubt have taken pains to ensure that future generations knew of their heroic deeds.
How often has Homer been contradicted by archaeology? It seems to me that he has earned the benefit of the doubt in regards to these questions, especially considering that there is no other way we will ever know for sure. His contemporaries certainly placed great value in his account.
I do not maintain that the Iliad is complete fact. Obviously it incorporates a significant amount of myth but it also contains an impressive amount of detail which lends credability.
Dont know if you have read any of the books by David Rohl putting a revised chronology based on various areas of evidence. His first book, A Test of time (aka Pharaohs and Kings ) was published in 1995. He proposes a redating of events on Egyptology- and therefore necessarily in other chronologies based on this- to 400 years later. In his 2007 book 'The Lords of Avaris' he specifically addresses the Trojan war and dates it to 874-864 bce. In the New Chronology Homer is therefore deemed to have lived shortly after the events he describes.
benzev is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 03:46 AM   #114

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,705

Quote:
Originally Posted by benzev View Post
Dont know if you have read any of the books by David Rohl putting a revised chronology based on various areas of evidence. His first book, A Test of time (aka Pharaohs and Kings ) was published in 1995. He proposes a redating of events on Egyptology- and therefore necessarily in other chronologies based on this- to 400 years later. In his 2007 book 'The Lords of Avaris' he specifically addresses the Trojan war and dates it to 874-864 bce. In the New Chronology Homer is therefore deemed to have lived shortly after the events he describes.
his work is highly debated among Egyptologists and as far as I know is any evidence missing for a Homerian Troy placed around 870. The layer troy VIII gives no report of a destruction for that period.
beorna is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 04:16 AM   #115

benzev's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Scotland
Posts: 267

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
his work is highly debated among Egyptologists and as far as I know is any evidence missing for a Homerian Troy placed around 870. The layer troy VIII gives no report of a destruction for that period.
Like all major hypotheses, quite properly hotly debated, but so far as i can see the jury is still out. Wikipedia states that in 2010 radiocarbon dating tests didnt support either chronology particularly but the methods and accuracy are under dispute. The New Chronology certainly gives a number of answers to questions, though not proof in itself. Regardless of the chronology, Troy VI seems to be the Troy of the war- addressed by David Rohl in Lords of Avaris.
benzev is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 04:32 AM   #116

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,705

Quote:
Originally Posted by benzev View Post
Like all major hypotheses, quite properly hotly debated, but so far as i can see the jury is still out. Wikipedia states that in 2010 radiocarbon dating tests didnt support either chronology particularly but the methods and accuracy are under dispute. The New Chronology certainly gives a number of answers to questions, though not proof in itself. Regardless of the chronology, Troy VI seems to be the Troy of the war- addressed by David Rohl in Lords of Avaris.
We have in germany a similar thesis from Illig, that says, that the centuries between 600 and 900 do not exist and are created by a conspiracy. I think to question the list of pharaos is good, but I am not sure, if his 400 years are really correct. And BTW, the chronology of troy is not based on the Egyptian king list!
beorna is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 04:39 AM   #117

Clemmie's Avatar
Ye olde librarian
 
Joined: Oct 2010
From: Florida
Posts: 3,443

Quote:
Originally Posted by benzev View Post
Dont know if you have read any of the books by David Rohl putting a revised chronology based on various areas of evidence. His first book, A Test of time (aka Pharaohs and Kings ) was published in 1995. He proposes a redating of events on Egyptology- and therefore necessarily in other chronologies based on this- to 400 years later. In his 2007 book 'The Lords of Avaris' he specifically addresses the Trojan war and dates it to 874-864 bce. In the New Chronology Homer is therefore deemed to have lived shortly after the events he describes.
Sounds like Immanuel Velikowsky. I read one of his books years ago. He thought the same thing about Chronology. In fact, there seem to be a number of people who think like this.

Immanuel_Velikovsky Immanuel_Velikovsky

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)
Clemmie is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 06:07 AM   #118
Citizen
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmie View Post
Sounds like Immanuel Velikowsky. I read one of his books years ago. He thought the same thing about Chronology. In fact, there seem to be a number of people who think like this.

Immanuel Velikovsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)
Without turning this into a Velikovsky thread, he should be credited for his work regarding cataclysmic evolution. The scientific comunity of his day crucified him for suggesting things that are now the prevailing theories.
Quiksilverfish is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 06:34 AM   #119
Citizen
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by benzev View Post
Dont know if you have read any of the books by David Rohl putting a revised chronology based on various areas of evidence. His first book, A Test of time (aka Pharaohs and Kings ) was published in 1995. He proposes a redating of events on Egyptology- and therefore necessarily in other chronologies based on this- to 400 years later. In his 2007 book 'The Lords of Avaris' he specifically addresses the Trojan war and dates it to 874-864 bce. In the New Chronology Homer is therefore deemed to have lived shortly after the events he describes.
I haven't read his books but I am familiar with some of his more controversial suggestions. If his dates are correct then Homer was telling a story that was relatively fresh in the collective memory. I hesitate to embrace his chronology for purposes of this discussion because I maintain that the ancients had an advanced oral tradition that spanned the centuries. Sadly, I believe, it was the development of writing that largely ended the practice and while some of the more popular tales were committed to text, many were no doubt lost to the ages.
Quiksilverfish is offline  
Old February 14th, 2011, 07:11 AM   #120

Clemmie's Avatar
Ye olde librarian
 
Joined: Oct 2010
From: Florida
Posts: 3,443

I read Richard's post this morning and decided to do a little investigating. I'm at work and my Hittite books are at home, so I'll look at those this evening.

In performing a google search, I came upon this web site.

We're all wrong, Troy isn't in Turkey, but in England.
The True History of Troy
Clemmie is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Ancient History

Tags
trojan, war


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
About Trojan people kgnju European History 10 July 10th, 2011 01:01 AM
Achaean and Trojan society and state Erazmus History Help 9 April 29th, 2010 06:19 AM
The Trojan Horse Sargon of Akkad Ancient History 25 December 12th, 2009 10:03 PM
What Aspect of the Trojan War is real? VM1138 Ancient History 11 June 26th, 2009 08:41 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.