Homer's epics, mycaenian or archaic?

Nov 2015
1,328
Somewhere
Everyone is familiar with the Iliad and the Odyssey, but what is striking in the epics that two time periods are mixed. Both in technology, customs and fighting styles.
 

Matthew Amt

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,010
MD, USA
Yup, the dates are messed up. If you cut out the "Dark Ages", everything works much better.

Centuries of Darkness by Peter James, I. J. Thorpe, Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot & John Frankish

Having mentioned this, I'll probably be knocked down in the mud and kicked, but oh, well...

There have been analyses of Homer that pick out cultural details that are "early" and those that are "late". And there have been linguistic analyses that have done the same thing, figuring out which passages have "early" language and structure and which are "late". I remember an article that looked at both analyses and found they matched almost perfectly, but backwards: All the "early" elements were in "late" language, and vice versa.

Striking, as you said.

Matthew
 
Nov 2015
1,328
Somewhere
Perhaps if we had more information on the dark ages it would have more sense.
Basicly the whole epos takes place in Mycaenian society (even though some tribes in the epic didn't even migrate to Greece yet), , but there is alot of anachronisms and technology that wasn't available in that era, like iron tools in a period where they didn't have those yet
 

Matthew Amt

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,010
MD, USA
The problem is that with the "Dark Ages" in place, events that might have been concurrent are seen as happening 300 years apart. The whole Trojan War episode is accepted as being at the end of the Bronze Age, but the rest of Europe doesn't start the Iron Age until the 9th century! Problem, much? And NO, it did not take 300 years for other folks to catch on! So a few iron implements are no big deal since there was obviously some overlap between iron and bronze.

Matthew
 

ib-issi

Ad Honorem
Mar 2011
3,403
just sitting here
There has been many a writer questioning the chronology in our histories , Fomenko
was probably the most well known recently , but even writers like Waddel have said that chronology is very mixed up ,
in his book , The British Edda he claims that Her-Thor , or Heer-Thor of the
hammer in Norse Myth is King Arther , and that Guinevere is Guen-Iva , or Queen Eve-r
of the Sumerian Mythologies.

both Velikovsky and Newton have writen about glaring errors in chronology as we are
given it , and there are plenty more over the years if you care to look for them.
 
Last edited:

Bart Dale

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,095
Yup, the dates are messed up. If you cut out the "Dark Ages", everything works much better.

Centuries of Darkness by Peter James, I. J. Thorpe, Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot & John Frankish

Having mentioned this, I'll probably be knocked down in the mud and kicked, but oh, well...

There have been analyses of Homer that pick out cultural details that are "early" and those that are "late". And there have been linguistic analyses that have done the same thing, figuring out which passages have "early" language and structure and which are "late". I remember an article that looked at both analyses and found they matched almost perfectly, but backwards: All the "early" elements were in "late" language, and vice versa.

Striking, as you said.

Matthew

Peter James's arguments against radiocarbon data in unconvincing, and he seems ignorant of the other scientific dating methods, such as thermoluminensence dating of pottery, and optical dating of sand and even stone buildings. Thermoluminesence dating gives the date when the object was made. The current dating is based on a variety to methods, which all give similar results. Startint with the Archaic period, we are are pretty solid ground, there doesn't seem room for any extensive gap in chronology between it and classical Greece, and you would need the time for evolution of the Archaic period into the Classic period, that development couldn't happen overnight.

The complete cultural break between tne Mycenaean and Archaic and Classical period couldn't happen in an instance, some amount of time was required. You couldn't have the Mycenaean civilization one year and the Archaic the next. You might shave a few years off the Dark Age chronology, but not the radical change envisioned by Peter James.