For Ancient Greeks myth meant stories handed down from previous generations, father to son, story teller to story teller-at first orally then from the 8th century in writing. As to its actuality, there are historical problems with the text and no genuine evidence for Greek presence at Hisarlik, the agreed site of the city, at the time the siege, according to Homer, took place.
Did the epic arise out of the destruction of Mycenae culture around 1200 BCE, compensation to the Greeks living in the Dark ages that followed urban collapse and depopulation of the mainland?
This question involves not only the historical viability of the Trojan War but also the nature of epic genre, its concern with appearance not reality. For those of a religious disposition, it concerns the Moses story as literature genre, and other ancient stories of historical origins.
Until now, the debate on the discovery of ancient Troy has not subsided. The fool Henry Schliemann actually found the location of Troy in Turkey on the basis of an analysis of Homer's Iliad. He also discovered a huge treasure trove of Priam (more than 8 thousand items). Thus, there are established facts, and there are skeptical opinions of confounded professors of archaeologists.
Is it possible that the later Greeks were half-remembering their raiding and possibly piratical past of the Late Bronze Age that evolved into the attacks of the Sea Peoples (a time still not understood but that consisted of a group made up of substantial European groups)?
The kidnapping or seduction of Helen (probably a later inclusion to the story) had clear precedents.
The kidnapping of an important woman was symbolic of the kidnapping of resources, of group identity. Also, the Mycenaens constantly kidnapped skilled women from Anatolia as industrial slaves.
Memories are subject to constant modulation. With each call, with each narrative, the memory is stored in a different way again. This is a well-known fact in neuropsychology. As long as history was handed down only orally, the content was subject to constant change beyond recognition. It may have been true stories in the beginning, but we can not really fathom their real truth content today.
Rudolf, written recording of memories also is subject to change. In approximately 7th century, although likely as early as the 8th century, competitions were held in Greece re-organising and remembering the past through poetic forms. These were also written down and thereby suffered additional changes, often simply through restrictions of form.
The Iliad appears to be an attempt to re-construct the past through a mythical, in the Ancient Greek sense, understanding of the past as collective effort with semi-divine, heroic figures personifying half-recalled states and groups.
In human history there were thousands wars. Especially between competing states in one nation.
Jasna, Late Bronze Age societies engaged in raiding, rarely conquest. These were normally for economic reasons: to obtain booty, crops, slaves or disrupt the economies of other neighbouring societies. The conquests of Egyptian kings were often no more than raids, trials of strength.
Therefore, if the Trojan War occurred, it was a raid of probably short duration. Unfortunately, Hittite records say nothing about conflict between any state at that site in Anatolia and Greek states, but a great deal (well some) concerning conflict in southern Anatolia. Nevertheless, strong evidence suggests that Greek societies were a real presence in the Eastern Mediterranean from 1400 BCE onwards, and by 1200 BCE were raiding advanced urban societies.
I dont think it is important to check it happened or not. its more important to enjoy the story.
Ah, Ayad and Ali, but I am an historian and for me if a story in the past suggests it is true, I must check. You see, it might throw light on the past and at present I am researching the connection between historical claims and writing (one and the same really). Many ancient stories are no more than historical fiction, but they are often so well written they appear true!
There seems to be a historical core behind the narrative told in the Kypria, Iliad, and Odyssey, even if the secondary details in the epics may be more or less legendary developments. That tradition criticism of the Kypria reveals the memory of two slightly different expeditions presupposes that such expeditions did in fact occur.
Kirk, they occurred but as raids, or perhaps even distorted memories of Greek participation in the Sea Peoples raids on Canaan-in which some Greeks took part.
The lack of evidence for anything like that happening on the Troy site is the problem. Often people don't give sufficient credence to ancient peoples making things up. There could be a number of things going on here, historical fiction, whereby actual events are written about in novel-like modes-Rob Roy and Ivanhoe for example-or fictional history whereby a story is simply made up for national/cultural purposes but which never actually happened.
Was the Troy story about Ugarit, stormed by Sea Peoples in the 12th century BCE? It never really rose again after being one of the giants of the Near East.
I have been conducting more research into the Sea Peoples and now the general consensus appears to be that the sudden depopulation of parts of Greece was part of the same phenomenon-although the dates do not seem to coincide. The idea is that the Sea Peoples were largely made up of Mycenaean Greeks-plus Anatolians and populations from further West.
It has always looked fictitious to me whenever I read the historical information. I think that the story about the Trojan war may be true but there has been a lot of distortions in the reality of the events, making it appear mythical.
Another anomaly from this period: the Philistines were, it is now conceded, Mycenaean Greeks who arrived in Palestine after 1200 BCE, around the time of the Sea Peoples and the Mycenaean diaspora. Present evidence suggests they chased away the Canaanite population or killed them, occupying their cities. Is there here a connection to the Moses and Joshua myths? I contend in one of my articles on here that many Biblical stories originated in Philistia-could this be one?
Where Ugarit and Troy are concerned it amounts to a conflation of events, as both Troy and Ugarit probably were Hittite allies. We know that Ugarit was. While Mycenaean involvement in the Sea Peoples was seemingly expunged, Classical writers make no mention of it, an unproven event such as Troy loomed large in their memory.
Surely it happened. Story telling was only mode available at that time. In Indian culture we have thousands of stories which are true. Even simple things noted at that time were transmitted to future generations by songs, stories.
Ah, a considerable problem with ancient story telling I'm afraid is to assume it is actually historical-notions of history emerged late and even with the emergence of Thucydides, true history is still melded into historical fiction. Clearly, with Homer, memories of the Mycenaean past continued into the 8th or 7th century but in terms of grandiosity common with ancient cultures. We would use the terms boasting or lying, they would not.
Interesting question. I think it happened, I'm just not sure about the details
The short and fast answer to this question is: No. That is because the Trojan War story falls into the category of myth.
http://cerhas.uc.edu/troy/q404.html
In many areas of the ancient world, myth was not a way of saying fiction or reconstruction, but a form of truth. The dramatic plays of the Athenians contained the 'truth' about, Jasna is right here, perceptions, feelings contemporary or imagined of a certain period.
Did the Iliad happen? It encapsulated an historical 'truth' in the same way as King Arthur captured conflict between Saxon and Briton, myths and actual events turned into allegory or entertainment over 8 centuries, embracing chivalry and romantic love.
If the Iliad occurred it did so at the conclusion of Mycenaean Greece, reflecting that period.
No one seriously believes the Odyssey is 'true', simply a story about hospitality, foreigners and adventure, carrying within it paradigms of pre-Classical Athens-or Greece as a whole without the superficial hold of Socratic thought.
Pyrrhean losses and Hannibal --in what way? Loyalty and hospitality yes. But Odyssey may have its routes in an early Egyptian story that is also considered the original of Sinbad. The Moses story is probably a collection, and that too may have its routes elsewhere-in Sumerian literature and myths. Jasna, these are merely literary devices found also in Sinuhe and Lugalbanda thousands of years before Moses and Ulysses.
there is a legend that every nation will glorify itself. It may have been the Trojan War, but the story is extraordinary.
But Salih, the exploits of the early Greeks in Lebanon, Palestine and Syria in the 12th and 11th century BCE were extraordinary enough-but those they did not remember? Why?
Odysseus exampled the cleverness of the Greeks, in that he was an archetype, exhibiting the capacity for negotiating the truth as seen, or believed to be seen, in Sophists (dissembling in other words). So, maybe not quite Hannibal.
Take your point about Pyrrhic Victories, except that Pyrrhic actually won, with of course substantial and insupportable losses. Some might say that Odysseus exampled egotism?
Thanks, Jasna. But I suggest Gilgamesh has clear proprietorship in terms of ancient wisdom and insight (where the Gilgamesh Epic, which I'm certain you know, is concerned it touches on philosophic tropes beyond the Greek writers). Homer and the Athenian dramatists (with some exclusion for Euripides, but only some) reflect and act via external forces, gods, supernatural, and tradition. Their mental processes are externally-based, reflecting the bicameral mind noted by Julian Jaynes-a reasonable assessment if not completely correct. Therefore the wisdom, understanding and insight displayed is of a kind. Gilgamesh displays greater autonomy by rejecting the gods and discovering his own destiny-and the death he must embrace (one of the first statements of the existentialist position). By contrast, the Greek (largely Athenian) writers remain stuck in tribal associations of kin relationships. Medea, although a complex play, is primarily concerned with relationships with Others, immigrant, foreigner, barbarian, and an exploration of the Athenian mindset and Athenian relationships with their neighbours. It rests upon the totality of myth and does not even consider the mind in the modern sense.
Thanks, Jasna, but I'm not convinced that any of the above applies to what I actually wrote, or intended to say. I think though, and have expressed it on a number of occasions, that views on the Greek thinkers, Greek thinking and achievements require scrutiny, built up in many ways through Euro-centred desire to claim the birth of not just modern civilisation but civilisation itself. The Greeks were until they structured a place called Europe after their wars with the Persians always a Near Eastern culture in many ways, and certainly expressly were at the time of Troy, etc. Its unlikely that pre-Classical Greeks saw their culture as different from Asian culture and would hardly look to the north and west of their cities for their cultural identity. A wider more realistic view needs to be taken.
In biological science the champion of mythic category is Ch. Darwin,
but in history it is sure ,
this is Odyssey stories of Homer. Bravo !!!
thank for interesting discussion !
Mouth to Mouth transmiting Storis/Legend will have the centrepiece of what happened
I don't think generations would pass on details of a "myth". For what reason? Entertainment? As a historian, you should have enough proof by now to understand the pathos of all Greeks which is to dwell on history and historical facts passed from one generation to the next.
Why did Alexander kept reading Iliad which he had under his pillow during his 12-year old expedition? You think he was reading a Disney equivalent nonsense?
It is interesting to hear that the identity of the Sea Peoples is not known yet. I thought that the Minoans were the Sea Peoples which were in mining (from Minos?) and excelled in metallurgy far and wide. I understand Homer does not mention them as they operated in different areas and mostly before the age of Homer.
Your discussion is most interesting.
Yes, the Sea Peoples were part of Iron Age1 long before Homer, but in that case your point escapes me. Surely, Troy, in the unlikelihood that it occurred, straddled the same period? But, the general understanding is that the Sea Peoples, on which I have written about at considerable length, were made up of a number of groups from Greece, Cyprus, Western Anatolia and perhaps Western Europe. There are absolutely no doubts as to their identity, but Minoan Crete-absolutely not!
Michael, don't forget that the British passed on the Arthur myth-you need perhaps to see these things as literature not history.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India