By looking at the various archaeological and historical evidence, we can determine the historical reality of the so called, Trojan War. I contend, that whilst the main source of information, Homers Iliad, is largely mythological and written not for history but for entertainment, there are still some archaeological factors suggesting there was some form of conflict between Greece and Troy. Thus, the categorisation of the Trojan war as a myth, warrants critical evaluation. I propose the reality behind the Trojan War is highly contorted, and may just be a form of ancient propaganda. As history is written by the victor, the exact reality of the war was recorded by the Greeks, who are known to be largely biased. This accounts for the mythological
…show more content…
Moreover, there was still a degree of scepticism in the late Twentieth Century. Herodotus placed Homer at approximately 400 years before his own time, which would place Homer at around 850 B.C.E. The Iliad is situated at the time of the Bronze Age collapse, in the early Twelfth Century B.C.E. Thus, Homer is writing 400 years after the war, in the period known as the Greek Dark Ages. In the Twelfth Century B.C.E, the only accounts of the war were through oral tradition, and would have undoubtedly effected the historical accuracy, and may be where the large prejudiced and legendary material seeped into the version Homer recorded. The historical and archaeological reality of the Trojan War has been a topic of scholarly debate for centuries. Our primary source of information is Homers Iliad; which we must treat as only partially accurate. If we read from Homer’s Iliad, and other Greek literature such as Euripides’ Trojan women, the Trojan War is regarded as historical fact. Due to the very apparent Greek biased in most sources - from Homer to Archimedes – it is expected, and rightly so, that these writers be treated with heavy scepticism. Although, we should not regard their works as mere myth, or superstition, and instead find the historical meaning and the messages the texts were encouraging during their time, in order to discover the accuracy of them. Even …show more content…
Unlike Homer, Thucydides says that Agamemnon wanted to attack Troy out of a desire for conquest and the other Greek states followed him, simply because he was the most powerful. It is likely that Homer invented these characters and their actions for narrative purposes. Thucydides however, writes with the intent to provide readers with exact accounts of history, and so his works should be held with higher regard. Thucydides notes that Homer never uses the term “Hellenes” to describe the Greeks. Instead, he refers to individual groups, “Argives,” “Danaans” and “Achaeans.” Homer also never uses barbaroi to describe the other side. This, Thucydides argues, shows that there was no unified sense of Greek cultural identity in Homer’s time, and therefore could not have existed before him. Thucydides’ reconstruction of the war is speculative and based primarily on militaristic knowledge. This sceptical account gives an interesting insight to the reality of the Trojan War. Thucydides doubts various aspects of the war,
Moreover, there was still a degree of scepticism in the late Twentieth Century. Herodotus placed Homer at approximately 400 years before his own time, which would place Homer at around 850 B.C.E. The Iliad is situated at the time of the Bronze Age collapse, in the early Twelfth Century B.C.E. Thus, Homer is writing 400 years after the war, in the period known as the Greek Dark Ages. In the Twelfth Century B.C.E, the only accounts of the war were through oral tradition, and would have undoubtedly effected the historical accuracy, and may be where the large prejudiced and legendary material seeped into the version Homer recorded. The historical and archaeological reality of the Trojan War has been a topic of scholarly debate for centuries. Our primary source of information is Homers Iliad; which we must treat as only partially accurate. If we read from Homer’s Iliad, and other Greek literature such as Euripides’ Trojan women, the Trojan War is regarded as historical fact. Due to the very apparent Greek biased in most sources - from Homer to Archimedes – it is expected, and rightly so, that these writers be treated with heavy scepticism. Although, we should not regard their works as mere myth, or superstition, and instead find the historical meaning and the messages the texts were encouraging during their time, in order to discover the accuracy of them. Even …show more content…
Unlike Homer, Thucydides says that Agamemnon wanted to attack Troy out of a desire for conquest and the other Greek states followed him, simply because he was the most powerful. It is likely that Homer invented these characters and their actions for narrative purposes. Thucydides however, writes with the intent to provide readers with exact accounts of history, and so his works should be held with higher regard. Thucydides notes that Homer never uses the term “Hellenes” to describe the Greeks. Instead, he refers to individual groups, “Argives,” “Danaans” and “Achaeans.” Homer also never uses barbaroi to describe the other side. This, Thucydides argues, shows that there was no unified sense of Greek cultural identity in Homer’s time, and therefore could not have existed before him. Thucydides’ reconstruction of the war is speculative and based primarily on militaristic knowledge. This sceptical account gives an interesting insight to the reality of the Trojan War. Thucydides doubts various aspects of the war,