Any basis for estimates of when the Trojan war occured?

[Kyriakos]

As far as i know most scholars argue that the Homeric epics were not formed any later than the 9th century BC. Most of the historians of the classical era and later, have as their earliest allusions the events of the end of the archaic period, such as the first naval battle between Greek powers (Corinth and Kerkyra) or the founding of the first Greek colony in the mainland of Italy, the city of Kyme (Cumae).
While both the dramas, and the theogonic myths (such as those by Hesiod) refer to vastly older periods, even before the great flood of Deukalion, i think that the historians only go back to the edge of the archaic era, when the Mycenean hegemony had declined, leading to individual cities forming their own sphere of influence. Of course the mythical circles of those cities also refer to previous periods (such as the Attic mythic circle, with Theseus and Minoan control of Athens, or the Theban circle and old wars with the Peloponnese), along with panhellenic myths as those centered on Heracles.

I would like to ask if anyone knows of studies on whether the Trojan war (assuming it did happen as a war) took place long before the ninth or tenth century BC. If i recall correctly the rise of Mycenae happened circa 1500 BC, with the concurrent decline of Minoan Crete and its colonies, and before that the Cycladic civilization had faded away, possibly reaching its apogee around 2000 BC (according to the cycladic art which is dated from that period).

 

[Dachs]

I would like to ask if anyone knows of studies on whether the Trojan war (assuming it did happen as a war) took place long before the ninth or tenth century BC.

"Assuming it did happen as a war" is the most important part. Since the only "sources" for the Trojan War are mythological epics, there's not a whole lot of positive evidence to suggest that it was a Thing.

With that said, some historians do believe that it did happen and that it can be dated (specifically, they almost always date it to ~1250 BC). I disagree with them, as do, I think, the majority of classicists, but they do exist. I think the most famous articulation of a "real Trojan War" framework comes from Barry Strauss. If you're intent on pursuing this Trojan War thing, that would be the first place to start.

 

[Traitorfish]

Serious question, is it even worth seriously considering if the Trojan War happened? Nobody goes around insisting that the Cattle Raid of Cooley actually happened, so what sets this apart?

 

[Dachs]

Serious question, is it even worth seriously considering if the Trojan War happened? Nobody goes around insisting that the Cattle Raid of Cooley actually happened, so what sets this apart?

It's not "set apart"; look at King Arthur. CFC's second-favorite historian wrote a book about how the whole King Arthur historicity debate is silly and how people should be focusing more on the environment and context in which Arthur is supposed to have lived and other things that more closely approximate facts. (And he's a guy who acknowledges how cool it would be if some sort of Arthur really did exist, so.)

You get three guesses what the comments section contains. First two guesses don't count.

Same with the Trojan War.

 

[Traitorfish]

Hm, even then, there at least some historical sources other than epic poetry, however unreliable, so you can see how somebody might imagine that to constitute evidence if they wanted it to. But with Troy, all we have is the epic poem, and it's not really clear to me how a person could mistake that for evidence of anything even if they were going out of their way to find it.

(Also, only second-favourite? Who's first?)

 

[Flying Pig]

I do think that with myths and legends, discussing whether they're true is less important than trying to work out what coming up with such a story says about a culture. One good example would be that the Romans, almost uniquely in the Classical world, had two foundation myths, both of which involved some kind of exile establishing a city through violence. It says something about a society that gives itself that for a self-image. There's got to be some link between that sort of mythology and a system of citizenship which - again, uniquely as far as I know - took on new citizens on a large scale, including freed slaves.

 

[Dachs]

Hm, even then, there at least some historical sources other than epic poetry, however unreliable, so you can see how somebody might imagine that to constitute evidence if they wanted it to. But with Troy, all we have is the epic poem, and it's not really clear to me how a person could mistake that for evidence of anything even if they were going out of their way to find it.

Gildas has arguably less historical value than Homer. Ever actually read On the Ruin and Conquest of the Britains? Everything else is explicitly epic poetry.

(Also, only second-favourite? Who's first?)

Plotinus?

 

[Traitorfish]

Plotinus?

Oh yeah. I forget that he's an historian as a well as a theologian. (Which is dumb, given how much of "Ask a Theologian" is history.)

 

[Louis XXIV]

If I'm not mistaken, there is at least evidence of Troy being destroyed a couple times in history. A few can be roughly dated to the time of Dark Age or Mycenaean Greeks. From there, the argument would be that the Greeks destroyed the city. From there, the argument would be that the real destruction of the city in any way mirrored the Iliad.

I think that the city being burned by Greeks and this was an inspiration for the Iliad is at least plausible. Although, I will point out that Troy doesn't fall in the Iliad and there's plenty of reason to disbelieve that the same person "wrote" the Iliad and the Odyssey. Is there any reason to believe that the original "writer" of the Iliad intended Troy to fall?

 

[Traitorfish]

If I'm not mistaken, there is at least evidence of Troy being destroyed a couple times in history. A few can be roughly dated to the time of Dark Age or Mycenaean Greeks. From there, the argument would be that the Greeks destroyed the city. From there, the argument would be that the real destruction of the city in any way mirrored the Iliad.

The identification of the ruins at Hisarlik as "Troy" is founded on their apparent similarity with the city described in the Iliad, mind, so that risks circular reasoning. We can't appeal to the Iliad to justify the Iliad, y'know?

 

[Louis XXIV]

Well, the Romans apparently thought they were Troy, fwiw. Maybe they based it on similarities to Troy of the Iliad, though. I understand that the actual terrain of Troy has changed so dramatically as to not resemble it at all today (it's not near the sea, for example).

 

[Plotinus]

Plotinus?

You're kind, but really I'm an amateur historian at best!

Hm, even then, there at least some historical sources other than epic poetry, however unreliable, so you can see how somebody might imagine that to constitute evidence if they wanted it to. But with Troy, all we have is the epic poem, and it's not really clear to me how a person could mistake that for evidence of anything even if they were going out of their way to find it.

I'm sure that Homer does constitute evidence to some degree of the Trojan War, given that the probability of the Iliad being written would be higher in a universe where the Trojan War had happened than it would be in one where it hadn't. The question is whether it's good evidence. There's also the fact that there are sources other than Homer (who, after all, describes only one incident during the war, not the war overall): there's the Epic Cycle, and I suppose any sources that the Greek tragedians had and also Virgil. So it's not like there's a single source for this, but again the question is whether these are good sources.

 

[r16]

Serious question, is it even worth seriously considering if the Trojan War happened?

but then the Greeks have a miserable way of going overboard when they show a prediliction of getting Anatolia into fold . Truva and '22 though Alexander didn't even bother staying there once there . Current situation in Greece not particularly bright ; they are , really are thinking going extreme and naturally need some legends from the past . It always beggars belief when people decide there should be some sort of a revolution .

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that there is a larger possibility that a war at a Troy was part of this universe, than, say, r16 making once a post which is relevant to the thread topic and/or sane

I am not sure if the classical era tragic poets/playwrights really were having other sources for their own presentation of this homeric myth. They seem to often alter it for their own play's function, and it is rather obvious they were far more interested in the dynamics of the drama, rather than in any sense of keeping true to history (unless the play was entirely about history, like The Persians, by Aeschylos, which iirc got banned due to evoking strongly sad emotions in specific link to a recent event).

 

[r16]

and it would only come as trolling to remark once again that the Greeks of the day were so utterly kicked around by the Anatolians of the day that they banned literacy for two centuries and re-wrote history 4 centuries later .

 

[Kyriakos]

r16, the "anatolians of the day" have nothing to do with you

And stop derailing the thread.

 

[Flying Pig]

The identification of the ruins at Hisarlik as "Troy" is founded on their apparent similarity with the city described in the Iliad, mind, so that risks circular reasoning. We can't appeal to the Iliad to justify the Iliad, y'know?

It's entirely possible that Homer could have visited a city at which there had been a war and used it to draw inspiration for Troy, without proving that there actually was a Trojan War. In the same way, the fact that JK Rowling drew inspiration from Oxford University to create Hogwarts does not prove that Hogwarts actually exists.

 

[r16]

r16, the "anatolians of the day" have nothing to do with you

my point actually .

as for derailing it's all about trying to help . A possible dating for an expedition that got defeated -like utterly . Troy of reality was possibly a tiny affair , instead of a metropolis that could withstood a 10 year siege . My living room is possibly larger .

 

[Kyriakos]

Uh, the western part of asia minor was Greek by the time of the end of the archaic age, so as usual you make no sense.

Just because you think in terms of turkey#1 and other assorted comedy, it does not mean i post threads to echoe an analogous sentiment. I often draw from history so as to enrich my metaphors in my own work, which is most of why from time to time i ask some questions about it.

 

[r16]

long standing notion that ı have no objections that the Troy in question was a Greek colony collecting tax revenue from the ship traffic in the Dardanelles . Neither Turkey does need r16 ranting on a gaming forum to be number 1 , 10 , 100 or anything that comes to mind .