Lexicus
Deity
Burden of proof would be on you to show they are other than fictional.
The Great Flood
- Thread starter Berzerker
- Start date
- Status
Burden of proof would be on you to show they are other than fictional.
Mouthwash doesn't mean that the characters themselves have to correspond 100% to specific people. But they certainly DO hail from known and real places in the archaic greek world, namely Thessaly, Aetolia, Boetia, Locris, the Argolid, Mycenae etc. So if their own home places - and cities- are real, it isn't that much of a stretch that the Ilion/Troy also was a real place at the time.
On a tangent: afaik the hittites speak of a western rising power, which was raiding and waring with some of their westernmost vassals. That too has a tie in the Iliad, given Priam was allied to inner asian powers.
Homer doesn't have to be presenting a history ala Herodotos, and is criticized by ancient philosophers for problematic claims as well (eg the claim that the greek allience didn't bother to count how many ships each member brought -- or similar). Socrates argues that this is highly unlikely. Heraklitos - of course - had a very negative opinion of Homer.
But all the above have no importance regarding the fact that the main locations of the Iliad in the west coast of the Aegean sea are historically existing (as named), so Troy very well may have been too.
On a tangent: afaik the hittites speak of a western rising power, which was raiding and waring with some of their westernmost vassals. That too has a tie in the Iliad, given Priam was allied to inner asian powers.
Homer doesn't have to be presenting a history ala Herodotos, and is criticized by ancient philosophers for problematic claims as well (eg the claim that the greek allience didn't bother to count how many ships each member brought -- or similar). Socrates argues that this is highly unlikely. Heraklitos - of course - had a very negative opinion of Homer.
But all the above have no importance regarding the fact that the main locations of the Iliad in the west coast of the Aegean sea are historically existing (as named), so Troy very well may have been too.
Last edited:
Lexicus
Deity
That is exactly what he appears to mean to me.
The Iliad claims it and I've given my reason for why we shouldn't dismiss their existence, regardless of the poem's historicity.
That's absolutely not what I mean. I also believe that Jesus was a real person, does it follow that I accept him as the Messiah?
Lexicus
Deity
I'm confused because you seem to be confirming exactly what I said. You believe that the characters in the Iliad correspond 100% to specific people. You don't necessarily believe those people did all the things they do in the Iliad.
Not 100%; different people can be amalgamated into one, titles can be confused with names, etc. But it's worth considering whether they did exist instead of dismissing the possibility out of hand.
Lexicus
Deity
I think the problem we're having is that I don't think the statement "they existed" has any meaning unless we're assuming that 100% correspondence. "Achilles is an amalgamation of a bunch of real guys" is a very different statement, to me, than "Achilles existed" or "Achilles may have existed."
Well, Achilles was the son of a nymph, so a 100% correspondence to reality isn't likely 
Yet fictional characters often exist in real setting, as with everyone in the works of Charles Dickens. Similar might be so for the main locations of the Iliad.
Moreover, in greek myth the main characters -- and at times also secondary characters -- are not just of very specific location (as in virtually always) but were in other myths as well, often of other greek states. A nice example would be in the attic circle, with one of the bandits Theseus kills outside Attica; Skyron is said in the attic circle myth to be another bandit, but in the Megarian mythology (and Megara, the state and city) Skyron was celebrated as a wise and positive figure.
In the Theseus story, he is another murderer, iirc the one who keeps a pet giant turtle in the Saronic gulf, and throws his victims from the high rise to the sea as food for the turtle.
Yet fictional characters often exist in real setting, as with everyone in the works of Charles Dickens. Similar might be so for the main locations of the Iliad.
Moreover, in greek myth the main characters -- and at times also secondary characters -- are not just of very specific location (as in virtually always) but were in other myths as well, often of other greek states. A nice example would be in the attic circle, with one of the bandits Theseus kills outside Attica; Skyron is said in the attic circle myth to be another bandit, but in the Megarian mythology (and Megara, the state and city) Skyron was celebrated as a wise and positive figure.
In the Theseus story, he is another murderer, iirc the one who keeps a pet giant turtle in the Saronic gulf, and throws his victims from the high rise to the sea as food for the turtle.
Lexicus
Deity
Yes, that I'm not denying. I think it's likely that Troy was a real place.
Berzerker
Deity
a real place involved in a war with Greece?
Lexicus
Deity
There was no "Greece" at the time
That is dead-wrong. Homer always refers to the greek side as a unified culture. Usually as the "Achaeans" and at times as the "Danaeans" or the "Argives" (apparently all mean the same and are used interchangeably).
Also, in case you mean that there was no 'Greece' even later on, eg in the classical period, that is even more obviously wrong given we have historical statements up to the very nice and specific accusation of athenians in the Peloponnesian war as having "commited crimes against Hellenism". That is pretty specific.
In the greek-persian wars, epigrams speak of the battle of Marathon with the athenians having been "fighting at the forefront of the Greeks" etc (i mentioned the most obvious so as to prove the point that Hellas was a thing).
Greece was at war with pretty much everybody at some point. But in a war involving warriors who were made invincible by the gods (except for the heel)? No. With Amazons (women warriors)? Maybe; there's no reason women can't put on armor, pick up a weapon, and fight. With Centaurs? If you mistake a man on a horse for a single being... but I very much doubt that cultures that depended on horses would be that ignorant.
The story of the Trojan War involves gods - in short, supernatural beings. So no, it could not have happened exactly the way that the stories say it did. Assuming, of course, that it happened at all.
This part of the thread's argument got me interested in revisiting a documentary series I last saw 30-odd years ago: Michael Wood's In Search of the Trojan War. It's all there on YouTube, 6 episodes.
I plan to watch this, to refresh my memory.
Berzerker
Deity
Its possible the centaur myth began when horse riding cultures met other people, like the fright caused by Spanish Conquistadors riding into battle against new world peoples. But I'm not arguing every detail of every myth occurred, just that myths generally have some kernel of truth underlying the story - perhaps even a disguised truth meant for the initiated.
FriendlyFire
Codex WMDicanious
Well, Achilles was the son of a nymph, so a 100% correspondence to reality isn't likely
Yet fictional characters often exist in real setting, as with everyone in the works of Charles Dickens. Similar might be so for the main locations of the Iliad..
Didnt someone turn up with a large female in a chariot and claim that she was Athena the actual goddess ?
(It was some kind of political stunt which worked iirc) O_o. Its quite possible Achilles "claimed" to be the son of Zeus or have divine favor of the Gods and then well it gets exaggerated and the myth grows
And you complained about Achilles being Black /s
Last edited:
Achilles was the son of the mortal Peleus and the nymph Thetis, so it's rather unlikely that he claimed to be the son of Zeus. The story of Apollo guiding Paris' arrow into Achilles' heel is somewhat specific and I find it rather unlikely that any of the Greek heroes were based on 'real' people at all.
Having the concept of crimes against being Greek is not necessarily the same as there being a unified Greek nation.
Having the concept of crimes against being Greek is not necessarily the same as there being a unified Greek nation.
A unified culture, or a group of people tied by it. Obviously they weren't one state-- the quote is about the Peloponnesian war at any rate
Though - in case you meant; i think you did- in the mycenaean era there might have been even something like a unified state, at least generally. Eg you don't see greek states going to Asia Minor as an alliance before the time of Alexander, while Athens, Sparta, and Thebes, did have expeditions alone.
I don't think being an amalgamation of several different people counts as existing. That's why I only said we should leave open the possibility. I'm not certain they existed, but I suspect they might have.
Let's imagine that an alliance of twenty Native American tribes lands on the shores of Europe and lays siege to Paris. Even if they aren't any more a single people than the Germans and Portuguese are, it might be useful to refer to those invaders by a catch-all name. A more historical example would be 'Franks' in the Crusades.
Why is that? Declaring one's divine ancestry seemed pretty common then, even into Hellenistic times.
But it requires a Greek identity.
Assuming that Achilles actually existed and thus was already was the child of an immortal, he would know better than to claim to be the child of Zeus. The Greek myths are literally rife with the punishments for hubris, both mortal and immortal alike.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Dude died to an arrow in the ankle shot by pansy-boy Paris...
- Status
Similar threads
