Truth behind Greek Mythology

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

As a reader of (one or two) versions of Greek Mythology. Particularly Old Greek Monsters and Trojan War
1. Who Minotaur actually was? if some archaeological claims suggested that a 'Taur was actually a mighty man with a big axe and wears bovine full helm to make an allegory of this beastman. What are achaeological evidence that backs the claims? and did labyrinth ever exists below Knossos and if so what was its actual function? a prison, a fortress? a big temple? The myth said that Minotaur was contained inside it, and Minoans use this beast to extort anyone else around them, preferrably The Mainland Greeks whom didn't yet united under one empire. Any of their vassals must sent a ship load of young men and women to feed the beast on regular basis. All this continued until a greek hero disguised as vassal offerings killed him.
Or were there so many 'Taurs actually?
2. And what did the rivalry between a giant scorpion and Orion means? a rivalry between Greeks (Orion) and other Desert Peoples like The Egypts (Scorpion)
3. On to the Trojan War. Who the Trojans really were? were they different 'Greeks' went by other names (In Civ3, Greek can build a city named 'Troy', in Civ5 and 6), were they a different Mediterranean peoples or were they more semitics than Greeks? Were they actually The Hittites or other Eastern peoples? Was Troy a seat of an empire or one of many city states around The Medit Sea?

 

[Señor]

You may find it interesting to look up a map of Minos palace. The palace itself is quite 'labyrinthian'.

 

[Kyriakos]

According to myth, the Minotaur was the son of Queen Pasiphae (wife of King Minos) and a white bull, and was a curse by Poseidon:
Minos was supposed to sacrifice the beautiful white bull to Poseidon, but decided not to, so the god made the king's wife enamoured with the beast. Daedalos had to create a replica of a cow, so as to cause the bull to have sex with Pasiphae.
Now, afaik, there is no way that dna from a different species can result to an actual birth. But in the myth it does (there is divine intervention anyway).
History-wise (?) the minoans at the time had defeated Athens and were being paid tribute, part of which was the ritual sacrifice of a few youths each nine (iirc) years. They were sent to the labyrinth, to be devoured by the minotaur. Also, according to the same myth, the reason Minos invaded Athens was because his son had been revenge-murdered after he won the panathenean games.

Re the axe thing, I don't think the minotaur is said to be carrying an axe (?). The characteristic double-edged minoan axe (the "labrys") is sometimes argued to be etymologically linked to the term "labyrinthos", which would make it mean something like "place of the labrys".

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

So the m'taur was actually a kinda priest on a sacrifical altar while Athenians and other in land greeks disdain cretan cultures ??

 

[Kyriakos]

Not sure what you mean, but in the myth the son of Minos was murdered by an athenian, and Athens refused to pay for it, so got invaded. I don't think it has to do with "hating cretan culture", given he was murdered due to winning an athenian event. Of course this all happens close to the mythical era of Theseus, so not exactly historic; revenge killings on different greek city states are something usual in the mythic circles, be it the attic, the theban or other.

 

[EnglishEdward]

3. On to the Trojan War. Who the Trojans really were? were they different 'Greeks' went by other names (In Civ3, Greek can build a city named 'Troy', in Civ5 and 6), were they a different Mediterranean peoples
or were they more semitics than Greeks? Were they actually The Hittites or other Eastern peoples? Was Troy a seat of an empire or one of many city states around The Medit Sea?

I have only read the Iliad in English (albeit occasional bits in Latin).

I believe that Troy existed and was at the site excavated by Schliemann in NorthWest Turkey.

I suspect that it was a pre-existing Bronze Age city, conquered by the Hittites
which survived the fall of the Hittite empire influenced by them and prospered.

I very much doubt that Greek was their native language.
If it had been, it is strange that that was not recorded in the Iliad.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

So who did Trojans really related to? Greeks? Phoenicians? Hittites? or other Levant Peoples? or are they the same people as Biblical Canaanites?

 

[Traitorfish]

So who did Trojans really related to? Greeks? Phoenicians? Hittites? or other Levant Peoples? or are they the same people as Biblical Canaanites?

I don't think we can assume that the Trojans correspond to a people who we happen to have heard of. Especially not ones living a thousand miles from the purported location of Troy.

It's most likely that the Homeric Trojans simply correspond to themselves: one of dozens or hundreds of forgotten ancient peoples, speaking a language we've never heard of and worshipping gods we wouldn't recognise, remembered only because they featured in a body of poetry preserved by later peoples.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ So Trojans are civilizations of their own?

 

[Traitorfish]

^ So Trojans are civilizations of their own?

In the sense that they probably represented a distinct language and culture, yes. But I think the tendency to talk about distinct "civilisations" in the region reflects an over-emphasis on sources associated with a few key imperial centres. We talk about the landscape as if it was comprised of distinct territorial units which we can call "Hittite", "Babylonian" or "Assyrian", when really you would have seen dozens or hundreds of city-states or tribes, arrayed into various confederations and tributary systems, most not very strongly distinct from the next polity over. What we call "civilisations" are really just the elite culture of those polities which managed to gain some sort of lasting dominance over a large part of the region.

You actually cited a well-known source which illustrates against- the Hebrew Bible, which describes a variety of kingdoms or confederations in what's now Israel-Palestine, none of which assumed to be markedly different in culture or language, except for the specific religious distinctions drawn by the text. It seems on the face of it absurd to say that the Israelites and Caananites were distinct "civilisations" but that the Mycenaean and Spartans weren't, simply because the narrative of certain epic texts we have inherited emphasises the conflict between the former two and the alliance of the latter two.

 

[Morningcalm]

As a reader of (one or two) versions of Greek Mythology. Particularly Old Greek Monsters and Trojan War
1. Who Minotaur actually was? if some archaeological claims suggested that a 'Taur was actually a mighty man with a big axe and wears bovine full helm to make an allegory of this beastman. What are achaeological evidence that backs the claims? and did labyrinth ever exists below Knossos and if so what was its actual function? a prison, a fortress? a big temple? The myth said that Minotaur was contained inside it, and Minoans use this beast to extort anyone else around them, preferrably The Mainland Greeks whom didn't yet united under one empire. Any of their vassals must sent a ship load of young men and women to feed the beast on regular basis. All this continued until a greek hero disguised as vassal offerings killed him.
Or were there so many 'Taurs actually?

The Minotaur was named Asterios, or Asterion, a name shared with several other individuals, including (historical) Cretan kings. It means "starry one". I would suggest the name shows Pasiphae had some affection for her offspring, before everyone realized its rage required it to be imprisoned in the Labyrinth (King Minos consulted the Oracle and she gave him that advice, hence the Minotaur was imprisoned in the Labyrinth). Some sculptures show Pasiphae nursing Asterion/Asterios as a child as well.

Historically, the Labyrinth was likely inspired by the multi-level, many-roomed palace of Knossos (the capital of Crete), and the Minotaur inspired by the frequent imagery of bulls in Knossos and Crete at large (including bull-leapers).

 

[yung.carl.jung]

In the sense that they probably represented a distinct language and culture, yes. But I think the tendency to talk about distinct "civilisations" in the region reflects an over-emphasis on sources associated with a few key imperial centres. We talk about the landscape as if it was comprised of distinct territorial units which we can call "Hittite", "Babylonian" or "Assyrian", when really you would have seen dozens or hundreds of city-states or tribes, arrayed into various confederations and tributary systems, most not very strongly distinct from the next polity over. What we call "civilisations" are really just the elite culture of those polities which managed to gain some sort of lasting dominance over a large part of the region.

You actually cited a well-known source which illustrates against- the Hebrew Bible, which describes a variety of kingdoms or confederations in what's now Israel-Palestine, none of which assumed to be markedly different in culture or language, except for the specific religious distinctions drawn by the text. It seems on the face of it absurd to say that the Israelites and Caananites were distinct "civilisations" but that the Mycenaean and Spartans weren't, simply because the narrative of certain epic texts we have inherited emphasises the conflict between the former two and the alliance of the latter two.

I read a strong Lyotard-take in this. I 100% agree with your assessment. Imho "Civilizations" are essentially just cultural essentialisms. They are almost universally retroactive constructs whose narratives forms some kind of specific purpose: To justify borders, to establish some kind of cultural and historical unity, and more importantly continuity, to establish in- and outgroups, to inject a political agenda into a particular history.

Any entity distinct enough to be described as such could be a singular civilization (e.g. Troy), but whether is it one or not is in the end relatively arbitrary. What's more telling is the self-image and self-representation of those people, but we often do not know much about that. I think it would be fair to say that civilizations became "real" at the point where people accepted these manufactured terms as their own indentity, which is incidentally also when local identities either disappeared or lost most of their meaning. many people nowadays see their nation state / essentialized culture as an inherent part of their identity / personality, often more than their ancestry (genetic) or their specific locality (basque country is one of the few examples where local-dominant cultures actually survived). few greeks today see themselves as Spartans, Athenians, or anything of that sort, because that metanarrative has been replaced by one of national unity and European togetherness.

To see just how artificial and arbitrary some of those narratives are one simply has to look at the absolute mess we call "the balkans"...

 

[Hrothbern]

If you are a Greek sailor and you visit a small island and see these skulls.... about twice the size of a human skull... what do you see ? ... some monster with one big eye ?

What those sailors did lokely see were the skull of extinct dwarf elephants.
The result of insular dwarfism.
Skulls have been found on the islands Cyprus, Crete, Malta and Sicily.

That big hole not an eye-socket but the hole for the trunk of that dwarf elephant.

The Cyclops story in the Odyssey not so strange anymore.
The sheep, the one-eyed Cyclops, the cave, the sharpened and fire hardened pole.

That cave in Ghar Dalam in Malta could have been known as well by Greek sailors.
https://ccccomedy.wordpress.com/2015/01/27/the-dwarf-elephant-of-malta-origin-of-the-cyclops-myth/

 

[Kyriakos]

The "eye" certainly looks circular, which is what "cyclops" means in the first place.
But wouldn't there be accounts of that discovery by historians of the period (or a bit later), if it was known to enough sailors? Afaik the greek colonization of that area had started in the 8th century.

 

[Hrothbern]

The "eye" certainly looks circular, which is what "cyclops" means in the first place.
But wouldn't there be accounts of that discovery by historians of the period (or a bit later), if it was known to enough sailors? Afaik the greek colonization of that area had started in the 8th century.

Would the original info have been "strong" enough to be used by genuine historians of that period ?
And yes... that does favor that there is at that time no recent finding of a skull but there is only some very old story that survived.

I am not precise with using a "Greek" sailor anyway. When does "Greece" really start in terms of stories and traditions ?
It could have been any sailor or traveller that brought in reach of Homer the story of some monster or the existence of those skulls with that one "eye". And up to Homer how much he added to it when using it for the Odyssey.

Homer uses an uninhabited island fitting his story. Those skulls have also been found on Cyprus, well within reach of Egyptian, Minoan, Greek travelling routes.
But do mind that sailors travelled anywhere already early in history simply because of storms !!! Unintended travels so to say.

I think, looking at that skull, that whenever in time some human saw it, it must have made a very strong monster impression !
Strong enough to survive long in tribal stories.

Myths in the mist of time

 

[Kyriakos]

Would the original info have been "strong" enough to be used by genuine historians of that period ?
And yes... that does favor that there is at that time no recent finding of a skull but there is only some very old story that survived.

I am not precise with using a "Greek" sailor anyway. When does "Greece" really start in terms of stories and traditions ?
It could have been any sailor or traveller that brought in reach of Homer the story of some monster or the existence of those skulls with that one "eye". And up to Homer how much he added to it when using it for the Odyssey.

Homer uses an uninhabited island fitting his story. Those skulls have also been found on Cyprus, well within reach of Egyptian, Minoan, Greek travelling routes.
But do mind that sailors travelled anywhere already early in history simply because of storms !!! Unintended travels so to say.

I think, looking at that skull, that whenever in time some human saw it, it must have made a very strong monster impression !
Strong enough to survive long in tribal stories.

Myths in the mist of time

Also, ivory was an important (and rare) resource in archaic Greece, and AFAIK it was considered a mineral, cause remains of elephant tusks were dug up. Ivory was mixed with gold and used in major statues, the most famous of which was the Gold-ivory statue of Zeus at Olympia.
So if any of those elephant skulls had been known by many people, it should have left accounts of ties to gods through the ivory alone. I am not aware of any mention, but maybe there is. At any rate there are accounts of cave exploration and theorizing on the discoveries there, eg with marine fossils in mountain caves -as you may recall from an old discussion

 

[Hrothbern]

Also, ivory was an important (and rare) resource in archaic Greece, and AFAIK it was considered a mineral, cause remains of elephant husks were dug up. Ivory was mixed with gold and used in major statues, the most famous of which was the Gold-ivory statue of Zeus at Olympia.

yes

And the statue of Zeus...

wow... such a shame that this statue did not survive !
It must have been truly beautiful

Would be nice to know what color ivory that statue had.
I bought once for my daughters some 5 cm pieces of mammoth ivory in our Naturalis Museum of prehistoric animals for 30-50 Euro. Very brittle BTW. Better pieces too expensive.
They are whitish brownish of color. And yes dug up. There seems to be lots of it coming from Siberia.
Greece with also Egyptian connection, trade and cultural, would strongly favor African tusk.
But the European-Asian trade routes were fully up and running in ancient Greece period as well.

 

[Kyriakos]

PS

The Cyclopai are immortal (and there is only three of them) in Hesiod's Theogonia, while in the Odyssey there is a tribe but I am not sure if they are biologically immortal or not. Furthermore, iirc in Hesiod they cannot die at all (even by violence).
Similar to the Gorgonai, of which two were entirely immortal, but one (Medusa) was just biologically immortal and got killed. But a lot of monsters in greek mythology just are undead, like the Scylla. Some of them can still be diminished, such as the dragon Ladon, guardian of the Hesperides, who got reduced to a perpetual state of near death by Herakles.

 

[Virote_Considon]

So who did Trojans really related to? Greeks? Phoenicians? Hittites? or other Levant Peoples? or are they the same people as Biblical Canaanites?

The Romans.