It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Did Troy really exist?...

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:46 AM
Good point freemason, all city states had a collective knowledge of being Greek. Look at the Olympic Games, where all "Hellenes" congregated, no barbarians allowed. It was the only time where representatives from Asia Minor, like Ephesus, or macedonia with King Phillip or even Masalia (present day Marseilles in France came together to celebrate Greek culture.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:50 AM
I thought the Trojan War was the first war written about by a historian (Herodotus?) rather than a writer, therefore making it historically accurate, depicting losses on both sides?

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:51 AM
I used the term "gold" loosely, but it was in reference to what I earlier stated about the theories of why the Trojan war would have happend.

First the Trojans were a powerful state that controled the Dardanelles.

Because of that any trade to the black sea could be taxed by them.

The winds blew against the coast of Troy (I believe the Iliad does state this) and so when the winds did blow, any ships trying to make it for the dardanelles first had to stop on the beaches just outside Troy. (Literally probably where the Greeks landed to attack Troy).

This allowed Troy to tax or even plunder ships that came to their coasts.

This of course would make them an enemy of any trading city. And wouldn't we know that Mycenea and other Greek city states but especially that one, were powerful trading cities.

Any city wanting to increase its trading abilities would surely see the sacking of Troy as a way to do it.

What I meant by the loose term of "gold" was also what the small man was seeking. Undoubtedly other city states that had no real trade concerns that abroad, went because there was plenty of gold to be won by whoever helped.

The destruction of the city in the Iliad was total so all its wealth would be spread amongst those who partook in the sacking. This is incentive for the lesser city states and more mercenary warriors to go follow those who were directly affected by Troy's position along the anatolian coast-line.

On an interesting note...since the Iliad was concevied by post Doric invasion Greeks.

Do you think it is possible that the "escape of Aeneas" is seen by the Greeks of the time the Iliad was composed as being a hint that the Doric invaders were led by Aneas as revenge?

Because I know that Virgil the Poet says that Aeneas went to found Rome, but since Rome didn't exist at the time of the composing of the Iliad, Aeneas' had to have escaped for a purpose in the story that didn't involve Rome, but that somehow involved the listener.

Or is it possible that the Iliad is so historically accurate it described the escape of someone for no theatrical purpose?

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:53 AM
No xenophane the first historically recorded battle was an Egyptian battle against the Hittites at Kaddesh or Qaddesh in 1290s BC by Rameses the Great aka Rameses II.

Basically it is described down to which divisions were sent where.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:55 AM
The Peloponisian war was written by Herodotus, Trojan War was written by Homer in Iliad. Actually to be specific, nowhere in the original translation tou will find Troy or Trojan- as the Trojans are called the Iliads hence the Iliad war.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:58 AM
Very interesting question Freemason. One can only speculate on how accurate the Iliad is, but you make a very valid point on the Dorian connection.I still believe though that the Romans are descendants of the Iliads of Troy.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:00 AM
Troy is the Roman word for it, Aeneas is probably the Roman name for the guy, modern translators would like to translate the names directly as ancient Greek but because no one knows who many of the greeks were by their greek names like Patroklos ... that is difficult for them.

Oh but I thought Herodotus was before the Peloponesian War and that it was Thucydides who wrote about it specifically the 2nd and 3rd Peloponesian Wars?

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:00 AM
To xenophane and Freemason- have you guys ever come across some Greeks that still believe in the old pagan Gods? I guess I should put that in a new thread.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:05 AM
Well there are just some problems I find with the Roman connection. First is that Rome was becomming a greater power in the world when Aeneas was claimed to be the one who created Rome, so it could be assumed this was a way of nationalizing Romans.

Also the irony against the Greeks as one day Rome would conquer the Greeks is ... a lot.

I wonder if there's any similarities to Etruscan civilization and Trojan?

Also Rome is agreed to be formed about 700BC, so that's about 600 years too late.

Also the question of why would Aeneas be mentioned in the Iliad before the composers knew of Rome? Mostly things are only put in the story that the listener will understand.

For instance there is never in the Iliad a part where it says, "and then paris took a dump over the wall on the east side." We all know that's quite possible concerning bathroom habbits, but to the listener this is detracting from the story line.

And if we take out the fact that Aeneas would one day go to Rome, Aeneas's escape to me seems detracting. (We know that Aeneas's escape is important because even the movie Troy which is very much unlike the book...Aeneas in the movie is a boy who looks like he never saw battle...they give him the "Sword of Troy" which Orlando then says, "Where ever this sword goes, Troy shall follow" or something like that. Just saying...ROME!")

But again, if we remove that part of the "irony" what were the ancient Greeks just after the Doric invasion thinking about the Aeneas line?

To me I can just see a young Greek asking "did Aeneas lead that dark invasion our grandfathers talk about?"

Or such...I just wonder if there's a more cultural connection there that we can no longer detect because of divisions due to time, locations, and histories that would later shape the story to something we wanted to see it as.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:09 AM
You are right freemason it was thoukidides and not herodotus, sheesh I would love my students to see my previous post, I would never live it down, mixing up herodotus with thoukidide.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:12 AM
It's cool, I'm not even sure I know who Herodotus is, one of those names you just recal the place you heard it at (some western traditions class I was sleeping through).

But if I remember right (and I forget the greek name) he was the first to write about the origins of the Gods wasn't he?

Beginning with mother earth or whatever giving birth to Kronos having sex with the sky or some thing like that.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:15 AM
Herodotus is the father of history- he invented the process and structure of what a historical account should written like. He is also widely regarded as the most accurate Greek historian.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:18 AM
So who is the guy I'm thinking of? I think the name of the creation of the Gods began with an H and the name of the man began with a T so that's why I confused Herodotus...

Oh well seems we've exhausted our conversation of Troy

Shame we don't live back then, those must have been fun times, people will remember Achille's names far more easily in 3,000 years than it seems people will remember the first man to walk on the freaking Moon! ... And all Achilles did was bash a bunch of people's heads in

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 01:33 AM
True, it would be great to have lived in ancient times. well I guess achilles accomplished his goal- he will always be remembered as one of the finest warriors to have ever lived.

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 02:07 AM
Eh I think we all did live in Ancient times...since I believe in Reincarnation
but the problem is I think it'd be really cool to check out those times right now ... I'm sure though the "awesomeness" of it is only because of our current heightened conciousness states that allow us to fully grasp the time we are living in more so than our "predecessors"

posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 07:45 PM
the only reason we want to live in the ancient times is because we want to be part of something more natural. Our technology and advances have made us a foreign entity in regards to nature. I am not sure though what the ancients would think of our way of life.

posted on Jun, 8 2004 @ 07:26 AM
they're probably think we're some sort of gods....O.o or demons or something weird like that.

posted on Jun, 8 2004 @ 10:24 AM
The existence of Troy and the Trojan war is a matter of historical and archaeological fact.

Check any encyclopaedia, any Google or Yahoo search with the words in parenthesis "Troy" and "Trojan War," or check your Encarta.

This isn't a matter of discussion. Troy existed, the Trojan War happened.

Robert Walker O'Neal

posted on Jun, 9 2004 @ 12:35 AM
It did exist I would like to know where Troy came from though. Troy was called Iliad by the Greeks and its people Iliads.

posted on Jun, 9 2004 @ 02:41 AM
Yes we know troy and the trojan war happened thankyou mr state-the-obvious (came a lil late didn't ya?)

an this stuff about far as the historical records shows that I know of they were rowed by slaves because the greeks saw it as a waste to use soldiers as rowers when at a sea battle because you were just throwing away valuable land troops.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in