I'm really not sure it's become so inbued with ledgend like robin hood and king arthur that it's become fiction. However could there really have been a battle for troy?
2007-03-02 22:37:59 · 2 answers · asked by Mcpirate 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Even though the is a grat dispute over where Troy is, it is believed to have really happened. As in Robin Hood and Arthur, it is one of those events that have been told and retold with various account that the actualy account has been lost in all the romantic.
Troy existed and the battle of troy happened, Helen of troy exisited but was only the excuse used to gain the alliance of the various greeks city states. Troy was a very wealthy trading city located between mordern greece and turkey.
Robin Hood existed and did fight on the side of King Richard, while Richard was inprisioned in Austria.
Author still remains a question. I tend to believe in the theroy that John Morris, that Author was a Roman knight, who gained power when the Romans left England. This theroy is easier to believe for it also justifies the existence of a Camelot, being a modern roman city.
2007-03-03 01:37:31 · answer #1 · answered by DeSaxe 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There were two campaigns to conquer Troy
The first campaign around 1100 bc was a failure and the greeks never made it to the walls of Troy.
The second campaign was made about 30 - 50 years later (this is the one that the Iliad describes)... the second campaign lasted for 10 years, war being made only through summer and spring.
The Iliad was commited to paper almost 500 years later around 600 bc. What we know is that for the most part the people described as participating in the fight were real people. The tombs of the Greeks that took part were found between the 1850s and 1960s... In between the 1950s 1960s Eric Sleeman found their Trojan counterparts in Dardanelia region in Turkey... He also found another city even older than Troy buried in the ruins of Troy
2007-03-02 23:18:21 · answer #2 · answered by Human over IP 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It was long thought to be a myth based on a popular story that may have been retold, changed and magnified over the years to the point where it is all fiction. They thought was made up based on the fact that they could not find a place that matched the description, but archeologists have since found that the contours of the land changed and the site really was exactly as described, including the city itself.
Like many places and stories thought to be a myth, and later proven largely true, I think this case is the same.
2007-03-02 22:43:16 · answer #3 · answered by Benji 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If archaeologists are correct, and Hisarlik on the Dardanelles is Troy, then many battels were fought there, and the city appears to have been conquered at least once.
Is that the source of the Illiad? Well, that is harder to say. The poem we have dates from about 400 - 600 years after the Trojan War, and is not history in any sense that a modern person would understand. But it may have a kernel of truth to it...or likely several.
2007-03-02 22:46:17 · answer #4 · answered by P. M 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yet it cannot be proven that Mycenaean Greeks did not participate in the sack of Hisarlik VI or VIIa ( the classifications of two site of archaeological digs in ancient Troy) sometime between 1325 and 1200 B.C. Consequently, belief or disbelief in the historicity of the Trojan War becomes in the end an act of faith, whichever position one adopts.
This is the conclusion of a team of archaeologists. the entire article is in the link below.
2007-03-02 23:35:37 · answer #5 · answered by aidan402 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The truth is no one knows for sure. However its a great read !
2007-03-02 22:55:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋