Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

On the Historicity of Troy

Expand Messages
  • Thomas Verenna
    Would anyone on the list happen to know of any scholar/archaeologist or group of scholars/archaeologists who have written against the historicity of Troy (as
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 17, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Would anyone on the list happen to know of any scholar/archaeologist or
      group of scholars/archaeologists who have written against the historicity
      of Troy (as it relates to the Homeric epics)? I know of Frank Kolb's work
      but I am curious if anyone else has written on Wilusa in a minimalistic
      fashion.

      --
      Cordially,

      Thomas S. Verenna


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
      The name of the philologist and ringleader of the Homeric /Neoanalytiker /Wolfgang Kullmann springs to the mind ; a summary of his objections appears in his
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 17, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        The name of the philologist and ringleader of the Homeric /Neoanalytiker
        /Wolfgang Kullmann springs to the mind ; a summary of his objections
        appears in his review,/Gnomon /73, 2001, pp. 657-653, of Joachim
        Latacz's seminal /Troia und Homer/ (English translation, Oxford, 2004) ;
        see http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2002/2002-02-15.html for a comprehensive
        smackdown. The archaeologist Dieter Hertel has been Kolb's acolyte in
        the latter's offensive against Korfmann ; see, of late, Hertel, /Das
        frühe Ilion. Die Besiedlung Troias durch die Griechen (1020-650/25
        v.Chr.)/, München, 2008, especially pp. 25-30 against Korfmann (this
        book, the most comprehensive exposition of the nihilist stance, does not
        really answer to D. F. Easton, J. D. Hawkins and E. S. Sherratt, 'Troy
        in Recent Perspective', /Anatolian Studies/ 52, 2002, pp. 75-109, where
        archaeology is far from looming large - see on 103-106). Though cool
        skepticism as advocated, e.g., by K. A. Raaflaub (in Foley (ed.),
        /Blackwell Companion to Ancient Epic/ [2005], pp. 58-60) remains the
        most scientific posture, my own conviction as an Homeric scholar is far
        closer to those of Latacz (/Troy and Homer/, pp. 166-205) or Bryce (/The
        Kingdom of the Hittites/², pp. 357-371).

        J.-F. Nardelli
        Université de Provence


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Simeon Chavel
        Comprehensive smackdown. Nice phrase. Simi Chavel ... Simeon Chavel Assistant Professor of Hebrew Bible The University of Chicago Divinity School
        Message 3 of 19 , Oct 17, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          "Comprehensive smackdown." Nice phrase.
          Simi Chavel
          --------------------------------------------------------------
          Simeon Chavel
          Assistant Professor of Hebrew Bible
          The University of Chicago Divinity School
          http://divinity.uchicago.edu/faculty/chavel.shtml
          --------------------------------------------------------------

          On Oct 17, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Jean-Fabrice Nardelli wrote:

          > The name of the philologist and ringleader of the Homeric /Neoanalytiker
          > /Wolfgang Kullmann springs to the mind ; a summary of his objections
          > appears in his review,/Gnomon /73, 2001, pp. 657-653, of Joachim
          > Latacz's seminal /Troia und Homer/ (English translation, Oxford, 2004) ;
          > see http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2002/2002-02-15.html for a comprehensive
          > smackdown. The archaeologist Dieter Hertel has been Kolb's acolyte in
          > the latter's offensive against Korfmann ; see, of late, Hertel, /Das
          > fr�he Ilion. Die Besiedlung Troias durch die Griechen (1020-650/25
          > v.Chr.)/, M�nchen, 2008, especially pp. 25-30 against Korfmann (this
          > book, the most comprehensive exposition of the nihilist stance, does not
          > really answer to D. F. Easton, J. D. Hawkins and E. S. Sherratt, 'Troy
          > in Recent Perspective', /Anatolian Studies/ 52, 2002, pp. 75-109, where
          > archaeology is far from looming large - see on 103-106). Though cool
          > skepticism as advocated, e.g., by K. A. Raaflaub (in Foley (ed.),
          > /Blackwell Companion to Ancient Epic/ [2005], pp. 58-60) remains the
          > most scientific posture, my own conviction as an Homeric scholar is far
          > closer to those of Latacz (/Troy and Homer/, pp. 166-205) or Bryce (/The
          > Kingdom of the Hittites/�, pp. 357-371).
          >
          > J.-F. Nardelli
          > Universit� de Provence
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Thomas Verenna
          Thanks for the list! I guess I fall more in line with Kolb and Hertel (reading his chapter in *A Companion to Greek Mythology* which asks a lot of questions
          Message 4 of 19 , Oct 17, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks for the list! I guess I fall more in line with Kolb and Hertel
            (reading his chapter in *A Companion to Greek Mythology* which asks a lot
            of questions that I believe need to be answered before anyone can make the
            links that Korfmann does). I'm not really convinced by the arguments that
            this area with its many settlements can be linked in any meaningful way to
            the Troy of Homer (or even a Troy in general). I guess I would have to
            read more recent studies. It seems a little premature to make such links
            when only 1/5 of the site has been excavated and, to my knowledge, nothing
            yet discovered *at the site* can link it directly to Troy. At least since
            the last time I checked, which admittedly was some time ago.

            On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Jean-Fabrice Nardelli <
            jnardellis36@...> wrote:

            > **
            >
            >
            > The name of the philologist and ringleader of the Homeric /Neoanalytiker
            > /Wolfgang Kullmann springs to the mind ; a summary of his objections
            > appears in his review,/Gnomon /73, 2001, pp. 657-653, of Joachim
            > Latacz's seminal /Troia und Homer/ (English translation, Oxford, 2004) ;
            > see http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2002/2002-02-15.html for a comprehensive
            > smackdown. The archaeologist Dieter Hertel has been Kolb's acolyte in
            > the latter's offensive against Korfmann ; see, of late, Hertel, /Das
            > fr�he Ilion. Die Besiedlung Troias durch die Griechen (1020-650/25
            > v.Chr.)/, M�nchen, 2008, especially pp. 25-30 against Korfmann (this
            > book, the most comprehensive exposition of the nihilist stance, does not
            > really answer to D. F. Easton, J. D. Hawkins and E. S. Sherratt, 'Troy
            > in Recent Perspective', /Anatolian Studies/ 52, 2002, pp. 75-109, where
            > archaeology is far from looming large - see on 103-106). Though cool
            > skepticism as advocated, e.g., by K. A. Raaflaub (in Foley (ed.),
            > /Blackwell Companion to Ancient Epic/ [2005], pp. 58-60) remains the
            > most scientific posture, my own conviction as an Homeric scholar is far
            > closer to those of Latacz (/Troy and Homer/, pp. 166-205) or Bryce (/The
            > Kingdom of the Hittites/�, pp. 357-371).
            >
            > J.-F. Nardelli
            > Universit� de Provence
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >



            --
            Cordially,

            Thomas S. Verenna


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Thomas L. Thompson
            Isn t the term nihilist position far too tendentious for a scholarly list? Thomas Thomas L. Thompson Professor emeeitus, University of Copenhagen
            Message 5 of 19 , Oct 18, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Isn't the term nihilist position far too tendentious for a scholarly list?
              Thomas

              Thomas L. Thompson
              Professor emeeitus, University of Copenhagen
              ________________________________________
              Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Jean-Fabrice Nardelli [jnardellis36@...]
              Sendt: 17. oktober 2012 17:37
              Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              Emne: Re: [ANE-2] On the Historicity of Troy

              The name of the philologist and ringleader of the Homeric /Neoanalytiker
              /Wolfgang Kullmann springs to the mind ; a summary of his objections
              appears in his review,/Gnomon /73, 2001, pp. 657-653, of Joachim
              Latacz's seminal /Troia und Homer/ (English translation, Oxford, 2004) ;
              see http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2002/2002-02-15.html for a comprehensive
              smackdown. The archaeologist Dieter Hertel has been Kolb's acolyte in
              the latter's offensive against Korfmann ; see, of late, Hertel, /Das
              frühe Ilion. Die Besiedlung Troias durch die Griechen (1020-650/25
              v.Chr.)/, München, 2008, especially pp. 25-30 against Korfmann (this
              book, the most comprehensive exposition of the nihilist stance, does not
              really answer to D. F. Easton, J. D. Hawkins and E. S. Sherratt, 'Troy
              in Recent Perspective', /Anatolian Studies/ 52, 2002, pp. 75-109, where
              archaeology is far from looming large - see on 103-106). Though cool
              skepticism as advocated, e.g., by K. A. Raaflaub (in Foley (ed.),
              /Blackwell Companion to Ancient Epic/ [2005], pp. 58-60) remains the
              most scientific posture, my own conviction as an Homeric scholar is far
              closer to those of Latacz (/Troy and Homer/, pp. 166-205) or Bryce (/The
              Kingdom of the Hittites/², pp. 357-371).

              J.-F. Nardelli
              Université de Provence

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Thomas L. Thompson
              Isn t the term nihilist all too tendentious for this list? It awakens very unpleasant memories for the ANE list. Thomas Thomas L. Thompson Professor
              Message 6 of 19 , Oct 18, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Isn't the term 'nihilist' all too tendentious for this list?
                It awakens very unpleasant memories for the ANE list.

                Thomas

                Thomas L. Thompson
                Professor emeritus, University of Copenhagen

                ________________________________________
                Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Jean-Fabrice Nardelli [jnardellis36@...]
                Sendt: 17. oktober 2012 17:37
                Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                Emne: Re: [ANE-2] On the Historicity of Troy

                The name of the philologist and ringleader of the Homeric /Neoanalytiker
                /Wolfgang Kullmann springs to the mind ; a summary of his objections
                appears in his review,/Gnomon /73, 2001, pp. 657-653, of Joachim
                Latacz's seminal /Troia und Homer/ (English translation, Oxford, 2004) ;
                see http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2002/2002-02-15.html for a comprehensive
                smackdown. The archaeologist Dieter Hertel has been Kolb's acolyte in
                the latter's offensive against Korfmann ; see, of late, Hertel, /Das
                frühe Ilion. Die Besiedlung Troias durch die Griechen (1020-650/25
                v.Chr.)/, München, 2008, especially pp. 25-30 against Korfmann (this
                book, the most comprehensive exposition of the nihilist stance, does not
                really answer to D. F. Easton, J. D. Hawkins and E. S. Sherratt, 'Troy
                in Recent Perspective', /Anatolian Studies/ 52, 2002, pp. 75-109, where
                archaeology is far from looming large - see on 103-106). Though cool
                skepticism as advocated, e.g., by K. A. Raaflaub (in Foley (ed.),
                /Blackwell Companion to Ancient Epic/ [2005], pp. 58-60) remains the
                most scientific posture, my own conviction as an Homeric scholar is far
                closer to those of Latacz (/Troy and Homer/, pp. 166-205) or Bryce (/The
                Kingdom of the Hittites/², pp. 357-371).

                J.-F. Nardelli
                Université de Provence

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
                Dear Thomas, though obviously a strong word, probably too much so, I have used nihilist in print before, since, in my mind, Kolb, Hertel, Kullmann and so
                Message 7 of 19 , Oct 18, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear Thomas,

                  though obviously a strong word, probably too much so, I have used
                  'nihilist' in print before, since, in my mind, Kolb, Hertel, Kullmann
                  and so forth refuse to believe _anything_ with respect to the Troyan
                  question, whether linguistic equations, geopolitical context, or
                  archaeological probabilities. To give a not inconsequential example,
                  Hertel persists in disallowing the relatively sturdy evidence for LBA
                  trade between the Black Sea and the Agean ; /Das fr�he Ilion/ went so
                  far as to suppress the crucial O. H�ckmann, 'Zu fr�her Seefahrt in den
                  Meerengen', Studia Troica 13, 2003, pp. 133-160, so that he could
                  maintain that Troy VII(a) = VIi was not the important, international
                  emporion hypothetized by Korfmann, Latacz, Easton-Hawkins-Sherratt. Is
                  this reasonable science or partisan scholarship ? Hertel also used to
                  speculate that the unimpressive amount of arrowheads found to date
                  disproves the claim that this level of Troy was ever taken over through
                  enemy action but merely destroyed by fire, a position that found no
                  followers and which he tacitly renounced in his later book. In such
                  instances I like to quote the great Aristotle scholar Ingram Bywater : �
                  negative criticism has its limits by transgressing which it degenerates
                  into a senseless and unprofitable exercise in logic � (�On a Lost
                  Dialogue of Aristotle�, Journal of Philology 2, 1869, p. 68).

                  J.-F. Nardelli
                  Universit� de Provence


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Thomas Verenna
                  There is a distinct difference between refusing to believe and just not convinced. It is important to make such a distinction, though trying to prove your
                  Message 8 of 19 , Oct 18, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    There is a distinct difference between 'refusing to believe' and 'just not
                    convinced.' It is important to make such a distinction, though trying to
                    prove your claim that Kolb, Hertel, and Kullmann are just flat-out
                    denialists seems to me to be a difficult task to accomplish. Frankly, I am
                    not convinced by the arguments for Troy either. I find them extremely
                    maximalistic, rather conservative interpretations. For example, the fact
                    that Troy VIIa has larger walls than its later settlements does not ipso
                    facto mean that there was an external threat they were guarding against
                    (such a concept is concocted with Homer in mind) and the fact that
                    Mycenaean pottery becames scant towards later layers does not therefore
                    mean that the external threat was Mycenaean. But these are the typical
                    arguments <http://www.dartmouth.edu/%7Eprehistory/aegean/?page_id=630> I've
                    read from those who suggest that there exists evidence for a historical
                    Troy here. Also, around Troy IIb you see a decline in the Mycenaean
                    civilization which probably accounts for some of that pottery vanishing
                    from trade to the settlement. And earthquake/fire seems rather consistent
                    with the destruction of VIIa and the resettlement makes a lot more sense
                    from such a perspective (like with Pompeii, where an earthquake devastated
                    the city, but was rebuilt and reinhabited continuously--a fact that is
                    quite perplexing in my mind).

                    So while I can understand your disliking their positions, I cannot
                    understand the total dismissal of their opinions as 'nihilistic'. They
                    aren't convinced; neither am I. Of course, I could be convinced, but so
                    far I haven't seen any sound grounding for it. When Korfmann released his
                    model of Troy years ago, and Kolb called him out on its exaggerations,
                    Korfmann reduced the size of his model. That smells funny, if you ask me.
                    It suggests, in my mind, that he was exaggerating the state of the evidence
                    for his own agendas and when he was (rightly) called out on it, all of a
                    sudden Kolb becomes the 'nihilist' and Korfmann the 'sensible scholar'. I
                    just don't buy it. Sorry. This whole thing just reads 'red-flag'.

                    Thanks,

                    Thomas Verenna
                    Rutgers, New Brunswick

                    On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Jean-Fabrice Nardelli <
                    jnardellis36@...> wrote:

                    > Dear Thomas,
                    >
                    > though obviously a strong word, probably too much so, I have used
                    > 'nihilist' in print before, since, in my mind, Kolb, Hertel, Kullmann
                    > and so forth refuse to believe _anything_ with respect to the Troyan
                    > question, whether linguistic equations, geopolitical context, or
                    > archaeological probabilities. To give a not inconsequential example,
                    > Hertel persists in disallowing the relatively sturdy evidence for LBA
                    > trade between the Black Sea and the Agean ; /Das fr�he Ilion/ went so
                    > far as to suppress the crucial O. H�ckmann, 'Zu fr�her Seefahrt in den
                    > Meerengen', Studia Troica 13, 2003, pp. 133-160, so that he could
                    > maintain that Troy VII(a) = VIi was not the important, international
                    > emporion hypothetized by Korfmann, Latacz, Easton-Hawkins-Sherratt. Is
                    > this reasonable science or partisan scholarship ? Hertel also used to
                    > speculate that the unimpressive amount of arrowheads found to date
                    > disproves the claim that this level of Troy was ever taken over through
                    > enemy action but merely destroyed by fire, a position that found no
                    > followers and which he tacitly renounced in his later book. In such
                    > instances I like to quote the great Aristotle scholar Ingram Bywater : �
                    > negative criticism has its limits by transgressing which it degenerates
                    > into a senseless and unprofitable exercise in logic � (�On a Lost
                    > Dialogue of Aristotle�, Journal of Philology 2, 1869, p. 68).
                    >
                    > J.-F. Nardelli
                    > Universit� de Provence
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >


                    --
                    Cordially,

                    Thomas S. Verenna


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
                    Dear T. Verenna, the difference you point out would impress me more had Hertel not conveniently deleted important contributions that weaken his own case : this
                    Message 9 of 19 , Oct 18, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear T. Verenna,

                      the difference you point out would impress me more had Hertel not
                      conveniently deleted important contributions that weaken his own case :
                      this is what I call 'partisan scholarship'. Nothing more, nothing less.
                      As for the remainder of your message, I am basically in agreement with
                      its arguments, though you appear to be somewhat more strident than a
                      layman who cites only derivative scholarship has any right to be and
                      though the way you phrase things smacks of old-style skepticism à la
                      Finley, a man who was ridiculed by philologists in Germany for his shaky
                      grasp of the Homeric tradition and one who denied that the /Odyssey/ had
                      anything to tell us about the Mediterranean : suffice it to mention here
                      Carol Dougherty (/The Raft of Odysseus/ [Oxford, 2001], pp. 12-13,
                      95-101) or M. Gras, P. Rouillard and J. Teixidor (/L'univers phénicien/
                      [Paris, 1989], pp. 106-107) as to the contrary, viz. for the view that
                      the poem takes us back to the late 8th century and the competition
                      between Greek colonists and Phoenician merchants/pirats.

                      Sorry if it hurts.

                      J.-F. Nardelli,
                      Université de Provence



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Richard Seager
                      I tend to agree Thomas, the idea that ancient Hisarlik was able to withstand the combined efforts of the Mycenaeans and their friends for ten years is hard to
                      Message 10 of 19 , Oct 18, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I tend to agree Thomas, the idea that ancient Hisarlik was able to withstand the combined efforts of the Mycenaeans and their friends for ten years is hard to believe.

                        Richard Seager
                        Australia

                        On 18/10/2012, at 11:35 PM, Thomas Verenna <tsverenna@...> wrote:

                        > There is a distinct difference between 'refusing to believe' and 'just not
                        > convinced.' It is important to make such a distinction, though trying to
                        > prove your claim that Kolb, Hertel, and Kullmann are just flat-out
                        > denialists seems to me to be a difficult task to accomplish. Frankly, I am
                        > not convinced by the arguments for Troy either. I find them extremely
                        > maximalistic, rather conservative interpretations. For example, the fact
                        > that Troy VIIa has larger walls than its later settlements does not ipso
                        > facto mean that there was an external threat they were guarding against
                        > (such a concept is concocted with Homer in mind) and the fact that
                        > Mycenaean pottery becames scant towards later layers does not therefore
                        > mean that the external threat was Mycenaean. But these are the typical
                        > arguments <http://www.dartmouth.edu/%7Eprehistory/aegean/?page_id=630> I've
                        > read from those who suggest that there exists evidence for a historical
                        > Troy here. Also, around Troy IIb you see a decline in the Mycenaean
                        > civilization which probably accounts for some of that pottery vanishing
                        > from trade to the settlement. And earthquake/fire seems rather consistent
                        > with the destruction of VIIa and the resettlement makes a lot more sense
                        > from such a perspective (like with Pompeii, where an earthquake devastated
                        > the city, but was rebuilt and reinhabited continuously--a fact that is
                        > quite perplexing in my mind).
                        >
                        > So while I can understand your disliking their positions, I cannot
                        > understand the total dismissal of their opinions as 'nihilistic'. They
                        > aren't convinced; neither am I. Of course, I could be convinced, but so
                        > far I haven't seen any sound grounding for it. When Korfmann released his
                        > model of Troy years ago, and Kolb called him out on its exaggerations,
                        > Korfmann reduced the size of his model. That smells funny, if you ask me.
                        > It suggests, in my mind, that he was exaggerating the state of the evidence
                        > for his own agendas and when he was (rightly) called out on it, all of a
                        > sudden Kolb becomes the 'nihilist' and Korfmann the 'sensible scholar'. I
                        > just don't buy it. Sorry. This whole thing just reads 'red-flag'.
                        >
                        > Thanks,
                        >
                        > Thomas Verenna
                        > Rutgers, New Brunswick
                        >
                        > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Jean-Fabrice Nardelli <
                        > jnardellis36@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >> Dear Thomas,
                        >>
                        >> though obviously a strong word, probably too much so, I have used
                        >> 'nihilist' in print before, since, in my mind, Kolb, Hertel, Kullmann
                        >> and so forth refuse to believe _anything_ with respect to the Troyan
                        >> question, whether linguistic equations, geopolitical context, or
                        >> archaeological probabilities. To give a not inconsequential example,
                        >> Hertel persists in disallowing the relatively sturdy evidence for LBA
                        >> trade between the Black Sea and the Agean ; /Das fr�he Ilion/ went so
                        >> far as to suppress the crucial O. H�ckmann, 'Zu fr�her Seefahrt in den
                        >> Meerengen', Studia Troica 13, 2003, pp. 133-160, so that he could
                        >> maintain that Troy VII(a) = VIi was not the important, international
                        >> emporion hypothetized by Korfmann, Latacz, Easton-Hawkins-Sherratt. Is
                        >> this reasonable science or partisan scholarship ? Hertel also used to
                        >> speculate that the unimpressive amount of arrowheads found to date
                        >> disproves the claim that this level of Troy was ever taken over through
                        >> enemy action but merely destroyed by fire, a position that found no
                        >> followers and which he tacitly renounced in his later book. In such
                        >> instances I like to quote the great Aristotle scholar Ingram Bywater : �
                        >> negative criticism has its limits by transgressing which it degenerates
                        >> into a senseless and unprofitable exercise in logic � (�On a Lost
                        >> Dialogue of Aristotle�, Journal of Philology 2, 1869, p. 68).
                        >>
                        >> J.-F. Nardelli
                        >> Universit� de Provence
                        >>
                        >>
                        >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >> ------------------------------------
                        >>
                        >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >
                        >
                        > --
                        > Cordially,
                        >
                        > Thomas S. Verenna
                        >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >



                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Thomas L. Thompson
                        Dear Professor Nardeli, I do not disagree at all with your academic judgment. Perhaps an expression like dismissive , but nihilist demonizes and refuse to
                        Message 11 of 19 , Oct 19, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Professor Nardeli,
                          I do not disagree at all with your academic judgment. Perhaps an expression like 'dismissive', but 'nihilist' demonizes and 'refuse to believe' questions their
                          integrity rather than their conclusions. Just such personal attacks in regard to disagreements about
                          the historicity of ancient figures of narrative once threatened to destroy the liist as such. Perhaps we should
                          submit our disagreement to the moderators for a judgment on whether such rhetorical
                          strategies are permissable.

                          Sincerely,
                          Thomas

                          Thomas L. Thompson
                          Professor emeritus, University of Copenhagen


                          Dear Thomas,

                          though obviously a strong word, probably too much so, I have used
                          'nihilist' in print before, since, in my mind, Kolb, Hertel, Kullmann
                          and so forth refuse to believe _anything_ with respect to the Troyan
                          question, whether linguistic equations, geopolitical context, or
                          archaeological probabilities. To give a not inconsequential example,
                          Hertel persists in disallowing the relatively sturdy evidence for LBA
                          trade between the Black Sea and the Agean ; /Das frühe Ilion/ went so
                          far as to suppress the crucial O. Höckmann, 'Zu früher Seefahrt in den
                          Meerengen', Studia Troica 13, 2003, pp. 133-160, so that he could
                          maintain that Troy VII(a) = VIi was not the important, international
                          emporion hypothetized by Korfmann, Latacz, Easton-Hawkins-Sherratt. Is
                          this reasonable science or partisan scholarship ? Hertel also used to
                          speculate that the unimpressive amount of arrowheads found to date
                          disproves the claim that this level of Troy was ever taken over through
                          enemy action but merely destroyed by fire, a position that found no
                          followers and which he tacitly renounced in his later book. In such
                          instances I like to quote the great Aristotle scholar Ingram Bywater : «
                          negative criticism has its limits by transgressing which it degenerates
                          into a senseless and unprofitable exercise in logic » (‘On a Lost
                          Dialogue of Aristotle’, Journal of Philology 2, 1869, p. 68).

                          J.-F. Nardelli
                          Université de Provence


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                          ------------------------------------

                          Yahoo! Groups Links
                        • Thomas Verenna
                          Good morning, Thanks for your note. There is no need to get defensive, I am again just asking questions to get a better understanding of how one draws
                          Message 12 of 19 , Oct 22, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Good morning,

                            Thanks for your note. There is no need to get defensive, I am again just
                            asking questions to get a better understanding of how one draws historical
                            conclusions from cultural memory. It makes little sense to me to claim
                            that someone has ignored or neglected evidence when only 1/5 of a site has
                            been excavated. I am not giving anyone a free pass here--if Hertel has
                            purposefully left out evidence of something, then by all means provide us
                            evidence of such a misstep. So far I have seen you make a lot of personal
                            claims about motive, but I haven't seen it demonstrated--which concerns me
                            greatly (even though I am only an amateur, so I imagine this may concern
                            the more learned amongst us even more than it bothers me).

                            Thanks for responding.

                            Thomas Verenna
                            Rutgers, New Brunswick


                            On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Jean-Fabrice Nardelli <
                            jnardellis36@...> wrote:

                            > **
                            >
                            >
                            > Dear T. Verenna,
                            >
                            > the difference you point out would impress me more had Hertel not
                            > conveniently deleted important contributions that weaken his own case :
                            > this is what I call 'partisan scholarship'. Nothing more, nothing less.
                            > As for the remainder of your message, I am basically in agreement with
                            > its arguments, though you appear to be somewhat more strident than a
                            > layman who cites only derivative scholarship has any right to be and
                            > though the way you phrase things smacks of old-style skepticism � la
                            > Finley, a man who was ridiculed by philologists in Germany for his shaky
                            > grasp of the Homeric tradition and one who denied that the /Odyssey/ had
                            > anything to tell us about the Mediterranean : suffice it to mention here
                            > Carol Dougherty (/The Raft of Odysseus/ [Oxford, 2001], pp. 12-13,
                            > 95-101) or M. Gras, P. Rouillard and J. Teixidor (/L'univers ph�nicien/
                            > [Paris, 1989], pp. 106-107) as to the contrary, viz. for the view that
                            > the poem takes us back to the late 8th century and the competition
                            > between Greek colonists and Phoenician merchants/pirats.
                            >
                            > Sorry if it hurts.
                            >
                            > J.-F. Nardelli,
                            >
                            > Universit� de Provence
                            >
                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            >
                            >
                            >



                            --
                            Cordially,

                            Thomas S. Verenna


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Trudy Kawami
                            One of the (usually) unspoken problems with classical text like the Iliad is the lack of any versions at all near the time it was supposedly composed or
                            Message 13 of 19 , Oct 22, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment
                              One of the (usually) unspoken problems with classical text like the Iliad is the lack of any versions at all near the time it was supposedly composed or written down or edited or… In other words using a text whose oldest copy is centuries & centuries after the time it purportedly describes to date an archaeological site that is even older is very, very difficult, to say the least.

                              In the ANE we can trace a fair amount of how the Gilgamesh stories went from the historical kernel of a king/strongman/local hero of Uruk to an epic of man’s search for immortality to Star Trek. It would be a bit naïve to assume that this natural creative mutability did not apply to the stories focused around the city states during the turbulent times at the turn of the millennium (broadly considered).

                              Trudy S. Kawami

                              From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Banyai
                              Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 9:07 AM
                              To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: AW: [ANE-2] On the Historicity of Troy (with address)



                              Dear Verenna,

                              we cannot be sure about anything concerning the bigger sites in the ANE. At least not if we take an excavation of 1/5 as insufficient to make a statement pertaining to the dimension of a site despite surveys completing the archaeological data.

                              1/5 of a site excavated could look as relatively little but is huge when compared to the percentage of excavated areal at other big sites. The least sites of comparable dimensions or even bigger have been excavated to 20%. This is very much in reality. Besides, we must differentiate also concerning the depth to which areals are inspected archaeologically.

                              Concerning whether this was Homers Troy – this is the wrong question. It is for sure Homers Troy, if you mean the site wearing the name Troy in the 8th century as Homer composed his epos. Going a bit farther with your question– whether the site by the name Troy in the 8th century had the same name in the 13th century – this is a little more difficult to specify.

                              I would personally answer this question affirmatively, but not on grounds of the research done already on the subject, but instead on grounds of research that will be published in the near future. I´m into that subject and this must be regarded just as a private view till going to press. It is huge work to be done with the Hittite archives of the period – many documents relevant to the Ahhijawa dossier are still misunderstood and misdated.

                              Best regards,

                              Michael Banyai

                              Oberursel

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Michael Banyai
                              Sorry Trudy, there are problems also with primary sources even if they are not outspoken. It is generally a bit naïve to disengage from solving problems
                              Message 14 of 19 , Oct 22, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Sorry Trudy,



                                there are problems also with primary sources even if they are not outspoken.



                                It is generally a bit naïve to disengage from solving problems because they exist. Most of us are working simply because problems exist.



                                Michael Banyai

                                Oberursel



                                Von: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] Im Auftrag von Trudy Kawami
                                Gesendet: Montag, 22. Oktober 2012 21:08
                                An: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                                Betreff: RE: [ANE-2] On the Historicity of Troy





                                One of the (usually) unspoken problems with classical text like the Iliad is the lack of any versions at all near the time it was supposedly composed or written down or edited or… In other words using a text whose oldest copy is centuries & centuries after the time it purportedly describes to date an archaeological site that is even older is very, very difficult, to say the least.

                                In the ANE we can trace a fair amount of how the Gilgamesh stories went from the historical kernel of a king/strongman/local hero of Uruk to an epic of man’s search for immortality to Star Trek. It would be a bit naïve to assume that this natural creative mutability did not apply to the stories focused around the city states during the turbulent times at the turn of the millennium (broadly considered).

                                Trudy S. Kawami

                                From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Michael Banyai
                                Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 9:07 AM
                                To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: AW: [ANE-2] On the Historicity of Troy (with address)



                                Dear Verenna,

                                we cannot be sure about anything concerning the bigger sites in the ANE. At least not if we take an excavation of 1/5 as insufficient to make a statement pertaining to the dimension of a site despite surveys completing the archaeological data.

                                1/5 of a site excavated could look as relatively little but is huge when compared to the percentage of excavated areal at other big sites. The least sites of comparable dimensions or even bigger have been excavated to 20%. This is very much in reality. Besides, we must differentiate also concerning the depth to which areals are inspected archaeologically.

                                Concerning whether this was Homers Troy – this is the wrong question. It is for sure Homers Troy, if you mean the site wearing the name Troy in the 8th century as Homer composed his epos. Going a bit farther with your question– whether the site by the name Troy in the 8th century had the same name in the 13th century – this is a little more difficult to specify.

                                I would personally answer this question affirmatively, but not on grounds of the research done already on the subject, but instead on grounds of research that will be published in the near future. I´m into that subject and this must be regarded just as a private view till going to press. It is huge work to be done with the Hittite archives of the period – many documents relevant to the Ahhijawa dossier are still misunderstood and misdated.

                                Best regards,

                                Michael Banyai

                                Oberursel

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Thomas Verenna
                                This is quite profound. The question is not whether we can trace the Iliad back to the historical kernel. That, I believe, starts with a presupposition
                                Message 15 of 19 , Oct 22, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  This is quite profound. The question is not whether we can trace the Iliad
                                  back to the historical kernel. That, I believe, starts with a
                                  presupposition (i.e., that we have knowledge of such a kernel--which we do
                                  not, by the way, have; we may never have it). Instead you have to go where
                                  the evidence goes. I do not believe we can say, for example, that the
                                  flood story of Deucalion and Pyrrha is rooted in history. Like the other
                                  flood narratives we see, they carry with them an edifying narrative that
                                  was most likely more important to the ancient cultures who took from them
                                  and fabricated from them whole new narratives that reflected their own
                                  cultural situations. It is unlikely, for example, that the flood of Noah
                                  is history (it doesn't flood in Palestine) but it is equally unlikely that
                                  such a story would have any use to a culture of that region for the same
                                  reason we might say it didn't originate there. So there are other reasons
                                  why such a story is useful, and the flood is just an example of such a
                                  reason (in this case, god's divine judgement upon his creation, granting a
                                  second chance to his chosen people--those who follow the straight path,
                                  i.e., the Israelites according to the Biblical narratives). I believe the
                                  same is true of the Iliad. With literature, where certain tropes and
                                  motifs come from may have been from a mixture of ancient events--some from
                                  as far away as Mesopotamia and others more locally rooted. One may find
                                  some day that the origins of the Trojan war best reflect the real
                                  historical wars that took place locally between competing poleis rather
                                  than something that happened across the Aegean. But that is the crux of it
                                  all, isn't it? And that is why I remain skeptical about the claims made
                                  about this settlement in Hisarlik.

                                  Thanks,

                                  Thomas Verenna
                                  Rutgers, New Brunswick

                                  On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...
                                  > wrote:

                                  > **
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > One of the (usually) unspoken problems with classical text like the Iliad
                                  > is the lack of any versions at all near the time it was supposedly composed
                                  > or written down or edited or� In other words using a text whose oldest copy
                                  > is centuries & centuries after the time it purportedly describes to date an
                                  > archaeological site that is even older is very, very difficult, to say the
                                  > least.
                                  >
                                  > In the ANE we can trace a fair amount of how the Gilgamesh stories went
                                  > from the historical kernel of a king/strongman/local hero of Uruk to an
                                  > epic of man�s search for immortality to Star Trek. It would be a bit na�ve
                                  > to assume that this natural creative mutability did not apply to the
                                  > stories focused around the city states during the turbulent times at the
                                  > turn of the millennium (broadly considered).
                                  >
                                  > Trudy S. Kawami
                                  >
                                  > From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                  > Michael Banyai
                                  > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 9:07 AM
                                  > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                                  > Subject: AW: [ANE-2] On the Historicity of Troy (with address)
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Dear Verenna,
                                  >
                                  > we cannot be sure about anything concerning the bigger sites in the ANE.
                                  > At least not if we take an excavation of 1/5 as insufficient to make a
                                  > statement pertaining to the dimension of a site despite surveys completing
                                  > the archaeological data.
                                  >
                                  > 1/5 of a site excavated could look as relatively little but is huge when
                                  > compared to the percentage of excavated areal at other big sites. The least
                                  > sites of comparable dimensions or even bigger have been excavated to 20%.
                                  > This is very much in reality. Besides, we must differentiate also
                                  > concerning the depth to which areals are inspected archaeologically.
                                  >
                                  > Concerning whether this was Homers Troy � this is the wrong question. It
                                  > is for sure Homers Troy, if you mean the site wearing the name Troy in the
                                  > 8th century as Homer composed his epos. Going a bit farther with your
                                  > question� whether the site by the name Troy in the 8th century had the same
                                  > name in the 13th century � this is a little more difficult to specify.
                                  >
                                  > I would personally answer this question affirmatively, but not on grounds
                                  > of the research done already on the subject, but instead on grounds of
                                  > research that will be published in the near future. I�m into that subject
                                  > and this must be regarded just as a private view till going to press. It is
                                  > huge work to be done with the Hittite archives of the period � many
                                  > documents relevant to the Ahhijawa dossier are still misunderstood and
                                  > misdated.
                                  >
                                  > Best regards,
                                  >
                                  > Michael Banyai
                                  >
                                  > Oberursel
                                  >
                                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >



                                  --
                                  Cordially,

                                  Thomas S. Verenna


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
                                  Trudy, what about the process of textual canonization of the main lines of the /Iliad/ (both at the microcultural and macrostructural levels : number and
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Oct 22, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Trudy,

                                    what about the process of textual canonization of the main lines of
                                    the /Iliad/ (both at the microcultural and macrostructural levels :
                                    number and succession of the episodes as well as conventions of
                                    storytelling, adherence to one main plot and shaping of the characters
                                    as well of the finer points of epic diction and dialect) that begun at a
                                    time preceding our earliest Iliadic testimonies ? The number of the
                                    lines may have varied somewhat with a few accretions before the time of
                                    the Alexandrine editors, but no wholesale books of the Iliad ever crept
                                    in nor were there ever transpositions of episodes or entire books,
                                    unlike what happens in the textual tradition of the Mahâbhârata (even if
                                    you take into account the Doloneia). See M. W. Haslam, in a synthesis
                                    which remains the best survey of the Textüberlieferung to date ('Homeric
                                    Papyri and the Transmission of the Text', in I. Morris and B. Powell
                                    (edd.), A New Companion to Homer [Leiden, New York & Cologne, 1997], pp.
                                    55-100) at 79-84 ; such 'crystallization', or 'linguistic arrest',
                                    cannot be put later than 560 B.C. when the Athenians used Iliad 2.
                                    257-258 as evidence against the Megarians, see A. C. Cassio, 'Early
                                    Editions of the Greek Epics and Homeric Textual Criticism in the Sixth
                                    and FIfth Centuries BC', in F. Montanari and P. Ascheri (edd.), Omero
                                    tremila anni dopo. Atti del Congresso di Genova, 6-8 luglio 2000 (Rome,
                                    2002), pp. 105-136 at 114-119, and is likely to be considerably older,
                                    especially if one puts credance in the demonstrations that the Iliad and
                                    Odyssy are orally-derived compositions (L. E. Rossi, 'I poemi omerici
                                    como testimonianza di poesia orale', in R. Bianchi Bandinelli (ed.),
                                    Storia e Civiltà dei Greci, I. 1 [Milano, 1978], pp. 73-147 ; R. Janko,
                                    'The Homeric Poems as Oral Dictated Texts', Classical Quarterly 48,
                                    1998, pp. 1-13 ; etc). As for "using a text whose oldest copy is
                                    centuries & centuries after the time it purportedly describe", may I
                                    remind the list that while the oldest complete copies of the Iliad are
                                    two mid-tenth century AD manuscripts, the Laurentianus D and the Venetus
                                    A, some seventeen or eighteen centuries later than Homer, we own over
                                    1500 papyri of the poem, the oldest of which approach the third century
                                    BC ? I trust that Bible scholars would be happy to have even a tiny
                                    fraction of such harvest instead of relying on the Septuagint, the
                                    Targumim, etc, to supply the Leningrad codex. See further my papers
                                    'Editer l'Iliade" : "I La transmission et ses débats : Perspectives
                                    critiques", /Gaia. Revue interdisciplinaire sur la Grèce archaïque /5,
                                    2001, pp.41-118 ; 'II Manuscrits et affiliations manuscrites dans
                                    l'Iliade XIII-XV', ibid. 6, 2002, pp. 47-144 (stemma p. 130).

                                    J.-F. Nardelli
                                    Université de Provence



                                    Le 22/10/2012 21:08, Trudy Kawami a écrit :
                                    >
                                    > One of the (usually) unspoken problems with classical text like the
                                    > Iliad is the lack of any versions at all near the time it was
                                    > supposedly composed or written down or edited or… In other words using
                                    > a text whose oldest copy is centuries & centuries after the time it
                                    > purportedly describes to date an archaeological site that is even
                                    > older is very, very difficult, to say the least.
                                    >
                                    > In the ANE we can trace a fair amount of how the Gilgamesh stories
                                    > went from the historical kernel of a king/strongman/local hero of Uruk
                                    > to an epic of man’s search for immortality to Star Trek. It would be a
                                    > bit naïve to assume that this natural creative mutability did not
                                    > apply to the stories focused around the city states during the
                                    > turbulent times at the turn of the millennium (broadly considered).
                                    >
                                    > Trudy S. Kawami
                                    >



                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Graham Hagens
                                        ....what about the process of textual canonization ....succession of the episodes as well as conventions of storytelling, adherence to one main plot and
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Oct 24, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                       
                                       
                                      "....what about the process of textual canonization ....succession of the episodes as well as conventions of
                                      storytelling, adherence to one main plot and shaping of the characters
                                      as well of the finer points of epic diction and dialect  that begun at a
                                      time preceding our earliest Iliadic testimonies ? The number of the
                                      lines may have varied somewhat with a few accretions before the time of
                                      the Alexandrine editors, but no wholesale books of the Iliad ever crept
                                      in nor were there ever transpositions of episodes or entire books,
                                      unlike what happens in the textual tradition of the Mahâbhârata ...... 'crystallization', or 'linguistic arrest',
                                      cannot be put later than 560 B.C. when the Athenians used Iliad 2.
                                      257-258 as evidence against the Megarians,....and is likely to be considerably older,
                                      especially if one puts credance in the demonstrations that the Iliad and
                                      Odyssy are orally-derived compositions ....As for "using a text whose oldest copy is
                                      centuries & centuries after the time it purportedly describe", .... own over
                                      1500 papyri of the poem, the oldest of which approach the third century"

                                      While this reply is interesting, surely it does no more than reduce Trudy's "centuries & centuries" to just "centuries" 
                                      A   ~560 BC testimony of   utilization of  text from the Iliad, says nothing about the state of textual canonisation at that time
                                      Snodgrass (Archaic Greece 1980: 72) wrote of the "great web of unsystematic oral mythology which existed throughout Greek history without being enshrined in verse form," and of the evidence that mythical scenes during the Archaic period  departed from the ‘official version’ of  the epic.   Also (Dark Age Greece  2001: 429, 431), with respect to diffusion of epic and the Homeric poems.  "in Ionia it is certain that an unbroken tradition ran from the time of the Ionian migration down to Homer" and that "before the Homeric poems can have been diffused we should infer that there was first an era of general interest and pride in the heroic age"  
                                       
                                       
                                      > One of the (usually) unspoken problems with classical text like the
                                      > Iliad is the lack of any versions at all near the time it was
                                      > supposedly composed or written down or edited or… In other words using
                                      > a text whose oldest copy is centuries & centuries after the time it
                                      > purportedly describes to date an archaeological site that is even
                                      > older is very, very difficult, to say the least.
                                      >
                                      > In the ANE we can trace a fair amount of how the Gilgamesh stories
                                      > went from the historical kernel of a king/strongman/local hero of Uruk
                                      > to an epic of man’s search for immortality to Star Trek. It would be a
                                      > bit naïve to assume that this natural creative mutability did not
                                      > apply to the stories focused around the city states during the
                                      > turbulent times at the turn of the millennium (broadly considered).
                                      >
                                      > Trudy S. Kawami
                                      >

                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                                       Isn't  this ~half millennium of undocumented activity more to Trudy's point?
                                       
                                      Graham Hagens
                                      Hamilton, ON
                                       In response to Trudy Kawami, Jean-Fabrice Nardelli wrote October 22, 2012 6:11 PM:


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
                                      Graham, you do not understand what the Athenian use of these two Iliadic lines from the Catalogue of the Ships (sorry for the wrong reference ; my only excuse
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Oct 24, 2012
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Graham,

                                        you do not understand what the Athenian use of these two Iliadic
                                        lines from the Catalogue of the Ships (sorry for the wrong reference ;
                                        my only excuse was the very late hour in Frence) demonstrates as to the
                                        textual canonization of the poem. Aristotle, Rhetoric, I, 1375 b 28-30
                                        (p. 69 Kassel [1976]) tells us that "by ancient witnesses I mean the
                                        poets and all famous figures whose decisions [KRISEIS] are notorious,
                                        like the Athenians who invoked Homer as witness with respect to Salamis"
                                        in 560 BC, which is confirmed by Plutarch (Life of Solon, 10) and
                                        Diogenes Laertius (I, 48), both of whom declare that the Attic
                                        leader-poet Solon cited Iliad 2. 557 with verse 558 of his own invention
                                        to bolster the claims of Athens on the great island against the rival
                                        ones of the Megarians. Though that story has been shown to lack
                                        credibility, the spuriousness of 558 was unquestioned in later times and
                                        is nearly universally admitted by modern scholars (contra, R. Hope
                                        Simpson and J. F. Lazenby, The Catalogue of Ships in Homer's Iliad
                                        [Oxford, 1970], pp. 59-61, see E. Visser, Homers Katalog der Schiffe
                                        [Stuttgart & Leipzig, 1997], pp. 449-452, who concludes that "fasst man
                                        alle Gesichtpunkte zusammen, so spricht doch mehr dafür, in B 558 einen
                                        Vers zu sehen, der nicht vom Iliasdichter stammt" ; the same Visser
                                        wrote the commentary on the Catalogue in Latacz's Basler
                                        Gesamtkommentar, vol. II [Munich & Leipzig, 2003], here at pp. 179-180,
                                        which replaces the badly defective G. S. Kirk, The Iliad. A Commentary,
                                        I [Cambridge, 1985], pp. 208-209). The line was omitted by Aristarchus
                                        in his epoch-making editions, in all probability because he only found
                                        it in a few of his chosen manuscripts (a point demonstrated beyond
                                        reasonable doubt by M. J. Apthorp, The Manuscript Evidence for
                                        Interpolation in Homer [Heidelberg, 1980], pp. 165-177 [text], 188-194
                                        [notes]), and it re-entered the textual tradition later on an unsecure
                                        footing (as it is omitted by six papyri and roughly one half of the
                                        best-known mediaeval manuscripts ; an instructive tale is told by the
                                        comparison of the apparatuses of G. M. Bolling's Ilias Atheniensium
                                        [Lancaster, 1950] , p. 39, and West's Teubner eddition, I [1998], p.
                                        71). The problem is highly complex and cannot be sketched in a few
                                        sentences - see Apthorp for a complete, if heavy-going, unravelling of
                                        it -, but, unless the interpolation was well-known by Solon's time, viz.
                                        textually fixed orally and in some exemplars of the poem, it is
                                        inconveivable that the Athenians could ever have invoked it and the
                                        judges of the quarrel with the Megarians accepted it. Homeric scholars
                                        were thus lead to posit an updating of the geographic-mythical map of
                                        heroic Greece as preserved by the Catalogue and some interpolations in
                                        Hesiod with a view to the interests of Athens and other regional powers
                                        of the middle of the 6th century (M. Finkelberg, 'Ajax's Entry in the
                                        Hesiodic Catalogue of Women', Classical Quarterly 38, 1988, pp. 31-41 at
                                        35-38) - if this is not an airtight sign of canonized textualization,
                                        then what can it be ?

                                        I can only hope that, tonight, I suceeded in making my point
                                        crystal-clear.
                                        Yours,
                                        J.-F. Nardelli
                                        Université de Provence
                                      • Jean-Fabrice Nardelli
                                        As my last words on the topic, unless the debate bounces back with new arguments going beyond mere generalities, I would like to commend the view that the text
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Oct 25, 2012
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          As my last words on the topic, unless the debate bounces back with new
                                          arguments going beyond mere generalities, I would like to commend the
                                          view that the text of the Homeric epics was submitted to a gradual
                                          process of textualization from the archaic period until the the middle
                                          of the sixth century, not my own creed, for I am rather convinced that
                                          we have in all essentials a ca. 750 BC Iliad, not the poem of some
                                          anonymous sixth century oral singers / arrangers (reasons in S. T.
                                          Teodorsson, 'Eastern Literacy, Greek Alphabet, and Homer', Mnemosyne
                                          LIX, 2006, pp. 161-187, and my Motif de la paire d'amis héroïque à
                                          prolongements homophiles. Perspectives odysséennes et proches-orientales
                                          [Amsterdam, 2004], pp. 170-180), yet a model that I find impossible to
                                          confine to silence (an interesting account of that progressive
                                          textualization can be found in L. E. Rossi, 'Dividing Homer. When and
                                          How Were the Iliad and the Odyssey Divided into Songs ? (Continued)',
                                          Symbolae Osloenses 76, 2001, pp. 103-112). Of course, the implications
                                          of the oral-traditional mechanisms on the textual criticism of the poem
                                          are far from assessed, witness, e.g., N. Kelly, A Referential Commentary
                                          and Lexicon to Homer, Iliad VIII (Oxford, 2007), pp. 378-384, who "is
                                          concerned to find out whether the feature under discussion is the kind
                                          of thing a traditionally trained poet would have produced" (p. 385),
                                          beyond the conspicuous fact that "von Anfang an hatten die Rhapsoden
                                          zweifellos dazu tendiert, den Text euphonischer und geschmeidiger zu
                                          machen, indem sie logisch überflüssige Partikeln zufügten, um Hiat oder
                                          andere metrische Anomalien auszuschalten (die häufig als Ergebnis des
                                          Digamma-Verlusts entstanden waren), und indem sie ungewöhnliche
                                          archaische Formen durch modernere ersetzten. Das war ohne Zweifel ein
                                          Grundzug der mündlichen Tradition schon lange bevor die Ilias geschaffen
                                          wurde" (West, in the Basler Gesamtkommentar, Prolegomena [Munich &
                                          Leipzig, 2003 ; 3rd ed., Berlin & New York, 2009], p. 31). The genious
                                          of the poet should not be downgraded or lost sight of in the
                                          appreciation of this process, if only because Homer may very well have
                                          brought out crucial modifications to the meter and dialect he inherited
                                          (N. Berg and D. Haug, 'Dividing Homer (continued). Innovation vs.
                                          Tradition in Homer - An Overlooked Piece of Evidence', Symbolae
                                          Osloenses 75, 2000, pp. 5-23, cf. p. 21 : "it is hard to see how a
                                          metrical change like the introduction of the equivalence between one
                                          long and two short syllables in thesi can have evolved gradually. For
                                          reasons shown above, these changes cannot have happened during the
                                          Aeolic phase and we see no way that they can be connected with an Ionian
                                          tradition which is but poorly supported by facts and contradicted by
                                          analyses of the epic diction like that of Hoekstra. That is why we would
                                          like to ascribe them to the monumental composer himself, or in Latacz’s
                                          words 1989, 26) : the “Begründer der abendländischen Textualität”) ; now
                                          the very existence of an Aeolic slice of the Greek dialectal continuum
                                          has been demolished by H. N. Parker, 'The Linguistic Case for the
                                          Aiolian Migration Reconsidered', Hesperia 77, 2008, pp. 431-464 at
                                          443-459, cf. 460 "the idea of an Aiolic dialect group itself falls
                                          apart. Boiotian is an archaic dialect, most closely related to West
                                          Greek, which underwent the First Compensatory Lengthening but retained
                                          *r° (with later independent change of *r° > ρο) and the labiovelars
                                          (with the default change to labials), and which underwent various later
                                          minor changes of its own. Lesbian and Thessalian are both archaic
                                          branches of Greek that did not undergo the First Compensatory
                                          Lengthening. They share no demonstrable common innovations, and nothing
                                          argues for a relationship between them. They are best viewed as two
                                          relic areas of a relatively unaltered early Greek" (I shall only declare
                                          here that I, like most Homerists with enough philological and linguistic
                                          expertise, remain unconvinced ; it has been trendy, for the past five
                                          decades, to minimize, or even rule out, the impact of Aeolic on both
                                          Homer and the dialectal map of Greece, with disastrous consequences ;
                                          cf. rather Finkelberg, 'The Dialect Continuum of Ancient Greek', Harvard
                                          Studies in Classical Philology 96, 1994,, pp. 1-36). Nor should the
                                          relevant technicalities in Homeric textual poetics and narratology, of
                                          which list members hardly suspect the level of intricacy and
                                          sophistication - sometimes oppressive, if not counterproductive : see
                                          further my Aristarchus Antibarbarus, pp. LXI-LXII note ************ - be
                                          ignored by all those who invoke Homer or the Iliad around Troy, lest
                                          what they say be heavily naive ; see C. Tsagalis, 'Towards an Oral,
                                          Intertextual Neoanalysis', Trends in Classics 3, 2011, pp. 209-244 at
                                          211-228, paper of which I must remark : es ist auf einem
                                          Spekulationsgebäude erbaut, ein neues schönes Beispiel dafür, wie
                                          produktiv unsere Irrtümer und fixen Ideen sein können.

                                          J.-F. Nardelli
                                          Université de Provence
                                          > _,_._,___




                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.