In article ,   
   mimirswell@hotmail.com (Derrick Everett) wrote:   
      
      
   > Of course "translated contemporary records" do exist.   
      
   for this particular region? you're not talking about linear b, are you?   
   the translations attempted upon that have been mostly speculative.   
      
   or could you mean hittite records? do those describe north-western   
   anatolia so completely that we can rule out the existance of any city   
   called troy or ilium?   
      
   > I did not ask for proof because there would be no point to such a request.   
   >  ..Therefore it is meaningless to speak of proof in relation to myth   
   > or to statements about myth.   
      
   we are in agreement on that.   
      
    > It is meaningful, however, to ask for proof   
   > of any historical basis that might be assumed for the "Iliad", such as the   
   > existence of a real historical Priam in a real historical Troy.  If you have   
   > such proof, then please show it.   
      
   how about substantial ruins from that time and in that location? such   
   as, um, hisarlik?   
      
   >   
   > The poems attributed to Homer are (as you acknowledge) works of fiction.   
   > They are not historical, although they do make use of traditions that had   
   > survived from the Bronze Age.  Such as, for example, the use of chariots   
   > in warfare.   
      
   yes, it is these contextual little bits of information that are   
   valuable to the historian. but couldn't the existance of a certain city   
   also be a factual bit?   
      
      
   > indeed, some survived, such as the one from which Alexander the Great   
   > later would cut the Gordian knot   
      
   are you citing this story as a factual event?   
      
   > Whether Troy existed or not, or whether it was on the plain where   
   > Ilium was later built,   
      
   i believe you cited 7th century greeks for the first documented   
   occurance of the name ilium for this site.   
      
   isn't the 7th century bc fairly close to the 12th century bc, as these   
   things go? compare this to your example of the gordian knot [or any   
   other particular anecdote involving alexander].   
      
   what are the earliest actual physical surviving texts of these stories?   
   sure, there is a received tradition of texts that were supposed to be   
   written during the greco-roman classical period, but how do we prove   
   it?   
      
      
   > It would have been interesting, of course, if   
   > Schliemann had found a sign saying "welcome to Troy", or an inscription   
   > that mentioned Priam.  Since he did not find anything of the kind -- and   
   > neither has anyone else -- there is no proof that Troy existed.   
      
   nor is there negative proof. there are no translated texts from   
   bronze-age troy. it would probably be too much to hope for mention of   
   priam. i believe we were discussing the existance of troy, not of any   
   other particulars from homer.   
      
   > So Troy, if it ever existed, probably lies somewhere else.  Given that the   
   > name Troy does not appear before Homer, then, if it existed, the city was   
   > not called Troy.  Whatever some over-enthusiastic 19th century archae-   
   > ologists might have claimed.   
      
      
   this is the point where overly-enthusiastic skepticism becomes   
   irrational. it begins to form conclusions based upon unfeasible   
   negative proofs: homer said it was located there, so therefore it must   
   have been elsewhere.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)