evidence regarding the question of a Trojan War is by no means conclusi ve (Sperling 1984:29). Fall of Troy VII: New Archaeological After a summary of the Homeric version of the Trojan War, I will give a brief explanation Interpretations and Considerations concerning the Homeric topography of the Trojan plain; in other words, I will explain why archaeologists have come to accept modem day Hisarlik as the site of ancient Troy. Swept into their city like a herd of Subsequently, having established the necessary frightened deer. the Trojans dried the sweat off their bodies. and drank and background information, the plimary section of quenched their thirst as they leant this paper wil1 be devoted to presenting the against the massive battlements. evidence believed to be indicative of an actual while the Achaeans advanced on the Trojan War. To this end, using post-processual wall with their shields at the slope. But Fate for her own evil purposes methodology, I hope to clitical1y evaluate such kept Hector where he was. olltside the evidence as being either suppOitive, contrary, or town in front of the Scaean Gate at present, inconclusive as to the validity of a (Homer. Iliad 22.1-6). historical Trojan War. It should also be noted, that if I am to This passage is from Homer's Iliad, an carry out such an attempt under the precepts of epic poem believed to have been composed post-processual archaeology, the issue of bias during the middle of the eighth century B.C. should be addressed. As "post-processual that accounts the last few weeks of the Greeks' archaeologists have pointed out, there are no ten-year siege on the city of Troy. This poem neutral methods: how one carries out an continued through the centuries of classical archaeological study is intimately related to why tradition to fire the hearts of the Greek people, one does so, both theoretical1y and institutional1y" and also initiated an interest in Troy that for the (Robb 2000:476). Of course, this paper is no last two mil1ennia, "has occupied the minds of exception to the rule, but realizing one's bias and many, archaeological1y and scientifical1y as accepting all possible lines of information, well as emotionally" (Korfmann 1984a: 1; whether it is supportive of one's hypothesis or Marrou 1956). not, is perhaps the first step towards objectivity. The primary objective of this paper is Therefore, in this paper an attempt at objective founded on such interest and is specifical1y interpretation wil1 be made by accepting all the concerned with the historical reality of an actual evidence presented; although certainly, not all the twelfth century B.C. battle between the evidence will be accepted with equal enthusiasm. mainland Greeks and the city of Troy located off the coast of Asia Minor, as maintained by Homer's Iliad the poet Homer. Although some authors are so As mentioned above, the Iliad only bold as to state that the Trojan War,"as encompasses the last few weeks of the Trojan archaeological investigations have proved, was War; however, owing to flashbacks by the not simply a myth or a tradition but an actual narrator, the origins of the ten-year struggle are historical fact" (Mavromataki 1997:231), most revealed. In accordance with an earlier pact, al1 of the literature suggests that the archaeological the Greek kings and princes took part in the

TOTJ':~I \'OJ 11211112-21111.' (opvright © 21111.1 TAgamemnon. in an attempt to repossess the fair Schliemann's Troja (1884), Professor Sayce goes Helen who had been kidnapped by Paris, prince so far as to say that the location of Troy had, of Troy. The Iliad is characterized by a "been solved by the skill, the energy, and the stubborn quarrel between Agamemnon and perseverance, of Dr. Schliemann"(1884:vii).To Achilles, resulting in the latter's abstention from give Schliemann his due, it was a result of his the battle, At the blink of the Greeks' total energy, personal finance, and indeed his destmction at the hands of the Trojans, Achilles perseverance that drew such attention and interest joined the fight and, as alluded to in the opening to Troy (Allen 1999; Startin 1993). However. the passage, eventually turned back the Trojan error in this statement lies in crediting assault. The Iliad concludes with the death of Schliemann's 'skill' in the discovery of Troy, the Trojan champion Hector, and consequently, The reality is that Frank Calvert, an expert on the all hopes of Troy's salvation perish, topography of the Troad and the owner of a large Although this is the point in the Trojan part of the site, had made uial excavations at War where Homer's Iliad concludes, it is by no Hisarlik, believing it to be Homer's Troy, seven means the end of the tale, Preserved in various years before Schliemann had any knowledge of forms of art and Homer's Odyssey, tradition has the site (Allen 1995: Luce 1998). it that after the prophesized death of Achilles. With Calvert's expertise and the ever-resourceful Odysseus contrived the Schlieman's capital, excavations at Hisarlik began infamous plan of the Trojan horse. Seeing that in 1870 with the objective of finding Homer's the Greeks had left their beach, the Trojans Troy (Allen 1996). To address the earlier believed the war had finally ended and deeming question, what did such excavations reveal that the horse to be a peace offering they wheeled it has led archaeologists to accept "beyond all inside their city. When the Trojans were asleep reasonable doubt"(Luce 1998:81), that Hisarlik is the Greeks emerged from the belly of the horse the site of Troy? The answer to this question is and unlocked the gates for their comrades who two-fold. had returned unobserved during the night. The The first aspect is concerned directly Greeks sacked the city of Troy and razed it to with Homer's accurate description of the Trojan the ground - they left no man alive. and every plain. Luce (1984, 1998) maintains that it is not woman was enslaved (Graves 1962: unlikely that Homer. who was presumed to have Mavromataki 1997). This was the fate of Troy lived during the middle of the eighth century at the unpitying hands of the Greeks, and this is B,C., actually visited the site. The foundation for the destmction that is sought by archaeologists. this argument rests on the accuracy of the setting and the absence of any arbitrarily invented Topography of the Troad landmarks in Homer's prose. The problem Ancient histolians have 10Jlg been adherent in this hypothesis is that although Homer interested in the location of Homer's Troy. accurately describes the Trojan plain, his actual Herodotus, Xenophon, Arrian, and Plutarch all description of the city of Troy is imprecise. To wrote detailed accounts on the topography of account for such inaccuracy, Luce insists that the the Troad - the region in northwestern Asia mid-eighth century B.C. Troy that Homer visited Minor that surrounds the ancient city of Troy. was at that time a Greek colony. Allen (1999) By far the most comprehensive account comes and Finley (1974) echo such sentiments, and from Strabo, a Greek geographer and historian while reminding us that Homer is a poet and not a who wrote around the time of Augustus Ifor a historian, they maintain that twelfth century B.c. detailed description see Strabo 19LU~8-90I, Troy, as it is presented in the Iliad, had been All of these ancient scholars attempted to covered by several settlements dllling the elapsed reconcile Homer's topographic descriptions 400 years. In other words,"Homer could not with actual sites in the Troad, hut were have seen buried Troy, but he could, and did, see specifically concerned with locating a site that the plain of Troy, and he desclibed it with matched the poet's description of Troy: a feat remarkable accuracy" (Finley 1974:9). that would finally be accomplished almost The second aspect removes any 2,000 years later. uncertainty pel1aining to the location of Troy. Most nineteenth and twentieth century Even if one is not willing to equate Hisarlik with literature on the subject leads us to bclie\'e that Troy, in all of western Anatolia there is no other Heinrich Schliemann was the one who prehistOlic site that compares to it. Korfmann discovered that ancient Troy lay heneath a stresses this point in mentioning that Hisarlik

'I () 1'1'\1 ",I 11211112-211<1,>

Co>pl1'1ghl' 21111, IIIII \1: Th, l'\X'<)Jo>urnal of,\nthropo>io>gl' "boasts a continuous stratigraphical sequence of 41 architectural levels, constituting an Mycenaean Pottery and Trade impressive deposit of more than twenty meters" Pottery from the seventh stratum at and that "the fOltifications are truly massive Hisarlik does suggest that there was significant among prehistoric defenses" (l984a: I). If this contact with the Mycenaeans to the west during were not enough, excavations have revealed that the late Bronze Age. In fact, commercial contact Hisarlik complised a vast wealth, was relatively between Greece and the Troad can be confirmed large in size, and had a long duration of from as far back as 1400 B.C. by Mycenaean settlements (Luce 1998). Although determined pottery found in Troy VI (Luce 1998). It is skeptics often cling to the possibility that an interesting to note that on mainland Greece no alternative site will be discovered, all the evidence exists of Trojan exports in retum. Luce archaeological and literary evidence points to (1998) believes there could have been exports in Hisarlik as the Bronze Age capital of the Troad the form of textiles but they would not have been (Luce 1998:81). preserved in the archaeological record. After examining the Greek pottery found Evidence of a Trojan War at Troy, Blegan (1963: 159) maintains that there Excavations at Hisarlik during the last was a noticeable decline in Mycenaean pottery 120 years by Calvert, Schliemann, Dorpfeld. as frequency at the end of Troy VI through Troy VII. well as teams led Blegan and Korfmann from Furthermore, by using the established and the University of Cincinnati. have yielded nine accepted sequence of Mycenaean ceramic styles, chronological strata for the ancient city of Troy Blegan argues that the overthrow of Troy VII (Allen 1999). Cultural remains on the bedrock must have occurred between 1270 and 1250 B.C. level have been called Troy I, and this stratum Conveniently, this range of dates coincides with ranges from approximately 2920-2450 B.c. the peak of Mycenaean supremacy on mainland The latest stratum of settlement has been named Greece, which Pedley (1993) places between Troy IX, and covers a period from 1450 and 1200 B.C. Therefore, according to approximately 85 B.c. onwards (Luce 1998). Blegan, the pottery evidence establishes that there The stratum that has been identified as was contact between Troy and Mycenae, and that encompassing Homeric Troy, and consequently, the fall of Troy VII fits within the timeframe of the one of most interest to this paper, is Troy Mycenae's dominance of the Greek mainland. VII, which extends from approximately 1250 to 1020 B.C. (Luce 1998; Blegan 1963; Korfmann Fire and Destruction 1984b; Page 1972). It is believed that the end of Troy VI was There have been many calculations a result of a devastating earthquake that hit the made from the literature to ascertain when area around 1300 B.C., but it appears that "repairs Homer's version of the Trojan War occurred. were made, and the life of the place continued Tracing the line of Spartan kings, the Greek without a major culture break into the phase historian Herodotus dates the event to 1250 named Troy VII" (Luce 1998:99). The beginning B.c., while the ancient Greek Eratosthenes, of this phase is characterized by a new and more specifically places the date at 1183 B.C. strange architectural appearance; large storage (Allen 1999). Although these and other jars were now being sunk into the floors of many calculations are, "all rather insecure to say the houses and were fitted with stone lids so that least" (Korfmann 1984b:28), most of the residents could walk over top of them. However, calculations produce a date that fits into the this stratum was short lived and it appears that chronological stratum of Troy VII. Troy VII,"met its end in a great conflagration" After reviewing the literature on the (Luce 1998:101). subject, I found three main categolies of The destruction of Troy VII is evidence pertaining to Troy VII's ruin. which characteristically marked by a burnt stratum, some believe to be indicative of a historical which Blegan (1963) and Korfmann (I 984b ) Trojan War, and I will therefore structure this believe to be indicative of a war, if not the war. subsequent sections accordingly. The first Because the appearance of the destruction of the section will be concerned with Mycenaean great walls of Troy VII differed so much from the pottery found in Troy; the second, with earthquake that had damaged the walls of Troy evidence of fire and destruction; and finally, the VI, Blegan boldly states that, "the destruction was last section examines the possible link between undoubtedly the work of human agency, and it the Greeks and Hittite texts. was accompanied by violence and fire"

TOTI·:,\! \'01 !I 211112-21111,) Cop\Tight © 2tHI,) TOT! ':~[:The 1I\X'<) Journa! of ,\nthropo]og\' (1963:161). According to carbon-14 dating, main city on Rhodes was called Akhaiwa. To this catastrophe occurred circa 1180 B.C. - a show it is not just a coincidence and to cement his date that is very close to the one given by argument he states that ,"the only other Eratosthenes of 1183 B.c. considerable Achaean settlement on the west Moreover, this stratum contained coast of Asia Minor at this time was Mi/atas, and cel1ain human and cultural remains that the only settlement on that coast assigned by the apparently point to military action. In the Hittite documents to the realm of the Achaeans streets and near one of the main walls, was Mi/awatas" (Page 1972: 18). archaeologists excavated an arrowhead of Finally, if One continues to assume that mainland Greek type, abandoned piles of sling the land refeITed to by the Hittites as Ahhiyawa stones, the skeleton of a man, fragments of a was indeed a Greek colony on Rhodes, then a human skull, and the hastily buried skeleton of a historical Trojan War becomes more plausible. girl (Blegan 1963; Luce 1998; KOlfmann First of all, the dates of the tablets would indicate 1984b).Concerning the male skeleton that the Greeks and the Hittites, "were in contact uncovered, Blegan (1963: 161) insists that,"it for a hundred and fifty years (more or less) seemed not to lie in the normal manner of a preceding the sack of Troy VII"(Page 1972: 19). proper burial: it looked as if the man had been This date, as mentioned above, is confirmed by struck down there and, left as he fell, been Mycenaean pottery found in Troy IV dating to covered by debris from above. The skull had around 1400 B.c. In addition, the island of been crushed." Rhodes was a wealthy trading colony that dominated the sea-lanes around Asia Minor. Hittite Texts Therefore, if you consider Rhodes' wealth and Excavations at the Hittite capital naval supremacy, combined with its close Bogazkoy in 1906-1907 brought to light ten proximity to Troy, then Page's assertion that the thousand clay tablets that aided in the rich and powerful land of Ahhiyawa was indeed a reconstruction of Hittite laws, religion, Greek colony becomes conceivable. literature, and history (Page 1972: I). Because of Troy" s location on the edge of the ancient Synopsis Hittite empire, and the apparent similarities The evidence revealed above, was drawn between Hittite words and their possible Greek almost exclusively from the work of Blegan, counterparts, these tablets caught the attention Korfmann, and Allen, archaeologists who have all of Troy scholars. For example, one such actually excavated at Troy. It may initially seem similmity is the Hittite word Wi/usa (Wi lias) problematic that I have not alluded to any of the referring to a city somewhere in the proximity infamous work done by Heinrich Schlie mann, but of the Troad, which is comparable to the ancient this becomes logical when considering that during name for Troy, /lias (Guterbock 1984). his years of excavating at Troy, he never did any Almost all the locations of the cities substantial work on Bronze Age strata, and in and nations mentioned in these tablets have fact, had mistakenly identified Troy II as Homer's been identified by literary and archaeological Troy (Allen 1999). To summarize the evidence study, except for one: the city/nation of so far, we can make a few assertions based on the Ahhiyawa. Since these texts identify a detailed work of Blegan and Korfmann: political association between the land of Ahhiyawa and the Hittites, the question of I. There was contact between Troy and whether the name Ahhiyawa refers to the land Mycenae as revealed by pottery of the Greeks certainly has a bearing on the found in Troy VII. Furthermore, historical background of a Trojan Wm" there was a decline in Mycenaean (Guterbock 1984:33). pottery frequencies from Troy VI to Page (1972) adamantly and Troy VII. Finally, by using an persuasively argues that the land of the established and accepted sequence Ahhiyawa is none other than Greece, of Mycenaean ceramic styles, specifically the island of Rhodes. Assuming Blegan dates the fall of Troy VII to that this is true, it becomes clear that the approximately 1250 B.C., which discourse in the tablets regarding the location, coincides with the peak of politics, trade, and religion of the land of Mycenaean power. Ahhiyawa (Rhodes) is incredibly accurate. To 2. A burnt stratum of ash and debris further strengthen his case, Page reveals that the dated to approximately 1180 B.C.

TOTI':~[ 1"01 11 2111/2-21111.) Copvright <[', 200.) TOTI ':~): ThL' U\X'() Journal of. \nthropo)ogr characterizes Troy VII. Blegan that the inhabitants of Troy VI would spend all maintains that the damage to the available resources on the necessities related to walls of Troy VII denotes human rebuilding the city, and simply could not afford agency and not a natural disaster. the luxury of Mycenaean imports. Or Finally, the presence of certain alternatively, Troy VI may have been left so human remains (skeletal material, impoverished by the destruction that they were no hastened burial, etc.) and cultural longer attracting such traders. The result is the remains (mainland Greek style same regardless of which explanation is favoured. arrowhead, abandoned piles of Second, we cannot rule out the sling stones) ce11ainly makes a possibility that the decrease in Mycenaean military action plausible. imports may reflect increased hostilities between 3. Following Page. if the Hittite word the two cities. One could take this evidence to Ahhiyawa was their word for the imply the possibility of a trade embargo that Greeks (Rhodesians), then this could have misen from Mycenaean pressure for might be evidence that Hittite and control of the Hellaspont region. Indeed, Troy Greek contact goes as far back as occupied a very valuable location in terms of 1400 B.C. - a date verified by trade. Again. it is not unlikely that a trading Mycenaean pottery found in Troy power such as Mycenae would be interested in VI. Fm1hermore, based on this controlling the Hellaspont and consequently, all same assumption. the location, of the trade from around the Black Sea and inland strength, relative naval superiOlity, Anatolia. and wealth of the Greek colony on Turning our attention to the date of 1250 Rhodes makes it a reasonable B.C. given by Blegan as the date of the fall of agent for the destruction of Troy Troy VII, a problem becomes apparent: he states: VII. There are some minor Interpretations and Considerations disagreements in detail - Standing on the shoulders of giants inevitable, since the evidence like Blegan and KOlfmann. I will attempt to itself is at best somewhat critically analyze and interpret the evidence tenuous and conflicting - most summarized above as being, in my opinion, field archaeologists accept these supportive, contrary, or at present, inconclusive dates in general, sometimes concerning the validity of a historical Trojan rounding them out for War. For convenience I will keep the three convenience and simplicity" categories as the base of the structure for this (1963: 160) [emphasis mine). section. To say that this statement is imprecise and Mycenaean Pottery and Trade unclear is obvious, but what is less obvious is I agree with Blegan that the that his date of 1250 B.c. is misleading. Luce Mycenaean pottery found in the strata of Troy (1998) mentions that in view of recent expert VI and VII conclusively represents trade analysis of the accepted sequence of Mycenaean between the two cities and that this trade had its ceramic styles, the fall of Troy VII could be as origins at least as far back as 1400 B.C. late as 1140 B.C. The problem that immediately Furthermore, regarding the decrease in becomes apparent with this new date is that it Mycenaean pottery frequency from Troy VI places the fall of Troy VII out of the range of through Troy VII, I agree that this represents "a Mycenaean dominance in Greece. Korfmann falling-off in the quantity of imported vessels as (1984a:26) states that,"it is practically beyond compared with locally produced imitations" the realm of imagination that the Mycenaeans (Blegan 1963: 159). The real question is why would still have been able to rally to such a full- was there a decrease in imported Mycenaean scale unde11aking at this time when their own pottery. Two possible explanations come to cities were clearly in decline." mind. In my opinion, the pottery evidence First, since it has been shown that an clearly reflects that there was contact between earthquake destroyed Troy VI, I believe that the Mycenae and Troy, but the decline in Mycenaean decrease in imported property at this time may pottery frequency could have simply been the reflect a sh0l1age of capital. It is not unlikely result of Troy VI's depleted capital in an attempt

TOTI·:,\I ml 11211112-21111,1 Copnight © 21111TOTI,1 ':,\!: The U\X'OJournal of, \nthmpology to rebuild their city after an earthquake hit the The last hole in the siege hypothesis is area in approximately 1300 B.C. Finally, in Blegan's (963) interpretation of the large storage light of new dates provided by Luce (1998), it jars (pit/wi) that were sunk into the floors of appears unlikely that the fall of Troy VII was many houses in Troy VII. He maintains that the the result of Mycenaean agency. presence of these pit/wi denotes a concern for supplies because there was possibly an impending Fire and Destructio/1 emergency of some kind. Again. I find this Based on carbon-14 dating of the ash hypothesis improbable. This kind of preparation stratum, I agree with Allen' s date of by the inhabitants of Troy VII would indicate that approximately 1180 B.C. for the destruction of they had an advance warning of an impending Troy VII. Furthermore, the fact that this date attack and fmthermore, that such a warning had generally coincides with the pottery evidence provided a significant amount of time to prepare. 0140 B.C.), and the date given by Eratosthenes In my opinion this architectural oddity is better 0183 B.C.), makes it a plausible inference. explained as a measure to conserve living space in The abundance of ash in this stratum clearly a city that already characterized by, "the crowding shows that Troy VII underwent a significant together of numerous small houses everywhere" catastrophe, but it still does not answer the (Blegan 1963:161). Or alternatively. this question of how. Was it the result of a military architectural feature may simply have been seen event as Blegan and Korfmann argue, or was it as a supelior method of storage: that is, for the result of an earthquake, similar to the one keeping water and food cool, while freeing up that leveled Troy VI? Truly, neither option can valuable household space. be conclusively disregarded. Finally, regarding the arrowhead of Since the destruction of Troy VI was mainland Greek type and the abandoned piles of deemed to be the result of an emthquake, and sling stones found, it can be said with certainty given that natural scientists have confirmed the that these elements are clearly military in nature. high probability of earthquakes in this region. I But what cannot be said conclusively is that they do not believe it to be improbable that Troy VII played a role in the destruction or defense of the could have met a fate similar to its predecessor. city. Surely, if a city were under attack, it is Moreover, Troy's proximity to the coast unlikely that a defending slinger would abandon exposes the plain to fierce ocean winds and his ammunition.On the other hand, one cannot even Homer speaks often about the onslaught of rule out the possibility that they were used to the wild west winds (Maclm'en 1863). In light protect Troy VII. It is just as reasonable to of such environmental conditions, I believe a believe that they were not abandoned by choice fire caused by an earthquake could spread but by necessity. rapidly throughout the city and account for such Let us consider the Greek type widespread destruction. anowhead found on the streets of Troy. And what of Blegan's "human agency" Certainly, it must be proof of a siege? In my 0963:161) behind the destruction of the walls? opinion, it is not. As a result of the pottery Besides simply referring to the probability of evidence mentioned above, it is clear that the human agency, Blegan mentions no evidence Greeks and the Trojans had an extensive trade that would conclusively show that these walls network. Besides pottery, Luce (998) mentions were brought down by "invading hostile forces" that the Trojan imports of Mycenaean products 0963:162). At present, let's consider the male included weaponry, and therefore, the arrowhead skeleton uncovered in an abnormal position that could have been a Trojan weapon.Furthermore, Blegan maintains, "had been struck down there since the sacking of Troy VII would require a and, left as he fell, been covered by debris from large force of men, certainly more than one above. The skull had been crushed" enemy arrowhead should be present. 0963:161). In light of this statement, again, I Notwithstanding my Cliticism of am drawn to the plausibility of an earthquake. Blegan' s interpretations, I am hesitant to Considering that after the destruction of Troy completely dismiss his hypothesis that, "fighting VII it was rebuilt and occupied (Troy VIIl), it is and killing must have accompanied the unlikely that a man killed in battle would be left destruction of Troy VII" 0963: 161). He to rot in the streets. On the other hand, if he accurately determined that an earthquake ruined was crushed from a crumbling building Troy VI, so it appears that he identify the resulting from an earthquake, his body might differences between earthquake and military never have been recovered for a proper burial. damage. Therefore, it is my opinion that Troy

'['()TJ.:,\! \'01 II 211112-211111 Copyright 10 21111,>T( l'lVH ThL' 1I\\'() .Journal of, \nthropo)o!-,,,' VII was destroyed around 1180 B.C., but the B.C. by either an earthquake or human agency in cause of such destruction is at present, the form of a military operation. These are the inconcl usi ve. only two points that I am comfOltable claiming as inefutable. Hittite Texts Luce states that,"the strength of one' s The hypothesis regarding the mention belief in the historicity of the Trojan War depends of Troy and the Greeks in Hittite texts certainly on one' s estimate of the overall reliability of walTants caution on the part of the ancient Greek tradition and its particular archaeologist. In fact, it is important to note embodiment in the poetry of Homer" (1998:3). I that most authors writing on the subject of a would disagree. The strength of my belief in the Trojan War seem to all but ignore the Hittite historicity of the Trojan War depends on texts. This may be because any reconciliation archaeological fact. And at present, such facts (or between ancient Greeks and the Hittite word lack thereof) lead me to conclude that the Ahhiyawa, "is still a matter of faith," according evidence pertaining to the historicity of a Trojan to the Hittite linguist Hans Giiterbrock War is at present, inconclusive. My position is ( 1984:33). based on the fact that, just as archaeology cannot Although Page (1972) puts forth a very prove the arguments put forth by Blegan and convincing case that the Greek colony on KOlfmann that there was a Trojan War, Rhodes was the Hittite land of Ahhivawa, it is archaeology cannot disprove them either. still based on an assumption and nothing more. Allen states, as echoed in much of the In his attempt to persuade the reader, he makes literature: - note of several striking coincidences. These. I must admit, drew my attention and even caught to lift the veil of prehistory once my imagination. Again, in spite of such and for all, the excavators will plausible coincidences, until further evidence need to find the palace archive can be uncovered that is not based on or some other written proof of speculation or assumption, then they will the identity of the ancient town remain just that, coincidences. and its inhabitants, for without These texts are, nonetheless, intriguing texts. the association of and full of possibility, but are useless to Trojan archeological finds with scholars until an accurate reconciliation can be specific histOlical events is made between the text and actual geographical notoriously difficult (1999:258). landmarks. Therefore, in my opinion, the Hittite texts do not attest to the validity of a Indeed, I believe the only conclusive evidence histOlical Trojan War. pertaining to the hiStOlicity of a Trojan War that will ever smface will be in the form of Conclusion documents that give detailed and precise "The heroes of the Iliad and the descriptions concerning the participants. Until Odyssey have become to us men of flesh and such documents are excavated, we must. like blood; we can watch both them, and older Homer's Achaeans who waited ten years to sack heroes still, in almost every act of their daily windy Ilium, be patient. life" (Schliemann 1884:vii). These are the words from the preface of Schliemann's Troja, Further Research written in 1884. For a man who had One idea of interest is concerned with misidentified the stratum of Homeric Troy at the fall of the Mycenaean Empire during the late Hisarlik, this statement is presumptuous to say thirteenth century B.c. This date is suspiciously the least. Similarly, almost 130 years later, I close to the one attributed to the fall of Troy VII. believe that it would be just as presumptuous to I believe that this is more than a coincidence. Two claim that there was an actual historical Trojan topics for further research immediately come to War. mind: first, could the destruction of both cities, In my opinion, the conclusive evidence within a relatively ShOlt peliod. denote that the produced by Blegan and Korfmann can be same enemy attacked them both? Second. if there summarized as such: 1) there was contact was a histOlical Trojan War and the Greek between Troy and Mycenae from at least 1400 coalition was led by Mycenae, could the B.c. up to and including the fall of Troy VII; economic and demographic losses from fighting a and 2) Troy VII was destroyed around 1180

HHI·:i\1 \'01 11211112-21111.1 Coprright

Luce, J. V. 1984. The Homelic Topography Allen, S. H, 1995. Finding the Walls of Troy: of the Trojan Plain Reconsidered. Frank Calvert, Excavator. American Oxford Journal of Archaeology. 3:31-42. Joumal of Archaeology 99:379-407. 1998. Celebrating Homer's Landscapes: ---, 1996. Principally For Vases, etc: the Troy and Ithica Revisited. New Formation and Dispersal of the Haven: Yale University Press. Calvert Collection. Anatolian Studies 46:145-166, Maclaren, C. 1863. Plain of Troy DesClibed. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black. 1999. Finding the Walls of Troy: Frank Calvert and Heiruich Schliemann at Marrou, H. 1956. Education in Antiquity. NY: Hisarlik. Berkeley: University of Mentor Books. California Press. Mavromataki, M. 1997. Greek Mythology and Blegan,C. 1963. Troy and the Trojans. NY: Religion. Athens: Haitalis Editions. Frederick A. Praeger Publisher. Page, D. 1972. History and the Homeric Iliad. Finley, M. 1974. Schliemann's Troy - One London: University of California Press. Hundred Years After. Mortimer Wheeler Archaeological Lecture, Pedley, J. 1993. Greek Art and Archaeology. London: Oxford University Press. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Graves,R. 1962. 1962. The Siege and Fall of Robb, J. 1999. Analyzing Human Skeletal Data. Troy. London: Cassell and Co. Ltd. /11 Human Osteology: In Archaeology and Forensic Science. Margaret Cox and Guterbock, H. 1984. Troy in Hittite Texts? /11 Simon Mays, eds. Pp. 475-490. London: Troy and the Trojan War: A Greenwich Medical Media Ltd. Symposium Held at Bryn Mawr College October 1984. M. Mellink, Schliemaru1, H. 1884. Troja: Results of the eds. Pp. 33-44. Bryn Mawr: The Latest Researches and Discovered on Department of Classical and Near the site of Homer's Troy, 1882. NY: Eastem Archaeology Bryn Mawr Benjamin Bloom, Inc. College.

'1'0'1'1·:,\1 ,01 11211112-21111,) CO[1Hight © 211111 '1'< )'1'1·:,\1: The U\\!<) .Journal ot- .\nthro[1olog' Sperling, J. 1984. Reminiscences of Troy. /n Startin, Bill. 1993. Preservation and the Troy and the Trojan War: A Academically Viable Sample. Symposium Held at Bryn Mawr Antiquity. 67:421-426. College October 1984. M. Mellink, eds. Pp. 29-31. Bryn Mawr: The Strabo. 1913. The Geography of Strabo: Department of Classical and Near Volume II. H. Hamilton, trans. Eastem Archaeology Bryn London: G. Bell and Sons Ltd. Mawr College.

'IUlv~r mill 2(1(12-211(1.,\