A personal bête noire

[chickenfeet]

Why is it that some historians and archaeologists lose all perspective when confronted with Homer or the Bible? I just finished Taylour's The Myceneans which for the most part is a reasonable if dry summary of the archaeological evidence. However when Homer comes into the picture he goes nuts. What kind of dope tries to date the fall of Priam's Troy (sic)? It's as dim as trying to work out Noah's birthday or how loud Joshua's trumpets were. Its a legend, pal. The fact that there was a not very important city somewhere in the Troad no more proves that The Iliad is historical fact than the discovery of a barrow on a headland in Lower Saxony would prove that Beowulf was fact. As further proof that an otherwise worthy archaeologist can go completely gaga I offer the following; "their stuccoed surface recounted many a saga of feats of valour and heroic legend , such tales as the king fain would hear..."

Pageing Professor Finley...