Troy and Mycenae were not mythical cities—they were described in many writings other than the Iliad. There wasn’t much doubt that they existed.
What? I don’t know of any writing that referred to Troy and Mycenae except the ones that directly related to the myths (I never said it was just Iliad of course, I mean the entire corpus of Greek myths).
We have a few Egyptian incriptions of the era that mention “Mukana” or some such, and perhaps a Hittite inscription that refers to some name similar sounding to Ilium, but those hardly count as “descriptions”—just a mention of a foreign city/country name without evidence to its location or anything really relating to it.
The evidence of the myths were pretty much the only evidence we had about Troy and Mycenae prior to the physical discovery of their remains.
What? I don’t know of any writing that referred to Troy and Mycenae except the ones that directly related to the myths (I never said it was just Iliad of course, I mean the entire corpus of Greek myths).
First, the question of whether the Trojan war was fiction is different from the question of whether the city of Troy was real and actually existed. It seems to me that during the first half of the XIX century there were claims that the Trojan war didn’t actually happen but was just imagined by Homer—but I don’t think that the mainstream consensus of that time insisted that the city of Troy was invented by him as well.
In fact, if you look at ancient texts you’ll find Troy being mentioned and discussed by such people as Herodotus and Thucydides. It’s not that their word should be taken as gospel, but their writings aren’t usually called “myths”.
All the texts described (Herodotus, Thucydides, etc) in your link only seem to discuss Troy in the context of the Trojan war which was itself known to the Greeks via the work of the myths passed down. So it seems strange to say that we knew Troy existed, but we doubted that the Trojan war was real.
Thucydides likewise mentions Mycenae—and he argued in favour of taking the poets’ words seriously about the past importance of Mycenae, though at his time no physical evidence of such remained (the location was by Thucydides’s time become mere insignificant villages).
which was itself known to the Greeks via the work of the myths passed down
Around the time of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, do you distinguish “myth” and “history” at all? It seems to me you’re calling everything without physical evidence a “myth”.
What? I don’t know of any writing that referred to Troy and Mycenae except the ones that directly related to the myths (I never said it was just Iliad of course, I mean the entire corpus of Greek myths).
We have a few Egyptian incriptions of the era that mention “Mukana” or some such, and perhaps a Hittite inscription that refers to some name similar sounding to Ilium, but those hardly count as “descriptions”—just a mention of a foreign city/country name without evidence to its location or anything really relating to it.
The evidence of the myths were pretty much the only evidence we had about Troy and Mycenae prior to the physical discovery of their remains.
First, the question of whether the Trojan war was fiction is different from the question of whether the city of Troy was real and actually existed. It seems to me that during the first half of the XIX century there were claims that the Trojan war didn’t actually happen but was just imagined by Homer—but I don’t think that the mainstream consensus of that time insisted that the city of Troy was invented by him as well.
In fact, if you look at ancient texts you’ll find Troy being mentioned and discussed by such people as Herodotus and Thucydides. It’s not that their word should be taken as gospel, but their writings aren’t usually called “myths”.
See e.g. http://riversfromeden.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/the-trojan-war-in-greek-historical-sources/ for more details.
All the texts described (Herodotus, Thucydides, etc) in your link only seem to discuss Troy in the context of the Trojan war which was itself known to the Greeks via the work of the myths passed down. So it seems strange to say that we knew Troy existed, but we doubted that the Trojan war was real.
Thucydides likewise mentions Mycenae—and he argued in favour of taking the poets’ words seriously about the past importance of Mycenae, though at his time no physical evidence of such remained (the location was by Thucydides’s time become mere insignificant villages).
Around the time of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, do you distinguish “myth” and “history” at all? It seems to me you’re calling everything without physical evidence a “myth”.