[gothic-l] Re: Schliemann & The Illiad as Fiction

[Alburysteve at AOL.COM]

Hi Nikolai:

> To trust in Any text written before the empirical age is
>  completely risky.

"empirical age"?

> The world was an extremely conjectural, biased
>  place, moreso than it is now, and heavily religiously
>  influenced.

This is conjectural.

>   And since none of us were alive during the composition of any
>  of these works, it would be nothing more than personal opinion,
>  not fact, as to whether any of it is legit or whether it is
>  there only to teach and give joy.

In antiquity, more was written about the Homeric poems than any other work.
We know a great deal about what the classical Greeks thought about Homer's
works thus making their feelings as "knowable" as the Peloponnesian war, for
example.

> And since not every single
>  piece of archaeological evidence yet to be discovered has been
>  discovered, it would be highly arrogant to arrive at any
>  "factual" conclusion as to a piece of literatures validity of
>  being wholly fictional or not.

Archaeologists write a great deal about what they know and do not flinch from
drawing conclusions based on that.  Our state of knowledge is not placed on
hold until all facts in the universe have been disclosed.  But feel free to
consider my opinion tentative.

>  No one knows whether or not there is any fact to those stories.

Really?  How do you know this?

>  Not you. Not I. You are basing your answer off of something you
>  have arrived at within your own mind, perhaps (most likely) from
>  earlier years of being steered by someone who also had similar
>  viewpoints.

And how do you "know" on what my response was based?  Is the knowldege of my
education and personal experiences part of your conclusion?  Would any facts
concerning my background effect in the least your amazing statements?

> Just because someone else of accreditation thought
>  of a particular perspective does not mean it is fact. Because
>  That person was not alive during the construction of the
>  stories, either.

And I suppose that if such a person were alive at the time, his judgement
could be questioned in any epistemological inquisition as rabid as this.

>  So... it is rather arrogant to inform someone else of
>  something's "intended purpose" when you, like the rest of us,
>  really have no idea... only educated guesses.

If forming an educated guess is "arrogant", then I'm arrogant.  I regret to
have pinked your feelings by expressing doubt in the absolute veracity of the
Homeric poems but most people who have (actually) studied them do not believe
that they are literally true.  On the other hand, there is much in those
works that help us understand the world of the Greek Bronze Age and I
disagree with those who consider them to be of no historical value.  I hope
that you find this calming.

>  Realistically yours,
>  Nikolai

Kind regards,

Steve O'Brien
Albury, Ontario

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/