New Theories Stating Troy was in Great Britain - Page 3




 
--
 
January 31st, 2005  
Anya1982
 
 

Topic: lies


Quote:
Troy in England is, however unbelievable at first sight, fully explained in this amazing work which provides detailed arguments of all sorts including geographic and linguistic evidence as well as countless archaeological finds.
This guy is cookoo or on drugs, seriously Troy is a lost land right?

If this is supposed to be true how comes its only come up now, and if so that would mean Englands History that has been counted for is lies.

Put this guy to sleep purlzzzzzzzz
January 31st, 2005  
charlie1970
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
well.....first we know this troy war from a dude named Homer...(means hostage), and it seems to be sure that he is living in the modern greek as a hostage from probably modern turkey.....

and there is a site discovered as troy near greek...

but it is really amazing how greek army can go to britain while later in Rome era ppl say no one has ever been to that island until Caesar's first expitation
According to Wilkens the war wasn't fought by Greeks. It was fought by Celts.

Another interesting piece of trivia is that Queen Elizabeth I was once greeted as 'that sweet remain of Priam's state, that hope of springing Troy'
January 31st, 2005  
charlie1970
 

Topic: Re: lies


This guy is cookoo or on drugs, seriously Troy is a lost land right?

If this is supposed to be true how comes its only come up now, and if so that would mean Englands History that has been counted for is lies.
[/quote]

Troy may not necessarily be lost. Maybe misplaced. Dictys (author of "Diaries of the Trojan War") backs up Homer's description of geography and weather. The descriptions are simply not of Turkey.

As for Englands history. Celtic spiritualty was the result Druidic lore. The Druids (and the Celts) did not keep written records of their history. Druids were required to memorise it all.

If Troy was located in England and was a battle between the Celts, Cessar's conquests of Gaul and England could have been responsible for the loss of that knowledge. Kill the high Druid priests and the knowledge is lost forever.

Another surprising piece of trivia (well I was surprised anyway) is that many towns in England have been inhabited since the Stone Age. People had been in England for a very long time before the Trojan War took place. Englands history (ie Kings & Queens) doesn't stretch that far into antiquity.

In relation to Hissarlik (where Troy is supposed to be), when the Trojan war is thought to have take place the Hittites were at the height of their power in Turkey. It could be said that it would have been difficult for Achillies to ravage the countryside without alerting them.

I don't know if any of it is true. I doubt anyone will ever know. But there are so many geographical inconsistencies, not to mention the fact that many translations leave out passages that cannot be explained geographically, that further investigations into the story should be conducted. Even if Troy didn't exist in England, wouldn't it be interesting to discover who fought a large scale battle in Cambridgeshire and left the 10k+ Bronze Age artifacts behind?
--
February 3rd, 2005  
Blue_Eyes
 
 

Topic: let em think


1) England was under Viking rule before Romans and it was pagens here not Celtics.

2) The theory is just that and no more.

3) If this is said to be true, why is there no history to it in England?
February 3rd, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 

Topic: Re: let em think


Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Eyes
1) England was under Viking rule before Romans and it was pagens here not Celtics.
1.) The Vikings didn't rule anything at all in England until much much later than the date that the Trojan War is supposed to have taken place. During the time period that the Trojan War would have happened in, the British Isles were controlled by the Celts. The Vikings dominated the British Isles much later in the 600-700's AD I believe.

The Celts didn't have a written language, so there are no written records of their history. There is only the clues offered by their mythology -- which probably came directly from their oral history.

The Celts were extremely widespread at that point in history. Caesar dubbed them "the Fathers of Europe" for a reason. Celtic ruins and standing stones have been found in Romania, Denmark, Poland, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Spain, England, France ... you get the idea. They were all over Europe.

Anciently, the Celts were second to none in their knowledge of metalworking. So they were an advanced culture in some ways, but primitive in that they were not united and had no written language.

Quote:
2) The theory is just that and no more.
That could be said of almost anything in ancient history.

Quote:
3) If this is said to be true, why is there no history to it in England?
I don't have the information of course, but according to the archaologists who came up with this theory, there is historical and archaological evidence of things that fits very well with the description of the Trojan War. As I already stated, the British Isles had no written record from that era.

I'm not saying that this theory is right or wrong, but if we're going to pick it appart, lets use historical facts.
Links for information about the "Viking Age":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings#The_Viking_Age
http://www.intercollege.se/viking/We...2B/analyse.htm
February 4th, 2005  
Charge 7
 
 
No doubt about it Celts (not Celtics - that's a basketball team) were highly advanced in both culture and technology. Art which is gloriously beautiful even today and they invented chain mail for example long before the Romans copied it. Also the Romans called _anybody_ not Roman "barbarians" as they said their languages sounded like the bleating of sheep to them "bah bah". I wouldn't let Roman terms decide who was and who wasn't a barbarian in the sense that we use the word now.
February 4th, 2005  
charlie1970
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charge_7
No doubt about it Celts (not Celtics - that's a basketball team) were highly advanced in both culture and technology. Art which is gloriously beautiful even today and they invented chain mail for example long before the Romans copied it. Also the Romans called _anybody_ not Roman "barbarians" as they said their languages sounded like the bleating of sheep to them "bah bah". I wouldn't let Roman terms decide who was and who wasn't a barbarian in the sense that we use the word now.
Phonetically they were 'kelts' and not 'selts'. And the Romans considered the Gauls (which were Celts) one level above barbarian. The Germanic tribes they considered barbarian. Cessar himself said so in his book 'Conquest of Gaul' (another interesting read).
February 4th, 2005  
charlie1970
 
Quoting from the website: http://www.troy-in-england.co.uk/

"The false assumption that Troy and the Trojan War was waged near Hissarlik in Asia Minor, where no traces of war are found, dates back to the eighth century BC when the first Greeks settled on Turkey's west coast.

The Greeks did not know that the Trojans who once lived in that area were migrants, as the collective memory of this fact was lost during the Dark Ages (1200-750 BC).

From 1180 to 1100 Hissarlik was indeed inhabited by a non-local people. They were the survivors of the greatest war of prehistory, when Troy on the Gog Magog Hills in Cambridgeshire, England, was destroyed. Here, countless bronze weapons and other remains of a major war in the late Bronze Age have been found.

The great migrations of the second millennium BC brought also Achaeans, Troy's enemies, from regions along the Atlantic coast of the Continent to the Mediterranean where they caused the collapse of many civilisations.

The name 'Achaeans' means 'Watermen' or 'Sea People' (the Gothic 'acha' for 'water' or 'stream' is cognate with Latin 'aqua'). The Greek historian Herodotus (fifth century BC) confirms that Pelasgians ('Sea Peoples') had settled in Greece long before his time. They founded Athens, renamed places, merged with the local population and adopted their language.

With the Achaeans came their gods and their oral tradition, including the Iliad and the Odyssey, which were written down in Greek only around 750 BC. Meanwhile, the newcomers had engaged in the time-honoured practice of renaming towns, rivers and mountains after familiar places in their former homelands. The transfer of place-names naturally led to the belief that the events described in the epics took place in Greece and the Mediterranean and that the Achaeans were Greeks. "
February 4th, 2005  
Charge 7
 
 
Correct, pronounced "kelt" not "selt". However, Rome's leader's name is spelled "Caesar" not "Cessar".

The Bronze Age was global. Unless you're going to tell me that the Trojans were in China too, I find the fact that bronze impliments have been found in Britain a non-arguement.

Becareful of back to back posts. Mods don't care for that. If you have something to add to a post it's best to use the "edit" button and add your other info that way.
February 6th, 2005  
charlie1970
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charge_7
Correct, pronounced "kelt" not "selt". However, Rome's leader's name is spelled "Caesar" not "Cessar".

The Bronze Age was global. Unless you're going to tell me that the Trojans were in China too, I find the fact that bronze impliments have been found in Britain a non-arguement.

Becareful of back to back posts. Mods don't care for that. If you have something to add to a post it's best to use the "edit" button and add your other info that way.
You are correct and thanks for the tip.

In relation to the bronze implement finds in England. It wouldn't really be a big deal if they were found all over the country. But almost all of the finds are in the area Wilkens suggests the battle took place. Outside of this area finds are limited.