← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Ragnar
Thread ID: 9944 | Posts: 11 | Started: 2003-09-21
2003-09-21 04:59 | User Profile
Long article, great fun for history buffs. In part:
[url]http://christianparty.net/homerbaltic.htm[/url]
[B]Homer in the Baltic[/B]
by Felice Vinci
Summary
The real scene of the Iliad and the Odyssey can be identified not in the Mediterranean Sea, where it proves to be weakened by many incongruities, but in the north of Europe. The sagas that gave rise to the two poems came from the Baltic regions, where the Bronze Age flourished in the 2nd millennium B. C. and many Homeric places, such as Troy and Ithaca, can still be identified. The blond seafarers who founded the Mycenaean civilization in the 16th century B. C. brought these tales from Scandinavia to Greece after the decline of the "climatic optimum". Then they rebuilt their original world, where the Trojan War and many other mythological events had taken place, in the Mediterranean; through many generations the memory of the heroic age and the feats performed by their ancestors in their lost homeland was preserved, and handed down to the following ages. This key allows us to easily open many doors that have been shut tight until now, as well as to consider the age-old question of the Indo-European diaspora and the origin of the Greek civilization from a new perspective.
Felice Vinci, Omero nel Baltico, with introduction by R. Calzecchi Onesti and F. Cuomo. Publisher: Fratelli Palombi Editori, 2nd edition 1998, Rome. ISBN: 88-7621-211-6 (an English translation is available by contacting the author).
Ever since ancient times, Homeric geography has given rise to problems and uncertainty. The conformity of towns, countries and islands, which the poet often describes with a wealth of detail, with traditional Mediterranean places is usually only partial or even nonexistent. We find various cases in Strabo (the Greek geographer and historian, 63 B. C. - 23 A.D.), who, for example, does not understand why the island of Pharos, situated right in front of the port of Alexandria, in the Odyssey inexplicably appears to lie a day's sail from Egypt. There is also the question of the location of Ithaca, which, according to very precise indications found in the Odyssey, is the westernmost in an archipelago which includes three main islands, Dulichium, Same and Zacynthus. This does not correspond to the geographic reality of the Greek Ithaca in the Ionian Sea, located north of Zacynthus, east of Cephallenia and south of Leucas. And then, what of the Peloponnese, described in both poems as a plain?
In other words, Homeric geography refers to a context with a toponymy with which we are familiar, but which, if compared with the actual physical layout of the Greek world, reveals glaring anomalies, which are hard to explain, if only on account of their consistency throughout the two poems. For example, the "strange" Peloponnese appears to be a plain not sporadically but regularly, and Dulichium, the "Long Island" (in Greek "dolichos" means "long") located by Ithaca, is repeatedly mentioned not only in the Odyssey but also in the Iliad, but was never discovered in the Mediterranean. Thus we are confronted with a world which appears actually closed and inaccessible, apart from some occasional convergences, although the names are familiar (this, however, tends to be more misleading than otherwise in solving the problem).
A possible key to finally penetrating this puzzling world is provided by Plutarch (46 - 120 A.D.). In his work De facie quae in orbe lunae apparet ("The face that appears in the moon circle"), he makes a surprising statement: the island of Ogygia, (where Calypso held Ulysses before allowing him to return to Ithaca) is located in the North Atlantic Ocean, "five days' sail from Britain".
Plutarch's indications lead us to identify Ogygia with one of the Faroe Islands (where we also come across an island with a Greek-sounding name: Mykines), Starting from here, the route eastwards, which Ulysses follows (Book V of the Odyssey) in his voyage from Ogygia to Scheria allows us to locate the latter, i.e. the land of the Phaeacians, on the southern coast of Norway, in an area perfectly fitting the account of his arrival, where archaeological traces of the Bronze Age are plentiful. Moreover, while on the one hand "sker" in Old Norse means a ësea rockû, on the other in the narration of Ulysses's landing Homer introduces the reversal of the river current (Od., V, 451-453), which is unknown in the Mediterranean world but is typical of the Atlantic estuaries during high tide.
From here the Phaeacians took Ulysses to Ithaca, located on the far side of an archipelago, which Homer talks about in great detail. At this point, a series of precise parallels makes it possible to identify a group of Danish islands, in the south of the Baltic Sea, which correspond exactly to all of Homer's indications. Actually, the South-Fyn Archipelago includes three main islands: Langeland (the "Long Island"; which finally unveils the puzzle of the mysterious island of Dulichium), Aerø (which corresponds perfectly to Homeric Same) and TÃÂ¥singe (ancient Zacynthus). The last island in the archipelago, located westwards, "facing the night", is Ulysses's Ithaca, now known as Lyø. It is astonishing how closely it coincides with the directions of the poet, not only in its position, but also its topographical and morphological features. And here, amongst this group of islands, we can also identify the little island ëin the strait between Ithaca and Sameû, where Penelope's suitors tried to waylay Telemachus.
Moreover, the Elis, i.e. one of the regions of the Peloponnese, is described as facing Dulichium, thus is easily identifiable with a part of the large Danish island of Zealand. Therefore, the latter is the original ëPeloponneseû, i.e. the "Island of Pelops", in the real meaning of the word "island" ("nêsos" in Greek). On the other hand, the Greek Peloponnese (which lies in a similar position in the Aegean Sea, i.e. on its southwestern side) is not an island, despite its name. Furthermore, the details reported in the Odyssey regarding both Telemachus's swift journey by chariot from Pylos to Lacedaemon, along ëa wheat-producing plainû, and the war between Pylians and Epeans, as narrated in Book XI of the Iliad, have always been considered inconsistent with Greece's uneven geography, while they fit in perfectly with the flat island of Zealand.
Let us look for the region of Troy now. In the Iliad it is located along the Hellespont Sea, which is systematically described as being ëwideû or even ëboundlessû. We can, therefore, exclude the fact that it refers to the Strait of the Dardanelles, where the city found by Schliemann lies. The identification of this city with Homer's Troy still raises strong doubts: we only have to think of Finley's criticism in the World of Odysseus. It is also remarkable that Schliemann's site corresponds to the location of the Greek-Roman Troy; however, Strabo categorically denies that the latter is identifiable with the Homeric city (Geography 13, 1, 27). On the other hand, the Danish Medieval historian Saxo Grammaticus, in his Gesta Danorum, often mentions a population known as ëHellespontiansû and a region called Hellespont, which, strangely enough, seems to be located in the east of the Baltic Sea. Could it be Homer's Hellespont? We can identify it with the Gulf of Finland, which is the geographic counterpart of the Dardanelles (as both of them lie northeast of their respective basins). Since Troy, as we can infer from a passage in the Iliad (XXI, 334-335), lay North-East of the sea (further reason to dispute Schliemann's location), then it seems reasonable, for the purpose of this research, to look at a region of southern Finland, where the Gulf of Finland joins the Baltic Sea. In this area, west of Helsinki, we find a number of name-places which astonishingly resemble those mentioned in the Iliad and, in particular, those given to the allies of the Trojans: Askainen (Ascanius), Karjaa (Caria), Nästi (Nastes, the chief of the Carians), Lyökki (Lycia), Tenala (Tenedos), Kiila (Cilla), Raisio (Rhesus), Kiikoinen (the Ciconians) etc. There is also a Padva, which reminds us of Italian Padua, which was founded, according to tradition, by the Trojan Antenor and lies in Venetia (the ëEnetiû or ëVenetiû were allies of the Trojans). What is more, the place-names Tanttala and Sipilä (the mythical King Tantalus, famous for his torment, was buried on Mount Sipylus) indicate that this matter is not only limited to Homeric geography, but seems to extend to the whole world of Greek mythology.
What about Troy? Right in the middle of this area, halfway between Helsinki and Turku, we discover that King Priam's city has survived the Achaean sack and fire. Its characteristics correspond exactly to those Homer handed down to us: the hilly area which dominates the valley with its two rivers, the plain which slopes down towards the coast, and the highlands in the background. It has even maintained its own name almost unchanged throughout all this time. Today, Toija is a peaceful Finnish village, unaware of its glorious and tragic past..............................................(Continued at above link)
2003-09-21 14:56 | User Profile
Excellant article. Perfect timing, as I am rereading the Con-Tiki Expedition, and I went to the Greek fair yesterday.
I just did a search for Felice Vinci. Seems to be nothing, at least on Amazon, that is translated into English. Too bad.
2003-09-21 16:23 | User Profile
I find articles like this so interesting, they are almost painful to read and contemplate. There is no area of inquiry in which we know so little, but are so passionate to know more. Will we ever learn the true early history of our race?
I recall another theory that Troy is located on the coast of England. It seems like for either alternate theory to be true there would have to have been an extreme change in weather. Homer doesn't mention bitter cold or ice floes. But, considering we probably don't know the true dates of the "Iliad" or "Odyssey" to a millennium, there could be a large difference in temperature and weather.
Enkidu
2003-09-21 16:30 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Enkidu] Homer doesn't mention bitter cold or ice floes. But, considering we probably don't know the true dates of the "Iliad" or "Odyssey" to a millennium, there could be a large difference in temperature and weather.
Enkidu[/QUOTE]
I think you haven't finished reading the entire essay.
2003-09-21 16:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]I think you haven't finished reading the entire essay.[/QUOTE]
Yep, I read the post but skimmed the link.
" There are countless examples of this; for instance, when Ulysses recalls an episode of the Trojan War:
ëThe night was bad, after the north wind dropped, and freezing; then the snow began to fall like icy frost and ice congealed on our shields û ( Od. , XIV, 475-477)."
Wow, doesn't sound much like the Dardanelles, does it?
Odd, I've read the Odyssey lots of times. I guess I need to go back and re-read it --- maybe today.
Enkidu
2003-09-21 16:56 | User Profile
And this:
[I]Therefore, it was along the Baltic coast that Homer's events took place, before the Mycenaean migration southwards, in the 16th century B. C.. This period is close to the end of an exceptionally hot climate that had lasted several thousands of years, the "post-glacial climatic optimum". It corresponds to the Atlantic phase of the Holocene, when temperatures in northern Europe were much higher than today (at that time the broad-leaved forests reached the Arctic Circle and the tundra disappeared even from the northernmost areas of Europe). The "climatic optimum" reached its peak around 2500 B. C. and began to drop around 2000 B. C. ("Sub-Boreal phase"), until it came to an end some centuries later. It is highly likely that this was the cause that obliged the Achaeans to move down to the Mediterranean for this reason. They probably followed the Dnieper river down to the Black Sea, as the Vikings (whose culture is, in many ways, quite similar) did many centuries later. The Mycenaean civilisation, which did not originate in Greece, was thus born and went on to flourish from the 16th century B. C., soon after the change in North European climate.[/I]
2003-09-21 17:30 | User Profile
This link probably goes with the one above:
[url]http://www.troy-in-england.co.uk/[/url]
The Dutchman Iman Wilkins started all this a dozen years ago with his book, Where Troy Once Stood. I bought a copy when it was new (1991) and now I've seen them go for $100 on Ebay. Wilkins believes he is closer to the actual site of Troy now (north of London) and promises a new, updated edition.
This whole subject area seems to be dreaded by consensus historians. When Barry Fell proved there was an ancient transatlantic copper route in Bronze Age America he was tossed out of professional organizations and threatened with lawsuits. Kennewick Man is the tip of the iceburg here; something in the past is supposed to stay buried.
But... when pop pseudo-science books pick up on the same subject there are no complaints. Frank Joseph's book Atlantis in Wisconsin has a chapter on how Great Lakes copper fueled the European Bronze Age -- essentially summarizing Barry Fell -- and it sold well without a word of protest.
I guess Zecharia Sitchen had the right idea. :)
2003-09-21 18:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ragnar] ...But... when pop pseudo-science books pick up on the same subject there are no complaints. ... [/QUOTE]
Maybe this explains David Icke's reptile aliens. I enjoy his books, but groan and skip to the end of the chapters on the alien stuff. Could it be that he hides the true identity of the "aliens" behind the metaphor of reptiles? I doubt it, but believing it would make reading his books easier.
We northern (Celtic, Nordic, Slavic) types aren't the only ones angry and confused by the break with the early history of our race. I have a Tuscan friend from Verona. He sends me links about the Etruscans. He has a lot of the "Who are my people," thing going on. Even the Roman I know doesn't know who the Romans were. They just showed up in Italy --- Romulus, Remus, and a she wolf.
Enkidu
2003-09-21 20:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Enkidu]...Even the Roman I know doesn't know who the Romans were. They just showed up in Italy --- Romulus, Remus, and a she wolf. [/QUOTE]
It was so bizarre when Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans came out and he showed the connections, at least some of them, stuff I never would have thought of. Because the connections seem to clash with people's stereotypes.
Mallory shows that Remus was originally Iemus, the early Italian version of the Indo-European "Yema" or twin. But Mallory really got my attention when he showed that the Norse giant's name Ymir comes from the same source. And a bunch of other European archetypes come from "Yema" as well. At some point they were part of one big system.
From the stone age to the gnostics Europeans thrive on a sort of dualism. The Romulus and Remus legend is a good version. I'm curious about where it comes from originally.
2003-09-21 21:02 | User Profile
It is interesting and confusing, at least to me, if we compare discussions of these two theories of Mycenean migrations.
The Baltic theory:
Therefore, it was along the Baltic coast that Homer's events took place, before the Mycenaean migration southwards, in the [B]16th century B. C.. [/B] This period is close to the end of an exceptionally hot climate that had lasted several thousands of years, the "post-glacial climatic optimum". It corresponds to the Atlantic phase of the Holocene, when temperatures in northern Europe were much higher than today (at that time the broad-leaved forests reached the Arctic Circle and the tundra disappeared even from the northernmost areas of Europe). The "climatic optimum" reached its peak around 2500 B. C. and began to drop around 2000 B. C. ("Sub-Boreal phase"), until it came to an end some centuries later. It is highly likely that this was the cause that obliged the Achaeans to move down to the Mediterranean for this reason. They probably followed the Dnieper river down to the Black Sea, as the Vikings (whose culture is, in many ways, quite similar) did many centuries later. The Mycenaean civilisation, which did not originate in Greece, was thus born and went on to flourish from the 16th century B. C., soon after the change in North European climate.
The Black Sea theory:
"Their geological marine research shows clearly that the Mediterranean (Aegean) Sea "spilled over" at the Bosporus about 7,500 years ago, forming the Black Sea."
The time lines don't meet at all. The Baltic theory maintains that the Indo-Europeans migrated due to the advent of an ice age. The Black Sea theory maintains that the Indo-Europeans migrated due to the thawing of an ice age. Science theorizes that the Black Sea flooded 7,500 years ago. The Baltic theory maintains that the "climatic optimum" reached its peak around 2500 B.C. and began to drop around 2000 B.C., which is 4,500 and 4,000 years ago, respectively. I think we have a couple ice ages mixed up. Or am I missing something obvious?
2003-09-22 02:53 | User Profile
I don't know either, maybe someone else can help?
European genes started moving west 40-45,000 years ago but Bronze Age specialist Robert Drews insists that the PIES (Proto-Indo-European-Speakers) didn't achieve in great numbers or influence till after 1800 BC. I do not understand that gap. Even granting that language and genes are not the same thing.
Ryan and Pittman wrote about the Black Sea flood in 5600 BC and tentatively worked out migration maps that have some Euros going west to become proto-Celts, others going south becoming pre-Dynastic Egyptians, etc. Even if it's true there would have to be an assumption that the PIES migrated for centuries. Lots of centuries.
Unless there's another theory to cover all that time.