In fact what?
T…
Whatever it was, it seems to have gotten OP banned?
Greek culture was and still is an Eastern Mediterranean civilization that has deep roots in Anatolia and that had and still has way more in common with other Eastern Mediterranean cultures than Western European cultures. There is no hard European/Asian line, only a smooth Eurasian continuum.
That Westerners and Hollywood try to pitch Greekness as some kind of Western outpost in the East says way more about their own Orientalism and, frankly, racism, than it does about Greek culture which, you know, just exists, regardless of what Hollywood has to say.
Claiming ancient Greek culture has deep roots from Anatolia is a Western narrative if you ask me. Considering the Greek culture only managed to get in and establish footholds at mostly the shorelines with the Sea People’s invasions from the west and never managed to establish full control over Anatolia or hold their holdings for a relatively long time. By your definition you can call the Ottoman Empire having deep roots in Europe. Considering they conquered Kosovo before Istanbul. Roots and historical ties are very different things.
I said Greek culture, not ancient Greek culture. And yes, even if you ignore 2/3rds of Greek history, you still end up with deep roots in Asia Minor, from the early Iron Age onwards. Ionia, Aeolis, and Doris were not just shallow "footholds"and definitely by the time the Romans arrived could very well be described as areas with deep Greek roots.
And, duh, yes of course we should be saying that the Ottoman Empire has deep deep European roots, wtf are you even disputing here?
Again it seems you’re mistaking roots of a culture with historical ties/relations and bundling up ancient Greek culture with Greek culture is another obvious mistake you make. Considering the ancient Greeks and Greeks after Christianity are two very different cultures. Meanwhile calling Ottomans having deep roots in Europe shows how much your mix and match the cultures. By your definition Atilla the Hun must be rooted in Europe as well considering he achieved his fame in Europe’s history and Genghis Khan must be rooted in China or Anatolia or Arabic Peninsula. If you can’t see the difference between roots and historical ties/relations there is nothing to talk about.
What do you mean by “roots”? It looks like we are thinking of different meanings. I think you are strictly thinking of “origins”. I use “roots” as something that can be developed over time, as in “take root” and I take seriously the development of these roots over centuries. Contrary to ancient Athenian belief, people don’t spring up from the ground (autochtony), they wander and take root. Ultimately we all originate from some African plateau.
Greeks did not originate in Asia Minor, but by the time Alexander set off to conquer Persia, they were extremely well rooted in the coastal regions and were already a core part of Greek civilization.
The Huns disappeared. The Magyars on the other hand didn’t. Yes they originate in the steppe, but they are deeply rooted in Hungary.
As to whether Christianity dissects Greek culture, and as to how profoundly that is, …well, άσε και σε μας τους Έλληνες να έχουμε μια άποψη για τον πολιτισμό μας.
Yes, we all came from Africa and yet we all managed mingle, change and to develop distinct different cultures along the way. This doesn’t make Greek, German, French or any other cultures rooted in Africa. They all originated somewhere along the way. Roots means the origin of a culture where it comes from and where it was first established. Considering the Greek culture was already established by the time of the war of Troy, it came from modern day Greece geographically to Anatolia. The ancient Greeks were seeing Troy as a foreign kingdom other that Greek, Heredotus and others write so.
As for the Huns, yes they disappeared and turned into different cultures like the Magyars and Bulgars. They are established as these culture where they are now, distinct from the Huns. They have historical ties to the Huns.
As for your culture of course you are entitled to your opinion, however writing in Greek doesn’t mean your culture and the ancient Greek is the same culture. Anyways, I wish you a pleasant day and I hope I made my point clear.
This is possibly the only thing that Troy (2004) did kind of correctly. The architecture is full of nods to Hittite and New Kingdom Egyptian culture (look at the design of the temple of Apollo!), and the costuming also points to Hittite and Assyrian designs.
There’s a ton of mystery surrounding the fall of Mycenaean civilization, but there’s at least some general agreement that Troy was at least partially based on a real city (with a different name), and that they not only shared some gods/cults with Mycenae, but also might have been directly allied with Mycenaean kingdoms.
I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that there was no mixing of cultures between the Anatolian sphere and the Mycenaean sphere, considering that the entire Eastern Mediterranean was known to trade heavily (ESPECIALLY the sea focused Mycenaean’s).
Today I learned that the Enigma machine was not in fact captured by Jon Bon Jovi and his all-American crew and then cracked by 100% heterosexual Benedict Cumberbatch.
It was actually cracked by German-speaking Polish mathematicians even before the war broke out (the Enigma had been used for diplomatic communications with German embassies in the 30s). Then once they realized through intelligence gathered with their early version of the bombe that Poland was about to be invaded, they smuggled out all the gear and it eventually wound up in England.
Turing did make significant improvements to the design though, essentially making it programmable, and he is often cited as the father of the modern computer.
Can you restate the issue in a way that non-history nerds can understand?
Troy wasn’t white people.
So… You think Hollywood produces documentaries?
TIL people still believe ancient Troy existed.
We have texts from the period (15th to 12thc. BCE) that discuss a city that the Hittites called Wilusa (Ilios) in a region they called Taruisa (the Troad), and the beef that the Achaeans had with them about it for centuries. The city that we found shows rebuilding something that in the Greek and Roman period that they also named Ilion / Ilium. It’s a well established fact that something with that name existed and that it was the object of a centuries long conflict with Greece.
It’s after the end of the Roman period, when it disappeared, that people into the medieval period started assuming it was never real. Until it was actually found. Don’t be a child.
Troy was repeatedly destroyed and rebuilt during its 4000 years of settlement. As a result, nine archaeological layers have been identified at the site, each corresponding to a city built on the ruins of the previous. Archaeologists refer to these layers using Roman numerals, Troy I being the earliest and Troy IX being the latest.
Do you live in the pre-Schliemann era?
Nope, its not because Schliemann was a Homer otaku that his discoveries were what he said they were. Guy had a worldview and made the evidence fit it.
There are many cities that were looted and rebuilt several times in the ancient world while having large walls.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Hisarlik
“…Hisarlık has been largely acknowledged by scholars as the site of historical Troy […]”.
Feel free to read those scholars if you want to be unimpressed. I am unconvinced by the faint evidence.
I’ll grant them it’s more historical than Atlantis.
