What's up with the haphazard tactics in The Iliad where heroes just wander around aimlessly? This compared to the Aeneid's autismus maximus regarding formations and troop movements.
>>783034
Heroes were schizopathic and prone to physicoemotional outbursts, soldiers in the Aeneid were a reflection of soldiers of Virgil's own time, which were less schizopathic and more autistic (physicoemotionally milder and more mental or intellectual).
>>783034
Homer was an old guy who didn't know how war works.
Virgil was a Roman.
Other posts need not apply.
>hello guize why did the Rohirrim just charge the orcs?
>>783062
???
>>783066
It's a fantastic story
Are you really concerned with tactics?
>>783070
What are you even talking about?
If you're not going to communicate anything, why post?
>>783034
The Iliad was written in the bronze age and was about small-scale, ritualized warfare among Greeks
The Aeneid was written a thousand years later when the Romans were near the height of their power.
>>783122
It was written after the Bronze Age ended. Homer thought Chariots were used as battle taxis when they were used as tanks.
>>783129
So you think crusty old academicists know how chariots were used better than Homeros?
illiad combat was was like this
>local kings ride into battle on chariots
>throw shit
>fight
>remount
>HUZZAH
source: john keegan
>>783154
The argument is that Homer never saw a chariot in his life and only heard about them because they were never used in battle in his time
>>783230
>Homer never saw a chariot in his life
What proof is there for that assertion? None. It's just one more of the virtually infinite spurious factoids by the crusty Academicists.
Even if it were true that Homeros never saw a chariot in his life, why is it impossible or improbable that he knew how they were used?
>>783154
was homer even one person?
socrates.jpg
>>783090
>this utter lack of reading comprehension
He's saying the Iliad is a fucking myth involving gods and demigods, and you shouldnt be worried about the battle tactics of plot armored folk heroes.
>>783330
>the Iliad is a fucking myth involving gods and demigods
And?
>you shouldnt be worried about the battle tactics of plot armored folk heroes.
Why not?
The Iliad is a fossilization of a centuries-old oral tradition emerging out of a low point in civilized culture in Greece, and the Aeneid is a piece of propagandistic fanfiction written by one dude so that Augustus senpai would notice him.
>>783342
Because chances are that the writers never held a sword in their hand.
>>783773
You do know that The Iliad is not fiction, right?
By your logic a documentary is bogus because the production crew are not skilled or apt in whatever that they are documenting.
>>783785
>You do know that The Iliad is not fiction, right?
Our redaction is ~800 years removed from the historical source material, at best the Iliad is like one of those shitty movies that says "based on a true story" but the only thing true about it is where it takes place and what the main character's name is.
>>783342
Why not question Beowulf's folk wrestling techniques when he rips off Grendel's arm then?
>>783877
>when he rips off Grendel's arm then?
That is entirely plausible.
>>783877
You tell me.
>>783244
>What proof is there for that assertion [that Homer never saw a chariot in his life]?
He literally never saw one. That nigga was blind.
Basically the Greeks had no idea how to fight a fucking pitched battle until Philip II came along and showed them. Then Alexander took over and kicked the shit out of the entire known world by improving on his father's tactics and generally being a fucking lunatic
>>783785
>You do know that The Iliad is not fiction, right?
you do know that that's exactly what it is?
>>784089
>being a fucking lunatic
How so?
>>783161
underrated post
>>784089
Please fuck off with the meme-tier history.
Also Iliad is 99% myth, any serious response to OP besides this is shitposting.
There is actually a decent scope for debate regarding representations of warfare in the Iliad.
Some people regard the descriptions as purely fanciful and not connected to real battles of the time, some decide (like Van Wees) that Homeric warfare is a fairly accurate account of early Greek warfare which did not involve well formed organised bodies of infantry, and some disagree and think that the Iliad DOES imply enough classical Phalanx traits to make that the most likely form of warfare in this time (such as Raflaub).
I wrote an essay on warfare in the Iliad in the 3rd year of my degree but I think the PDF's I downloaded from JSTOR are unable to be uploaded here, just pops up telling me I'm not allowed to upload it. So if anyone has any questions which might be answered in my essay or one of the PDF's I still have feel free to ask.
but basically to answer the OP the conclusion of my essay (which like most ancient history, especially on epic poetry is far from indisputable) was that the Greeks would approach battle in formations similar to phalanxes and in dense formations but that this would break down into smaller pockets of individual fighting loosely spread around, with soldiers moving forwards to fight and backwards to rest several times in one day of battle. This explains the sporadic nature of combat and the ability for heroes to wander around through empty space mid battle. One of the main reasons for this is how similar the descriptions and flow of the Iliad (oral epic poetry) match to descriptions of battles from people who still primarily use oral poetry for such things, such as Papua New Guinean tribesmen. These tribesmen fight very loosely, men walk forwards and throw spears at each other and do a little fighting sporadic whilst 75% of the men stand further back shouting encouragement and waiting for their 'turn' to replace those currently in the fight, which is very similar to the descriptions of combat in the Iliad.
>>783034
It's a story about heroes challenging other heroes, not about the infantry tactics of the 12th century BC.
>>784137
Not exactly.
We don't know for sure since turkey is a shithole and archaeologists there are not really trustworthy, but the troy war seems to have happened, even if obviously the Iliad is not historically accurate.
>>784229
More like 95%, i've actually been to Troy and seen the place. You can see exactly why people would have fought over the place.
>>784188
You know, the getting heavily drunk, killing his best friend, and leading the army into a huge desert stuff.
>>784369
Then that would make the Iliad historical fiction. A work based on a true story but with several key details changed is considered fiction, see: macbeth, Hamlet.
>>784433
Nope.
The Greeks believe it was what happened, on the whole anyway. This makes it a history fraught with problems, but not straight fiction. You can't really judge ancient literature by modern standards. Otherwise where do you draw the line, does Herodotos write fiction because of the hugely inflated numbers of Persians?
>>784369
>but the troy war seems to have happened
so did normandy landing. does that make "saving private ryan" any less fictive?
>>784445
>its the 24th century AD
>people have been passing down the story of DDay, and the saving of private Ryan, orally for 400 years. Everyone accepts it as true
>film is made about it
This would not be considered fiction really. Whether it is accurate or not, if people believe it is what happened than it isn't fiction.
>>784452
>Everyone accepts it as true
no they didn't
>>783050
Does this relate to the continuing breakdown of the bicamarel mind (Jaynes, 1976)?
>During the Bronze Age and before the invention of the phalanx, Greek fighting had been dominated by aristocratic warriors who reveled in individual duels with their adversaries, in a manner immortalized by Homer in The Iliad.
Wait, so were the Greeks that ransacked Troy Mycaenean or Minoan or Luwian?
>>784528
Except that overwhelmingly they did.
To them the age of heroes was a real thing that happened. Not some mumbo jumbo made up as an interesting story.
>>784188
By personally leading every battle and doing insane things for glory and eternal fame (which he achieved).
He was basically Achilles IRL except without the sulking and bratty behavior.
The first thing you have to take in mind when tackling Homer is that before it was ever written down it was passed down for hundreds of years as an oral tradition.
Basically it's the granddaddy of all songs. If you were lucky enough to be rich way back in the day, there wasn't that much entertainment-wise besides having someone who would sing songs about heroes, gods, and maybe a little history. It's likely that we don't even have all of the Iliad. We just have the best, most memorable part: The Menis (Wrathful Rage) of Achilles.
To the question of the thread, a lot of fighting in the Iliad is used to just set up chapter-long descriptions of armor or a side story to emphasize one of the many themes.
Now this is just my opinion, but I think the reason we don't have descriptions of Hoplite fighting is because it's not as fun or memorable as the aristeia (beast mode killing sprees).
The aristeia are like the first battle scene in 300 when Leonidas breaks rank and everything goes slowmo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8bIEk58LzI
Imagine that you're drunk, hanging out with a few buddies, eating a pizza, and you're looking for something to watch. Do you want to watch a documentary about battle formations or do you want to watch a decapitated head twirl through the air in slow motion and Gerard Butler smash a dude with his shield?
Now imagine there's no writing and everything is just passed down by word of mouth. What's going to be more popular and more likely to be remembered: the documentary or the popcorn action movie?
>>783034
Troop tactics weren't terribly advanced, and the Iliad was written more for dramatic storytelling than documentary objectivity.
Consider also that the Trojan War is estimated to have taken place in the 13th century BC, and Herodotus' writings six or seven centuries later talk about the first guy who got the idea to separate troops into melee, projectile and chariot divisions rather than one large mob.
>>784528
>>783034
>haphazard tactics in The Iliad where heroes just wander around aimlessly
scouting parties of the empire, op
>>783034
Champion combat.
Literally.
>>784052
this is some grade A prime roasted sophism right here.
kudos m8t
>>784584
>minoan Luwan
Are YouTube mentally retarded?
>>783869
>name and location
probably more than that.
>Hephastus the cripple serving drinks while DZouche and company laugh at him
Probably less than gods and men.
>>784433
It's too important to the cultural psyche of the ancient Greeks to be considered mere fiction.
>>784863
The transmission of the Iliad and Odyssey is an incredible story. Parry travelled around the Balkans studying Yugoslav oral poets transmitting stories of events from centuries past in exactly the same way as the Iliad, with certain key sentences, heroic epithets and mnenonic devices e.g. 'rosy fingered Dawn, 'light footed Achilles' etc.
For at least 400 years the Iliad and Odyssey were transmitted purely by bards singing in the courts of the Greek dark age chiefs until it was written down and crystallised in the form we have it today c.700 B.C.
>>783034
Maybe it's artistic convention, heroic combat and the fact that the guy who wrote/dictated it wrote it down a couple of centuries after the tactics and warfare of that day happend.
It's like trying to describe the battle of Cannae when all you have ever known are armored tanks, helicopters and machine guns.
>>790566
Oh by the way since we can now read those pesky linear scrips which where unknown to us until the late 19th century we actually have some idea of how Mycenaean warfare worked. Everything points to chariot archery like the pretty much every complex civilization at that point from Ancient Greece to the middle East to Northern India and China.
>>790253
>Are YouTube mentally retarded?
>>784311
Hell yeah, post your fucking PDF. Just upload it to some hosting like Mega.
