Customer Reviews

Gods, Heroes and Tyrants: Greek Chronology in Chaos

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

One of the odd things about archaeology and stratigraphy is that the archaeologists don't believe their eyes or the work they've done in the ground. True, these archaeologists are not experts on Aeolian layers and other ways to determine how much time has passed so they seem to feel poetic license need not be eschewed. They'd rather continue a false chronology then actually use scientific ethics/detachment to examine the evidence they find. Is this the reason why no archaeologist will allow a geologist trained in Aeolian layers any where near a site? In a manner of speaking, yes. For the problem is archaeologists and ancient historians have an emotional attachment to the 'long' chronology. Sadly, this is not new. Isaac Newton was reviled and vilified for showing a much shortened chronology using his knowledge of physics. This was in the 1600's (you might think the rocket scientists would show some support for Newton since they consider his cosmology god-like). So, it comes down to two separate ways in determining what the chronology of the ancient world actually looked like: 1) forensic science and 2) using the ancient authors as a guide. Charles Ginenthal has shown the chorology to be much shorter through forensic science. Emmet Sweeney in this book, 'Gods, Heroes and Tyrants: Greek Chronology in Chaos,' uses the ancient writers. Of course, it must be stressed that one cannot take everything ancient writers wrote as verbatim. This is where the trick and the joy of the research lie. Understanding when these ancient writers have erred a little or a lot or entirely is a core problem and certainly points toward the conclusion. Sweeney's arguments are incredibly strong and logical. He not only backs up his claims but debunks the claims of those who support the orthodox belief. His arguments pinpoint problems with depth and his analysis of them is succinct and relatively brief. This gives one time to reflect and keep from being bored. For those who have a difficult time with integrity or scientific ethics this book is probably not for you. Yet, if you can look at an argument with detachment - sans an emotional connection - than you should enjoy the book even if you don't necessarily agree the Sweeney's conclusions.