Perhaps it is overrated? There were no doubt royal contacts and influence on Greece from at least the Middle Kingdom. Or was this due to a later assimilation of royal history into Greek idenitity?
The founding of a dynasty by "Epaphos" several generations prior to the Fall of Troy probably is a memory of Apophis. Certainly there is an abundance of Greek pottery showing up in Egypt by the end of the Hyksos period. Classical Greek writers date events of the early "historical period" to so many years or generations before or after the Fall of Troy. So, scholars are following their lead in attributing importance to the event. However, in the present chronology there are "centuries of darkness" between the Fall of Troy and the rise of Classical Greek culture. That isn't actually the case, but you would think scholars would downplay Troy on account of the perceived separation between the Fall of Troy and the great city states of Sparta, Athens, etc.
What's your take?
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.