In his book “The Trojan War” the author Barry Strauss makes the case for the Trojan War really being motivated a personal vendetta, rather than a political one, and it is this aspect of the Trojan War history that he intends to defend as a new interpretation, just as his title suggests. With this curt and sweeping dismissal of the reader who might be skeptical of Homer, Strauss proceeds to build his case in defense of his explanation for the Trojan War by reinterpreting Homer’s account of the war. Telling story after story with the attention to detail that is characteristic of the first chapter, Strauss is utterly engaging, drawing the reader in and making history a living, active, dramatic scene, not a cut and dry recitation of dates, events, and places. The traditional historian seems absent entirely from his book.
Strauss does reach into the archive of history in an attempt to locate and insert facts that can support his speculative claims about the motives of the Trojan War in “The Trojan War”. He makes frequent references, for instance, to the discoveries of archaeologists. On numerous occasions, Strauss contends that “Archaeology confirms Homer’s description” (105). In one of these references, Strauss explains what he believes to be the significance of a “bronze disk…[e]ach side of [which] is incised with writing….” (Strauss 22). He describes the features of the bronze disk in detail, and then concludes, hastily, “In short, the seal testifies to a degree of freedom and equality for women” (Strauss 23). This is only one of many such examples in which the “evidence” that Strauss is so eager to accumulate is offered by the author but is not analyzed or explained to the satisfaction of the critical reader who wants a more convincing argument to establish the significance of the relationship between object and event. Such a reader may also expect, and rightfully so, evidence from other sources to support Homer’s—and Strauss’s—claims.
Although The Trojan War: A New History is a well-written and thoroughly enjoyable book, one must return to the question: Can Strauss’s book be considered a history? Strauss is clearly passionate about his subject and believes himself to be fair and objective, even while he recognizes that he is taking up a new argument and is using a source that many readers will consider unreliable. While his contention about the motives of the Trojan War may very well be feasible, he does not do a convincing job of establishing compelling and unassailable evidence that can support his claim. He dismisses potential criticism too easily and makes connections that support the idea he has developed without really taking a searching and critical evaluation of their relevance and reliability.
I liked The Trojan War: A New History, but confess that I remained suspicious of its claim to be a historical account of a past event even until the very last page. Although it is exciting—and even important—to propose new interpretations of old events, particularly as new knowledge and information come to light, it is important that our enthusiasm for our own argument not eclipse the responsibilities of rendering an account of history that is plausible and defensible. Strauss is an excellent and engaging writer, but I conclude that The Trojan War: A New History is not really a history at all, but an imaginative piece of well-written historical fiction.
Other essays and articles in the Main Archives related to this topic include : Father and Son Relationships in The Odyssey by Homer The Development of the Character Telemakhos in The Odyssey The Narrow Role of Women The Odyssey by Homer Food Imagery and Temptation in The Odyssey The Theme of Revenge in Medea and The Odyssey Character and Divine Influence in The Aeneid and Iliad Extended Critical Biography of Alexander the Great Education in the Roman Empire
Work Cited
Strauss, Barry. The Trojan War: A New History. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006.
