Rodney Castleden aims to present the real-life account of the Trojan War, looking at Homer’s semi-fictional epic, The Iliad, and other related works from antiquity such as The Odyssey, The Kypria, The Little Iliad, and utilising the discoveries of archaeology and contemporary factual documents from both the Hittite empire and Mycenaean kingdoms to draw out the real Trojan War.
Castleden has no hesitation about diverging from The Iliad where Homer’s account is demonstrably implausible, but even then can explain convincingly how these elements in Homer tally with the evidence – for example, obviously the doings of the gods in Homer’s work are no more than fantastical fiction, but almost certainly, the warriors on both sides of the conflict would have prayed to their gods, been encouraged to think that the gods were on their side when the battle was going well, or might have fallen into despair and believed that their gods had deserted them when the battle was going badly. The plot device of the Trojan Horse is, Castleden argues, merely a clever bit of storytelling incorporating themes of being brought down from within, but amazingly probably came from a grain of truth – the use of huge wooden siege engines wheeled up to the walls of Troy and used to knock down the highest levels, to enable Mycenaean warriors to bring up scaling ladders and breach the Trojan defences – contemporary battle accounts across the Mediterranean and ancient Near East do indeed show that such siege engines were in use. Castleden fleshes out even seemingly minor details such as the landing site for the Mycenaeans and their allies, examines the literature on the topic, and is able to argue persuasively that the interpretations he gives here are indeed the most plausible and credible ones. It is this kind of attention to detail that is I loved about this book – no stone is left unturned, and Castleden produces a comprehensive examination of what the real Trojan War may have been like, from the landings to the equipment to the battle manoeuvres and aftermath.
The book is well structured and begins by clearly and coherently explaining its purpose, before using real historical and archaeological evidence to set the scene and bring to life the world and circumstances in which both Mycenaeans and Trojans moved prior to the war – and thus illuminating the possible reasons for it. The climax leads up to the full examination of the war itself and the battles described in The Iliad, and Castleden prudently offers two possible interpretations of the extent to which The Iliad tallies with history – a minimalist view, conceding the least possible correlation between fact and fiction, and a maximalist view, in which as much of Homer’s account that can be potentially supported and is indeed plausible is taken as possible. Either version, whether you believe Castleden’s minimalist or maximalist scenario, contends credibly that there was indeed, in some sort of form, a Trojan War.
On top of that, despite the thoroughness and detailed manner in which the book treats the subject material, I still found the writing style clear and accessible, and this book could be read by the layperson just as easily as the academic. I would have liked a few more diagrams of battle manoeuvres, however, as the book only includes a few and sometimes Castleden’s postulations about battle movements don’t have an accompanying diagram, and it just would have set the battle actions more clearly in my mind. I’m guessing that this book will mainly be picked up by the layperson with an interest in finding out whether or not the Trojan War was a real event, and personally I enjoyed this non-fiction examination of just that question so much that I would definitely recommend this book. The research seemed good to me, but I must add a caveat that I feel I cannot comment on this definitively - the questions surrounding the existence of the Trojan War are so many, and the amount of literature on the subject extensive, so I feel certain that as good as Castleden's work is, there must be scholars out there who have argued equally convincingly against some of his arguments.
8 out of 10.