1

Troy: New Perspectives on Archaeology and Cultural Heritage in Turkey

Symposium at the Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam, 20-23 March 2013

Knock down the walls to let the horse come in: conflicting
imaginations, archaeology and reconstruction at Troy
Peter Jablonka

Introduction: a woman, a horse, and many stories

As an archaeological site Troy is inconspicuous and hard to understand, to say the least. It actually
resembles an abandoned stone quarry more than anything else, or did so at the onset of new
excavations 25 years ago.
The paradox about Troy archaeologists need to be aware of is that they are the only ones who
perceive it primarily as an archaeological site. For everybody else, both visitors to the site and the
general public around the world, it figures as the scene of the Trojan War. If there is anything iconic
about Troy, it is this archetypal story, a story about love and war, Us and the Other, Greeks and
Trojans. This story has been retold for millennia, in every conceivable genre and media from Greek
epic to computer game. And it has been used for many purposes, as teaching material in schools
from ancient Greece to modern higher education; as a means to construct identities and national
histories; as moral example; to support different ideologies, to boast tourism; or help to increase
Hollywoods income. If a text can be iconic, this one certainly is.
However, two iconic Trojan images immediately come to our minds, both emphasizing a connection
between site and legend: a woman and a horse. First, the portrait of Sophia ErgastromenosSchliemann dressed with Early Bronze Age jewellery found by her husband Heinrich in Early Bronze
Age layers and termed Priams Treasure. No doubt this is meant to be Helen of Troy, the face that
launched a thousand ships(Marlowe, 1981, Scene 13). And of course the horse keeps looming over
the site; millennia after the Greeks made the Trojans believe they had lifted the siege, so that they
would knock down their walls to bring the horse left as a gift by the enemy, and the warriors hiding
inside, into the city if this ever happened (Easton, 2010 for more on the Trojan horse).
These two images will always overshadow any supposedly real archaeology or history of Troy
because of what they stand for is overwhelming: the woman, love; the horse, violence; libido and
aggression driving forces, and, just as much, permanent threats to any society (Freud, 1930 [1962]).

Fig. 1

An iconic text: Manuscript of the Iliad, ca. 2.-3 century AD, Papyrus Berlin P. 7502
(http://smb.museum/berlpap/index.php/02241/).

Fig. 2 The face that launched a thousand ships

(Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus, Scene 13).
Sophia Schliemann-Ergastromenos posing as Helen of
Troy, wearing Early Bronze Age jewellery, found and
dubbed Priams Treasure by her husband Heinrich
Schliemann (Photograph by W. A. Mansell, 1 January
1877 (information from Gettyimages), this version
from (Schuchhardt, 1891)).

Fig. 3 Trojan Horses on the promenade in anakkale,

Turkey. Foreground: Small copy of the horse shown at
the archaeological site of Troy (like so many others
based on a painting by Henry Paul Motte (18461922). Background: Horse used in the film Troy (2004,
directed by Wolfgang Petersen) and given to the city
by Brad Pitt (Peter Jablonka).

Archaeological reconstruction: beyond architecture and staffage

For better or worse, archaeology and Greek epic tradition remain inseparably joined. After all, Troy is
not the only site that has been excavated to reveal the truth behind the legend (Muhly, 2010). A
similar example of a strong and intricate link between archaeology and an iconic text is perhaps the
archaeology of the land of the Bible. Nevertheless, present-day archaeologists at Troy try hard to
steer clear of any trouble caused by a war led for the most beautiful woman in the world. They do so
by invoking academic specialisation and pleading incompetent as far as the legendary part of the
story goes. Of course this attempt has not always been successful. One cannot escape fate one of
the lessons taught by the Iliad and the Odyssey.
But let us take the claim that archaeology is a scholarly and scientific endeavour disconnected from
other aspects of the site of Troy at face value, and look at this rather different, very sober story, the
archaeologists own narrative. By definition, archaeology studies past human behaviour with the help
of material traces it has left. It has long been recognized by archaeological theory that this material
record of human behaviour is fragmentary, or filtered: Not all human behaviour will leave a
material record behind; much of what was left behind has been destroyed; only a fraction of what
remains can be excavated or studied by other methods; only part of what is studied will be
documented; and not all that has been documented will be published. Therefore, while not all
reconstructions are archaeological, obviously, all archaeology is, to a certain extent, reconstruction.
Nevertheless, acceptance of reconstructions in general, and digital 3D-visualisations in particular, in
archaeology is poor. Dotted lines bridging gaps on plans is usually as far as it goes. There are several
reasons for this.
In the archaeological discourse reconstruction has taken on a variety of meanings, in between a
mere visualisation of architecture with some added furniture,landscaping and staffage figures, and

3
the theoretically much more difficult ultimate goal of archaeology: reconstruction of ancient
societies as a whole.
For example, in pottery studies, fragments / sherds are frequently assigned to shapes of whole
vessels, which can be done by classification, involving reconstruction of the fragment just in the mind
of the expert, reconstructed drawing by hand or computer, or reconstruction by conservation and
restoration of the actual object. In studies of the environment, evidence like cores from drilling holes
or plant and animal remains is used to reconstruct palaeolandscapes and past land use. At the next
level, such reconstructions are in turn used for interpretations of the archaeological record and
reconstruct past society in terms of agricultural and economic system, carrying capacity of the land,
and demography. To test hypotheses, past behaviour or society can also be modelled or
reconstructed by means of a simulation, which is more likely a set of mathematical equations than
a visualisation. The most famous application of this methods is the expansion of the Neolithic into
Europe (cf. Bocquet-Appel, Naji, Vander Linden, & Kozlowski, 2012). Technically, computer
applications from Geographic Information Systems to Agent-based-modelling can be involved.
Only in a much more narrow sense, the term reconstruction is used for visualisations of the
restored appearance of a site, or part of it. This has always been part of archaeological methodology
with classical buildings where complete reconstructions from a few remaining stones are possible
because of standardized styles (Anastylosis). The reconstruction is often done by architects
working with archaeologists (an example from Troy: Riorden, 2007). Often the division of labour
remains unclear. There is a tendency to assign all tasks concerned with graphics, illustration, anything
visual, including reconstruction, or even museum exhibits to artists, designers, recently 3D-modelling
experts. If the artist gets it wrong, archaeologists cannot be blamed. A clear policy clarifying who is
responsible for which part of the work should be called for.
Architects usually go one step further and use the process of reconstruction as a research tool,
including properties like volume, area, amount of materials and labour needed,or static properties of
materials. The Early Bronze Age citadel and a palisade of Troy II have been analysed in this way
(Hueber, 2004; Schirmer, 1971). The aim is usually a definite solution; functionally possible
alternative reconstructions, for example gabled roofs for the Troy II Megaron buildings (Smith, 1942)
are rarely discussed. It is also established practice now to rebuild parts of a site in reality, on-site or
off-site, as a method of experimental archaeology. This has been done with a stretch of the city walls
at Hattusa, the Hittite capital (Seeher, 2007). The purpose was both to gain a deeper insight into
Hittite architecture, and to present the result to visitors.
Several reconstructions of the main periods of Troy have been done by artists: Lloyd K. Townsend
(Siebler, 1994, end-paper), Peter Conolly (Connolly, 1986), and Christoph Hauner (Archologisches
Landesmuseum Baden-Wrttemberg et al., 2001, Figs. 26, 66, 372, 377, 388, 464-465; Hauner &
Raidt, 2000). The artists sought advice from archaeologists to include the latest research, but
sometimes show scenes from the Iliad set against an archaeologically correct Late Bronze Age
background, thus placing the epic within a material reality. Compared to these lively artists
reconstructions, 3D-computer models (Brandau, Schickert, & Jablonka, 2004a, 2004b, 2004c;
Jablonka, 2002, 2004; Kirchner & Jablonka, 2001) done in a collaboration of archaeologists with an IT
company look rather sober, if not cold. Detail had to be omitted because the system designed for an
exhibition should facilitate real-time movement. For exhibitions, wooden reconstruction models have
also been built (Archologisches Landesmuseum Baden-Wrttemberg et al., 2001, figs. 77, 349).

Fig. 4 Architectural reconstructions of the citadel of Troy to and Megaron type buildings (top left: Drpfeld,
1902; right: Schirmer, 1971; bottom left: Smith, 1942).

Fig. 5 Artists' reconstructions of Troy VI (top left: Lloyd K. Townsend; bottom left: Christoph Hauner; right:
Peter Conolly). Note settlement outside citadel on Hauner's reconstruction; and Peter Conolly's archaeology
with and without added scene from the Ilias.

5
In all reconstructions, details of the citadel walls of Late Bronze Age Troy resemble the Hittite city
walls of Hattusa because both are based on the same Hittite terracotta model of a wall and tower
(Seeher, 2007). Reconstructed buildings inside the citadel sometimes invoke images of Arthur Evans
reconstructions of Knossos. Besides, new attempts at reconstructions also rely heavily on earlier
examples. New reconstructions of Troy VI leave the centre largely as it was, but add the newly
discovered settlement around the citadel. The main difference is not the technique or technology
used to do a reconstruction it is content.
It has been criticised that archaeological reconstructions are often, and to a large extent,
hypothetical. In the case of Troy this criticism targeted areas outside the Bronze Age citadel, of which
only a small fraction has been excavated. But, because the archaeological record will always be
fragmentary and incomplete, we can never be sure about any interpretation or reconstruction. On
the other hand, one can be perfectly sure that even an ill-preserved, partially excavated settlement
was definitely not a largely empty space dotted with a few ruined buildings. Therefore one can and
should boldly go on and present complete reconstructions, as long as the difference between extant
remains and hypotheses is made clear. We will never know for sure how the past looked like, but we
can always suggest how it possibly could have. By being overtly timid, and regretting that we still
dont know enough after decades or even centuries of research, archaeology runs the danger of
making itself redundant. Clearly, documentation should clarify where the work incorporates
arguments based on actual evidence, plausibility (static properties, function, ...), or analogy (better
preserved evidence elsewhere, pictorial or textual sources, ethnographic or historic examples, earlier
reconstructions ...), and hypothetical elements.

Fig. 6 Computer reconstructions of Troy VI. Top left: free reconstruction, complete; bottom left: only buildings
with complete ground plan known from excavations reconstructed; right: defensive ditch and gate, excavated
rock cuttings and schematic reconstruction; images provided by the author).

These considerations apply to all kinds of reconstructions, regardless if they are done as a drawing,
computer model, scaled-down or original size replica. However, 3-D computer representations are
certainly the most versatile method. They can be used for a large number of applications in research

6
and presentation. Products for different audiences, purposes and media can be derived using the
same data.
In any case, reconstructions are very powerful visual statements. In everyday life, we encounter
similar visualisations of things that might or might not actually exist in different contexts. Scientific
visualisations are expected to be true images of real, but hidden objects, based on actual data, for
example CT or MRI scans of the inner organs of the body (Hence the misleading title "how it really
looked like" given by the publisher to Brandau et al., 2004c). In architecture or product design,
objects are shown before they are built or produced, as they are supposed to look like in the future.
On the other hand, in films or computer games animations are meant to create the illusion that these
products of fantasy are real. The medium conveys conflicting messages: we know that visualisations
can be either representations of some aspect of reality, or delusions. 1 This may partly explain the
emotional and fierce criticism reconstructions can provoke, especially digital, or virtual
reconstruction. Computer images using photo-realistic lighting and texture are perceived as objects
with strong materiality, negatively, as deception, an illusion of a reality that never existed. No
wonder many archaeologists are reluctant to make such statements. However, in an age of visual
communication one should rather learn to master visualisation techniques than avoiding them.
Within archaeology, reconstructions assume a double role depending on the audience. For
archaeologists, they can serve as a tool or aid in research and interpretation. In presentations for the
wider public, reconstructions have much in common with a visit to the actual site but enhanced
with an element of virtual time-space travel. Still, a reconstruction on its own remains purely
descriptive and self-referential, like a journey to a foreign country without any experiences apart
from sightseeing. To create a lasting impression, a much richer narrative must be added. In the case
of Troy this is how the legends come back into the play. When visitors encounter the Trojan horse at
the entrance to the site, archaeology is reduced to a mere background for a much more interesting
story, inevitably presenting the Trojan War as real as the archaeology.

History as reconstructed past: simply to show how it "really" was

Of course the archaeology of a particular site is always just a material correlate of society and its
history. History itself is a reconstruction combining different narratives taken from ancient sources as
well as modern academic conventions at a spot where they supposedly overlap in time and space.
Just like in archaeology, simply to show how it really was in a positivistic fashion is impossible (Carr,
1961 against von Ranke's "wie es eigentlich gewesen ist"). This can explain why Homer and the Trojan
War paradoxically still figure in all accounts of Greek or Anatolian history, even if the authors strongly
reject that the Greek epic tradition has any value as a historical source.
The ancient Greeks did not make a clear distinction between myth and history. But while maintaining
that the Trojan War did actually happen in their distant past, they were well aware that the stories
told about it needed critical reading. In the introduction to his history of the Peloponnesian War,
Thucydides gives an account of Greek prehistory, or archaeology(Thucydides, 1.1-1.19). The Trojan
War is stripped of all mythological and legendary elements, there is no interference of the gods, the
abduction (rape) of Helen is not considered as a possible cause of war, and the events are reduced
to an example of Realpolitik, a game of power and economy. Thucydides even uses archaeology in
the modern sense material evidence to support his argument.
Modern attempts to reconstruct early Greek and Anatolian history by combining archaeology,
ancient textual sources, and the epic tradition in one narrative still resemble Thucydides approach.
According to one scenario, which has been both acclaimed and criticised (Latacz, 2004; Starke, 1997),
Troy was the capital of the Hittite vassal state Wilusa. Conflicts between this kingdom and
Mycenaean groups during the period of unrest at the end of the second millennium BC are not

Aptly, a market-leading 3D-visualisation software is named Maya. In Indian philosophy Maya stands for
the concept that the outside world created by our sensory perception is mere illusion.

7
unlikely. A faint remembrance of such conflicts could have formed the core of the story of the Trojan
War. Narratives like this can be viewed as textual reconstructions of fragmentary sources.
Another type of narrative combining different lines of evidence may be termed
Geoarchaeomythology: Places and events from the epic are put on archaeological site plans
(Drpfeld, 1902, pp. 601-632), and on maps of the ancient or even modern topography. This line of
argument goes back to Hestiaia of Alexandria Troas, who rejected claims by the inhabitants of
Hellenistic Ilion that their city was also Homers Troy (Strabo, 13.1.36). Remarkably scientific, she
argued that the plain of the Scamander consisted of recent alluvium. During the time of the Trojan
War the area had still been flooded a bay of the Aegean leaving no room for a battlefield.
Nevertheless, since antiquity many locations from the epic, including the grave mounds of the
heroes, have been pinned down on the landscape (Luce, 1998). Contradicting Hestiaia, geologists
have placed the Greek camp and other places from the Iliad on palaeogeographic maps of the area
during the Late Bronze Age (Kraft, Rapp, Kayan, & Luce, 2003). Even more, both Platos Atlantis and
Homers Trojan War have been put on the same palaeographic map, and projects have been
suggested to find scientific proof for this daring hypothesis (Zangger, 1992). Troy has even been
located in regions anywhere from Cambridge (England) (Wilkens, 2012) to Cilicia (southeast Turkey)
(Schrott, 2008). By eclectic or selective use of evidence and sources it is possible to construct a
convincing-looking "scientific proof" for almost anything. It can therefore be very difficult to refute
too far-reaching claims.
On the other hand, the fact that there are roadside signposts giving directions does not provide
definite proof that any particular phase of the archaeological site of Hisarlk actually is Homeric
Troy. Heinrich Schliemann may well have found nothing underneath the ruins of Hellenistic and
Roman Ilion. But since his days, the remains of a large and strongly fortified settlement have been
unearthed. This means that the case remains open. We still have to consider if and how the events
told in the Iliad mirror history. The answer strongly depends on an interpretation of Greek epic
traditions. Unambiguous evidence of events that took place on the stage that archaeology can
provide is still lacking.
Archaeology and history of Troy are therefore facing the same dilemma. To tell the story without any
reference to the Iliad seems impossible. However, as soon as the legends are discussed, they assume
a status similar to other sources. In the design of an educational website, it has been attempted to
keep different threads archaeological evidence, reconstructions, historical background, legends
separate (http://www.cerhas.uc.edu/troy/ ; Riorden, 2005). Perhaps such distinctions will be blurred
once again in the experience of readers/users.

Reconstructions of a myth: art as transmedia storytelling

The diversion of elements of a story across multiple delivery channels (websites, movies, books,
games, even theme parks) has been termed transmedia storytelling (Jenkins, 2006, pp. 99-130).
But this is exactly how the legends of Troy have been told and retold for millennia, in every
conceivable media: epic, theatre play, opera, painting, sculpture, novel, movie, computer game,
comic (Latacz, Greub, Blome, & Wieczorek, 2008). This clearly shows that the media or technologies
used are not of primary importance a good story can be carried across all genres. Since the Iliad
focuses on just a few weeks of a ten years war, the greater part of the story has to be reconstructed
from other sources. There never was a single, complete, authoritative, and canonical version of
Trojan legends. Beginning with the Hellenistic period or earlier, during Peisistratos reign in Athens, a
canonical version of Homers Iliad and Odyssey (but not of the epic circle) developed. This of course
never included all the other parts of the story not covered by these two epics, the countless variants,
and the usage made of the legends to serve many purposes. The archaeology of Troy, including
reconstructions of the site, is only one more , rather recent, and certainly not the most important
aspect of what constitutes, as a whole, the most successful story of all times.
In visual media, from Greek vase painting to Renaissance art, the story is usually set in a period
context with some added heroic or fantastic elements. In medieval manuscript illustrations of the

8
Trojan legends, for instance, we will see knights in their typical armour fighting in front of a walled
town of their own time. Only later this will change into an antiquarian past. For the Achilleion, the
Habsburg Empress Elisabeths mansion on the island of Korfu, Franz Matsch (1861-1942) painted
Achilles triumphant. In this painting, weapons are apparently taken from the Greek Archaic period,
whereas Achilles chariot is based on models from Pharaonic Egypt. The architecture of Troy in the
background seems to be influenced by Schliemanns excavations in Troy and Mycenae. The Minoan
column from the relief at the Lion Gate at Mycenae is used for palace entrances, but at the citadel
gate column and lions are replaced by a swastika. In the latest movie versions of the legends, Troy
still has Late Bronze Age, Minoan-Mycenaean architectural elements. For his graphic novel Age of
Troy (Shanower, 2001-2009), the author even visited the excavations at Troy and did extensive
research to create a realistic setting.
Thus another strong, suggestive link has been established between Late Bronze Age archaeology and
modern versions of the Trojan legends spread by popular culture. Once again, it will be difficult, if not
impossible, to separate fact and fiction.

Fig. 7 Top: A view of Troy from the graphic novel Age of Bronze (Eric Shanower); bottom: Franz Matsch, Achilles
triumphant, mural in the Achilleion, Korfu
(http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_"Triumph_of_Achilles"_fresco,_in_Corfu_Achilleion.jpg).

Lethal reconstructions: Trojan identity building and re-enactment of the

epic
From ancient Greece to modern higher education, Homer and the Trojan War have been a subject of
higher education. However, if we read the Iliad today, what strikes us most are its graphic
descriptions of extreme violence, men against men, women, even children. The heroes follow a
moral code of conduct that reminds us more of Genghis Khan ethics than of noble chivalry: "The
greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their

9
wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their
wives and daughters." 2
Yet values like these had to be conveyed to elite young males (all others were oppressed rather
than educated) as long as their leaders would send them to war. Only recently what used to be
accepted behaviour has turned into a social problem when we are facing gangs of violent young men
in our streets. One way to act out such violent drives, not limited by any repressive constraints
society imposes, and still without harming others in real life, seem to be interactive computer games.
Of course opinions are divided if it is healthy to escape from reality to live the life of an aggressor in
cyberspace, but the fact that such games are popular shows that they supply a need: ... as Lacan put
it, the truth has the structure of a fiction: what appears in the guise of dreaming, or even
daydreaming, is sometimes the truth on whose repression social reality itself is founded (iek,
2006). Perhaps not surprisingly, Warriors Legends of Troy (http://www.troy-game.com/) is a
typical example. To make it look authentic, the game designers researched the archaeology of the
Late Bronze Age and included features from the Aegean landscape around Troy (IGN Staff, 2009).
Encouraging individual identification with heroic values is one way to exploit the epic tradition
politically. The other way is fostering group coherence by identification with one side in the war,
Greeks or Trojans. The epic tradition with its stories about a fight for a common cause, its
connection of gods, heroes and men, its maze of genealogies linking real with mythological places,
persons , and events, formed the core of ancient Greek ethnogenesis. One can have doubts whether
a common Greek identity would have developed without Homer, just as a Jewish identity could
hardly be maintained without the Old Testament (Assmann, 1999, pp. 272-280).
Identification with the other side, the Trojans, started with the first Roman Emperor Augustus, who
traced the mythical ancestry of his family, the gens Julia, back to Julus (Ascanius), who had fled to
Italy from Troy with his father Aeneas. Following the Roman example, many later gentes like the
Franks, and aristocratic families, assumed Trojan lineages.
Renaissance scholars noted that the Ottoman Empire had formed in Bithynia, in the vicinity of the
Troy. They also claimed that Teucri (Trojans) and Turci (Turks) were the same name. Maybe the Turks
had even conquered Constantinople and Greece to take revenge for the Trojan War (Meserve, 2008,
pp. 22-64). This identification is maintained by Turks to the present day as an integral part of
republican Turkish Anatolism (Kranz, 1998), but also imposed on them by others, especially in times
of war. During the battle of Gallipoli (1916) allied forces, well aware that they fought close to Troy,
styled themselves as Greeks: Stand in the trench, Achilles, / Flame-capped, and shout for me
(Patrick H. Shaw-Stewart; quoted after Wood, 2005, pp. 44-45). It was especially important to create
at least an illusion of a heroic past for the many ANZAC soldiers from Australia and New Zealand,
countries devoid of any history of their own to be proud of (Midford, 2010). 3 And towards the end of
the Turkish War of Independence, Mustafa Kemal Atatrk supposedly said after the decisive victory
at Dumlupnar (1922): Hector, I have avenged you (according to Sabahattin Eybolu: Aslan &
Atabay, 2012, p. 159).
Today, more peaceful ways of re-enacting the epic prevail in Turkey. Mustafa Erdoans dance show
musical Troy an Anatolian Legend / Fire of Anatolia does not hesitate to make Homers epic part
of Anatolian folklore (cf. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/troy-opens-season-with-fire-ofanatolia.aspx?pageID=238&nID=46481&NewsCatID=384). On the slope of Mount Ida (Kaz Da), the
judgement of Paris takes place every year as a beauty contest (cf. http://www.canakkaleili.com/idaguzellik-yarismasi.html). And after a history of wars, the city of Canakkale at the Dardanelles has
become a self-proclaimed city of peace (cf. http://www.canakkale.bel.tr/bp.asp?caid=273).
2

Arnold Schwarzenegger says something similar in the movie Conan the Barbarian (1982). However, the
famous quote, often cited without source, ultimately goes back to Abraham dOhssons translation of a passage
from Rashid-al-Din Hamadanis (12471318) Jami' al-tawarikh (d'Ohsson 1852, p. 104).
3
It might have been a coincidence that one British battleship at Gallipoli was named Hector, for, from the
17th century to World War II, at least 11 ships of the Royal navy bore this name (internet search).

10
When it comes to educational and political uses of the legends of Troy, it is no longer the question if
epic tales are based on actual historical events. Fact and fiction seem reversed. Real life is
reconstructed according to a moral code of conduct, identities, even re-enactment of events taken
from the Iliad. And if epic wars and cruelty form a threat to society, they can be acted out in role-play
or virtual life.

Fig. 8 Reconstruction of the epic in real life: Re-enactment of the Judgement of Paris at Ayazma, on the slopes of
Kaz Da (Mount Ida), 2003 (http://www.canakkaleili.com/ida-guzellik-yarismasi.html).

Conclusion: reconstructions embedded into narratives

While Troy is certainly an extreme case, it can serve to highlight what is less obvious elsewhere, and
easily forgotten in our age dominated by visual media: One needs to illustrate something. And this
will always remain a story. Every painting has at least a title; and even movies or computer games are
still based on texts, screenplay scenarios, a storyline. Any reconstruction has to be part of a narrative.
To be successful, archaeological reconstructions must be embedded into the archaeologists own
narrative of methods and practices. This will include presentation only at the very end of the story, as
an illustration of the interpretation of a site. Before that, reconstructions in a more general meaning
are part of the research process, and will be accepted if they can serve as a useful tool to aid this
process.
Cultural heritage in general, and an archaeological site in particular is auratic (Benjamin, 1939
[1972]): unique, authentic, remote. These properties make cultural heritage a valuable resource
several competitors will want to exploit (archaeology, other academic fields, tourism, entertainment,
politics). Under the conditions of developed capitalism narratives serve to make otherwise
interchangeable products unique what sells is the aura (brand), not the product. All interested
parties will therefore compete to profit from the aura of a site by attaching their own narratives to it.
They will all make use of reconstructions of events to claim that their own narrative is the one and
only true story: there is no longer one grand narrative, only competing small narratives (Lyotard,
1984). In the presentation and interpretation of an archaeological site, archaeological
reconstructions will have to compete with other narratives.

11
If this is neglected and archaeological reconstructions are created out of any narrative context, as
real or virtual objects or visualisations, the models will end up collecting dust in a dark corner, or they
will be used by others to support their own narratives. It will only be possible to keep them alive and
convey a message through them by embedding them in a story, using techniques like unique
characters and a storyline ("digital storytelling"). This can be as simple as an archaeologist telling
about his work and interpreting the site. It can also be based on events or characters taken from
history, or even fantasy.
By far the strongest narrative attached to Troy is the Iliad not archaeology. Any attempts to
reconstruct the story of the site without it will fail, no matter if the Trojan War ever was an event of
actual history or not. The horse and the woman will always come back. This is because the story is
both archetypical and unique. While there are perhaps no more than three basic plots (Foster-Harris,
1960), it is the quality of a particular realisation that counts, and an established link of characters
with well-known names to a specific location in space and time.

Bibliography
Archologisches Landesmuseum Baden-Wrttemberg, Troia-Projekt des Instituts fr Ur- und
Frhgeschichte und Archologie des Mittelalters der Eberhard Karls Universitt Tbingen,
Braunschweigisches Landesmuseum Braunschweig, Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum
Kunstmuseum des Landes Niedersachsen Braunschweig, Kunst- und Ausstellungshalle der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland GmbH Bonn, & Generaldirektion der Denkmler und Museen
des Kulturministeriums der Republik Trkei (Eds.). (2001). Troia - Traum und Wirklichkeit.
Begleitband zur Ausstellung (1 ed.). Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.
Aslan, Rstem, & Atabay, Mithat. (2012). Atatrk in Troy. In Jorrit Kelder, Gnay Uslu & mer Faruk
erifolu (Eds.), Troy. City, Homer, Turkey (pp. 155-159). Amsterdam: W Books.
Assmann, Jan. (1999). Das kulturelle Gedchtnis (2 ed.). Mnchen: C. H. Beck.
Benjamin, Walter. (1939 [1972]). Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit
Gesammelte Schriften (Vol. 1, pp. 471-508). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Bocquet-Appel, Jean-Pierre, Naji, Stephan, Vander Linden, Marc, & Kozlowski, Janusz. (2012).
Understanding the rates of expansion of the farming system in Europe. Journal of
Archaeological Science, 39(2), 531-546. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2011.10.010
Brandau, Brigitte, Schickert, Hartmut, & Jablonka, Peter. (2004a). La misteriosa storia di Troia. Rom:
Newton & Compton.
Brandau, Brigitte, Schickert, Hartmut, & Jablonka, Peter. (2004b). Resimlerle Troya. Ankara: Arkada.
Brandau, Brigitte, Schickert, Hartmut, & Jablonka, Peter. (2004c). Troia wie es wirklich aussah.
Mnchen: Piper.
Carr, Edward Hallett. (1961). What is history? The George Macaulay Trevelyan lectures delivered at
the University of Cambridge January-March 1961. London: Macmillan.
Connolly, Peter. (1986). The Legends of Odysseus. Oxford - New York: Oxford University Press.
d'Ohsson , Abraham Constantin Mouradgea. (1852). Histoire des Mongols, depuis Tchinguiz-Khan
jusqu' Timour Bey ou Tamerlan (Vol. 1). Amsterdam: Frederik Muller.
Drpfeld, Wilhelm. (1902). Troia und Ilion. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in den vorhistorischen und
historischen Schichten von Ilion 1870-1894 (Vol. 1-2). Athen (Osnabrck): Beck & Barth (Otto
Zeller).
Easton, Donald F. (2010). The wooden horse: some possible Bronze Age origins. In Itamar Singer
(Ed.), Ipamati Kistamati Pari Tumatimis. Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David
Hawkins, on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday (pp. 50-63). Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.
Foster-Harris, William. (1960). The Basic Formulas of Fiction. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma
Press.
Freud, Sigmund. (1930 [1962]). Civilization and its discontents (James Strachey, Trans.). New York:
Norton.
Hauner, Christoph, & Raidt, Matthias. (2000). Rya und der Traum von Troia. Hamm: Roseni.

12
Hueber, Friedmund. (2004). Eine bronzezeitliche Stadtmauer von Troia (Rekonstruktionsversuch
einer zinnenbekrnten Palisade mit Schwergewichtsmauer). In Taner Korkut (Ed.),
Anadolu'da Dodu. 60. Yanda Fahri Ik'a Armaan (Festschrift fr Fahri Ik zum 60.
Geburtstag) (pp. 359-368). Istanbul: Ege Yaynlar.
IGN Staff. (2009). Warriors: Legends of Troy Developer Interview. The Trojans and Greeks clash in a
battle that will shake the earth. IGN. http://uk.ign.com/articles/2009/09/29/warriorslegends-of-troy-developer-interview
Jablonka, Peter. (2002). TroiaVR: Ein Virtual Reality-Modell von Troia und der Troas. In Gesellschaft
Wiener Stadtarchologie (Ed.), Workshop 6 Archologie und Computer. Wien.
Jablonka, Peter. (2004). Reconstructing sites and archives: information and presentation systems at
Troy. In Magistrat der Stadt Wien - Referat Kulturelles Erbe - Stadtarchologie Wien (Ed.),
Enter the Past. The E-way into the Four Dimensions of Cultural Heritage. Proceedings of the
31st CAA (Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology) conference,
Vienna, Austria, April 2003. (pp. 281-285). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Jenkins, Henry. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York
University Press.
Kirchner, Steffen, & Jablonka, Peter. (2001). Virtual archaeology: VR based knowledge management
and -marketing in archaeology. First results - nexts steps. In David Arnold, Alan Chalmers &
Dieter Fellner (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Virtual reality, archeology, and
cultural heritage, Glyfada, Greece (pp. 235-240). New York: ACM Press.
Kraft, John C., Rapp, George, Kayan, lhan, & Luce, John V. (2003). Harbor areas at ancient Troy:
Sedimentology and geomorphology complement Homer's Iliad. Geology, 31/2, 163-166.
Kranz, Barbara. (1998). Das Antikenbild der modernen Trkei. Wrzburg.
Latacz, Joachim. (2004). Troy and Homer. Towards a Solution of an Old Mystery. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Latacz, Joachim, Greub, Thierry, Blome, Peter, & Wieczorek, Alfried (Eds.). (2008). Homer. Der
Mythos von Troia in Dichtung und Kunst. Katalog Ausstellung Antikenmuseum Basel, Art
Centre Basel und Reiss-Engelhorn-Museen Mannheim. Mnchen: Hirmer.
Luce, John V. (1998). Celebrating Homer's Landscapes: Troy and Ithaca Revisited. New Haven -London: Yale University Press.
Lyotard, Jean-Franois. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Joff Bennington &
Brian Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Marlowe, Christopher. (1981). Doctor Faustus. In Fredson Thayer Bowers (Ed.), The Complete Works
of Christopher Marlowe (2 ed., Vol. 2, pp. 121-272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meserve, Margaret. (2008). Empires of Islam in Renaissance Historical Thought. Harvard: Harvard
University Press.
Midford, Sarah. (2010). From Achilles to Anzac: Heroism in the Dardanelles from antiquity to the
Great War. Australasian Society for Classical Studies Proceedings, (31).
classics.uwa.edu.au/ascs31
Muhly, James D. (2010). History of Research. In Eric H. Cline (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze
Age Aegean (ca. 3000-1000 BC) (pp. 3-10). New York: Oxford University Press.
Riorden, Elizabeth. (2005). Troy on the internet. Anthropology News, 46(5), 24.
Riorden, Elizabeth. (2007). The Odeion of Ilion: a Proposed Reconstruction and Some Implications.
Studia Troica, 17, 47-55.
Schirmer, Wulf. (1971). berlegungen zu einigen Baufragen der Schichten I und II in Troja. Istanbuler
Mitteilungen, 21, 1-43.
Schrott, Raoul. (2008). Homers Heimat. Der Kampf um Troia und seine realen Hintergrnde.
Mnchen: Hanser.
Schuchhardt, Carl. (1891). Schliemanns Ausgrabungen in Troja, Tiryns, Myken, Orchomenos, Ithaka
im Lichte der heutigen Wissenschaft (2 ed.). Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.
Seeher, Jrgen. (2007). Hattusa Kerpic Kent Suru. Bir Rekonstrksiyon almas / A Mudbrick City
Wall at Hattusa. Diary of a Reconstruction / Die Lehmziegel-Stadtmauer von Hattusa. Bericht
ber eine Rekonstruktion. Istanbul: Ege Yaynlar.

13
Shanower, Eric. (2001-2009). Age of Bronze San Diego, CA: Hungry Tiger Press.
Siebler, Michael. (1994). Troia. Geschichte -- Grabungen -- Kontroversen. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
Smith, E. Baldwin. (1942). The megaron and its roof. American Journal of Archaeology, 46, 99-118.
Starke, Frank. (1997). Troia im Kontext des historisch-politischen Umfeldes Kleinasiens im 2.
Jahrtausend. Studia Troica, 7, 447-488.
Strabo. Geography Perseus Digital Library: Tufts University.
Thucydides. The Peloponnesian War Perseus Digital Library: Tufts University.
Wilkens, Iman Jacob. (2012). Where Troy once Stood (2 ed.). Amsterdam: Gopher.
Wood, Michael. (2005). In Search of the Trojan War. London: BBC Books.
Zangger, Eberhard. (1992). The Flood from Heaven Deciphering the Atlantis Legend. London:
Sidgwick & Jackson.
iek, Slavoj. (2006). Freud lives!: dreaming. London Review of Books, 28(10), 32.