My background
This isn't something I'd usually include in my reviews, but since this is a nonfiction book, I thought I should.
I have a BA Hons in Classical Studies, Creative Writing, and Archaeology. I began my MA in Classical Studies, almost finished the taught section before the dissertation, but had to defer due to health reasons. My main areas of speciality are the Trojan War through the Homeric epics, and the formation of the first to the fall of the second triumvirates during the Late Republic into Early Imperial Rome.
I love the Trojan war.
The small details
The book constantly refers to the Iliad as being "written down in the 8th century BC" when we know that is not true. The epics were composed in the 8th century BCE, but were not written down until the 5th. I'm fully aware that this might seem like a petty thing to be annoyed at, but it is important; the Homeric epics were oral traditions, they were performed and not read.
There is endless debate about Homer as an author. The most accepted theory is that the epics were adjusted as they were performed by each bard, but it was not until the epics were written that the stories were set in stone (if you'll pardon the phrase). This book settles on the idea that Homer was one person, the epics unchanging, and Homer was a real historical person. None of that can be proven without doubt.
This book contains a summary of the Iliad but "with the supernatural elements stripped away to clarify the progress of the military action" which I believe is unnecessary. This goes on for ten pages. There is a ten page summary of an epic poem. There's no analysis, it is just description. Anyone with any academic experience knows that you are taught to never describe, never summarise events. This has a ten page summary that can easily be found online, but this seems to be aimed at an academic audience who would already be familiar with the Iliad. It's just unnecessary.
While discussing idols being loaned to other places, the author says "I doubt whether the British Museum will be lending the Greeks the Elgin Marbles, because of the strong suspicion that they would not be returned" and I have opinions about this. I'm not going to go into my rant about what I think should happen to the artefacts stolen by the British Museum, but my initial thought was quite simply "Good."
The book calls the Trojan horse a "fable" but there is evidence to argue against that. It absolutely could have existed. I'm going to suggest this documentary on it, but there are other sources available. When Castleden dismisses repeatedly the notion that the epics are pure fiction, or fictionalised history, I am genuinely surprised that the one piece of the story that has been proven to be potentially true is dismissed as "fable" when that's clearly not the case.
There are so few references in this. At university, we were taught that every claim you make must be backed up by evidence. Castleden makes countless claims without the evidence to prove them. Give me your references, show me where you found the evidence, let me read the sources myself as well. For primary sources, give me your translations, I want to read other translations of the same evidence. There should really be five times as many references as there actually are in this book. Likewise, for a book to be (re)published in 2020, the most recent source in the bibliography should not be from 2005; a fifteen year gap between the most recent source and publication is ridiculous, and needs to be changed. I'm aware that this was first published in 2006, but honestly, if a book is going to be republished it should be updated to reflect the changes that have happened since the first publication.
Overall
Putting aside my pet peeves, like the way the book constantly says that the Homeric epics were "written" in the 8th century BCE, I'd probably not recommend this book. Castleden makes grand claims without the evidence to back them up, and combined with ignoring the last decade and a half of scholarship, I cannot recommend this book for an academic audience. If you are a more casual reader of the Trojan war, I'd suggest Bettany Hughes' book Helen of Troy: Goddess, Princess, Whore instead.
Time it took to read: two hours including review
E