Oliver D. Smith
Alternative location hypotheses of Troy In the 19th century there were four location hypotheses of the ancient city Troy and its citadel Ilios proposed by archaeologists: Hisarlik, Pinarbaşi (Bunarbashi), Akça Köy (often identified as Ilion Kome, the “village of the Illians”) and Alexandria Troas (Chiblak). All these sites are in north-western Turkey. In the 1870s, Heinreich Schliemann carried out excavations at Hisarlik and identified Troy with one of its archaeological layers. Schliemann, however, was not the first to identify Hisarlik with Troy (Charles Maclaren in his Dissertation on the Topography of the Plain of Troy made the same identification in 1822). By the end of the 19th century, most archaeologists were convinced Hisarlik (a 200 x 150m mound and lower plateau) is the site of Troy described in Homer’s Iliad (c. 700 BCE), although archaeologists tend to now identify a younger archaeological layer than what Schliemann had equated with Troy. The Troy-Hisarlik identification benefitted from Akça Köy and Alexandria Troas being falsified as Troy, leaving only Pinarbaşi as a rival location hypothesis. Pinarbaşi lacked the impressive archaeological finds at Hisarlik; archaeologists mostly agreed by the 1880s it was an improbable location for Troy (the foremost supporter of the Pinarbaşi-Troy hypothesis Richard C. Jebb died in 1905).
Carl Blegen who continued Schliemann’s excavations at Hisarlik claimed in 1971 “There is no alternative”site for Troy (although no consensus emerged on the historicity of the Trojan War which to this day is disputed by scholars). Blegen’s claim is only true if the remains of Troy are sought in north-east Turkey because no other archaeological site in this region comes close to matching Homer’s description of Troy as a fortified mound. However, on the nearby island Imbros (Gökçeada), there is an ancient mound with traces of a surrounding wall (Yenibademli Höyük); the author of this article recently published a peer-reviewed paper in Athens Journal of History identifying Troy with Yenibademli Höyük. The Imbros-Troy hypothesis is only one of about a dozen proposed alternative locations for Troy (see table below). The identification of Troy with Cambridgeshire, England dates to back to an eccentric publication by a Belgian lawyer named Theophile Cailleux in 1878. However, the Cambridgeshire-Troy hypothesis was popularised by Ernst Gideon and Iman Wilkens in the second half of the twentieth century.
References Allen, Susan H. Finding the Walls of Troy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999). Beaumont, Comnys W. Britain, the Key to World History (London: Rider and Company, 1947). Blegen, Carl. “The Identification of Troy” in Iorwerth Edwards, et al. (eds.) The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. 1  (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), 411-416. Crossley, Geri. “Was Troy Really at Cambridge? Or a Severe Case of Celtomania: P.-T. Cailleux”, French Studies Bulletin 2, no. 2 (1982): 6-8. Crowe, John. The Troy Deception: Finding the Plain of Troy (Leicester: Matador, 2011). Gideon, Ernst. Homerus, Zanger der Kelten: Odysseus op Schouwen-Duiveland (Deventer: Ankh-Hermes, 1973). Gideon, Ernst. Troje lag in Engeland: Odysseus landde in Zeeland (Deventer: Ankh-Hermes 1991). Lascelles, John. Troy: The World Deceived (Victoria, BC: Trafford Publishing, 2005). Price, Roberto S. Homer's Blind Audience: An Essay on the Iliad's Geographical Prerequisites for the Site of Ilios (San Antonio: Scylax, 1985). Price, Roberto S. Homeric Whispers (San Antonio: Scylax Press, 2006). Santos, Arysio. Atlantis: The Lost Continent Finally Found (Lynnwood: Atlantis Publishers, 2011). Schrott, Raoul. Homers Heimat: Der Kampf um Troia und Seine Realen Hintergründe. (Munich: Hanser, 2008). Sinožić, Vedran. Naša Troja (Novigrad: Simbol, 2015) Smith, Oliver D. “An Alternative Site for Troy on Imbros (Gökçeada)”, Kerberos: KCL’s Classics Undergraduate Research Journal 2, no. 2 (2020): 61-70. Smith, Oliver D. “A New Suggested Site for Troy”, Athens Journal of History 8, no. 1 (2022): 81-98. https://athensjournals.gr/history/2022-8-1-4-Smith.pdf Sora, Steven. The Triumph of the Sea Gods: The War against the Goddess Hidden in Homer's Tales (Rochester, VT: Destiny Books, 2007). Vellay, Charles. Controverses autor de Troie (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1936). Vinci, Felice. Omero nel Baltico (Rome: Fratelli Palombi, 1995). English translation: The Baltic Origins of Homer's Epic Tales (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 2006). Vinci, Felice. “The Nordic Origins of the Iliad and Odyssey: An Up-to-Date Survey of the Theory”, Athens Journal of Mediterranean Studies 3, no. 2 (2017): 163-186. Wilkens, Iman. Where Troy Once Stood (London: Rider and Company, 1990). ________________________________  Susan H. Allen. Finding the Walls of Troy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999).  The Pinarbaşi-Troy hypothesis nonetheless continued to have a minority of supporters into the early 20th century, namely Charles Vellay, author of Controverses autor de Troie (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1936).  Carl Blegen. ‘The Identification of Troy’ in Iorwerth E. S. Edwards, et al. (eds.) The Cambridge Anci
Was a Tiny Mummy in the Atacama an Alien?
This NY times article just came to our attention. What are your thoughts on the analysis and theories?
Nearly two decades ago, the rumors began: In the Atacama Desert of northern Chile, someone had discovered a tiny mummified alien.
An amateur collector exploring a ghost town was said to have come across a white cloth in a leather pouch. Unwrapping it, he found a six-inch-long skeleton.
Despite its size, the skeleton was remarkably complete. It even had hardened teeth. And yet there were striking anomalies: it had 10 ribs instead of the usual 12, giant eye sockets and a long skull that ended in a point.
Ata, as the remains came to be known, ended up in a private collection, but the rumors continued, fueled in part by a U.F.O. documentary in 2013 that featured the skeleton. On Thursday, a team of scientists presented a very different explanation for Ata — one without aliens, but intriguing in its own way.
Ata’s bones contain DNA that not only shows she was human, but that she belonged to the local population. What’s more, the researchers identified in her DNA a group of mutations in genes related to bone development.
Some of these mutations might be responsible for the skeleton’s bizarre form, causing a hereditary disorder never before documented in humans. Antonio Salas Ellacuriaga, a geneticist at the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain who was not involved in the new study, called it “a very beautiful example of how genomics can help to disentangle an anthropological and archaeological dilemma.” “DNA autopsies,” as Dr. Ellacuriaga calls them, could help shed light on medical disorders “by looking to the past to understand the present.” The research, published in the journal Genome Research, began in 2012, when Garry P. Nolan, an immunologist at Stanford University, got wind of the U.F.O. documentary, “Sirius,” while it was still in production.
Dr. Nolan emailed the producers and offered to look for DNA in the mummy. The skeleton’s owner agreed to X-ray images as well as bone marrow samples taken from the ribs and right humerus.
Once Dr. Nolan and his colleagues received the samples, they were able to retrieve fragments of DNA from bone marrow cells without much struggle. “We could tell this was human right away,” said Atul Butte, a computational biologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and a co-author of the new study.
The scientists eventually managed to reconstruct much of Ata’s genome. She was a girl, they found, most closely related to indigenous Chileans. But she also had a substantial amount of European ancestry.
The scientists have not carried out any precise dating of the skeleton, so they can’t say exactly when Ata lived. But her European heritage suggested it was sometime after Chile was colonized in the 1500s.
After death, DNA disintegrates into fragments, which become smaller over the centuries. Ata’s DNA fragments are still large, another clue that she’s less than 500 years old.
While her elongated head was striking, it wasn’t the strangest feature of Ata’s skeleton. Despite being the size of a human fetus, about the length of a pen, her bones were as developed in some ways as those of a 6-year-old. Ralph S. Lachman, an expert on hereditary bone diseases at Stanford University, examined her X-rays. He concluded that her constellation of symptoms did not match any known disease. The scientists reasoned that Ata might have had mutations for a disorder that had never before been described. Sanchita Bhattacharya, a researcher in Dr. Butte’s lab, searched for mutations in Ata’s DNA and identified 2.7 million variants throughout the genome. She whittled this list to 54 rare mutations that could potentially shut down the gene in which they were located. “I was amazed by how much you can tell from the genetic blueprint,” said Ms. Bhattacharya. Many of those genes, it turned out, are involved in building skeletons. Some have already been linked to conditions ranging from scoliosis to dwarfism to having an abnormal number of ribs. But some of Ata’s mutations are new to science. It’s possible some caused her skeleton to mature quickly even while failing to grow to normal stature. Ms. Bhattacharya speculates that such a disorder would have caused the child to be stillborn. And she stressed that these mutations are, for now, only theoretical candidates. Other experts concurred. “There is no single slam-dunk finding that explains the bizarre appearance of this individual,” said Daniel G. MacArthur, a geneticist at the Broad Institute who was not involved in the study. Yet understanding what happened to Ata might shed light on skeletal deformities seen today. That may require engineering stem cells with each of the 54 mutations, growing them in a dish, and then looking for telling changes in their development. Here is the original NYTIMES article
By Carl Zimmer
Here is the original NYTIMES article https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/science/ata-mummy-alien-chile.html