Schadewaldt, 1944 — Schadewaldt W. Von Homers Welt und Werk. Lpz., 1944.
Schadewaldt, 1965 — Schadewaldt W. Von Homers Welt und Werk. Stuttgart, 1965.
Schadewaldt, 1975 — Schadewaldt W. Der Aufbau der Ilias. Frankfurt am Main, 1975.
Schmitt, 1967 — Schmitt R. Dichtung und Dichtersprache der indogermanischer Zeit. Wiesbaden, 1967.
Schuchardt, 1940 — Schuchardt K. Wer hat Troia I gegründet? B., 1940.
Schuchardt, 1941 — Schuchardt K. Alteuropa. B., 1941.
Schwyzer, 1939 — Schwyzer E. Griechische Grammatik. Bd. 1. München, 1939.
Ševoroškin, 1968 — Ševoroškin V. Zur hethitisch-luwischen Lexik. — Orbis. Louvain, 1968, t. 17.
Shipp, 1972 — Shipp G. F. Studies in the language of Homer. Cambridge, 1972.
Singer, 1975 — Singer I. Hittite hilammar and Hieroglyphic Luwian *ḫilana. — ZA. 1975, Bd. 65.
Singer, 1983 — Singer I. Western Anatolia in the thirteenth century. — AS. 1983, vol. 33.
Snell, 1953 — Snell B. Homer und die Entstehung des geschichtlichen Bewustseins bei den Griechen. — Varia variorum: Festschrift für K. Reinhardt. Münster-Köln, 1953.
Sommer, 1932 — Sommer F. Die Aḫḫijawa-Urkunden. München, 1932.
Sommer, 1934 — Sommer F. Aḫḫijavāfrage und Sprachwissenschaft. München, 1934.
Sommer, 1937 — Sommer F Aḫḫijava und kein Ende? — IF. 1937, Bd. 55.
Stählin, 1923 — Stählin F. Der geometrische Stil in der Ilias. — Philologus. Lpz., 1923, Bd. 78.
Steiner, 1962 — Steiner G. Neue Alašija-Texte. — Kadmos. B., 1962, t. 1.
Steiner, 1964 — Steiner G. Die Aḫḫijawa-Frage heute. — Saeculum. Freiburg, 1964, Bd. 15, № 4.
Strassburger, 1972 — Strassburger H. Homer und die Geschichtsschreibung. Heidelberg, 1972.
Strobel, 1976 — Strobel A. Der spätbronzezeitliche Seevölkersturm. B., 1976.
Stubbings, 1973 — Stubbings F. H. The rise of Mycenean civilization. — CAH. Vol. 2, PL 1.
Stubbings, 1975 — Stubbings F. The recession of Mycenean civilisation. — CAH. Vol. 2, PL 2.
Szemerényi, 1957 — Szemerényi О. The Greek nouns in — ϵυς. -ΜΝΗΜΝΣ ΧΑΡΙΝ. Gedenkschrift für P. Kretschmer. Bd. 2. Wien, 1957.
Tischler — Tischler J. Hethitisches etymologisches Glossar. Innsbruck, 1977—…
Tomaschek, 1980 — Tomaschek W. Die alten Thraker. Eine ethnologische Untersuchung. Wien, 1980 (paginatia varia).
Toporov, 1990 — Toporov V. N. The Thracian horseman in an Indo-European perspective. — Orpheus, Journal of Indo-European, Paleo-Balkan and Thracian Studies. Sofia, 1990.
Toynbee, 1950 — Toynbee A. J. Greek historical thought. N.Y., 1950.
Van Brock, 1959 — Van Brock N. Substitution rituelle. — RHA. 1959, t/ 17.
Vasmer, 1970 — Vasmer M. Die Slaven in Griechenland. Lpz., 1970.
Vaux, 1969 — Vaux R. de. La Phénicie et les peuples de la mer. — Melanges offerts à Maurice Dunand. T. 1. Beyrouth, 1969.
Ventris, Chadwick, 1959 — Ventris M. Chadwick J. Documents in Mycenean Greek. Cambridge, 1959.
Ventris, Chadwick, 1973 — Ventris M.. Chadwick J. Documents in Mycenean Greek. 2-nd ed. Cambridge, 1973.
Vermeule. 1964 — Vermeule E. Greece in the Bronze Age. Chicago. 1964.
Vetter, 1948 — Vetter E. Die etruskische Personennamen leϑe, leϑi, leϑia und die Namen unfreier oder halbfreier Personen bei den Etruskern. — Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäeologischen Instituts in Wien. 1948, Bd. 37.
Vian, 1959 — Vian F. Recherches sur les «Posthomerica» de Quintus de Smyrne. P., 1959.
Vian, 1959a — Vian F. Historic de la tradition manuscripte de Quintus de Smyrne. P., 1959.
Wainwright 1952 — Wainwright G. A. Asiatic Keftiou. — AJA. 1952, vol. 56.
Wainwright, 1963 — Wainwright G. A. A Teukrian at Salamis. — JHS. 1963, vol. 83.
Walberg. 1976 — Walberg G. Northern Intruders in Мус. III С? — AJA. 1976, vol. 80.
Watkins, 1976 — Watkins C. Observations on the Nestor’s cup inscription. — HSt 1976, vol. 80.
Watkins, 1986 — Watkins C. The language of the Trojans. — TTW.
Watkins, 1987 — Watkins C. Questions linguistiques palaites et louvites cuneiformes. -Hethitica. Louvain â-la-Neuve. 1987, t. 8.
Webster, 1964— Webster I. B. L. From Mycenae to Homer. L., 1964.
Weickert, 1959 — Weickert C. Neue Ausgrabungen in Milet. — Neue deutsche Ausgrabungen im Mittelmeergebiet und im Vorderen Orient. B., 1959.
Weippert, 1981 — Weippert M. Kreta. — RLA. Bd. 6, Lief 3–4. 1981.
Whitman, 1958 — Whitman C. H. Homer and the heroic poetry. Cambridge, 1958.
Wiesner, 1963 — WiesnerJ. Die Thraker. Stuttgart, 1963.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, 1886 — Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von. Isyllos von Epidauros. B., 1886.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, 1895 — Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von. Euripides. Herakles. Bd. 1. B., 1895.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, 1903 — Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von. Apollon. — Hermes. B., 1903, Bd. 38.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, 1916 — Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von. Die Ilias und Homer. В., 1916·.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, 1924 — Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von. Hellenistische Dichtung in der Zeit des Kallimachos. Bd. 2. В., 1924.
Wood, 1985 — Wood M. In search of the Trojan war. L., 1985.
Zgusta, 1964 — Zgusta L. Kleinasiatische Personennamen. Prag, 1964.
Zgusta, 1984 — Zgusta L. Kleinasiatische Ortsnamen. Heidelberg, 1984.
Zwiecker, 1921 — Zwiecker J. Sarpedon. — RE. 2-te Reihe. 1921, Hbd. 3.
Summary
In their book, Homer and History of the Eastern Mediterranean, L. A. Gindin and V. L. Tsymburski suggest their own reconstruction of historical actualities underlying the myths concerning the great military expedition of the Achaean Greeks against the Trojan capital, Ilios. The authors combine traditional methods of historical analysis with the available archaeological data and profound research of the linguistic relicts which shed light on the early ethnical history of Troy.
In the introductory Chapter 1, History Belongs to a Poet, the authors explain their attitude towards the Homeric question in its two main issues: both concerning the genesis of the poems and their historical value for a researcher. The opinion is expressed according to which each of the three rival trends in Homerology (namely, analyticism, unitarianism and the point of view regarding the Homeric poems as a traditional kind of oral epos) reflects one actual corresponding aspect of the genesis of «The Iliad» and «The Odyssey». Thus, the folkloristic school of Homerology exposes characteristic features of the formulaic technique used by Homer in his versification, ranging from standard word combinations (or set expressions) to the repertory of traditional images and scenes. Analyticism reveals strife between different versions and variants in the pre-Homeric tradition; the strife that had been integrated by the Poet’s artistic intention — perhaps to the point of merger of the earlier epic portions into his discourse. Lastly, Unitarian approach explains the systems of images and plots of «The Iliad» and «The Odyssey» from the viewpoint of integrity of the Poet’s conception which is in many respects unique for ancient epic. This conception is determined by the two topics which coexist in either of the Homeric epics: the declared topic of a hero’s fate (e.g. fate of Achilles or Odysseus), and the implicit topic of the heroic epoch nearing its end. The most complicated and diverse interrelations of metaphorical and metaphysical nature are established between the two abovementioned topics in the discourse; as a result of this, the Homeric relation obtains the multitude of functional dimensions. Each of the delineated three trends in Homerology sees in the concept of «Homeric historicism» somewhat different meaning. For a supporter of the folkloristic school, historicism of Homer lies primarily in his use of the formulae/clichés which preserve some or other actualities of the long-gone past. For an analyst (meaning here a follower of the analytical school) the said historicism is in the dynamics of the interacting and developing earlier versions whose vague shapes can be discerned behind the Homeric text; in the dynamics reflecting those of history itself. Lastly, an Unitarian sees the Homeric historicism in the artistic skill using which the Poet reconstructs image of the epoch as of a space of time permeated with a single meaning, connected with a singe action that prevails over diversity of individual plots and stories.