Heinrich Schliemann: The Man Behind The Masks In Ancient Greece

The study of the past is the key to understanding the development of man and with that comes a great deal of responsibility. This responsibility entails being respectful of that past and understanding that and also that preserving it, these are utmost priorities. Heinrich Schliemann brought in new discoveries about the past, specifically about majestic ancient Greece. His discoveries controversially shaped what is currently known about ancient Greece. Heinrich Schliemann was an individual who was corrupted by fame and power, which would lead to the destruction and complete disregard of historical items from antiquity. Schliemann’s crusade to achieve self-gratification and fame led to the discovery of artifacts from antiquity, but ultimately
As an adult, Heinrich Schliemann was, “Known to be a businessman prior to entering the field of archaeology”, according to D.F. Easton from The Classical World. Easton also states that, “Schliemann started a banking operation which he ran in California in 1851” (Easton 1998). He also lived in St. Petersburg during the 1850’s adds in David Turner, who wrote Heinrich Schliemann The Man Behind The Masks (Turner 1990). During this time, “Schliemann made connections with affluent merchants”, says Turner. During his time in the United States Schliemann was a dubious individual. Easton adds, “Schliemann lied to secure his United States Citizenship and divorce in 1868.” Even though Heinrich had been enamored with the Greek world throughout his life. He was only known as an international businessman and had never entered the world of archeology. To understand his motives, one must understand his development as a person. For example, Turner explains that Schliemann was, “A man who rose from rags to riches through sheer willpower, a man who strove for achievement in all he did but was never satisfied with the crude achievement of wealth” (Turner 1990). Schliemann seemed like a man who always was obsessed with the next thing and never seemed satisfied with what he had. This would definitely have an impact through the ways he would discover the various
Mark Rose states that Schliemann’s accounts of his discovery written in his diaries, letters, and publications were, “often contradictory, contained simple mistakes, romantic embellishments, and outright lies” (Rose 1993). David Traill, a Classics Professor at UC Davis suggests in What Did Schliemann Find? that maybe Schliemann did not find all these artifacts in the same location and at the same time (Rose 1993). Traill also suggests that the reason may be to prove that he had found Homer’s Troy (Rose 1993). In addition Schliemann also wanted to find a treasure that equaled the significance of those written about in The Iliad, Schliemann possibly could have made fakes, as Rose writes, “At the time, it was rumored that newly made pieces, perhaps fabricated in Athens, were used by Schliemann to supplement those found at Troy” (Rose 1993). To continue, Schliemann would also later discover The Death Mask of Agamemnon and Nestor’s cup in Mycenae in 1876. Schliemann could have continued says Turner but the lack of funds ruined his chance to research more at The place of King Minos (Turner 1990). In addition to his other finds, Schliemann also dug and discovered a grave circle at Mycenae between 1874-1876.As mentioned previously, Schliemann discovered several gold plate masks at this gravestone. The most famous of the masks being the Mask of Agamemnon, which is of the famous