Sir Arthur Evans vs. Heinrich Schliemann
The Minoan archaeology is one which was surrounded by numerous controversies and this can be considered to be incomplete without the overall understanding of Sir Arthur Evans. The Minoan archaeology on its own has been present for several years however a true understanding of the culture and the culture was brought to life due to the efforts by Sir Arthur Evans. Heinrich Schliemann on the other hand was focused on the Mycenaean culture. Both these scholars were known to make a number of alterations to the artifacts, however for very different reasons and rationale. The main aim of this paper is to discuss their position in each culture and to discuss the possible rationale that these individuals had for making the alterations.
Although both Evans and Schliemann made alterations to the artifacts, it is crucial to note that the rationale for the changes made was completely different from each other. For instance, Evans was clearly more focused on brining to life the lost civilization and to help people recognize the distinct civilization (Morford, Lenardon and Sham). Here
…show more content…
he had a strong and powerful position in history and was known for the developing and recreating the Minoan archeology and building the places to relive the culture. Here although there were numerous opinions and controversies that were developed as a result of this, Arthur Evans had clearly been able to effectively navigate and keep his focus on the revival of the culture (Morford, Lenardon and Sham). Schliemann on the other hand was found to be more obsessed with the Mycenaean culture and this obsession was turning to become a negative impact rather than a positive impact.
For instance, with all the excavations, he had started with preconceived notions. No matter what he found, he yet went on to stick to his preconceptions and here this overall interaction and interference with the Homer and Greek Mythology, went on to be more of a hampering with the true academic study (Morford, Lenardon and Sham). Here the main focus was on finding treasures and his attention was only on the treasures, rather than on the humbler finds, which would otherwise be more useful and beneficial for the future archaeologists and would have otherwise given the historians and archaeologists more understanding and knowledge of the excavation sites and the history of the
place. In conclusion, it is safe to say that the alterations made by the Evans were more in a positive and beneficial for the overall culture and the history of the culture. On the other hand, the alterations made by Heinrich were more obsessions based and were more a solution for the need of the individuals rather than focused on the general public or even the need to improve the historic knowledge of the culture (Morford, Lenardon and Sham). Clearly there was a similarity that both the individuals participated in the history and were focused on bring about change, however Evans was focused on sharing and bringing in a respect for the history and the lost culture. However Heinrich was more focused on his own obsession and was more a hindrance than any helps to improving the overall history and academic studies.
The second question frequently asked regarding Schliemann’s legacy examines his motives and skill as an excavator: was Heinrich Schliemann a good archaeologist? This question has two sides. First, did Schliemann use the best techniques and technology available to him at time of his first excavation? Second, did he have the same values that other archaeologists have?
Although, scientist’s main goal is to find treasure from a certain place, they get lost and make a whole new city, and even more treasure. From the source "Lost Cities, Lost Treasure" It talked about a man- whose name is Heinrich Schliemann- dreamed of discovering the lost land of Troy, but during his adventure he had made his way to California where he found gold. This shows that even though their mind had been set to find this certain place adventurers get sidetracked and discover other things: like gold. Also, Schliemann became an archaeologist in the 1800s; he had discovered treasure in foreign lands like Greece. From the text it had stated “he loved Greek culture so much that him and his wife names their children Agamemnon and Andromache." Lastly, you can learn different languages from the other cultures. From
“Mask of Agamemnon” and shaft graves are other important discoveries for Heinrich Schliemann. After leaving Turkey, Schliemann started digging in M...
"…would require a knowledge of many aspects of Greek life. The would-be investigator would have to be familiar with terrain in the case of any given battle, have an acquaintance with the archaeological artifacts of various types, close familiarity with the written sources, and most important, an understanding of the general economic picture. He would also need some insight into ancient religion and acquaintance with military and naval procedures and strategy."
The development of an empire is a change strongly emphasized in the Archeology as a radical departure from the Hellenic tradition, and consequently a major source of conflict among the Greeks. Prior to the adven...
The art is locate more than 100 m into the cave and the artifacts were found at the cave’s opening. The artifacts were linked to the Early Woodland/early Middle Woodland to the Mississippian period. The ways that the artifacts were dated was by looking that the markings and the brushing of the ceramics. In the center of the...
Homer. ?The Odyssey,? World Masterpieces: Expanded Edition. Maynard Mack ed. Ed. Coptic St.: Prentice, 1995.
8. Edmondson, J. C., and MyiLibrary. “Augustus”. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 4 May 2014.
W. Raymond Johnson, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, (1996), pp. 65-82, Date viewed 19th may, http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3822115.pdf?&acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true
In The Odyssey, Homer, or more so, the characters, often referred to Odysseus as the ‘Great Odysseus’. In the text, it is obvious to see that Odysseus demonstrates arrogance, charisma, over-confidence, and pride. Odysseus and his m...
GREECE & ROME. Archaeology [serial online]. November 1987;40(6):18. Available from: Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed December 22, 2011.
of ‘Biblical Archaeology’ and saw it as a means of establishing the credibility of the
Homer’s literature served as a moral messenger to the people of ancient Greece. The Odyssey by Homer demonstrates the character development of Odysseus, the epic hero, and his journey of self-discovery. Odysseus was a great, wise, noble, and well respected war hero to his people. Odysseus had one tragic flaw that was demonstrated by his actions throughout the book. The author Homer continued to strip Odysseus of his arrogance throughout the story, by throwing challenges his way, making him pay for his mistakes, and allowing him to continue to overcome obstacles. The main purpose of Odysseus journey also to reach his home a more humble man. Reading Odysseus’ journey also served as a way to look at morals. The
According to The Society for American Archaeology, the definition of Archaeology is, “to obtain a chronology of the past, a sequence of events and dates that, in a sense, is a backward extension of history.” The study of ancient civilizations and archaeology is rather ambiguous due to the primitive nature of the time period. With little imagery and even less textual evidence, professionals in the field must work diligently when studying their subjects. Naturally, archaeologists cannot see or communicate with those whom they are studying, so they must be extraordinarily meticulous when analyzing past cultures. This relates to all aspects of the ancient world including; foods, raw materials, artifacts, agriculture, art work and pottery. All of these elements can collectively provide new and innovative information to curious archaeologists who may wish to gain a better understanding of those who came before us. This information is equally beneficial for both historians and archaeologists who plan to compare the histories of societies from all around the world. In the world of archaeology, archaeologists strive to better explain human behavior by analyzing our past. Therefore, the study of archaeology is a key element in understanding a time before our own.
He writes, “All parties with an interest of one sort or another in the antiquities trade agree that it causes a certain amount of damage to the world’s archaeological heritage” (1). Brodie is right to say that the antiquities market does do some damage to the archaeological world because of looting. However, one cannot ignore the fact that the antiquities market has helped to spread ancient cultures across the world, which has done a great deal to help archaeological heritage. Whatever the motives, be it monetary gain or a true passion for ancient artifacts, the collectors and dealers of antiquities have done a great deal in conserving and drawing attention to