Priam's Treasure Heinrich Shliemann Summary

The first, and most hotly contested question, that modern scholars ask about Heinrich Schliemann’s archaeological legacy is whether or not his findings at Hisarlik and his claims about Homer’s Troy are the result of lies. On May 31st, 1873, Heinrich Schliemann wrote in his excavation journal that he had found a large cache of gold and briefly described a few of the objects. Beyond that, there was no thorough account of what Schliemann found until much later. Once Schliemann finally revealed what he had unearthed on that day, it shook the archaeological world. Pictures of Schliemann’s wife in gold jewelry and headlines applauding the discovery of “Priam’s Treasure” appeared all throughout the world, but many were skeptical. Not only did they not agree with the interpretation Schliemann made regarding the objects, but they found the circumstances of the discovery suspect. The complaints modern scholars make begin from the very first moment that Schliemann found the objects. In his publication, Schliemann says,

As I found all the …show more content…
Schliemann published a picture atlas of his findings at Hisarlik. This atlas contains 270 pictures of objects that were discovered in the ruins of Troy. The pictures of Priam’s Treasure (Fig. 1) reveal Schliemann’s proclivity to fantasize. First, the measurements and scholarly information included with the pictures suggest that the findings and analysis are well supported. Second, by labeling them Priam’s treasure, he tells the reader that Priam was indeed a real person, and that this treasure proves his existence, and therefore, the reality of The Iliad. Another example of this is “The Great Tower of Ilium”. This name alone inspires an image of a fantastic Troy which towered over its surroundings and whose power was known far and wide. Calvert’s account of this “Great Tower” tells a different