Week 5: Mackenzie: Schliemann and Evans

Although both Schliemann and Evans have been criticized for the specific techniques they've used in excavation, there is no doubt that both men have made huge contributions to the fields of art history and archeology. Schliemann was called destructive for not using proper technique, and was seen as more of a treasure hunter than a true historian. Although Schliemann's motives to follow Homer's myths and find the treasure sites may have been personal, the final result is still valuable to the fields of archeology and art history. The Funerary Mask (mask of Agamemnon) that he found at a shaft in Circle A, Mycenae, has been valuable in our studies as we compare the more natural form of the mask to other royal masks in a more natural vs. ideal style. Although he alerted the press and told them he had "gazed into the face of Agamemnon" and was later proved to be incorrect, there's no denying that his find of this mask has given us good context in comparing it to other pieces of work. Evans, on the other hand was criticized for rebuilding the Palace Complex at Knossos, Crete in such a way that could be misleading to an unknowing viewer. Yet, the reconstruction he has done has helped us to understand the civilization and culture of the people of Knossos, Crete in order to compare them to other cultures. From Evan's reconstruction of the Palace Complex, we've learned that the people of Knossos, Crete thought that mountains were sacred and oriented their Palace Complex to complement the mountain. No reconstruction can be absolutely perfect, but Evans' reconstruction has really helped us to understand the history and context behind the Palace. Both men may have been criticized for their techniques, but without them, we would be missing out on a lot of information about specific pieces of artwork that we now can appreciate, thanks to them.