Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:01:03.301Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frank Calvert, Henry Austen Layard and Heinrich Schliemann

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Wout Arentzen
Wout Arentzen
Affiliation:
Utrecht, independent scholar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Within the past few years not a little has been written about the relationship between Heinrich Schliemann and Frank Calvert (see, for example, Traill, Calder 1986; Traill 1995; Robinson 1994; 1995; Allen 1999). The central thesis of these studies is that Schliemann mistreated Calvert in every possible way, not only financially, but also intellectually. For instance, ‘Schliemann's egotism and false claims have robbed Calvert of his proper place in the history of archaeology’ (Traill 1984).

Such statements give the impression that Calvert was a better scholar than Schliemann and that there is still a good deal in his work, as there is in that of Schliemann, which can help us. From the above interpretation by Traill one could almost believe that it is a distinct loss that Calvert has become nothing but a footnote in the works of Schliemann and that it is high time for a revaluation. Robinson is the most ardent exponent of this attempted revision. She is of the view that the world was duped by Schliemann, and that everything would have been done much better by Calvert. If truth be spoken, Schliemann has robbed us of the knowledge that Calvert would have given.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 51 , December 2001 , pp. 169 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, S A 1999: Finding the walls of Troy. Los Angeles, Berkeley, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arentzen, W 1997: ‘Ein Stubengelehrter mit Spaten. Schliemann und Thera’ in Bölke, W (ed), Vorträge anläβlich des internationalen Kolloquiums Heinrich Schliemann zum 175. Geburtstag. Forschungsprobleme und neue Informationen über sein Leben und Werk, vom 4. bis 6. Juli 1997 in Waren (Müritz) an der Europäischen Akademie Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Mitteilungen aus dem Heinrich-Schliemann-Museum Ankerskagen Heft 5). Ankershagen: 137–52Google Scholar
Bloedow, E F 1998–1999: ‘Heinrich Schliemann and Frank Calvert in the Troad - 1868–1873’ Boreas 21/22: 31Google Scholar
Bloedow, E F 1999: ‘Heinrich Schliemann and relative chronology: the earliest phase’ L'Antiquité Classique 68: 315–25Google Scholar
de Perthes, Boucher 1847: Antiquité Celtiques et antédiluviennes. Mémoire sur l'industrie primitive et les arts a leur origine Vol 1. ParisGoogle Scholar
Calder, W M III, Cobet, J 1990: Heinrich Schliemann nach hundert Jahren. FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
Calvert, F 1873: ‘Excavations in the Troad’ The Levant Herald February 4Google Scholar
Chabbas, F 1873: Etudes sur l'Antiquité historique d'après les sources egyptiennes et les monuments réputés préhistoriques. ParisGoogle Scholar
Estorff, G OCarl von, 1846: Heidnische Alterthümer der Gegend von Uelzen im ehemaligen Bardengaue. HannoverGoogle Scholar
Fouqué, F 1867: Premier rapport sur une mission scientifique à l'ile Santorin (Archives des missions scientifique et littéraires. Ministère de l'instruction publique et des cultes IV Serie 2). ParisGoogle Scholar
Fouqué, F 1998: Santorini and its Eruptions trans McBirney, A R. London (original: Santorin et ses Eruptions. Paris 1879)Google Scholar
Hutchinson, H G 1914: Life of Sir John Lubbock. LondonGoogle Scholar
Layard, A H 1849: Nineveh and its Remains. New YorkGoogle Scholar
Lenorant, F 1866: ‘Découverte e constructions antéhistoriques dans l'ile de Thérasia’ Revue Archéologique NS 4: 430–1Google Scholar
Lubbock, J 1865: Prehistoric Times. LondonGoogle Scholar
Meyer, E 1936: Briefe von Heinrich Schliemann. BerlinGoogle Scholar
Meyer, E 1953: Heinrich Schliemann. Briefwechel 1. BerlinGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M 1944: ‘Pioneer, scholar, and victim. An appreciation of Frank Calvert’ Anatolian Studies 44: 153–68Google Scholar
Robinson, M 1995: ‘Frank Calvert and the discovery of Troia’ Studia Troica 5: 323–41Google Scholar
Robinson, M forthcoming: Schliemann's Silent Partner: Frank Calvert (1828–1908)Google Scholar
Schliemann, H 1869: Ithaka, der Peloponnes und Troja. Archäologische Forschungen. LeipzigGoogle Scholar
Schliemann, H 1874: Trojanische Alterthümer. Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Troja. Atlas Trojanischer Altertümer. LeipzigGoogle Scholar
Schliemann, H 1990: Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Troja in den Jahren 1871–1873 ed Korfmann, M. LeipzigGoogle Scholar
Schmerling, P C 1833–1834: Recherches sur les Ossemens Fossiles découverts dans les Cavernes de la Province de Liège Vol 1. LiègeGoogle Scholar
Stiebing, W H Jr 1993: Uncovering the Past. New YorkGoogle Scholar
Tozer, H F 1875: ‘Notes of a tour in the Cyclades and Crete’ The Academy September 25Google Scholar
Traill, D A 1984: ‘Further evidence of fraudulent reporting in Schliemanns archaeological works’ Boreas 7: 309Google Scholar
Traill, D A 1995: Schliemann of Troy. Treasure and Deceit. LondonGoogle Scholar
Traill, D A 1999 ‘Review of W Bölke (ed), Vorträge anläβlich des internationalen Kolloquiums Heinrich Schliemann zum 175. Geburtstag. Forschung sprobleme und neue Informationen über sein Leben und Werk, vom 4. bis 6. Juli 1997 in Waren (Müritz) an der Europäischen Akademie Mecklenburg Vorpommern’ American Journal of Archaeology 103: 382Google Scholar
Traill, DA, Calder, WM III 1986: Myth, Scandal, and History. DetroitGoogle Scholar