Schliemann's Claims Regarding The Mask Of Agamemnon

Weighing in on the debate of the validity of Schliemann’s claims regarding the mask of Agamemnon, two aspects of the story must be taken into account: the trustworthiness of Schliemann and the actual artistic elements of the mask. First of all there is the issue of Schliemann and his seemingly unethical and unprofessional habits in relation to archeology. Foregoing the aspects of his previous exploits and exaggerations there is the problem that is raised in regards to Schliemann possibly preparing the mask to have more traditionally 19th century beauty standards such as the facial hair that is shown on the mask. Even if the mask were Agamemnon an addition of facial hair would force any person to have to take every aspect of the face with a grain of salt since he is not a reliable art

Therefore any inferences made about Agamemnon or the Mycenaean people in relation to the mask would have to be highly examined and nitpicked to ensure the inferences are not made in regards to a change he made. In addition, Calder writes of the possibility of Schliemann having created a replica or faking the mask since he had previously been accused of such actions in relation to other archaeological finds like Priam’s Treasure. If the mask were a fake or reproduction once again the inferences made from the mask would have to be reevaluated to investigate if there is still truth to those claims. On account of the technical elements of the mask Calder mentions that artistically the mask is dissimilar to masks from the time period and location as the Agamemnon mask suggesting it may not have been created during that era. In regards to personal opinion, circumstantial evidence leads me to believe the mask is not actually Agamemnon. Due to the highly shady character of Schliemann, I would not trust any claims or discoveries he made especially since the mask would have created quite a buzz being a really successful archaeological dig giving him money and possibly