Archaeology and Heinrich Schliemann 2012

9Schliemann’s Mycenae excavations through the eyesof StamatakisDavid A. TraillAs evidence accumulates that Schliemann’s archaeologicalreports are not as reliable as wasonce believed, the need for the testimony of independenteyewitnesses has increased accordingly. 1 Thelargely unpublished reports of Panagiotis Stamatakisprovide us with invaluable insight into the day-todayrunning of Schliemann’s excavation of Mycenaein 1876. Stamatakis was the official representative ofthe Greek Archaeological Service at the excavationand he sent regular reports back to the General Ephoriain Athens. However, he was also representing theArchaeological Society at Athens, for it was to the Society,not directly to Schliemann himself that the permitto excavate Mycenae had been granted; Schliemannwas, in effect, conducting the excavations, athis own expense, on behalf of the Society. 2 There areaccordingly also reports written by Stamatakis tomembers of the Council of the Archaeological Society.The late Professor Mylonas kindly provided me withcopies of Stamatakis’ reports to both the Ephoria andthe Society. My paper will be devoted principally toextensive quotation from these reports. They provideus with fascinating pictures of the activities of thatsummer and fall in 1876 that were to have such anenormous influence on subsequent Aegean archaeology.The paper will begin with a brief summary ofthe salient points in Stamatakis’ career and close witha summary of what these reports contribute to ourunderstanding of his achievement at Mycenae.Panagiotis Stamatakis was born in Varvitsa inLaconia, in the mid-nineteenth century. The year ofhis birth is unclear, but probably it was around 1840.He had no formal university education. In 1866 hebecame an assistant to the Ephor General of Antiquities.His first task was to establish an inventory of theantiquities in private possession. In 1871 he became anitinerant ephor. In 1884, just a year before his prematuredeath from malaria, he became Ephor General.His work took him all over Greece: Attica, Boeotia,Phthiotis, the Peloponnese, Delos and Delphi. Hismost important work before 1876 was in Boeotia,where his excavations and careful arrangement of thefinds did much to build up the important collectionsat Thebes, Chaeroneia, and Tanagra. Information onthe life and work of Stamatakis is not easy to come byand I am indebted for the information given here tothe invaluable history of the Archaeological Society atAthens recently published by Basileios Petrakos. 3 Petrakosdraws attention to the painstaking accuracy ofStamatakis’ work and calls him the last and greatestof the self-educated Greek archaeologists. 4To avoid needless confusion I have changed all datesin the following reports to the Gregorian calendar.The first report from Stamatakis is dated 16 August1876, that is to say, nine days after the start ofSchliemann’s excavations. It was sent to EuthymiosKastorches, a member of the Council of the ArchaeologicalSociety. After summarizing the finds of thefirst few days Stamatakis continues: 5“The finds are classified by me according to typeof material: metal, stone and pottery. This systemhas been accepted by Mr. Schliemann. We havecome across no inscription or piece of sculpture sofar. At a depth of 4 metres beside the wall of the1. On the unreliability of Schliemann’s archaeological reporting,see in particular: Traill 1984a, 95-115; Traill 1984b, 295-316; Traill 1986, 91-98.2. The text of the permit issued by the Ministry to the ArchaeologicalSociety at Athens has now been published byPetrakos 1987a, 99-100.3. Petrakos 1987b, 80 and 279-282.4. Ιbid. 282.5. Ι am grateful to B. Petrakos, Secretary-General of theArchaeological Society at Athens, for kind permission topublish this and the following excerpts from Stamatakis’reports. Petrakos has published Stamatakis’ letter to Kastorchesin full in the original Greek (see Petrakos 1987a,101-104).