Heinrich Schliemann's Influence On Art
As we all know, interpretation and perspective is the lens in which we see life, it is a part of everything we do. Thus, it is the foundation of how we view all kinds of art forms. Depending on who is analyzing a piece of art determines the meaning and worth the work has. The person or people who are analyzing the work are parts of an even bigger picture; what time period are they exploring the art and when was the work created. By knowing the time period, it can change the interpretation and significance of the art completely. I will be examine how the Epitaph of Seikilos, created in the first century C.E., and the Mycenaean Funerary Mask, created 1600-1500 B.C.E., interpretations affected the importance of the works of music and art and
…show more content…
Schliemann was a biased archeologist, who was deeply invested in his personal findings and motivated to boost his reputation. This impacted his over-eager conclusion that he discovered the Mycenaean Funerary Mask covered the body of the famous Agamemnon. It was later found that the mask was not actually created during the lifetime of Agamemnon and could not have been his funeral mask. Schliemann was in a particular time period and position that allowed him to bring momentous attention to a mask that was not even the piece of work he labeled it. The masks’ worth and reputation was heightened because of the publics untrue perception that the mask belonged to a significant Greek leader. Another aspect that influenced the masks importance is the fact that Schliemann was working during a time with little regulation and rules for archeologists, and there is even some rumors that he tampered the mask himself to gain more individual …show more content…
The Mycenaean Funerary Mask would probably never receive the amount of attention and analysis that is has without Schliemann’s beliefs in a time period that allowed his thoughts to be culturally accepted. It would just be another unnamed funerary mask that is skimmed over. The Epitaph of Seikilos would not have the issue of figuring out what the particular voices and instruments used in the original if it was being analyzed in the era it was created, where similar instruments and culture were readily available. The time in which works are studied and by whom they are being evaluated by changing the overall meaning and we must take each work with a grain of
Schliemann was a biased archeologist, who was deeply invested in his personal findings and motivated to boost his reputation. This impacted his over-eager conclusion that he discovered the Mycenaean Funerary Mask covered the body of the famous Agamemnon. It was later found that the mask was not actually created during the lifetime of Agamemnon and could not have been his funeral mask. Schliemann was in a particular time period and position that allowed him to bring momentous attention to a mask that was not even the piece of work he labeled it. The masks’ worth and reputation was heightened because of the publics untrue perception that the mask belonged to a significant Greek leader. Another aspect that influenced the masks importance is the fact that Schliemann was working during a time with little regulation and rules for archeologists, and there is even some rumors that he tampered the mask himself to gain more individual …show more content…
The Mycenaean Funerary Mask would probably never receive the amount of attention and analysis that is has without Schliemann’s beliefs in a time period that allowed his thoughts to be culturally accepted. It would just be another unnamed funerary mask that is skimmed over. The Epitaph of Seikilos would not have the issue of figuring out what the particular voices and instruments used in the original if it was being analyzed in the era it was created, where similar instruments and culture were readily available. The time in which works are studied and by whom they are being evaluated by changing the overall meaning and we must take each work with a grain of