‘Priam's Treasure’: clearly a composite

Abstract

Schliemann's first campaign of excavation at Troy (1871–3) culminated in the discovery of ‘Priam's Treasure’. The find remains the largest and certainly the most controversial ever to have been made at Troy. In 1984 l argued that it was not a single find, as Schliemann reports, but a composite, comprising a core of pieces actually found on 31 May 1873 and a number of other pieces found earlier (Traill 1984 = 1993: 127–53). The article generated a considerable response and, apparently, some confusion. For instance, after demonstrating that Schliemann's story of Sophia's assistance at the discovery was a lie, I asked if there were adequate grounds for believing that he had actually found the pieces of ‘Priam's Treasure’ at Troy rather than, say, bought them from local dealers. I then indicated that the answer was ‘overwhelmingly in the affirmative’ and listed six specific reasons why we should believe this. I concluded: ‘These facts constitute a powerful argument that most, and probably all, of the pieces of ‘Priam's Treasure’ were in fact found in Early Bronze Age Troy’ (Traill 1984: 111 = 1993: 148–9). It would have been remarkable if after this I went on to argue, or even to suggest, that some of the pieces might be fakes. I did not. I have never suggested that any item of ‘Priam's Treasure’ is a fake. Yet critics have persistently represented me, either explicitly or implicitly, as holding this view, thereby muddying waters already murky and distracting attention from the real issues. It is hoped that this paper will refocus the debate on relevant topics.