How did scholars react to Heinrich Schliemann’s claims about Troy?

When Heinrich Schliemann published his findings regarding Troy in the 1870s, the scholarly reaction was mixed. Many experts received his theories and discoveries with skepticism, particularly given his uncritical excavation methods that damaged various archaeological layers in his singular drive to uncover Homeric Troy.1

Despite this professional doubt, Schliemann’s claims found significant support among the general public and certain prominent figures, such as the British prime minister and classical scholar William Ewart Gladstone, who accepted his identifications.1

Over time, assessments of his work evolved. Later research revealed that Schliemann engaged in significant self-mythologizing and often minimized the contributions of others, such as the English archaeologist Frank Calvert, who was instrumental in identifying Hisarlik as the site of Troy. While his methods were later criticized for their destructive nature, Schliemann is credited with being one of the first to popularize archaeology, bringing unprecedented global attention to the ancient history of the region.1