Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Homeric Troy.
am not ill pleased to say a feAV Avords before this assembly , not because I think you will derive any great benefit from Avhat I have to say on the subject of the paper , but because it enables me to give some vent to my opinion and feeling with regard
to the claims of Dr . Scliliemaun . I think that Ave see in Dr . Schliemann a spectacle , not perhaps so rare in his own country as it is among us , of the most pure , simpleminded , and ardent devotion to the cause of literature and knowledge in one of its
most interesting departments . Dr . Schliemann , Avith immense labour , as he has told us in that very striking Avork of his autobiography , qualified himself , ancl provided the means which others Avould bave spent perhaps in ignoble waste ; and having in
one arduous course oflabour , thus furnished himself Avith Avhat was necessary for the purpose of his pursuit , he proceeded to engage himself and to giA'e his life to another course of exertion , perhaps still more arduousand the result certainlhas
, y been that he has given us the most splendid example of disinterested sacrifice . Also , as Lord Stanhope has said , he has conferred a sendee which cannot be over-estimated
or forgotten in the history of primeval inquiry itself ( cheers ) . The field which has been covered by Dr . Schliemann ' s work , ancl by his remarks to-night , is so Avide , that even if the clock now pointed to the hour at which you commence your
papers it would not be possible , for me to attempt to traverse it . Nor clo I pretend to state that , after the interval of rather a lengthened period of arduous Avork in that other department to which Lord Stanhope has referred , I am as fresh ancl as exact In
my recollection as I should like to be if I were to proceed to discuss controversiall y or even argumentatively , tbe conclusions of Dr . Schliemann . I feel also that eA'en the best and most circumspect among us are at present in this conditionthat from
, year to year the evidence varies , though I by no means think the direction in Avhich it leads is from year to year reversed . On the contrary , upon the whole , it appears to me that there is considerable unity of direction to be discovered in the additions
which have been made to archaeological knowledge , especially within the last ten or twenty years . At the same time , Avith regard to particular and special conclusions , they must necessarily be formed with
considerable reserve and caution when our evidence is still partial and incomplete . 1 Avisb , therefore , to speak with very great reserve on anything which . I maysay , and to reserve to myself the liberty of correction , as Avell as to give my judgment withsubmission
to those Avho are better informed . I think , indeed , our debt as regards Dr . Schliemann is really independent of the truth or untruth of his discoA'ery . We owe a debt to him for his devotion and for his example —a debt which could never be cancelled
even if he were to fail in the piroof of any of his conclusions . ( Hear , hear . ) But I must also say it appears to me , endeavouring to look calmly at the matter , that Dr . Schliemann ' s main conclusion is exceedingly difficult to shake . I myself have for many years been very strongly
what may be called a believer in Homer and the Homeric poems , as far as regards their poetical unity , and as far as regards their historical character , in the highest sense of history—that is , as regards the manner and institutions of mankind . But
Avith respect to the question of the facts of the poems as distinguished from the manners , the institutions , and the characters described , on this matter my mind has been altogether open , and , I think , to some extent impartial . I am bound to say , also , I have ahvays had the impression—I don ' t
know whether Dr . Schliemann shares it or nut—that it is extremely difficult as to certain details to reconcile tbe topographical features of the Plain of Troy , as it UOAV exists , Avith the topography described in the " Iliad . " I have never been able fully to embrace the opinion current
until quite recently , that Buaarbashi was the site of Troy ; for it was quite impossible to reconcile that site Avith the distance from the sea , and to bring together the natural features of the place with the described features of the poem .
But I don ' t see by what arguments are to be met the proofs adduced by Dr . Schliemann in favour of Hissarlik . He has shown indubitably that at a great depth below the surface he has found the remains of a city of a certain size and a certain
advance in civilization—a city which underwent a sudden and violent destruction by means of five , aud so far he is in entire and indubitable accordance with Trojan and Homeric traditions , ( Hear , hear . ) Looking further into the details of
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Homeric Troy.
am not ill pleased to say a feAV Avords before this assembly , not because I think you will derive any great benefit from Avhat I have to say on the subject of the paper , but because it enables me to give some vent to my opinion and feeling with regard
to the claims of Dr . Scliliemaun . I think that Ave see in Dr . Schliemann a spectacle , not perhaps so rare in his own country as it is among us , of the most pure , simpleminded , and ardent devotion to the cause of literature and knowledge in one of its
most interesting departments . Dr . Schliemann , Avith immense labour , as he has told us in that very striking Avork of his autobiography , qualified himself , ancl provided the means which others Avould bave spent perhaps in ignoble waste ; and having in
one arduous course oflabour , thus furnished himself Avith Avhat was necessary for the purpose of his pursuit , he proceeded to engage himself and to giA'e his life to another course of exertion , perhaps still more arduousand the result certainlhas
, y been that he has given us the most splendid example of disinterested sacrifice . Also , as Lord Stanhope has said , he has conferred a sendee which cannot be over-estimated
or forgotten in the history of primeval inquiry itself ( cheers ) . The field which has been covered by Dr . Schliemann ' s work , ancl by his remarks to-night , is so Avide , that even if the clock now pointed to the hour at which you commence your
papers it would not be possible , for me to attempt to traverse it . Nor clo I pretend to state that , after the interval of rather a lengthened period of arduous Avork in that other department to which Lord Stanhope has referred , I am as fresh ancl as exact In
my recollection as I should like to be if I were to proceed to discuss controversiall y or even argumentatively , tbe conclusions of Dr . Schliemann . I feel also that eA'en the best and most circumspect among us are at present in this conditionthat from
, year to year the evidence varies , though I by no means think the direction in Avhich it leads is from year to year reversed . On the contrary , upon the whole , it appears to me that there is considerable unity of direction to be discovered in the additions
which have been made to archaeological knowledge , especially within the last ten or twenty years . At the same time , Avith regard to particular and special conclusions , they must necessarily be formed with
considerable reserve and caution when our evidence is still partial and incomplete . 1 Avisb , therefore , to speak with very great reserve on anything which . I maysay , and to reserve to myself the liberty of correction , as Avell as to give my judgment withsubmission
to those Avho are better informed . I think , indeed , our debt as regards Dr . Schliemann is really independent of the truth or untruth of his discoA'ery . We owe a debt to him for his devotion and for his example —a debt which could never be cancelled
even if he were to fail in the piroof of any of his conclusions . ( Hear , hear . ) But I must also say it appears to me , endeavouring to look calmly at the matter , that Dr . Schliemann ' s main conclusion is exceedingly difficult to shake . I myself have for many years been very strongly
what may be called a believer in Homer and the Homeric poems , as far as regards their poetical unity , and as far as regards their historical character , in the highest sense of history—that is , as regards the manner and institutions of mankind . But
Avith respect to the question of the facts of the poems as distinguished from the manners , the institutions , and the characters described , on this matter my mind has been altogether open , and , I think , to some extent impartial . I am bound to say , also , I have ahvays had the impression—I don ' t
know whether Dr . Schliemann shares it or nut—that it is extremely difficult as to certain details to reconcile tbe topographical features of the Plain of Troy , as it UOAV exists , Avith the topography described in the " Iliad . " I have never been able fully to embrace the opinion current
until quite recently , that Buaarbashi was the site of Troy ; for it was quite impossible to reconcile that site Avith the distance from the sea , and to bring together the natural features of the place with the described features of the poem .
But I don ' t see by what arguments are to be met the proofs adduced by Dr . Schliemann in favour of Hissarlik . He has shown indubitably that at a great depth below the surface he has found the remains of a city of a certain size and a certain
advance in civilization—a city which underwent a sudden and violent destruction by means of five , aud so far he is in entire and indubitable accordance with Trojan and Homeric traditions , ( Hear , hear . ) Looking further into the details of