swept on to Babylon, to Susa, to Persepolis, assuming the functions of the “Great King.”  The fugitive Darius was assassinated.  Alexander henceforth assumed a new and oriental demeanour; but he continued his conquests, crossing the Hindoo Koosh to Bactria, and then bursting into the Punjab.  But his ambitions were ended by his death, and their fulfilment, not at all according to his designs, was left to the “Diadochi,” the generals among whom the conquered dominions were parted.  Athens led the revolt against Macedonian supremacy, but in vain.  Demosthenes, condemned by the conquering Antipater, took poison.  The remainder of the history is that of the blotting out of Hellas and of Hellenism.

* * * * *

HEINRICH SCHLIEMANN

Troy and Its Remains

Heinrich Schliemann was born at Kalkhorst, a village in Mecklenburg-Schwerin, on January 6, 1822, and died on December 27, 1890.  During his early childhood an old scholar, who had fallen upon evil days, delighted him with stories of the great deeds of Homeric heroes.  At the age of fourteen he was apprenticed in a warehouse, but never lost his love for antiquity, and unceasingly prayed to God that he might yet have the happiness to learn Greek.  An accident released him from his low position, and he went to Holland and found a situation in an office.  He now began to study languages, suffering extraordinary denials so as to be able to afford money for his studies.  In 1846 he was sent by his firm to Russia, learning Swedish and Polish, and next acquired Greek.  Later, he travelled in Europe and the East, making a voyage round the world.  At last he realised the dream of his life.  Inaugurating a series of explorations in Greece and Asia Minor, Dr. Schliemann gained fame by his discoveries at Tiryus, Mycenae, and Troy, largely solving the problems of antiquity and archaeology associated with these localities.  “Troy and Its Remains” is published here in order that, having read in the classical histories, we may see how the ancient world is reconstructed for modern readers, by the records of one of the most famous of archaeologists.

I.—­Searching for the Site of Troy

Hissarlik, Plain of Troy, October 18, 1871.  In my work, “Ithaca, the Peloponnesus, and Troy,” published in 1869, I endeavored to prove, both by my own excavations and by the statement of the Iliad, that the Homeric Troy cannot possibly have been situated on the heights of Bunarbashi, to which place most archaeologists assign it.  At the same time I endeavoured to explain that the site of Troy must necessarily be identical with the site of that town which, throughout all antiquity and down to its Complete destruction at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century A.D., was called Ilium, and not until 1,000 years, after its disappearance—­that is, in 1788 A.D.—­was christened Ilium Novum by Lechevalier, who, as his work proves, can never have visited his Ilium Novum.