Busting the "Vergina Tomb" myth

[George S.]

Oh well that refutes the greek claims that it's Phillip II remains.From the various evidence available that concludes the research on the bodies.It's amazing how much speculation there was & how methodical the research was.

[Voltron]

George, This is not "Greek" claims but positions of various people that deal with the field.
Antonis Bartsiokas is Greek and is the one that Bratot uses as a reference. Ironically my source is that of a Non-Greek answering Bartsiokas critisicms.

[Bratot]

^ Quite Clear ? And what if it isnt quite clear Daskalot ?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/47364467/J...l-of-Medical-S

The Occupants of Tomb II at Vergina. Why Arrhidaios and Eurydice must be excluded

On 21 April 2000 Science published an article by Antonis Bartsiokas titled ‘The Eye Injury of King Philip II and the Skeletal Evidence from the Royal Tomb II at Vergina’. In it he criticised some observations made by Prag, Neave and Musgrave in earlier publications concerning possible trauma to the cranium and facial asymmetry. In an attempt to identify the man in the main chamber of Tomb II at Vergina as Philip III Arrhidaios rather than Philip II, he also argued that the bones had been burned dry, degreased and unfleshed. We answer his criticisms, and refute his dry cremation argument, pointing out that, far from strengthening the claim for Arrhidaios, it weakens it considerably.

If Bartsiokas is right and the bones in the gold casket were burned dry, they could never have belonged to Philip III Arrhidaios because it would have taken them several years to achieve the state of dry-ness to produce the fracture lines classic of dry cre-mation. The literature on decomposition is extensive.References (18) and (19) are useful sources. This is hypothetical. We have already demonstrated that the bones from the main chamber were burned fleshed. It is also likely that the fleshed body of Arrhidaios was cremated soon after death on ethical grounds. For ordinary Macedonians burying him and exhuming him for cremation and reburial later would have been repugnant. ‘In many ancient Greek sacred laws, every human corpse is considered a significant source of pollution’ (20). See Section 9.1.2. We happen to have a description of the reaction of battle hardened soldiers to rotting corpses at the time. To those beleaguered in Pydna during Cassander’s siege in 316, the sight and stench as recorded by Diodorus Siculus (Library of World History 19.49.4) was abominable and unbearable.

THE CASE FOR ARRHIDAIOS ANDEURYDICE GROWS WEAKER7.1. The absence of Kynna. The argument in favour of Arrhidaios and Eu-rydice as the occupants of Tomb II is further undermined by the absence from Tomb II of the remains of a third person. Both Diodorus Siculus (19.52.5) and Diyllos (29) imply that Kynna, Cleopatra’s mother, wasburied alongside her daughter and son-in-law Arrhidaios. Presumably Kynna’s ashes were already in an urn as she was executed in Asia by Alcetas inc.322BC (8, n.30). See too Section 9.1.2.

We answer Bartsiokas’ criticism of our early work on a very small area on the upper facial skeleton of the man in the main chamber of Tomb II at Vergina.We also maintain that there is ample evidence of asymmetry in the lateral wall of the right maxillarysinus; and of alveolar resorption on the right side ofthe maxilla that may have resulted from periodontaldisease. We have demonstrated that he was mistaken in claiming the skeleton was burnt dry rather than fleshed. He understood the differences in appearance between bones burned fleshed and those burned dry.However he seems not to have understood how long it takes a fleshed cadaver to become a completely dry,degreased skeleton. We have drawn attention to the consequences for the pro-Arrhidaios supporters of this misunderstanding. Finally we do not believe that the qualitative and quantitative differences between the two collections of bones in Tomb II, their committal in separate caskets and chambers, and the absence of a third individual fit the descriptions of the funeral Cassander laid on at Aigai for an undistinguished Argead king, his wife and his mother-in-law

What kind of evidence is "we believe"?

It's not about how we interpret the history, but what kind of results those analysis gave.

Especially if happen that the historically known facts can not be confirmed on the corps as this was previously used as main argument.

From what this text is saying, apparently they can't beat the argumentation of Bartsiokas against their conclusions and now they put effort to present some significant deformation of the bones as concequence of cremation, to be their excuse.

Indirectly they admit their prior statements about the 'physical' evidence can't be supported.

Understandably, they run to the 'Exit' door which seems to be their own history interpretation they create to support themselves.

[Bratot]

George, This is not "Greek" claims but positions of various people that deal with the field.
Antonis Bartsiokas is Greek and is the one that Bratot uses as a reference. Ironically my source is that of a Non-Greek answering Bartsiokas critisicms.

It does matter if someone push for a position that is favorable to Greek propaganda, that's why I suggested you couple of threads to reveal exactly about what we are talking in here, because this 'finding' (as the others) is undoubtedly the foundation stone of the Greek claim for Macedonia and their 'unification' as the main Greek politicians then claimed and pressured Andronikus to provide them the 'evidence' they needed.

Those foreign experts are there only for their piece of the fame because everyone would like his name to be attached to such great finding, even if it's fake.

Not mentioning the other political indicators.

[Voltron]

What kind of evidence is "we believe"?

It's not about how we interpret the history, but what kind of results those analysis gave.

Especially if happen that the historically known facts can not be confirmed on the corps as this was previously used as main argument.

From what this text is saying, apparently they can't beat the argumentation of Bartsiokas against their conclusions and now they put effort to present some significant deformation of the bones as concequence of cremation, to be their excuse.

Indirectly they admit their prior statements about the 'physical' evidence can't be supported.

Bratot, to me it makes no difference if it is indeed Phillip II or not. I fail to see what the point of it not being Phillip the 2nd means in anyway.
If you openend the link, they provide evidence they use to their findings.

What they are saying is that its not Arrihidaios.

[Voltron]

It does matter if someone push for a position that is favorable to Greek propaganda, that's why I suggested you couple of threads to reveal exactly about what we are talking in here, because this 'finding' (as the others) is undoubtedly the foundation stone of the Greek claim for Macedonia and their 'unification' as the main Greek politicians then claimed and pressured Andronikus to provide them the 'evidence' they needed.

Thats ridiculous ! You mean to tell me Andronikos provided evidence to support the Greek position regarding Macedonia ? Andronikos is the reason you adopted the sunburst for your flag when Macedonia gained independence. If it wasnt for his findings and the way he stressed that it was a Macedonian symbol this issue today would of been nonexistant. He did more harm than good for in that sense.

How does the assertation that it being Philip II make any difference to what Greece says ? What is this propaganda you are referring too ? Have you even ever been there to see for yourself ? Do you think the location of corpses which are found in today's borders indicate what ethnicity they are ? Is this the reason why you are so deadset in the tomb not belonging to Philip II ? I dont get it.

[Bratot]

Thats ridiculous ! You mean to tell me Andronikos provided evidence to support the Greek position regarding Macedonia ? Andronikos is the reason you adopted the sunburst for your flag when Macedonia gained independence. If it wasnt for his findings and the way he stressed that it was a Macedonian symbol this issue today would of been nonexistant. He did more harm than good for in that sense.

How does the assertation that it being Philip II make any difference to what Greece says ? What is this propaganda you are referring too ? Have you even ever been there to see for yourself ? Do you think the location of corpses which are found in today's borders indicate what ethnicity they are ? Is this the reason why you are so deadset in the tomb not belonging to Philip II ? I dont get it.

You enjoy playing the dumb don't you?

Andronikus isn't the reason we adopted the symbol, we have adopted this symbol because it was logical step since we are the Macedonians and until then we were the ONLY side identifying themselves and our country as such.

This issue would be nonexistant if this finding wasn't misused to make a claim that we have no right to be Macedonians and to connect our history with ancient Macedonians:





As you can read the written statement of Andronikus in the newspaper and also the conference mentioned in the last sentence of this printscreen calling us 'Forgers'!

Few quotes from THE NATION AND IT"S RUINS-Yannis Hamilakis:

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=VaMuETP_ugMC&dq=THE+NATION+AND+ITS+RUINS-Yannis+Hamilakis&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=B_psXk15-H&sig=B8mHH8IyN2mmRegQYYh-8pCXvTM&hl=en&ei=-HO5Sp6vGYz-sgOejaQi&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

"During that dispute, Andronikos and Vergina played a key role.He, along with the vast majority of archaeologists, took it for granted that Macedonians were Greek, based on inscriptions at Vergina that mentioned Greek names. For them, therefore, shared writing and (by implication) language meant shared self-identification and ethnic identity, despite the plentiful literary evidence that points to the opposite."

"Andronikos was ‘uprooted’ but in his new homeland in Greek Macedonia, the homeland that he shared with many of the ‘uprooted’ from Asia Minor, he was determined to plant new roots, not only for him but for all his fellow Asia Minor immigrants too. That was what he was doing: he went down that tomb not to find roots, but to plant them. ‘The village had no history’, he said of Vergina (1997: 21), erasing thus with these five words the presence
(and past) of people who inhabited the hamlets of Koutles and Barbes, and who, judging from the names of these hamlets, may have spoken their own non-Greek language;34 these toponyms had already been erased from the map by the local bishop, who renamed them Vergina in 1922, when the immigrants from Anatolia, Andronikos among them, arrived. He had to produce history not only for the village but also for the region of northern Greece as a whole, annexed to the state of Greece only in 1913. And he did."


"Thanks to him, and to the historical contingencies that were to follow, Macedonia was transformed from otherness to national self-hood, from a peripheral role it came to occupy centrality.Thanks to him, northern Greece will enjoy, for years to come, an unprecedented archaeological renaissance (Kotsakis 1998).37
Andronikos was a historical constructionist (cf. Faubion 1993). He dreamed of a new past for the region and for the country, and he materialized it. He single-handedly wrote the script, produced, stage-managed, and played a protagonistic role in the drama that would re-enact the symbolic, material incorporation of Macedonia and northern Greece into the national imagination and psyche. At the same time he rewrote the script of the national
narrative; national imagination through him was not simply reproduced,
but was produced anew."


"Andronikos was encouraged by the political leadership to overcome his reservations and declare the tomb as belonging to Philip II (and his excavations were amply rewarded financially by the state), but he deeply believed in his sacred mission and his destiny as the shaman of the nation."

Yannis Hamilakis, Senior Lecturer in Archaeology, University of Southampton

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I don't have to further elaborate the Greek propaganda, because it's quite known what kind of track you are playing since Metaxas regime.

Note:

The lecture, Facing the Facts: Philip of Macedon's Face, Mycenaean DNA, Etruscan Excarnation, and the First Western Portrait, was co-sponsored by the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies and the Leicestershire and Rutland Classical Association.

And this is what the reviews are saying about this book of Hatzopoulos:

Definition of a Coffee Table Book:

http://www.ehow.com/about_5036135_de...able-book.html

Largely an interactive decorative item, the coffee table book is usually an oversize book people keep on the coffee table in their home to entertain guests or alleviate boredom. Coffee table books are often about art, nature, photography or any subject matter that lends itself to large photos or illustrations.

[Voltron]

[QUOTE]

Andronikus isn't the reason we adopted the symbol, we have adopted this symbol because it was logical step since we are the Macedonians and until then we were the ONLY side identifying themselves and our country as such.

Indirectly he was the cause. Prior to 1977 this wasnt even on the map.

This issue would be nonexistant if this finding wasn't misused to make a claim that we have no right to be Macedonians and to connect our history with ancient Macedonians:

As you can read the written statement of Andronikus in the newspaper and also the conference mentioned in the last sentence of this printscreen calling us 'Forgers'!

He was probably upset that his findings created a political clusterfuck from then on out.

Few quotes from THE NATION AND IT"S RUINS-Yannis Hamilakis:

If those are indeed his quotes than this is another liberal trying to make a name for himself. You will have plenty of those as well. They all pop out of the woodwork at some point.

Just understand that this symbol was not used exclusilvy by the Ancient Macedonians. It is a "myth" and this is fitting to the title that the sunburst is a Macedonian only symbol. It only became a symbol in a "national" sense in 1992 and subsequently 20 yrs after Andronikos publicised the hell out of it.

[Bratot]

Thats ridiculous ! You mean to tell me Andronikos provided evidence to support the Greek position regarding Macedonia ?
What is this propaganda you are referring too ?

Do you think the location of corpses which are found in today's borders indicate what ethnicity they are ?
I dont get it.

[Voltron]

Thats what your implying, isnt it ?

[Bratot]

And something to add:

"The findings from the extensive and systematic excavations in Vergina and Dion confirmed the uniform national character of our people both in the North and in the South. Because it was proven that language, religion and culture had been common feuters of all the Hellenes.

Thus, an indisputable answer was given to all those who from time to time have been trying to distort the history of Macedonia in a way that is not only suspicious, but also naive and absurd."

"Macedonia" by Athanasios D. Paliouras, p. 11

http://books.google.com/books?ei=aj3JTd_yBcufOtPj_MYH&ct=result&hl=pl&id=42tpAAAAMAAJ&dq=Karamanlis+Vergina&q=Karamanlis

"From that time onwards the excavations at Vergina have continued with abundant financial aid secured thanks to the personal interest of Constantine Karamanlis, President of the Republic (then Prime Minister). "

Vergina: the royal tombs and the ancient city by Manolēs Andronikos, p. 11

http://books.google.com/books?ei=aj3JTd_yBcufOtPj_MYH&ct=result&hl=pl&id=YqcVAQAAMAAJ&dq=Karamanlis+Vergina&q=Karamanlis

[Voltron]

So evidence showing that the Ancient Macedonians shared the same national character with the rest of the Greeks should be put aside so we do not offend anyone's identity today ? Is this what your advocating ?

[Bratot]

Don't play the dumb.

The discoveries of "Vergina" had the purpose to SERVE that allegation and to construct the bridge for the claims of "Greek" Macedonia because there was no other way you could tie up with the region you OCCUPIED in 1913.

Everything is well said in all those examples I provided.

[Voltron]

And I suppose if we had different findings in Vergina all of a sudden the pre 1913 status quo would suddenly reassert itself. Cmon Bratot, im not the one playing dumb.

Using your logic, a quarter of Turkey is due to hand our land back any time now.

[George S.]

Voltron you are wrong about the flag issue macedonia has allways used the sun symbol as rom in the state symbol.Evidence is scattered throughout Macedonia.With 16 sun ray sun symbols in churches etc etc etc.The macedonians worshipped the sun.I have read your bs claim by your govt that they have exclusive right to the use of the 16 ray symbol because
it was ONLY found in northern greece for the first time by andronikos in 1978.What alot of bs you should go to rom & see for yourself that the 16 ray sunsymbol is used everywhere.Even in the clothes of traditional costumes etc too numerous to mention.
After all is said & done the greeks are really just greek & their trying to bs masquerading as macedonians.Bratot you are totally right.
Voltron thank you for identifying your opinion as it coincides with your countries view that everything is greek really it isn't you are dissolusioned & mistaken.