Largest ancient tomb found of a prominent Macedonian

[Amphipolis]

That's all. They refused to answer questions or add anything. This (part of the) excavation is finished. New/final announcements in November 22 & 29.

newsIT.gr Δηλώσεις για Αμφίπολη - YouTube

[spitfire]

So there is still a lot of excavation on the tomb, since that is what Peristeri said in the video.
We 're in for much more. Who knows what elese is there in the tomb? They 'll bring the periphery of the tomb to light. That's very interesting. Another entrance maybe? Who knows?

[Amphipolis]

So, there IS a press conference. Peristeri said she's certain the dead is an important Macedonian general, surprising Mrs Mendoni and Panagiotarea who were present (next to her). She also excluded Alexander the Great (OK we knew that).

That means we know it's not a woman or a child.

It also means that the burial is not earlier or later than the tomb, or at least that's what Peristeri believes.

[SoutherNeighbour]

So it is the skeletal remains of one human? This is most intriguing. What is the Greek media saying about this? What is the purpose of the proposed genetic test? What are the stated ambitions thereof?

The Greek media are literally flooded by Dr.King's comments speculating it is either Alexander or Hephaistion.All major and mainstream news agencies right now in Greece report on her comments.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%CE%B1%CE%BC%CF%86%CE%B9%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%B7+%CE%9C%CE%B5%CE%B3%CE%B1%CF%82+%CE%91%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B4%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%82&oq=%CE%91%CE%BC%CF%86%CE%B9%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%B7+&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i59l3j69i60j0.6974j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8#q=%CE%B1%CE%BC%CF%86%CE%B9%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%B7+%CE%9C%CE%B5%CE%B3%CE%B1%CF%82+%CE%91%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B4%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%82&tbm=nws

[Amphipolis]

The Greek media are literally flooded by Dr.King's comments speculating it is either Alexander or Hephaistion.All major and mainstream news agencies right now in Greece report on her comments.

They're not very serious. I'm troubled on why the announcement calls the grave "autoschedios" which may translate as offhand, improvised, impromptu, extemporary, extemporaneous.

Their announcements are always very short and enigmatic. A coffin or burial bed of wood, glass and bone doesn’t look very rich. The whole form of that grave does not seem to fit in there.

[Philosopher]

The Greek media are literally flooded by Dr.King's comments speculating it is either Alexander or Hephaistion.All major and mainstream news agencies right now in Greece report on her comments.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%CE%...%CF%82&tbm=nws

Why is the idea that Alexander was buried there even entertained, when it is well-known he did not die in Macedonia? Are they suggesting his corpse was transported to the tomb and buried thither?

[SoutherNeighbour]

I think they are just reproducing Dr.King's statements. It appears that she weighs in heavily towards the Hephaistion scenario but not excluding Alexander either.

[Amphipolis]

They also say it was probably a heroised (apheroismenos) person, that is people would visit the grave and could see him under the glass in a sarcophagus and worship or honor him. That would also expalin the doors that openned and closed many times.

[SoutherNeighbour]

Meaning a person worshiped like a hero (not exactly like a God)

[Amphipolis]

Why is the idea that Alexander was buried there even entertained, when it is well-known he did not die in Macedonia? Are they suggesting his corpse was transported to the tomb and buried thither?

One of the early reasonable scenarios was that this huge thing was built to host Alexander's body, which never arrived.

The thoughts that the tomb was left empty or unfinished, or that someone destroyed and covered it later for political reasons have been valid and matched the idea for a tomb of Roxanne and Alexander IV or/and Olympiad.

What troubled everybody is that this monument (with the lion on the top) should be huge, yet it was unexpectedly covered/destroyed and forgotten and does not appear in any historical reference.

Let me just remind people that this was originally a hill, not an artificial tomb and it’s quite realistic to expect other Macedonian Tombs within the hill with gates at other points of the expensive marble precinct. The Vergina Tomb Complex is similar.

[Amphipolis]

The same decorative patterns can be found in the so-called Sarcophagus of Alexander in Sidon.

[Amphipolis]

So, there IS a press conference. Peristeri said she's certain the dead is an important Macedonian general, surprising Mrs Mendoni and Panagiotarea who were present (next to her). She also excluded Alexander the Great (OK we knew that).

That means we know it's not a woman or a child.

It also means that the burial is not earlier or later than the tomb, or at least that's what Peristeri believes.

In a late interview Mendoni said the sex of the dead is not known yet (so Peristeri's comment could be just hasty or stupid, or her quick estimation). She also said they're certain this is the dead of the grave (not a looter) and that the tomb gems re-confirm the 325-300 BC dating.

An earlier (Thursday afternoon) interview of Antikas who will examine the skeleton was very interesting but made it clear he hadn't seen the skeleton yet.

[Amphipolis]

In another short interview of Mendoni it became clear that the sex of the dead is unknown and could not be superficially recognized on site because the pelvis was broken. All bones were collected (without being touched by bare hand) and put in boxes along with soil.

I believe that at the moment the examination of the skeleton has not started yet or even assigned to a specific scientist. As announced, all DNA examinations will be ordered to two different foreign laboratories as (it seems) Greek authorities do not fully trust anyone.

Prof. Palagia also reemerged with a new (nonsensical) theory that I won’t bother to detail. She basically insists that this is Roman-era monument, that the third chamber was probably a mass-grave that was later evacuated and that the unearthed grave is just an older humble Macedonian grave that was forgotten underneath. Jesus!

Yet, the mysteries remain and I don’t think anyone has contributed a theory that matches all the contradictory data. As I’ve said before the “mystery of the Tomb” may eventually become its’ main value in both a scientific and promotional sense.

I remind you that even if the burial chamber was wildly looted (which is certain that happened even AFTER it was covered with soil) and even if everything was removed it still looks a little poor and weird as a construction. It doesn’t match with the glorious antechamber that’s why I had called it an unfinished or abandoned project. It also seems there was no horizontal diaphragm wall above the grave. Unless the whole floor had sunk down there were also no stairs (!). The grave covers almost the entire chamber so there is almost no room to properly move and put the sarcophagus inside. And these are only few of the problems.

[Amphipolis]

An interesting interview of Palagia (google translation)

Internationally recognized as an expert in ancient art, a scientist with a large and important writings, Ms. Olga Palagia, Professor of Classical Archaeology at the University of Athens, "read" the archaeological findings of Amphipolis in a way that is different from any other interpretations-especially by official of the excavators. These views often provoke particularly harsh criticism and furious attacks against the same defense but insists on using any prejudices as a shield strength of the ancient sources. After the storm had caused the requisite declarations of a few months ago, the skeleton of Amphipolis 'persuaded' the eminent Greek archaeologist, to break the silence.



If the excavation has been completed, what is your overall assessment of the monument Amphipolis?

I think the monument to Tomb castes created in three phases: The skeleton in the cave portion indicates the second phase, when some Macedonians broke the floor of the original burial chamber and created a cist grave below the level of the original floor. For some unknown reason they wanted to add one there dead. So, the burial was over the frame, is the first stage. All of these should occur between the 4th and 3rd century BC century, which is why I say that the "core" of the monument is Macedonian. However, the first BC century created a new build within this vaulted Macedonian tomb. Then added the Sphinxes, the Caryatids, probably the mosaic, but certainly the marble. Beneath the marble pillars obviously there limestone, belonging to the original Macedonian tomb. These were coated with marble slabs, the first BC century.

Has reported another similar case burial as that described in the explanation you suggest?

Certainly. There is a previous finding, "parallel" as we say in archeology and even Amphipolis. Is Tomb Nos. 3, a Macedonian, cist grave of 3rd BC century, in which, after the first burial, added an additional dead after removal of stones was the floor.

Who do you think belongs to the skeleton?

The discovery of the skeleton document that starts the monument from the 4th century. We have indeed a Macedonian tomb, cist, which is no different from dozens of others who have discovered throughout Macedonia, but also more specifically in Amphipolis. The tomb is not anything special and therefore one who is buried there was rather a mere mortal, a simple Amphipolis, like all others who have been in the area previously. I do not know if it is male or female, but I know that it is neither a king nor a general of Alexander the Great, nor any eminent personality. His name will never be known if -Besides has discovered a legend. I also believe that DNA analysis would have no benefit. Definitely will try to associate with the skeleton of Philip, but the genetic material will not fit. Simply because the dead Amphipolis does not belong to the Macedonian royal family.

Excluded skeleton belonging to Alexander the Great?

The Tomb of Alexander is located in Alexandria, but not found, because they are immersed in the sea has sunk. In the 5th-6th AD century was a terrible earthquake, because of which precipitated the whole beach. Are underwater excavations found several things, but still has not found himself tomb of Alexander the Great.

Could be dead Hephaestion or Olympics?

We have ancient testimony that Hephaestion solemnly burned -and, indeed, a grand ceremony. Also, any debris from the fire were buried in Babylon, that in today's Iraq. Therefore could not be found skeleton of Hephaestion in Amphipolis, and his body never returned to Macedonia. I wonder how some even dare to think. It is shameful. Those who speak for Hephaestion is ahistorical, or at least have basic knowledge of Macedonian history.
As for the tomb of the Olympics, as it is also known, is at Pydna. That can not be denied, as has been found in a nearby tomb inscription, which says "the tomb is next to my Olympics."

The American archaeologist Dorothy King, believes that the tomb was built by order of Olympias in Alexander the Great, but eventually hosted the dead Hephaestion.

In academia, Ms. King is unknown, because no scientific publications. Writes only staff blogs and I do not think that is specific to the Macedonian history. From what I know, has just published a book on the Elgin, supporting positions was not particularly in favor of Greece.

From the remains of the decoration, we could assume for the coffin?

Like a great many cist tombs found in Amphipolis, the deceased should be located on the bed, a bed that is not in the coffin. As a curator, having seen many similar tombs, Ms. Katerina Peristeri should be aware that the bed is the most common element and wonder how he immediately why the coffin. Also, for two round pieces of glass that we see in the photo of the last findings, I think it is the eyes (centers) propellers, ie turns playing the role of the foot bed. This was a common decorative motif in Macedonia.

Still think the monument is Roman?

The final monument will be built in August to honor some very great dead at the Battle of Philippi, which occurred in 42 BC and was the world-historical importance. These deaths were not, or can not be placed there, never was from the outset was a cenotaph. However, Augustus found an older, Macedonian tomb and retrofit, as the course encroached. Augustus defeated his enemies, the murderers of Caesar and loved too Amphipolis. We know from epigraphic sources they rebuilt after the Thracians were razed. There is an inscription on a statue base that has been found in Amphipolis, which writes "August, Mason, Saviour." The "Builder" means that built the city again, and this is considered a co-founder. It is known also that in the 1st BC prevailed century building orgasm Amphipolis. Unfortunately, we can not escape the Romans, especially because of the precinct and the Caryatids. These data, in my opinion, refer to the 1st BC century. And it was a private person who made it. For the colossal sculptures, huge quantity of marble for wall, mosaic etc. spent too much money, which further suggests that the monument is the Roman period. The generals of Alexander who have been entombed in the tombs were not such statues. They however frescoes, as in Lefkadia where graves are Alexander's generals, without marble statues.

Where the base of the monument dating to the reign of Augustus?

During my dating mainly based on the typology of Caryatids, because such daughters there before the first BC century. The Caryatids Amphipolis not sculptured, but stuck on a pillar and imitate archaic daughters that we know from the Acropolis. These are all elements that refer to the 1st century. At Eleusis there respective Caryatids this period. Very hardly be a correct assumption that the Daughters of Amphipolis is revolutionary and first appeared in Tomb castes. But how is it to be forgotten, and appeared again in the 1st century, after three hundred years? In ancient Greek art, when they discovered something, repeat all, there are no gaps.

Do you think the yard and he was placed first in BC century?

As I said, in my opinion the Caryatids and marble slabs dating to the 1st BC century, in the time of Augustus. Until then the entry of Sphinxes must have been just a street shrouded. The yard is the first BC century and thereby deduce the chronology of the rest of the monument, because inside the tomb there itself revetment, ie the same investment, which added to the original masonry of limestone. Why they built the enclosure leads us to what we all hate the Romans. Because Amphipolis destroyed by the Thracians around mid-1st century BC In 42 BC the battle of Philippi, the camp of Mark Antony was, indeed, Amphipolis. The military forces were too large, on the order of 100,000 combatants and because it was too violent war, participated senators and too many great Romans. It is very likely that Augustus created this monument on the old, pre-existing Macedonian tomb, to honor some of these illustrious Romans comrades. Also, there is a question of imitation: We know that the Romans generally copied tombs Amphipolis, because there has been a grave-like Macedonian, but a copy of the 1st century AD century. There is an inscription with the date and name of the deceased.

Leo who was at the top of the hill there is proof that the tomb was built in the 4th century rather than later?

The lion is a statue of the 4th century, in that there is no doubt. I believe, however, that Leo was not at the top of the Tomb. Instead, Ms. Peristeri has stayed firm in the conviction for dating, it just feels that the Lion of Amphipolis was above the tomb revealed. But the evidence is incomplete and can not substantiate. At the top of the hill was the foundation of a monument. But no one can prove that there was Leo. The lion is five kilometers away and we have seen other such statues, but not on a mound. The lions of Chaeronea, Knidos etc are grave markers, but have no connection with tombs. I do not know any lion on the mound Greek area. If the dating of the monument of Amphipolis based in Leo, in my opinion is extremely precarious.

The mosaic of Persephone does not prove that the tomb is the last quarter of the 4th century?

In any case. I can assure that the pebble technique continues to Roman times. There is one such example in Ancient Corinth, beautiful, pebble art, 2nd AD century. I think the mosaic of Persephone is definitely not the 4th century, archaeologists have made a mistake, because the mosaics of this period is tetrachroma in shades of brown. This Amphipolis is colorful and with blue pebbles, which are not customary in the Macedonian art. For example, the marvelous mosaics of Pella, the blue color is entirely absent. Indeed, I would say that compared to those, the mosaic is rather less artistic value made by a less worthy artist. Most importantly we know that the Macedonians placed mosaics forms the graves, but only with geometric motifs. The mosaic of diamonds found at the entrance of the Tomb castes, like other mosaics found in Amphipolis. Probably left there by the old grave.

The researchers felt that the dead of Amphipolis was "afiroismenos" ie worshiped as a demigod. Do you agree with this?

The afiroismos documented only for the Romans. The excavators afiroismo talked about, I guess mainly because of the Caryatids, as many have found, however, is only sacred. There are some from tombs, but no resemblance to those of Amphipolis. So if the tomb is a monument afiroismou caste, should be in favor of a Roman monument.

You are an expert in Macedonian art, teaching at the university, write books about it, etc. How do you judge the Sphinxes Amphipolis?

The head of the Sphinx does not match the style of the body, the head is very classicists. But if you actually owned the Sphinx, because from what I know the excavators not placed on the body to see if in fact actually been removed from there, then there is no doubt that the monument is the Roman period. Why statues of sphinxes is very bad, totally tasteless. The head with the body does not fit all. They could not have made the Greek artists.

The embankment, the 'polders' Tomb with soil, explained how, in your opinion?

The backfill should be revealed by a flood, because the area was a lake in ancient times. I do not think that was put there by human hand. In any case, this issue needs further documentation, because the embankment is not dating the monument, or any shells that are found within it, because it is after the construction of the Tomb. Incidentally, only the ceramic found in the foundation can be used for reliable conclusions. Because these shells are remnants of the workers were plates and glasses, which were used during the work. Just as today's builders leave behind waste, eg cans or bottles of beer and soft drinks, so the workers threw their ancient pottery that it was not useful.

Think that there are findings from Amphipolis not made public?

Yes, I believe that the excavators not have given us all the information, but this is not because there is feasibility, do not purposely, just does not appeal to archaeologists. Things are great archaeological value, but not impress the general public, not the public. Anything you get from the official updates, are selective. Alone the archaeologists say they have found a great deal of pottery, but it is not significant to our present. And yet, from ceramic dated monuments.

Do you think that the monument of Amphipolis is not as important as we think?

Each other, I think it is an amazing archaeological discovery and us for a long time. At the same time, however, say that the tomb itself, the Macedonian cist found deep in the third chamber, was something too common. There were scores of such Amphipolis, identical to that of the Tomb, cist with deathbed.

Why do you think your views cause such strong reactions?

Macedonia is a sensitive area anyway and whoever says something off the beaten track, immediately accused as a spy. My error was that I did not sue for libel in a newspaper that a few years ago had accused as filoskopiani because I said that the looted tomb at Vergina not found the bones of Philip II, but his son. Parasiopithike course that I had also said that Philip II would be located adjacent to the tomb, the looted, where unfortunately not found anything. The argument against me is that because I say that the tomb does not belong to Philip, will come the Skopjans claim the findings of Vergina. However, this is completely crazy, because I say that the tomb of Philip is right next door. I get angry, because when we do not like the view of some, reviled him, accusing him of being an agent. The same is happening now, because I said that the tomb of Amphipolis is the work of August. I do not think, however, that is so terrible betrayal to say that the core of the tomb in Amphipolis Macedonian, while later additions, probably Roman. And if I have fallen so far out, we deny to the excavator, based on the shells may have found that the foundations of the enclosure or the tomb, which is the only reliable for dating the monument.

Accuse that I have never been in Amphipolis. This is a terrible lie. I've been there too many times to archaeological study, but not in the tomb castes, of course, because access is denied. Not only to me but to anyone outside of the excavators and their associates.

From a historical and archaeological point of view, there is some support in Skopje claims the name "Macedonia"?

Absolutely no support. The Skopjans are Slavs. But because they do not want to belong to Bulgaria, tried to create another ethnicity to differentiate themselves from Bulgarians. Since Macedonia was beside them, calling itself "Macedonians". But this is an argument completely unfounded and unhistorical.

[Redsun]

Amphi is there any pictures of the remains?

Was the body found in a wooden coffin? I cant recall where I read it, I find it hard to believe that after all the effort that was put into the stone tomb the final room would hold a simple wooden coffin.

What materials where found in the coffin, what cloths did the body have on?