The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

This moderated forum is for discussion of Alexander the Great. Inappropriate posts will be deleted without warning. Examples of inappropriate posts are:
* The Greek/Macedonian debate
* Blatant requests for pre-written assignments by lazy students - we don't mind the subtle ones ;-)
* Foul or inappropriate language

Moderator: pothos moderators

Matthew Amt
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:26 am
Location: MD, USA
Contact:

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Matthew Amt »

Taphoi wrote:...The absence of Classical tombs elsewhere is not evidence that there are none under the mound. So it does not exclude the presence of cremation fragments in the soil used to backfill the cist tomb. Really this is just a fact and not susceptible to debate.
I'm sorry, I feel like I'm the little kid butting into the grown-ups' discussion, here, but this is really too much. From all of the excavation and survey done, the ONLY possible conclusion at this time is that there were NO Classical tombs/graves/cremations on that site. Cuz there is nada. Zippo. The Big Goose Egg. You CAN NOT use that as PROOF that cremated remains INside the tomb are from a disturbed Classical grave! Are you using a different definition for the word "fact"?

They didn't find a flying saucer, either--is that PROOF that the cremated bones are alien??

My thanks to all the adults and professionals, here, who have all tried to say this in the proper way. For 104 pages. I'll go back to stomping around and tearing my hair out...

Matthew

PS: Sorry, sorry, I know I'll get in trouble for this. You shoulda seen the first version of this post...
Zebedee
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:29 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Zebedee »

Helepolis wrote:hi Zebedee,

yes at the current state it seems it is floating in the air or at a different level behind the male figure but we dont actually have a complete picture
of the background
The background is even less clear than the foreground, for sure! One thing with the horse you have there is that it doesn't quite chime for me as a portrayal of a horse - the neck seems too extended if that makes sense?

eg compare with

Image

(first half of 3rd century BC, Athens, National Archeological Museum)

The pose is an interesting one. I don't think the arm is held up as in your example (1st century BC?) though. It's more bent - I think whatever it is is holding something to their mouth rather than extending the arm upwards. Agree with the left arm looking like it has a cloak on it.

Just to illustrate what I mean with the figure's right arm shape seeming to imply something being held, here's a Roman (2nd century AD) satyr with baby Dionysos perched on his shoulder. It's from the Pio Clementino in the Vatican, and is believed to be a copy of a 4th century BC original. My eyes are telling me that the centaur's forearm is bent even further than this which is why I suggested something actually being held to the mouth (horn, rhyton, ?).

Image

Hopefully the UV results will help provide a bit more clarity! I think if everyone's honest, we're drawing in lines which may or may not actually be relevant to the depiction. Fully open to these not being centaurs. But I still think all the other elements which are there (amphorae, tripods, bull) plus the big carved snake which was supposedly at the heart of the tomb do lend themselves to reading this as related to 'Orphism'.
Zebedee
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:29 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Zebedee »

Should really contrast with the arm shape Helepolis compares.

It's a lovely bronze. It's 3rd/2nd century BC and from Alexandria. Currently at the Walters Art Museum.

Here's another angle.

Image

If you notice the finger extended on the hand. Compare with another example from the same period held at the Palazzo Massimo alle Terme. This is believed to be a Seleucid ruler or prince, but again notice how the arm shape matches and the finger.

Image

Without seeing the figure or a good write-up of it, I'd suspect the Walters Art Museum's bronze also once had something of a staff or spear there. Have had a brief look this afternoon but not a lot about it I could find, so happy to be corrected if that is not so. But hopefully it helps illustrate at the very least.
gepd
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:06 pm

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by gepd »

I am only going to comment on two statements and hope the discussion will move into other topics from the cremation cemetery, which has been over-discussed. I made all my points, if I keep replying, I will only try and rephrase the same things written before and its not worth the effort anymore.
I am pleased that you now understand my hypothesis. If it is crazy, you will be able to state a clear proof of why such a Classical cemetery does not exist and you will not need to resort to calling me "crazy" to try to win the argument.
I want to clarify that calling a theory crazy does not imply, at least for me, that the person promoting it is crazy. I don't like to offend people, and if I was misunderstood, just replace "crazy" with "extremely unlikely", which exactly reflects the intent of my original comment. For the rest of the sentence, one who proposes the theory is in charge of proving it. It is your theory that a classical cemetery existed, this theory is what goes against all "hands-on" evidence and I can only point the weak points of your proposal. For all the rest, answers have been provided.
I wish to encourage you and others to stop passively accepting the Hephaistion cremation hypothesis from the archaeologists and to start demanding investigation of the bones instead.
None of my arguments in the later discussion implies anything about Hephaestion - only that there was a cremation at Kastas. So, I do not passively accept any Hephaestion hypothesis. Whatever I pointed out is actually against the cremated bones being for Hephaestion, because Kastas had a monumental pyre and Hephaestion's pyre was almost definitely in Asia, no matter if it had the form that Diodorus describes.

With regards to Hephaestion, I just cannot exclude yet the possibility that the monument was originally intended for him (or had some short of connection to him), because an inscription exists that may actually include his name and rosettes that may include his initials. I don't have the knowledge or extra info to interpret the inscription or clarify if the supposed ΗΦ in the rosettes is from random scratches, so I am just curious to hear the opinion of epigraphics experts. I have no problem if the current views of the archaeologists about the inscription or the rosettes end up being completely wrong and irrelevant to Hephaestion.
User avatar
Paralus
Chiliarch
Posts: 2875
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Paralus »

Matthew Amt wrote:I'm sorry, I feel like I'm the little kid butting into the grown-ups' discussion, here, but this is really too much [...] PS: Sorry, sorry, I know I'll get in trouble for this. You shoulda seen the first version of this post...
Matthew I do not see that there is any need for apologising or that you should feel you are "butting into the grown-ups' discussion". On the contrary, you are only expressing what others clearly feel - myself included and not only on the point you've quoted. Gepd has manfully attempted to discuss the relevant points here despite the increasingly obstinate indifference to the evidence by Taphoi which now borders on religious zealotry. Her/his frustration at the schoolboy tactics is evident. Zebedee, too, has tilted laboriously against accumulating Taphonic windmills. I can only suggest you keep calling mutton dressed as lamb for what it is.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
Paralus
Chiliarch
Posts: 2875
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Paralus »

Taphoi wrote:You keep implying that I think the archaeologists are lying. I do not.
Gepd has 'implied' nothing of the sort and these sort of spurious accusations do nothing for the discussion. You really need to cease misrepresenting what others have said; in this case the geological results showing the trench was cut into the existing hill with which you choose to disagree for reasons that are blindingly obvious and self serving.
Taphoi wrote:The problem with the Kasta Mound archaeologists is not that they have lied, but that they have been economical with the truth. Key facts have been withheld. They seemingly knew about the Hephaistion inscriptions from the start, but said nothing (except possibly to tip off their friends, who have since used the information to appear prescient to the media.) They omitted key parts of the inscription blocks in their photos etc etc.
You accuse the archaeologists of withholding key facts (supposedly supplying said facts only to their "friends") and omitting key information. In your view this is so as to continue to foist their view of a Hephaistion connection upon the public about which you so sanctimoniously lecture gepd. You seem blithely unaware that you've accused these archaeologists of lying by omission for that is the perfect definition of same. Not only that, you refuse to accept any and all results or evidence which does not suit your preferred view - even unto the old 'evidence of absence' line which you unsuccessfully trolled through the Academia debate. You, who has never set foot on the archaeological site, are far better placed to adjudge just what those who have done so have found. You, who is yet to get one grain of sand or chamber fill under a fingernail, are far better placed to lecture the archaeologists on its contents and interpretation; to choose to accept or reject geological and other findings. The archaeological team is clearly weakened by the absence of such a self appointed authority on all things Kasta being involved with the site.
Last edited by Paralus on Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
amyntoros
Somatophylax
Posts: 2188
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 2:51 pm
Location: New York City

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by amyntoros »

Taphoi wrote:The problem with the Kasta Mound archaeologists is not that they have lied, but that they have been economical with the truth. Key facts have been withheld. They seemingly knew about the Hephaistion inscriptions from the start, but said nothing (except possibly to tip off their friends, who have since used the information to appear prescient to the media.) They omitted key parts of the inscription blocks in their photos etc etc.
I feel the need to interject here also. The only "problem" with the Kasta Mound is that the discoveries played out in public. Previously, as we are all well aware, the gap between discovery and publication was enormous, with the only discussions in the early and intervening years taking place during academic presentations that did not involve media-publicized challenges from worldwide experts (and amateurs) in almost every field, not to mention members of the press. Those intimately involved with any discovery had the time to research and investigate thoroughly and then define and even refine their theories. Now, because of all the unwarranted negative attention it has been made plain that any future finds, no matter how sensational the excavators believe them to be, will again be treated in this manner. It is such a shame - for us, not for the archaeologists! I believe that almost every member of Pothos who has participated in this thread was disappointed to learn that we shall not have this pleasure again. This is predicted to be the last time we will feel almost like a participant in the excavations as we discuss each new finding.

So ... I think it worthwhile pointing out that accusations of the Kasta Mound archaeologists being "economical with the truth" have no bearing given that there is no precedent for the sharing of information to its current extent. They are not OBLIGED to surrender ANY information to the general public, or even at academic conferences and symposiums. It is their discovery - how much they tell us and when is up to them. Anything that they withhold - or share with a few only - is entirely up to them. And when they finally do publish it will be their publication. I, for one, couldn't give a damn who might "appear prescient to the media" because it is the media attention given to those who have been screaming that they are "right" and those involved with the excavation are "wrong" that has screwed it up for all of us in the future. And yes, in the beginning there were accusations flying in both directions which tends to happen in such situations. However, can anyone blame the Kasta Mound people for keeping things as close to their chests as they could after the initial (and continuing) backlash? I certainly don't blame them, but I regret it has come to this.

It's doubtful we will ever have another thread like this one, no matter what or who may be discovered in the future. We should just enjoy our debate and be grateful for any further information we are graciously given.
Amyntoros

Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:16 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Xenophon »

Just to put rather futile speculation about the skeletal remains to bed, it should be recalled that skeletal remains, especially partial ones, tell us very little about a tomb and its occupants, original and subsequent - not even which is which. A tomb like Kasta which remained open for many years might have successive generations of important people, or a family buried there, some cremated and others inhumed, just like modern family tombs.

Whist I am dubious of many of the archaeological team's theories and pronouncements, due to political machinations in Greece, and the need to hint at an "Alexandrian" connection for funding reasons, we might recall what Katerina Peristeri, who has much experience of finding skeletal remains in her excavations has to say:

Greek Reporter March 2015
"The head archaeologists in Amphipolis, Katerina Peristeri has finally spoken after months of silence, giving a new twist to the case that piqued the international community’s interest.

“We need to focus on the monument, not the bones, which for me are not that important. You cannot receive accurate dating from a skeleton. For me the skeletons are meaningless. They are misleading our research,” said Katerina Peristeri, head of the archaeological excavation team in Amphipolis.

Furthermore, she noted that when they opened the tomb, the space was so messy that the archaeologists could not come to any conclusions. “The tomb looters had ravaged everything. You see, they were looking for the great treasures in the burial chamber, causing enormous damage.”

Regarding the skeletons that were found, the Greek archaeologist notes that several hypothesis have been made. “The skeleton may be sacrificial remnants, or even looters. Besides, we found skeletal material in more than one place.”

Referring to the tomb owner Peristeri noted that they found skeletal material belonging to the person who was first buried in the tomb, very close to the floor. The body belonged to a short man who stood at 1.60 meters in height, whose bones had been shuffled by looters. However, Peristeri believes that if the original tomb owner was a very important person, then his bones may have been stolen.
In other words the skeletal remains tell us very little, and never will reveal more.

Of course it was around that time too that funding completely dried up. Nothing will be coming from the site for a very long time, sadly .
As can be seen from Ms Peristeri's comments, Taphoi's accusations that information is being with-held is not very likely, rather it is the case that there is no information to be had. With limited or no funds, no-one is going to waste money looking at skeletal remains for possible information that can only be of very limited value. Whatever funds can be made available will be used in a more efficient way.
Zebedee
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:29 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Zebedee »

Looking at the construction of the cist grave itself is actually quite interesting.

Kyriakou has a few interesting essays posted up on her academia profile, and this one could help a little with getting to grips with what could reasonably be assumed to be a 'typical' cist grave burial for the richer members of Macedonian society from mid-4th century BC:

https://www.academia.edu/1127787/The_hi ... e_and_time

To quickly summarise the essay:

There was a pyre and cremation near to a cist grave of limestone, the cremated remains placed into a casket, the roof closed, and then the rest of the pyre deposited on what is now the roof of the grave. Which incidentally in the two examples in that essay also included evidence of a horse being sacrificed. A tumulus was then erected over the grave, which was marked out by a peribolos of stones. Over time, the tumulus was expanded to cover several graves, had a monument placed upon its top, and there is evidence of small pyres and broken pottery where ritual sacrifices were performed. On at least two occasions the tumulus was looted, and on both occasions someone blocked up the holes, filled in the trenches and made a sacrifice. The last of the two occasions was sometime around the second quarter of the second century BC. And all this among a group of Iron Age tumuli outside Vegina.

The parallels to Amphipolis seem to be there in my view, regardless of who and how many and in what manner burials were made. Although there are certainly some pretty huge differences too. eg the division of the grave at Amphipolis, to me, seems to somewhat mirror a late 4th century division of cist tombs (see Andronikos' Some Reflections on Macedonian Tombs) which seem to have no purpose structurally, but may have been designed to provide a division between where a kline is placed and an antechamber. It leads to odd questions following that line of thought though. Such as why a cist grave and not a chamber tomb if a huge monument was always the intention here.

One question which is really niggling at me. A snake on a tree on its own. Is there anywhere else such a thing has been found? The closest I've got is some symbolic depictions of Zeus as an eagle at the top of said tree and even then it's not on a standing stone!
User avatar
Taphoi
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 932
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:32 pm
Location: Bristol, England, UK
Contact:

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Taphoi »

Matthew Amt wrote:...You CAN NOT use that as PROOF that cremated remains INside the tomb are from a disturbed Classical grave! Are you using a different definition for the word "fact"?
As a matter of record, I have not said that the possibility that the cremation fragments came from a classical cemetery lying under the mound proves that there was no cremation burial in the mound. I believe now and have stated above that it is possible that there was a cremation burial in the mound. I have only said that there is no certainty concerning the origin of the fragments. It is perfectly plausible that there are classical burials hidden beneath a 20000m2 mound considering that the area was used for burials right into the early 5th century BC.
Best wishes,
Andrew
User avatar
Paralus
Chiliarch
Posts: 2875
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Paralus »

Taphoi wrote: It is perfectly plausible that there are classical burials hidden beneath a 20000m2 mound considering that the area was used for burials right into the early 5th century BC.
Of course it is. Everything is "perfectly plausible" in your fantasy. That is the point of your "argument". Perfect plausibility allows for many creative scenarios as gepd has adroitly pointed out.

I'm guessing you've run away from your certainty that Kassandros destroyed and sealed the tomb or is that still one of your "perfectly plausible" scenarios Taphers? (With due attribution to my departed friend)
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
amyntoros
Somatophylax
Posts: 2188
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 2:51 pm
Location: New York City

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by amyntoros »

Re.The Shield on the Relief

Gepd posted an image of this "sculpture" in early March (the one below is a different photograph) and didn't know the source. System1988 correctly thought it might not be from a Greek museum. I came across it by accident tonight whilst browsing images of terracotta figurines. Turns out that it is a small, early Hellenistic terracotta relief dated late 3rd to early 2nd century, one of four which were probably attached to a large funerary jar, and it is at the Metropolitan Museum here in New York. Link here for further info.

Image

Best Regards,
Amyntoros

Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
gepd
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:06 pm

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by gepd »

Thanks Amyntoros for finding this - very interesting.
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:16 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by Xenophon »

Amyntoros wrote:
Turns out that it is a small, early Hellenistic terracotta relief dated late 3rd to early 2nd century, one of four which were probably attached to a large funerary jar, and it is at the Metropolitan Museum here in New York. Link here for further info.
At the risk of being pedantic, whilst that sculpture might be somewhat 'Hellenistic' in style, in fact it is Italian - from Canusa in Apulia to be exact, as is evident from the link Amyntoros kindly posted. The theme/topos of a 'celtic' style horseman (though equipped in Celtic style, the victorious rider may not be intended to be a 'Celt') over a 'Greek' style opponent is a common one - I posted another example following Gepd's post on Sun 6/3; p.85. The dating is accurate (3C), but this theme is purely Italian.......

Nevertheless, it and others like it are good illustrations from a time when such shields had been adopted in Italy from the Celts, and about the time we see it introduced into Greece i.e. circa 275 BC aprox, plus or minus a few years, very likely by Pyrrhus of Epirus......
rodakes
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 7:17 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipolis

Post by rodakes »

Philip of Macedonia and Olympias are burried into the AmphipolisTomb!
https://youtu.be/LK1ytuFk0-k
Post Reply