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

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 Amphipol

Post by Taphoi »

Callisto wrote:Is it me or the figures at the top of the sphinxes look like Caryatids?
Yes, indeed. And they have one arm out-stretched to support the throne strut, which is perhaps the pose of the Amphipolis Caryatids with respect to their lintel. So the Amphipolis tomb guardians are reproduced in miniature as supporters on the throne of Alexander's grandmother. I consider that this tends to support the hypothesis that the occupant at Amphipolis was a late 4th century queen of Macedon.
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 Amphipol

Post by Paralus »

I cannot see this as a tomb for Olympias. Nothing, historically, points to such. After what can only be seen as an ill-considered (but entirely in character) rule of terror, Olympias was bottled up in Pydna until abject surrender. Following this, Kassandros, de facto king of the country, had her murdered. One might counter that he was careful in constructing this murder but the result was precisely the same. Post the 'Peace of the Dynasts' he eliminated the rest of her line. He ruled until consumption claimed him in 297/6. There is, in my view, very little chance of Kassandros countenancing such a monument to Olympias while he lived. There is precious little more chance of such being contemplated by Demetrios, Pyrrhos or Lysimachos.

I do not see any hard evidence that Olympias died at Amphipolis (and a circular argument that the tomb supports such is obvious). If Kassandros was so concerned about Macedonian reaction to his judicial murder of the old matriarch then there is precious little reason to engage in what must have been an interment to put that of JFK in the shade. Nor, as I wrote above, to countenance such while he or his line lived. Far from mollifying opposition, it can only have enhanced the position of Alexander IV.
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
Callisto
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:14 pm

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by Callisto »

I have to take back the guess about the miniatures.

Yesterday Kottaridi commented on the Eurydice throne's miniatures. She said they are "dancers" from those initiated into the Orphic mysteries. They are in motion contrary to the Caryatids of Amphipolis. They dress differently and have a completely different role.

As a similar example to the Amphipolis Caryatids, she mentioned the ones found in Sveshtari (Bulgaria). They both stand in the similar way and have the same role.
Attachments
dancers_eurydice_throne.jpg
dancers_eurydice_throne.jpg (168.95 KiB) Viewed 4264 times
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 Amphipol

Post by Taphoi »

Callisto wrote:I have to take back the guess about the miniatures.
It is clear that the caryatids on the throne are not exactly the same as the caryatids in the Amphipolis tomb, but they are nevertheless caryatids: Diana King referred to those on the throne as caryatids in a post about the sphinxes on the throne before the caryatids at Amphipolis had been found and both sets meet the definition. Neither are the sphinxes on the throne exactly like those at Amphipolis. However, the differences could for example be explained by the funerary context at Amphipolis, whereas the throne was made for use in life. Caryatids with one arm upraised and sphinxes were used together as symbols of Eurydice I and now we see the same combination at Amphipolis. Symbols are always modified over time and according to the context in which they are used, so variations have to be expected.

Best wishes,

Andrew
Nikas
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 5:50 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by Nikas »

Nikas wrote:
agesilaos wrote:We call the 9th century AD people Slavs, rather than slaves (douloi), I know you won't take the correction the wrong way; yes, and there are the Ostrogoths in the fifth century and the Bulgars, They were probably not as destructive as the so-called civilised peoples make out, though, the Vandals were certainly capable of high art, the Visigothic sack of Rome was more of an organised tithe, and the Empire was saved by Stilicho, a Vandal, and continued with more tolerance by Odoacer , a Rugian and particularly Theodoric the Ostrogoth (though he did murder Odoacer in a church during a truce prompting some of my favourite dying words, 'Ubi Deus?' - 'Where is God!?') The problem is this supposed 2nd Century date, I can see it being a reporting error of AD for BC, the press seem to be guilty of much distortion and the archaeologists not forthcoming; which is probably best until there is some real evidence. Maybe we should have a poll beforehand, I think Taphoi will have to set it as he started the thread, it will have to cover quite a broad range though, maybe if we ask Marcus or Amyntoros nicely they can mergethe two threads and start a poll :wink: I will give my list of options if anyone can think of others post and I feel sure those who look on high can accomodate NB this is for the occupant(s) not the desecrators:

1] empty tomb intended for Perdikkas' burial of Alexander
2] Roxane
3] Niarchos
4] Polyperchon
5] Kassandros
6] Olympias
7] Leonnatos
8] Antipatros
9] Herakles
10] Alexander IV
11] Alexander V
!2] Sostratos
13] Lysimachos
14] Polysperchon
15] The Antigonid Dynasty

That's it from me but there are plenty more ... don't forget if it ain't on the list you won't be able to vote for it :shock:
How secure is the dating of the tomb from what is known so far? Do the architectural elements also carry forward to say circa second-century BC? Is it certain it is a female occupant? Wild speculation but there is another potential royal candidate:

Philip V. died at Amphipolis towards the end of B.C. 179. His last days were embittered by remorse for the death of his son Demetrius, whose innocence had been demonstrated to him. He wished to leave his crown to Antigonus, the son of Echecrates and nephew of Antigonus Doson, in order to punish his elder son Perseus for his treachery in securing his brother's death. But Philip died suddenly before this could be secured, and Perseus succeeded him without opposition. See Livy, 40, 55-57.
Hmm, I just read somewhere conjecture on the lion being associated with Laomedon....
system1988
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 739
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:20 am
Location: Athens, Greece

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by system1988 »

Taphoi wrote:
It is clear that the caryatids on the throne are not exactly the same as the caryatids in the Amphipolis tomb, but they are nevertheless caryatids: Diana King referred to those on the throne as caryatids in a post about the sphinxes on the throne before the caryatids at Amphipolis had been found and both sets meet the definition. Neither are the sphinxes on the throne exactly like those at Amphipolis. However, the differences could for example be explained by the funerary context at Amphipolis, whereas the throne was made for use in life. Caryatids with one arm upraised and sphinxes were used together as symbols of Eurydice I and now we see the same combination at Amphipolis. Symbols are always modified over time and according to the context in which they are used, so variations have to be expected.

Best wishes,

Andrew

Now that I have seen the miniatures up close, I can see that they are indeed dancers. The meaning behind the Kariatides and the Atlantes is that they are holding something, serving as their foundations. In the case of Euridikes' throne,there seems to be an empty space above the head and the extended arm for each figure. All things considered, their stance indicates their dancing form and intention.

As far as the throne itself is concerned, I do not believe it was intended for everyday use but it rather served as a status indicator for the deceased. An analogous "everyday" throne must have been made of wood, probably some comfortable pillows....

By the way, I did see you on the news here in Greece today. The newscaster was talking about your belief of the tomb being Roxane's or Olympias' and was very enthusiastic about it.
Πάντες άνθρωποι του ειδέναι ορέγονται φύσει
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by agesilaos »

Laomedon? Hardly a figure worthy of such a monument, he does not figure greatly in the story of Alexander let alone the Diadochoi, and the three chambers ? Korybantic dancers are not Karyatids, Andrew; don't force your associations, you have made your initial best guess and whilst I disagree with your reasoning, should you be shown to be incorrect, I for one will not be ridiculing anyone, I have to agree with Paralus' case against it being Olympias, but I am only human and may be wrong :shock:

I know that Tomb III at Vergina is generally thought to have been that of Alexander IV, but what evidence is there? I ask this from a position of relative ignorance rather than as an agent provocateur. If it is securely dated to Kassandros' rule might it not be that of Iollas, Kassandros' brother, whose tomb was desecrated by Olympias? He murdered Alexander IV in secret a public burial is therefore unlikely. Burying his brother alongside the lately murdered royals would make a clear propaganda point, associating his family with the old dynasty.

Enthusiasm is no guarantee of accuracy, Pauline :wink:

Edited to take a little bit of the mickey out of Andrew :twisted:
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Efstathios
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:08 pm
Location: Athens,Greece

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by Efstathios »

Let's see the facts again.
- The tomb is dated from around 325 to 300 b.c.
- All facts point that it was made by Dinocrates the favorite architect of Alexander and founder of Alexandria. It was constructed with Thasian marble.
- The tomb is most probably a royal one and the decoration further reinforces this.
- It's the largest tomb found in Greece.

There is also a theory that has been reported by archaeologists that probably explains the view of Mrs Peristeri that the tomb is possibly unlooted. The little holes on each separating wall in the corridor and the sand refer to the egyptian tactic to protect a tomb from smugglers, which seems possible to have been used here as well revealing that the tomb was most probably sealed right after the burial. This also further reinforces the fact that the architect was Dinocrates who had good knowledge of the egyptian architecture. There is no other tomb found in Macedonia that has this characteristic, with sand that reaches to the top of the tomb which makes this one unique.

According to all of the above, the tomb is most probably for a member of the royal family that died at that era. If the theory that the tomb was sealed is correct then it is not an empty tomb and it's most possibly unlooted. The size of the tomb in comparison to Vergina's tombs indicate that it's either Alexander, his son, Roxanne or Olympias. The most probable scenario as i see it is that it's Alexander the 4th and Roxanne. Everything is on the table though. It could even be Alexanders' if the information about the soma at Alexandria is false. But as we have said that is the least probable scenario.
Last edited by Efstathios on Mon Sep 08, 2014 11:55 pm, edited 4 times in total.
"Hence we will not say that Greeks fight like heroes, but that heroes fight like Greeks."
Sir Winston Churchill, 1941.
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 Amphipol

Post by Paralus »

Hi Stathi. Long time.

There are all sorts of 'connections' being made and, annoying though it is, it is probably best to wait til they get inside. I do hope, as you suggest, the tomb may be intact and that any frescoes are well and truly preserved (along with other items). It is a rather large tomb - three chambers. Again, I do not see this as being built for Olympias for, if it were so, the other two are only likely for her grandson and his Asian mother. Now, Olympias was taken at Pydna after a debilitating siege. Macedonian anger at her injudicious rule - a Macedonian St Valentine's Day interlude - was at a peak. If Kassandros were to have this anger do the job for him the 'trial' had to be concocted and carried out as a matter of alacrity. She therefore is done away with as soon as is practicable which does not encompass carrying her about the countryside whilst conducting operations against Amphipolis. This being the case, why does Kassandros allow such a mausoleum to her family to be built? Three rooms presumes others to follow and Alexander IV and his mother did not do so until the closing decade of the century.
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
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:16 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by Xenophon »

...not to mention that there is archaeological evidence that suggests Olympias was buried somewhere close to Pydna.
From the 1930's onward, fragments of funeral epigraphy, clearly suggested that Olympias' Epirote family ( the Aeacids) had moved to Pydna, lived there for generations, died and been buried there.

"After the execution of Olympias at Pydna, Cassander, according to Diodorus [Diodorus, XVII.118.2] and Porphyry, refused her body proper burial and caused it to be cast into the open.But there were surely those in Macedonia who would see to it that the corpse of the mother of the great king received interment, however informal. Because of the circumstances it is understandable that the initial and necessarily surreptitious burial should have been at or near Pydna. Given Cassander's notorious hatred for Olympias, it is unlikely that a formal tomb was constructed for the queen's body during his reign or even during that of his sons, that is, from 316 down to 294 B.C. The terminus ante quem for the construction of Olympias' tomb is the years 288 to 285 B.C. during which Pyrrhus of Epirus, himself of course an Aeacid, ruled the western half of Macedonia within which Pydna was situated. Pyrrhus would surely have seen to it that the body of his famous cousin received proper burial, had such burial not already taken place during the short reign of Demetrius I (294-288 B.C.)..........Our knowledge of the internal history of the Epirote monarchy after the death of Pyrrhus in 273 is too slight to permit anything save conjecture. The relations between Antigonid Macedonia and King Alexander II of Epirus (273-ca. 240 B.C.) were ordinarily hostile or at best strained. Conceivably there can have been quarrels within the Aeacid house which caused some of its members to flee to Macedonia. But for this there is no evidence at all. There is one occasion, however, which would motivate the appearance of members of the Epirote royal family in Macedonia. Shortly before 229 B.C. the dynasty in Epirus was overthrown by a popular revolution and its members put to death. At this time the wife of Demetrius II, king of Macedonia, was the Aeacid princess, Phthia. Had any members of the Aeacid house-small children, for example-lived through the revolution, Demetrius II would have made every effort to save them and to give them refuge in Macedonia. And nothing would have been more appropriate than for the Aeacid survivor or survivors to have received a land grant from the Macedonian king at the place where was located the tomb of Olympias, the most celebrated of Aeacid princesses. I suggest, though there can as yet be no certainty on the matter, that it became the custom for the Aeacid family after settling at Makriyialos[Pydna] to bury their dead in the immediate vicinity of Olympias' tomb. This explanation best motivates the mention of the tomb in Oikonomos' fragmentary epigram and adds point to the claim to descent from Olympias made in the epitaph for Alcimachus." Charles Edson.

With two fragmentary references to Olympias and her tomb implying that it was nearby, that is strong evidence that Olympias' tomb ( most likely a modest one) is at Pydna, undiscovered. That, of course is exactly what we should expect......

In the circumstances, I think that the Amphipolis monument being connected to Olympias can be firmly ruled out......
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 Amphipol

Post by amyntoros »

Seeing as no one other than Taphoi, as far as I recall, has decided to enter a vote for someone on Agesilaos' list, I am about to commit. (I also do think that Taphoi's vote should be amended to full committal given that he's publicly declared for Olympias to all news outlets while claiming here that he's only 50 per cent!) Anyway, I'm going for Nearchus. Simple choice really, given that (a) he's from Amphipolis and (b) he certainly must have been rich enough by his death to have such a tomb built for his family. And ... well .. if it IS Nearchus' tomb then hopefully it will have triremes and/or other sailing ships adorning its walls so there will be no arguing about its occupants. :lol:

Sadly, very sadly, if my guess should prove to be right then groans of disappointment will surely echo around the world. Of course there is excitement in the Greek media regarding Andrew's article. If the tomb can be connected with Alexander's mother then the world will join in the celebrations and the publicity for Greece will be wonderful (and well deserved, IMO, because it is an incredible tomb no matter who it holds, and it deserves to be celebrated). However, if it were found to have been built for Nearchus or another of Alexander's officers I'm rather afraid that the publicity will die down very fast as most of the world, i.e. the average "Joe", will likely respond with "Who?"

Best regards,
Amyntoros

Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by agesilaos »

I think you err, Amyntoros; I have plumped for the Mausoleion of the Antigonid dynasty, System 1988 for Niarchos, like yourself and Nikas for Laomedon (or maybe he just mentioned him).

The problem with Niarchos is that he is last heard of in the entourage of Demetrios at the battle of Gaza and no defection to the Antipatrid camp is mentioned, which is a problem of minor proportions if the Tomb does date to 310 (probably June the fourth around tea-time!), also, and this is tenuous, Kassandros and Lysimachos seem to have been firm allies, Onesikritos is found in the Court of Lysimachos and he was an enemy of Niarchos, I would think Niarchos died in Asia under Antigonos or maybe Seleukos. Similar to Laomedon he does not seem a grand enough to warrant a tomb on such a scale. Laomedon perished with the Perdikkan rump in their Asian prison, I think, so he too is unlikely.

Paralus is quite right that we will have to wait but that is a tad boring. I second what both he and Xenophon (maybe I third it, mmh?) say about the liklihood of it being Olympias, Roxane and Alexander IV (if he is at Vergina he cannot be here negating any royal connotations to the decoration of Tomb III there, the occupant would not be Argaead but a re-buried Iollas, given the shortage of high status teenagers dying around this time, Herakles was jointly not acknowleded as royal by any of the Diadochoi so cannot be a candidate IMHO).

The 'so-called' dating evidence has not been released only the over precise conclusion - Kassandros did not date his coins as Ptolemy did; arguments from style are fraught as they persist. The arguments that Dinokrates built it are built on the same substance that that fills the chambers and arise from the wish for an Alexander connection just as the precise date is meant to show that it was Rhoxane. At least, the three chambers do suggest that the tomb was occupied and is not a cenotaph, the sculpture is certainly of high quality so there ought to be some nice finds preferably with names inscribed, and a stele or two, and a complete Hieronymos preseved in the anaerobic conditions...well if you don't hope you can't taste the bitter cud of disappointment.
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
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 Amphipol

Post by Paralus »

Boring! Boring? Yes, a Hieronymus would be quite the thing actually - a possibility for your suggestion with which I tend to agree. What of the Antipatrids?? I recall something linking Antipatros with the area. Nearkhos and Laomedon surely cannot warrant such a thing. I'd expect something similar to Aghios Athanasios for such a one; not this Colosseum of a mausoleum.

The notion that Kassandros took himself to Amphipolis is nothing more than speculation; nothing necessitates such a view. That he'd tow around the fearsome old queen on such a campaign is negated by the fact that he had her write and order the fortress's surrender which duly followed. Had it not, Kassandros will have had to besiege the fortress with Olympias in tow. Further, when Olympias was put on 'trial', she is not present to give a defence before the "general assembly of the Macedonians" and Kassandros, on duly getting his 'judgement', "sent some of his friends to Olympias advising her to escape secretly, promising to provide a ship for her and to carry her to Athens". Olympias rejected this ploy and vowed to face her accusers. Kassandros then sent soldiers to kill her. These broke into "the royal house" (τὴν βασιλικὴν οἰκίαν) and, unless one supposes Macedonian royalty had shifted house, that royal residence cannot have been at Amphipolis. Now, it might be said that this may simply refer to the abode which held the royal personage rather than the royal residence. But if it is highly unlikely that Kassandros would tow Olympias to Amphipolis to plonk her in someone's house then it seems even more so that Kassandros has gathered "the relatives of those whom Olympias had slain" and towed them all along to Amphipolis to await the surrender of Aristonous as well.

There's something of a fount of wishful thinking breaking out on the site as well as at the site.
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
Zebedee
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:29 am

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by Zebedee »

I was just hoping for Aristotle, a son by concubine and a great nephew. With their complete works preserved. I'll be disappointed won't I? :D

To me, there's a lot of Athenian elements to what has been uncovered so far and that would plausibly fit in with the dates being suggested. Very early for some of the influences but still plausibly dating from after the c.317 BC edicts there. Did notice some coverage seeming to make much of the various styles as pointing to gender or even specific status and I'm not sure it really does. Even something like an 8 petalled rosette is found in Macedonian funerary settings elsewhere (eg the silver calyx found at Tomb B, Derveni), and more broadly rosettes regularly appear in Macedonian burials.

If you wanted to push the Athenian links some more, there is a smaller version (110cm tall) of that lion in the Getty collection made of Pentelic marble and originally from Marathon. The bigger 'twin' at Chaeronea is Boetian marble and has been suggested as being part of Cassander making nice in 315 BC after re-founding Thebes. It does seem to point to Cassander being involved with the construction.

Leaning towards a big statement by the Antipatrids if I can't have Aristotle.
User avatar
delos13
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:59 pm

Re: The Sphinxes Guarding the Lion Tomb Entrance at Amphipol

Post by delos13 »

I was reading all the discussions in excitement for a long time and now, when the time is hopefully close, would like to join in speculations. :)

Though, unfortunately, I can see more reasons why the tomb can't belong to the candidates on the Nikas' list than I can see why yes. First, my thoughts on Olympia. In the beginning, I thought there was no way why it can be her tomb, the biggest argument being that there was simply not a single person who would want to give her appropriate last honors, even her being Alexander's mother. And then I realized, there was actually one, Thessalonika. Olympia practically raised her and it is possible that Thessalonika loved her as a mother. No proof but it is quite a possibility. So, it maybe the case that T. wanted to give Olympia a burial fitting for Macedonian Queen. As for means, yes, Kassander forced her into marriage but then he named a city after his wife. People do fall in love, even such monsters as Kassander. So, I can envision a scenario when Thessalonika went to Kassander and said, "You know what, darling, the woman raised me, she was like a true mother to me, I want to give her a proper burial. You don't need to publicize it, you don't even need to be involved, but please, do it for me?" And Kassander caved. As romantic as it sounds, it is quite a possible scenario.

Alexander IV and Roxana are another valid possibility (mostly time wise and geographically) but I can't figure out who would want to do that?

I also think that Antipatrides (any combination of them) are good candidates.

And in the end, Alexander is still a possibility. There is nothing to say against the idea that, after learning how Egyptian Pharaohs started to built their pyramids right away after they ascended the throne, Alexander didn't get fond of the idea. Let's not forget, that Dinokrates' plans for transforming mount Atos' geographically very close. The constriction of such a tomb might be not widely publicized and just selected few knew about its existence. Perdiccas would definitely be among those few. Honestly, I was always suspicious about Ptolemy's successful hijacking of Alexander's remains on route to Pella. Even in modern times it is customary to organize a fake transport of some precious goods but the real McCoy transported secretly without much ado. Plus, suspecting that Ptolemy might want to do exactly that, Perdiccas might wanted to have a cause to declare war on his former brother-in-arms. It didn't turn out well for Perdiccas, but he wouldn't be the first (or the last) whose perfect plans went astray.

Question for Agesilaos: you mentioned in one of your comments above that there is a candidate for a burial place for Thessalonike. Can you please let me know where can I read about it? I tried to find, but unsuccessfully.
Post Reply