"I carried in my hands his light – like a small shield- body"
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:44 pm
In 2011 there was a discussion in the forum on the case of L.Soulvatzi who, in the 90’s performed an excavation by paying the expenses on her own, on an area located at the Sioua Egyptian oasis. She then announced that she had found Alexander the Great’s tomb. Agesilaos gave very informative answers to the questions of the forum’s members. On the link containing the answers (which I cannot find) it is mentioned that the Egyptians, most of them archaeologists, were claiming that Souvaltzi had simply “discovered” a temple which had already been discovered long ago.
In short, Souvaltzi was intensely questioned at a global level and was accused of many things, such as her behavior, being an amateur, plotting and being a political opportunist etc
Of course, for the facts to be fully comprehended, one must browse through the publications of the archaeologists who first found the temple and learn to which god it was dedicated to, its dating etc (lucky be those who know Arabic and can read the original texts)
I had the chance to read in haste the book ‘ Διόνυσος και Αλέξανδρος – το κοινό όραμα’ (Alexander and Dionysus – the common vision), a greek-only publication I believe.
The book is “flaky” as far as the photographic part is concerned there are title-less photos, title without photos, unidentified ancient monuments, tombs shown without coherence and cohesion etc.
In the end there is a photo of the excavated tomb (face), and a few of its virtual representations.
Whatever follows is the Souvaltzi’s approach. The data are shown without ande order and they are the ones that peaked my interest.
Ptolemy’s loyal soldiers, dressed as Arabs caravan salesmen took only the corpse and covered it with various cloths to hid he intense smell from the oils and perfumes and placed it inside their trade goods. In order to not be spotted by Perdikka’s soldiers they traveled only at night. It took them four months to reach the Sioua oasis where Ptolemy had built the tomb.
They passed by five oasis until they reached the one they wanted. All these neighboring oasis do not have neither Egyptian nor Ververian names but instead altered by times Greek ones. For example there is El Maraki oasis. It comes from the word “μειράκιο” (mirakio) because Alexander was too young when he began his campaign and that had made a great impression. Another one is called Τιμοίρια (Timoiria) and the word comes from the word “μοίρα” (moira) which in Greek means “fate”. There is also a forest that is called by the locals “Alexander’s forest” because it was there that the soldiers that carried his body rested before reaching the Sioua oasis.
Alexander has many similarities to the god Dionysus. One of them is that both are depicted wearing women clothes- Alexander however just mimicked the god (after all he had participated in the mysteries of Dionysus)
The emperor Traianos visited the tomb. There is an inscription that proves and it bears an engraved ivy symbol, a sign of mutual recognizing between members of the Dionysus mysteries participants. Emperor Andrianos also visited the tomb. There is an inscription of a Macedonian officer, Laonikeios (?) who visited the tomb and expresses his marvel. We have found this name in the history books, meaning that he indeed was an officer of Alexander.
Lastly there is an inscription of Ptolemy himself that makes a reference.
“I carried myself the light like a small shield body of his (towards the tomb). I am the last survivor, I am the keeper and what I did, I did so for him”
Having mentioned all these things by Souvaltzi (I didn’t buy the book so this is all I remember) here are a few of my own thoughts:
1) It’s a shame that we don’t have any contact with an Egyptian archaeologist of historian for the excavated temple’s on Memphis importance and especially for the oasis importance on Alexander’s history as well as his descendants. It is not impossible for worship of Alexander to have emerged in that area, during the Ptolemy dynasty, just from the memory of Alexander visiting temple of Ammon Zeus alone. From what the evidence is telling us there are archaeological remnants in almost all of the oasis.
2) It’s a shame the we don’t know the opinion of Egyptian/ Arabs linguists as far as the greek names of the oasis are concerned. If this is valid then it is a worthwhile historical testimony.
3) It’s a shame that we don’t know something more about the aforementioned inscriptions.
4) It’s a shame that the relationship of Alexander to the god Dionysus has not been researched extensively as far as I know.
5) And what happened to the half-excavated monument? It is said to be guarded. Has its revealing been on the Egyptian authorities’s agenda? Even if it belongs as said to some Macedonian officer and it is a grave, not a temple, it would be very interesting to know of the hypotheses concerning the identity of its owner (you have to be a… VIP in order to have a 525 square meter tomb surrounded by a 12.000 s.m landholding on the general area!)
6) TIt would be so valuable if we had a greater touch with Hellenistic Egypt from the forum’s part !
In short, Souvaltzi was intensely questioned at a global level and was accused of many things, such as her behavior, being an amateur, plotting and being a political opportunist etc
Of course, for the facts to be fully comprehended, one must browse through the publications of the archaeologists who first found the temple and learn to which god it was dedicated to, its dating etc (lucky be those who know Arabic and can read the original texts)
I had the chance to read in haste the book ‘ Διόνυσος και Αλέξανδρος – το κοινό όραμα’ (Alexander and Dionysus – the common vision), a greek-only publication I believe.
The book is “flaky” as far as the photographic part is concerned there are title-less photos, title without photos, unidentified ancient monuments, tombs shown without coherence and cohesion etc.
In the end there is a photo of the excavated tomb (face), and a few of its virtual representations.
Whatever follows is the Souvaltzi’s approach. The data are shown without ande order and they are the ones that peaked my interest.
Ptolemy’s loyal soldiers, dressed as Arabs caravan salesmen took only the corpse and covered it with various cloths to hid he intense smell from the oils and perfumes and placed it inside their trade goods. In order to not be spotted by Perdikka’s soldiers they traveled only at night. It took them four months to reach the Sioua oasis where Ptolemy had built the tomb.
They passed by five oasis until they reached the one they wanted. All these neighboring oasis do not have neither Egyptian nor Ververian names but instead altered by times Greek ones. For example there is El Maraki oasis. It comes from the word “μειράκιο” (mirakio) because Alexander was too young when he began his campaign and that had made a great impression. Another one is called Τιμοίρια (Timoiria) and the word comes from the word “μοίρα” (moira) which in Greek means “fate”. There is also a forest that is called by the locals “Alexander’s forest” because it was there that the soldiers that carried his body rested before reaching the Sioua oasis.
Alexander has many similarities to the god Dionysus. One of them is that both are depicted wearing women clothes- Alexander however just mimicked the god (after all he had participated in the mysteries of Dionysus)
The emperor Traianos visited the tomb. There is an inscription that proves and it bears an engraved ivy symbol, a sign of mutual recognizing between members of the Dionysus mysteries participants. Emperor Andrianos also visited the tomb. There is an inscription of a Macedonian officer, Laonikeios (?) who visited the tomb and expresses his marvel. We have found this name in the history books, meaning that he indeed was an officer of Alexander.
Lastly there is an inscription of Ptolemy himself that makes a reference.
“I carried myself the light like a small shield body of his (towards the tomb). I am the last survivor, I am the keeper and what I did, I did so for him”
Having mentioned all these things by Souvaltzi (I didn’t buy the book so this is all I remember) here are a few of my own thoughts:
1) It’s a shame that we don’t have any contact with an Egyptian archaeologist of historian for the excavated temple’s on Memphis importance and especially for the oasis importance on Alexander’s history as well as his descendants. It is not impossible for worship of Alexander to have emerged in that area, during the Ptolemy dynasty, just from the memory of Alexander visiting temple of Ammon Zeus alone. From what the evidence is telling us there are archaeological remnants in almost all of the oasis.
2) It’s a shame the we don’t know the opinion of Egyptian/ Arabs linguists as far as the greek names of the oasis are concerned. If this is valid then it is a worthwhile historical testimony.
3) It’s a shame that we don’t know something more about the aforementioned inscriptions.
4) It’s a shame that the relationship of Alexander to the god Dionysus has not been researched extensively as far as I know.
5) And what happened to the half-excavated monument? It is said to be guarded. Has its revealing been on the Egyptian authorities’s agenda? Even if it belongs as said to some Macedonian officer and it is a grave, not a temple, it would be very interesting to know of the hypotheses concerning the identity of its owner (you have to be a… VIP in order to have a 525 square meter tomb surrounded by a 12.000 s.m landholding on the general area!)
6) TIt would be so valuable if we had a greater touch with Hellenistic Egypt from the forum’s part !