pothos.org

You raise good questions, but Deinocratis was not the only architect in Alexander's campaign. He was the head-architect, and he could have other architects or students working on the projects, and he could have visited them at any time. He could have left Babylon for Amphipolis to start working on this monument and the temple of Artemis tavropolos at any given time. The trip to Macedonia wouldn't take that long.

Deinokrates certainly returned to Alexandria, as he reportedly planned a statue of Arsinoe II which would be suspended by magnetic force for Ptolemy II Philadelphos (Pliny is the source I think). His connection with the alleged pyre, certainly appears on the internet but is notably absent from Diodoros' account of the pyre (XVII 114) and Plutarch (Alex. 72 iii) says ἐπόθησε μάλιστα τῶν τεχνιτῶν Στασικράτην 'he desperately longed for the engineer Stasikrates...' who is confirmed as the same man as Deinokrates as Plutarch identifies him with the Mount Athos project; this is the only association I can find and it is clear that Deinokrates was actually absent and thus not involved, one does not 'yearn desperately' for things to hand but for those unobtainable; given he was alive he had most likely remained to supervise the construction of Alexandria.

Efstathios wrote:

Nevertheless, there is a suspicion that somebody who is choosing to highlight Justin as their principal source on Hephaistion's funeral and has not realised that he is translating pyra rather arbitrarily as tumulus has not properly read all the relevant material before pronouncing.

Prof. Mavroyiannis did say that this depends on how one translates the text. So he is aware of the translation issue. He made a hypothesis. I only quoted what he said. But tumulunque does not translate into pyra, if that was the case then tumulus that is the english word derived from the latin could also have the meaning of pyra, but you don't use that word do you? A tumulus is a mound of earth raised and stones raised above a tomb. In this case the original translator from latin to english did not "say" pyre but tomb. And it doesn't really matter who is the source as we are talking about a certain wording here that probably has nothing to do with the credibility of the author. We know that a "book" about Alexander's and Hephaestion's burials existed but it has not survived the ages. So Justin could have used that as his source for Hephaestion's tomb.

Tumulus in Latin is more or less equivalent to sema in Greek. Both mean a marker for the grave, originally an earth mound, but later any kind of tomb monument. Pyra in the sense of a monument on the site of the funeral pyre is therefore a special case of sema, so it is quite reasonable to translate it as tumulus, given that there is no direct equivalent in Latin. We know that Justin and Diodorus are both derivatives of Cleitarchus. We know that Justin and Diodorus are the two sources that costed Hephaistion's funeral at 12000 talents. Diodorus uses pyra for both the funeral pyre and the monument to be built on the site of the funeral pyre. So too I think did Cleitarchus. Therefore Justin (actually Trogus originally) is translating pyra as tumulus. Anyone who had studied all the sources in their original languages would know this.
Best wishes,
Andrew

The Greek tv show "Overthrow" - The entitre truth about Amphipolis - yesterday aired this episode about Amphipolis.

http://www.megatv.com/anatropi/default. ... d=34156777

In the episode some of the most well-known archaeologists of Greece talk about their take on the excavation as well as about their hypothesies as to who the deceased person is.

Dorothy King is also there through a statement of hers (unfortunately the only one you will understand as the entrire show is in Greek)

From left to right: Prof. Faklaris, Prof. Olga Palagia, Prof. Alevra, Prof. Valavanis, and on the screen Prof. Paliadeli (the one with the glasses) and Prof. Nakasis.

The conversation was interesting and many issues came to light- most of them have already been unravelled on Pothos. I hope someone has the time to translate the key points the guests make.

I still didnt obtain the manuscript by Steve Miller about the peribolos blocks at the Strymon, but apparently he noted down the letters seen on the pictures I posted earlier:

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/pr ... 1=standard&

See entry 349 from above: apparently the graffiti appears in several places, what is inscribed is ΔΙΖΑ ΑΛΚΟΥ, whatever that means.

The only thing I found from a fast look is that ΔΙΖΑ (diza) is a goat (Attic aix) and Hera aigophagos Goat-eater in Sparta.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doric_Greek & http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... irect=true

Taphoi wrote:We know that Justin and Diodorus are both derivatives of Cleitarchus. We know that Justin and Diodorus are the two sources that costed Hephaistion's funeral at 12000 talents. Diodorus uses pyra for both the funeral pyre and the monument to be built on the site of the funeral pyre. So too I think did Cleitarchus. Therefore Justin (actually Trogus originally) is translating pyra as tumulus.

Justin and Diodorus each report a cost of 12,000 talents. Ergo, both accounts are firmly based on Cleitarchus? This is the only particularity between the two. Justin's account is a mere two sentences: we have no idea what Trogus' account looked like and even less that of his source. To generalise from such thin 'evidence' is exceedingly dangerous especially as Diodorus' account contains many details particular only to his account. More compelling is that Justin's two sentence abbreviation includes a condemnation of Alexander's unbecoming grief (Alexander mourned for him longer than became his dignity as a king). Arrian (7.14.3) notes that (previous) authors either praised Alexander's display of grief or condemned it is as excessive and unbecoming of a king. This was clearly a strong theme in the source of Justin-Trogus for Justin found room for it in his two sentences on the matter, but it finds no mention in Diodorus' extensive treatment. Diodorus was fond of moralising - especially about 'princes' and kings.

That is one thing, but to then conclude that because of the shared 12,000 talent cost and the fact that Diodorus used pyra proves that Trogus translated the same word from Cleitarchus is absurd. Pyra is attested some 192,194 times in the ancient corpus - 94 times in the extant Diodoran corpus. It is a common word and it does not follow that Diodorus wrote prya because Cleitarchus wrote such or that Trogus translated such from Cleitarchus.

It is, as McKechnie notes, regrettable that Curtius' account is lost. His account of Alexander's death and what followed is, though, extant and we 'know' that Curtius used Cleitarchus just as Justin did. There are multiple discrepancies of fact between the two; so much that Errington was moved to claim that Curtius possibly used Hieronymus. Given all this, it would be the overly brave or foolhardy that might hang a "therefore" on a single word.

Taphoi wrote:Anyone who had studied all the sources in their original languages would know this.

Do you know Prof. Mavroyiannis has not done so?

Taphoi wrote:

Diodorus uses pyra for both the funeral pyre and the monument to be built on the site of the funeral pyre. So too I think did Cleitarchus. Therefore Justin (actually Trogus originally) is translating pyra as tumulus. Anyone who had studied all the sources in their original languages would know this.

....and out comes a discredited argument yet again !! I seem to recall on the "Hephaistion Pyre" thread there was considerable discussion of whether 'pyra' could mean this. The consensus ( Taphoi excepted of course) was that Diodorus did NOT use 'pyra' in this way.Notice too the flat assertion regarding Cleitarchus, whose work has not survived beyond second-hand fragments. Based on this 'non'-evidence we then have 'therefore...', as if it logically followed which of course it does not. And then "Anyone.....would know this."

On the contrary, everyone here on Pothos who studied this ( bar Taphoi) came to very different conclusions ! See also the LSJ......

Regarding ΔΙΖΑ ΑΛΚΟΥ (the graffiti on the peribolos marbles), here is all I could find:

a) ΔΙΖΑ (diza) is a goat (Attic aix) and Hera aigophagos Goat-eater in Sparta (as posted earlier).
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doric_Greek & http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... irect=true

b) ΔΙΖΑ is was used sometimes as synthetic in words from the Thrace region, with the meaning of walled enclosure (interestingly). It appears that is derives from the persian word Paradise (Paradiza ?) with the same meaning (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?ter ... in_frame=0). The source for that is a commentator in a blog discussion about the foundations of dialekts/language in Thrace: (http://akritas-history-of-makedonia.blo ... leaks.html)

c) Its a name, rare, but still existing in the region: see for instance this http://soltdm.com/inscr/igb/dublet/dublet_igb.htm and for a more extensive explanation here, with reference to the Strymon blocks : http://helios-eie.ekt.gr/EIE/bitstream/ ... .011.2.pdf (pages 94-95, in French - I had to use google translate for that, so did not get everything written there). ΔΙΖΑ could be the female variant of ΔΙΖΑΣ (DIZAS).

Can't find anything relevant for "ΑΛΚΟΥ" (ALCOU), although this appears as synthetic of names from the region (e.g. from the pdf above, there is a name Androsthenes Sitalkou.

I guess (c) is the most likely expanation, ie the graffiti inscibes a name of a worker maybe (?), but (b) marks an interesting coincidence.

Diza alkou would be 'The (Spartan) Goat of Power/Protection' diza being the laconian for goat and 'alkou' a false genitive of alke - power, false because this is a masculine genitive and alke is feminine so should form alkes; looks like schoolboy Greek humour from some Brits stationed there from 1915, the mixture of Laconian and the incorrect Attic form does not bode well for the graffitisto being an ancient Greek IMHO.

I personally have never encountered a superscript upsilon, which is required to interpret one sign, ou, but I have led a sheltered life.

edited having read the article above.

Were it a name it would be Diza son of Alkos

I think the upsilon appears with the omikron in a single symbol (circle with two lines above). Not sure if it is modern graffiti, but if it is, it is not from 1915, these blocks were underwater then.

Perhaps it is mediaeval, is it certain when the blocks were submerged?
the arrangement of the characters also makes it look like they have been added after the block was broken, hence they fit the triangular corner. Maybe not a pranking Etonian, but not much help, although the looped alphas and that superscript upsilon ought to give a date range...mmm

These forms seem to first appear after roman times: http://books.google.de/books?id=x2AD3M7 ... MQsziZgyqx

Perhaps this was why they date the destruction to Roman times? Good find, gepd.

agesilaos wrote:Diza alkou would be 'The (Spartan) Goat of Power/Protection' diza being the laconian for goat and 'alkou' a false genitive of alke - power, false because this is a masculine genitive and alke is feminine so should form alkes; looks like schoolboy Greek humour from some Brits stationed there from 1915, the mixture of Laconian and the incorrect Attic form does not bode well for the graffitisto being an ancient Greek IMHO.

I personally have never encountered a superscript upsilon, which is required to interpret one sign, ou, but I have led a sheltered life.

edited having read the article above.

Were it a name it would be Diza son of Alkos

I have no knowledge of ancient Greek and must trust the experts, as everyone here well knows, but the other day I just read the following (which might be relevant) in James Romm's Ghost on the Throne. This paragraph, concerning goats, follows on from an introduction to Argaeus:

Aegae was at that time the royal seat of the Macedonians. The name of the town reveals much about the humble origins of the people, for it closely resembles the Greek word meaning "goats." Herdsmen for much of their history, the Macedonians suddenly, almost miraculously, transformed themselves into warriors and conquerors under Philip and Alexander. A legend recorded by the Roman historian Justin speaks of this transformation as something forseen, if not decreed, by the gods. An ancient oracle declared that goats would lead the Macedonians to a great empire. One of their early kings, recalling this oracle, founded Aegae where he saw a herd of wild goats and thereafter always led his warriors into battle with goats depicted on his standards. Thus the name of Aegae came to stand for the imperial destiny of this world-conquering people, rather than their goat-herding past.

So ... a perhaps an indication of why 'goat', if it should be ancient Greek and not Roman or later graffiti. The other day I did see photos of inscriptions inside the tomb. Just found them again - here's the link in full:

https://twitter.com/PepiSer/status/5344 ... 48/photo/1

If anyone knows how to copy this photo to Pothos, please feel free.

Best regards,

One thing that the city being Aigai does demonstrate is that the Macedonians used the Attic form rather than the Laconic (Doric), coupled with the late letter forms, which only occur in Imperial Roman inscriptions, divorce these grafitti from any context of the building of the monument, even Palagaia makes it late Republican.

Having read the notice posted by gepd, I do think it is a later name, the most common form of grafittto after all, which is sad because the 'Spartan Goat of Power' has such a Heavy Metal ring to it

Nor should you feel shy about the languages, Perseus has both Liddell -Short (LSJ) for Greek and Lewis (for Latin) online, and very few forum members do not require recourse to these, myself included, the only trick then is deciding which of the many suggested uses is valid, and you possess more common sense than some and as much as most