Yes, Andrew
Chugg, as can be expected, has written a second analysis just after the caryatids
were discovered. He decided to explain the meaning of the presence of these
ladies. (For his first comment, see: A wonderful analysis of Amphipolis by Andrew Chugg).
Although the best-known caryatids are those of
the Erechtheion on the Acropolis of Athens ,
they are a very common feature in Greek and Roman architecture. The caryatids
guarding the entrance door of the Kast Hill tomb are slightly out of
common because of their posture, facing each other in a mirror effect with an
upraised arm in the center and the outside arm holding up their dress.
Andrew
Chugg shows us that the Amphipolis’ caryatids closely
resemble the one found at Tralles (modern Aydin , Turkey ) dating from the first
century BC. He adds however that little has changed in the general representation
of the caryatids, either for those from the Classical or the Hellenistic
periods.
More interesting, I think, is his comparison with
the miniature caryatids found on the throne of Eurydice, Alexander’s grandmother (Philip’s mother) who stood in her tomb at Aegae. These caryatids,
separated from each other by columns, also hold the ceiling with one arm while
the other picks up their dresses but they show more dynamic in their movement.
These caryatids, in combination with the now-lost sphinxes, draw a clear
parallel with Amphipolis and tend to point towards the burial site of a
Macedonian queen of the fourth century BC. A detail, but a rather important
one, is that women and adolescent girls only served Macedonian queens and not
their kings, meaning that they only appear in female burial sites. Andrew
Chugg here quotes Plutarch and
goes as far as to link the baskets in which Queen Olympias kept her snakes (λίκνων) to the baskets carried on the heads of
the Amphipolis’
caryatids. This makes Olympias a
favorite occupant of the Amphipolis tomb.
He also mentions Diodorus who wrote that Cassander left Olympias behind where she fell after being murdered, but no source
speaks of her burial. Yet it is unthinkable that Olympias’ relatives or supporters, or the Macedonians in general
would not have provided a fitting burial to the mother of Alexander the Great.
So far, we generally have accepted the idea
that Olympias was buried at Pydna but this assumption seems to be solely based on a fragmentary inscription found
in the area. The reconstruction of the text, i.e. filling in the blanks, is
purely speculative and is subject to lots of interpretations. According to Andrew
Chugg, it is improbable that Olympias died at Pydna as her death occurred weeks after she surrendered to Cassander who had his hands full with
the revolt in Amphipolis. It makes no sense for Cassander to stay in Pydna pending Olympias’ execution while he was so badly needed to defend his
position in Amphipolis.
Of course, this still doesn’t prove that Olympias is actually buried at Amphipolis even though she may be the main candidate. As stated earlier, second in line could be Roxane, for which I have my personal doubts since I cannot believe that the Macedonians treated her with enough reverence to build such a lavish burial site – even though she was the wife of their Alexander.
Of course, this still doesn’t prove that Olympias is actually buried at Amphipolis even though she may be the main candidate. As stated earlier, second in line could be Roxane, for which I have my personal doubts since I cannot believe that the Macedonians treated her with enough reverence to build such a lavish burial site – even though she was the wife of their Alexander.
No comments:
Post a Comment