The Tumulus at Amphipolis, monument for Hephaistion?

A lot has been written about the Kasta Hill Tumulus at Amphipolis and many of the theories and absurdities have made it to my blog. 

It all started in 2012, see: Has the tomb of Roxane and young Alexander been located? After much nonsense about Alexander being buried at Amphipolis (see: Nonsense about Alexander’s grave in Amphipolis) in 2014, the hype exploded in 2014 when everyone expressed its own opinions with more or less conviction (see: Amphipolis/Kasta Hill … here we go again!). 

The first serious study about Hephaistion’s presence occurred in 2019 (see: The site of Kasta Hill and the Tomb of Amphipolis). It was not until today that I got hold of this excellent report by Professor Emeritus Dimitrios Dendrinos shared by Academia.edu. 

 

On the Tumulus at Amphipolis

A paper by:

DIMITRIOS S. DENDRINOS, Professor Emeritus

Ph.D., MArchUD, Dipl. Arch Eng.

10/27/15; 1st update 11/1/15; 2nd update 12/24/15; 3rd update 1/10/16

 

Summary.

This paper is a sequel to four prior papers by the author on the subject of the Great Tumulus at Amphipolis. It incorporates some new evidence, as presented by the archeological team responsible for the excavation at Kasta Hill (near the old City of Amphipolis, in Macedonia, Greece) on September 30, 2015 [1]. Some General as well as certain Specific (but nonetheless all major) points, are outlined in this paper. They all confirm the author’s prior views on some key issues involved in both the architecture and historiography of Kasta Tumulus. However, this paper also serves to amend certain points made in the prior works by this author. It also adds considerably to the evidence linking a local version of the Bull Cult, covering a broader Region including Samothrace, to the monument at Kasta.

General points: (i) it is now almost certain that the major construction phase of the Tumulus at

Kasta commenced immediately following Hephaestion’s death in November 324 BC. It is almost certain that it was at that point in time intended as a burial place and monument for Hephaestion. Very likely, it was designed in the form of a Serapium Temple and in the overall religious tradition of a Bull Cult. In Appendix A it is suggested that a prior structure was there, as a Temple to Artemis Tavropolos. (ii) Deinokratis was very likely the Architect of the Hephaestion monument and tomb. Most likely his presence and tenure at Kasta lasted only about a couple of years. (iii) These conclusions are consistent to an extent with the archeological team’s views, expressed on August 10, 2014 and thereafter. They are also partly consistent with Professor Mavrojannis “Hephaestion Hypothesis” first presented on September 10, 2014. In Appendix B correspondence with Professor Mavrojannis is shown, which fully justifies this author’s characterization of the Hephaestion Hypothesis. In combination, these three (the two Peristeri plus the Mavrojannis) hypotheses fully confirm the propositions last presented by the author in his paper “On Certain Key Architectural Elements of Kasta Tumulus” Update #4 (as well as its Final Version). Additional evidence presented here further strengthens the conclusions of that paper.

Specific points: (i) Contrary to the claims by the archeological team, the perimeter of Kasta Tumulus is a circle, not an ellipse; (ii) The Lion of Amphipolis was never installed and was not intended for the top of the Hill; (iii) The perimeter wall is in no way possible “three meters tall”; (iv) The proposition that “the monument was accessible with a staircase” is inconsistent with a an exposed perimeter wall. These four items are elaborated in Part 1 of this paper. (v) The finding by this author that the tomb’s modulus (1.36m) in its ratio to the length of the circumferential wall (497m), a wall which was meant to be a calendar, produces an astonishing astronomical approximation to the exact numbers of day in a year (365.44) now has a possible candidate as being behind it: the mathematician-astronomer and Aristotle co-worker, Callippus;

This aspect of Kasta is elaborated in Part 2. (vi) Amphipolis and Kasta are linked to the Sanctuary in Samothrace by a Bull Cult depicted both in the Sanctuary’s site plan at its early phase of construction, and the inside of Arcinoe’s Temple there; this issue is addressed in Part 3. (vii) The archeological team’s new evidence, presented on 9/30/2015 as it relates to Hephaestion is extensively discussed and critically analyzed in Part 4. (viii) There is a possibility the Hephaestion tomb and monument was built in a space used prior to that as a Temple to Artemis Tavropolos; this issue (along with geologist Kabouroglou evaluation of the tomb’s dimensions) is discussed in Appendix A. 

Some analysis of Kasta’s internal dimensions is presented in Note 1, where references also to certain basic ratios found to govern key elements of the Parthenon, and the Temple of Epicurius Apollo at Bessae are made. The topic of dimensions in Monumental Architecture is elaborated throughout the paper, and some analysis of Halicarnassus Mausoleum is supplied along these lines. Note 2, plus Appendix C do address these issues also.

A number of key conclusions (as presented by the author in a string of four papers, published from October 2014 till July 2015, and their corresponding revisions) stand, although a few minor ones are amended here. One of them concerns the Kasta tomb orientation at the time it was constructed: new evidence confirms that it was built quite close to a North-South axis. 

Far too much has be speculated about the occupant of the Tomb at Kasta Hill, but as developed above, it is very plausible that Alexander planned Hephaistion’s Tomb in Amphipolis. It will take years to have a final answer which for now, is very satisfactory.