Another Macedonian tomb

The large number of tombs that dot ancient Macedonia never ceases to amaze me. They do not immediately stand out, but driving around on local roads in the wider area of Pella and Vergina (ancient Aegae), they appear as solitary structures or ruins. Occasionally, their names are announced on promising road signs pointing you to mysterious sites. 

Most visitors flock to the Great Tumulus housing the Tomb of Philip II in Vergina, along with the Tomb of Persephone (based on her frescoed depiction on the wall), and the Tomb of the Prince, attributed to Alexander IV. 

[Picture of the Abduction of Persephone from The Maritime Explorer]

The large necropolis to the east of the city and the many tombs outside the ancient city walls are generally ignored. In this area, it is nearly impossible to miss other beautiful examples like the Rhomaios Tomb, the Tomb of Eurydice (Alexander’s grandmother), the Macedonian Tomb on the Bloukas Farm, or a series of tombs on the Bella Farm (see: There is more to Aegae than the Royal Palace and the Great Tumulus). These tombs are rarely open to the public.  

Excavations are still ongoing, and more than one thousand tombs have been uncovered at Pella alone since 2000. They often carry the names of Macedonian families, and many monuments still display their vivid original colors. 

Closer to Náousa  (some 50 kilometers east of Pella), the Tomb of the Judgment, the Tomb of the Palmettos, the Tomb of Lyson and Kallikles, and the neglected Tomb of Kinch are worth visiting if the opportunity arises (see: Alexander's schooling at Mieza. Visit of the surrounding area). These tombs are not always open to the public.

Earlier this year (2025), the Tomb of the Philosophers, situated in the eastern necropolis of Pella, made headlines. The burial chamber measures 4.40x1.95 meters and is three meters high. It dates from around 300 BC and shows frescoes of six unnamed philosophers that document the richness of Pella’s intellectual development and cultural life at the time, when philosophy and sciences were a common good. 

The frescoed figures, who gave their name to the burial site, call for our attention. The most intriguing picture is that of a man wearing a red himation (kind of mantle), holding a wooden rod, pointing at a celestial globe, indicating that he might be a philosopher interested in astronomy. The theme is likely influenced by Aristotle’s teachings and other works written by philosophers and poets living at the Macedonian Court of Antigonus II Gonatas in the 3rd century BC. 

On the wall to his right, a bearded man is studying a papyrus scroll. The left wall depicts another wreathed, bearded ‘philosopher’. Above them are scenes of horsemen and grave steles inspired by Homeric funeral games. 

Excavations have revealed that the grave was probably built for a family. It contained the remains of three individuals: a man in his forties, a woman in her thirties, and an infant. The presence of this elaborate decoration with symbolic elements indicates that the family belonged to the higher social elite of Pella. The man could well have been a scholar or an astronomer who cared for his family after their death. 

The tomb’s frescoes are of high quality, giving a telling insight into the personal identity and the cultural values of the deceased. What’s more, the elements testify to the vibrant intellectual and artistic level that was reached in Pella some one hundred years after the death of Alexander. 

[Pictures of the Philosopher's Tomb from the Teacher Curator]

The case of Alexander of Lyncestis

The name Alexander is already very popular in the days of Alexander the Great and may lead to confusion. 

For a start, there was King Alexander of Epirus, Olympias’ brother and Alexander’s uncle. I usually refer to him as Alexandros to make the difference. He is the one who married Alexander’s sister Cleopatra in 336 BC, the day King Philip of Macedonia was assassinated. 

[Expansion of Macedonia from Wikipedia]

Then there is Alexander of Lyncestis, in Upper Macedonia, son of Aeropus and son-in-law of the general and later regent Antipater. He had two brothers, Heromenes and Arrhabaeus, who were soon accused of plotting the murder of Philip II and put to death. Brother Alexander is said to have been the first to proclaim Alexander of Macedonia as king and thus avoided punishment, for now at least. 

In Alexander’s campaign, the Lyncestian was soon appointed to command the Thracian detachment and later the Thessalian cavalry. However, two years later, Parmenion, who was spending the winter near Gordion, caught a messenger carrying a secret letter from the Persian King Darius for Alexander of Lyncestis. It revealed that Darius promised to pay him a thousand talents of gold to kill Alexander and would proclaim him King of Macedonia instead! Parmenion sent the messenger with a trusted escort to Alexander, where the man repeated the same story. 

This was an extremely serious matter that Alexander put before his assembled Companions in order to make the appropriate decision. It was agreed to send a trusted man, a brother of Craterus, to Parmenion. He would travel incognito, dressed as a local and accompanied by guides from Perge, and deliver his message verbally, as it was thought better not to write down anything on a matter of this importance. Alexander’s envoy reached Parmenion without being detected and reported the instructions he was carrying. Alexander of Lyncestis was arrested and put in chains. He was tried for plotting against his king and put in prison. Being the son-in-law of Antipater, acting as the king’s Regent in Macedonia, was an important factor in his favor. 

The Lyncestian was dragged around for about three years, when in 330 BC, in the wake of Philotas’ trial and execution for a similar plot, the Macedonians demanded that he should be tried and punished accordingly as well. When he was brought in from confinement to plead his case, he was faltering and nervous, and found no words to reply and defend himself. This was perceived as a guilty conscience, and the bystanders ran him through with their spears. 

It should be noted that Queen Eurydice I, Alexander’s paternal grandmother, was born in Lyncestis. She married King Amynthas III of Macedonia, the father of Philip II, in 390 BC to consolidate the relations between the two countries.

There is more to Aegae than the Royal Palace and the Great Tumulus

Driving from modern Vergina towards the Royal Palace of Aegae, we take little notice of the open fields to our left, where the necropolis of ancient Aegae is waiting to be fully excavated. The very area is uninspiring as it consists of a succession of more or less conic bumps in the landscape. These are, in fact, mounds covering the tombs dating as far back as 1000 BC. The cemetery remained in use until the 2nd century BC. 

Proceeding further south, we encounter the Rhomaios Tomb and the Tomb of Eurydice, Alexander’s grandmother, a few meters onward. Further north lies an undefined Public Building and the so-called Hellenistic House and the Sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods to the west

With its 8.50 meters, the Rhomaios Tomb is one of the longest tombs. It consists of two rooms, an antechamber, and the chamber proper. The antechamber measures 4.50 x 2.50 m and is 2.20 m high. A narrow band runs around the walls and is painted with flowers. The colors alternate on the deep blue background using combinations of red-blue, white-blue, yellow-blue successively, and again red-blue, etc. A marble door separates the antechamber from the main vaulted chamber, which is square (4.50x4.50 m) and 4.45 m high. Here too, a dark blue band decorates the walls, but it is plain blue this time. An impressive marble throne stands in the back of the tomb with a footstand and a kind of bed. The throne is remarkable because of its large size. It is decorated with small painted friezes in the lower part, and its armrests display sculpted sphinxes. 

This tomb has been totally robbed in antiquity, making dating very difficult. However, comparing its features and style to those of the nearby Palace, it has been possible to date it to the first half of the 3rd century BC. Last, but not least, it is essential to note that this tomb was never covered by a tumulus and that its location so close to the village is puzzling.

Unknown author, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The Tomb of Eurydice is another large burial monument, which appears to be the earliest known Macedonian tomb. As expected, this gravesite has been plundered in antiquity. However, based on the shards left behind, it could be dated to around 340 BC. The dating, the wealth of the tomb, and the dedications found in the nearby  Temple of Eukleia led us to believe that this grave belonged to Queen Eurydice, the mother of Alexander’s father. The monument is 10.60 m long and nearly 8m wide. It is divided into an antechamber and the chamber proper, which measures 5.50x4.40 m with a 5.80-meter-high vault. The chamber's back wall displays an elegant but straightforward Ionic façade of a Macedonian tomb whose stucco and architectural details have been well-preserved. The trompe-l’oeil painting reveals a central door flanked by two stucco windows separated by two pairs of Ionic half-columns. The frieze of flowers and the cornice of the entablature are painted in vivid blue, red, and green. Like in the Rhomaios Tomb, we find a richly decorated throne two meters high. The back of the seat surprises with a superbly painted panel showing the Underworld, with the gods Pluto and Persephone, standing in full majesty on a quadriga drawn by two white and two brown horses. The throne itself is decorated with reliefs, gilded flowers and animals, and even with statuettes of korai. 

Other remarkable tombs in the area are the Tomb of the Bella Farm (first half of the 3rd century BC) with its delicate facade paintings, the tomb on the Bloukas field (c. 200 BC), and the cist grave of Palatitsa (c. 350 BC) – none of which are open to the public. 

The Temple of Eukleia is situated some 80 meters north of Aegae’s theater and close to the road leading to the Palace. Not much of this sanctuary survived, but it could be established that it had a small pronaos of 4x2.5 m and a square naos of 4x4 m. Archaeologists assume that the pronaos was an open space because the bases for statues were found in the two corners of the naos and possibly flanking a sacrificial table. It is striking that the temple faced north. Along the west side of the temple, three bases for statues were found at regular intervals. On the face of the southernmost base, a valuable inscription was found, reading ΕΥΡΙΔΙΚΑ ΣΙΡΡΑ ΕΥΛΛΕΙΑ, in other words, ”Eurydice, daughter of Sirra (erected this statue) to Eukleia.” The finesse of the letter curving has helped to date the inscription to the second half of the 4th century BC. These elements indicate that Queen Eurydice dedicated her statue to the goddess Eukleia, worshiped in this temple. It is assumed that the other bases carried similar offerings by members of the royal family. 

Roughly 400 meters east of the Temple of Eukleia are the remains of the Sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods. This archaic deity had a close relationship with the cult of Dionysus. By the early 6th century BC, the Mother of the Gods was linked with her Asian counterpart, Cybele. The goddess was worshiped with orgiastic dances and music. On votive reliefs and terracotta statuettes, she is depicted holding a large libation bowl in one hand and a large drum for the orgiastic dances in the other. Her head is crowned with a kind of fortress, referring to her role as goddess of cities and fortification walls.

Together with the information left by ancient writers, the remains of this Sanctuary reveal the importance of the cult. A large square building of 32x32 m has been unearthed in recent years. It contained separate rooms playing an essential role during initiation and worship. Various terracotta figures of the goddess, incense burners, vases, coins, loom weights, and all kinds of architectural relics from the earlier building from the 4th century BC have been found. The excavation showed that this sanctuary, destroyed by a severe fire around 150 BC, dates from Hellenistic times. 

A recent article in the Archaeology News Network mentions new studies of a large building complex close to the northwest gate of Aegae and the “queen’s burial cluster.” However, it is not clear whether this is close to the tombs mentioned above or the sanctuaries, but I suppose it is the case. 

The building complex from the 4th century BC has been associated with the worship of the royal family. It was built with stone from the nearby Mount Vermion and set up in successive square and rectangular rooms reaching 100 square meters. They are organized around a large courtyard. The space on the east side resembles a temple with a very large antechamber and two Doric columns on the courtyard side.

More exciting are the stamps carrying the Macedonian shield, which were also used on the coins by the Macedonian kings in Hellenistic times. Importantly, roof panels bearing the inscriptions AMYNTOΥ. This may refer to King Amyntas III, the husband of Eurydice and grandfather of Alexander. In any case, it testifies of a close relationship with the Macedonian royal family. Other tiles are imprinted with ΠΕΛΛΗΣ, indicating that this particular sacred building must have belonged to Amyntas, who was given the status of hero. A similar cult is known to have existed in Pydna. Moreover, the presence of Eurydice in her nearby temple cannot be a coincidence. 

Despite the thorough looting by the Roman general Metellus in 148 BC, extensive renovations occurred under Philip V during the late 3rd/early 2nd century BC. For instance, the walls are covered with painted plaster. The favorite color was purple, with touches of green and ochre, and the scenes are divided with reliefs, not unlike those known from  Pompeii. The floors are inlaid with marble, as seen in the Palace of Aegae. However, it could be established that the cracks and irregularities in the floor levels were due to catastrophic landslides in the 1st century AD. After a period of decline, the city of Aegae disappeared under the debris.

 It is clear that the cult of Alexander was kept alive and that the building complex was a way to confirm and legitimize his power and that of his successors.

Project for a virtual Museum of Alexander the Great in Vergina

The renewed excavations around the Royal Palace of ancient Aegae and the adjacent theater seem to have reached completion (see: At last, the Palace of Aegae reopens to the public).

For many years, this area was widely neglected by tourists because the remains offered a rather poor idea of the wealth and beauty the Palace once displayed. Besides, it stood in the shadow of the marvelous exhibition space inside the Great Tumulus where the unlooted grave of Philip II was discovered in the 1970s as well as the tomb of a young prince attributed to Alexander IV, the son of Alexander the Great.

However, Vergina (the modern name for Aegae) has much more to offer because the ancient city was widespread. In an attempt to connect the many known elements of Aegae, a new building has been constructed to become the entrance to what is called the Polycentric Museum. This space will house the statues and sculptures that were unearthed in the many sanctuaries of the city. It will also be used for temporary exhibitions and, most importantly, it will contain a virtual museum named “Alexander the Great: from Aigai to the World” – a true honor to their world-famous citizen! Please also read the update The Palace of Aegae/Vergina in full glory.

Honestly, it is about time that all the hitherto discovered remains are truly put on the map and disclosed to the general public. Many of the tombs and sanctuaries were off-limits for years and the recent financial crisis that hit Greece did not help. It was important for Aegae to be recognized as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO, which eventually led to an EU funding of 4.5 million euros. Finally, the proud citizens of Vergina consider that their city played an important role in European civilization. Nicely said, but it was Alexander’s doing and not the work of Aegae or Pella!

However, their argumentation does not really matter. What really counts is the fact that by now all the known elements of Aegae are finally brought together, for they are many!

Take, for instance, the Sanctuary of Eucleia from the 4^th century BC with the grave of Eurydice, Alexander’s grandmother, which was always closed to the public. It further consists of a small temple from Hellenistic times, two Stoas, and at least three other burial sites of high-placed people. Another Sanctuary was dedicated to Cybele, the mother of the gods, of which very little remains. Not much has been disclosed about the excavations in and around the private houses from the Hellenistic era, and only part of the city walls have been exposed.

The attention of archaeologists was focused mainly on the great number of necropolises (see: More Royal Tombs found at Aegae) located to the east of the Great Tumulus containing the grave of Philip. Here we find several clusters of necropolis, such as the cluster of the Queens, the cluster of the Temerid dynasty, the cluster of Heuzy and Bella, the general cemetery of the tumuli (apparently still to be investigated further), the archaic necropolis, and the necropolis from the classical period. They certainly have their work still cut out!

The site of Kasta Hill and the Tomb of Amphipolis

Kasta Hill is a huge tumulus made of limestone having a perimeter of almost 500m which can easily be spotted from nearby Amphipolis. It is a landmark that inevitably impresses any visitor.

Since 2014, the hype of the Tomb of Amphipolis has traveled around the world as a wildfire but now that the fever has subsided, it is time to consider a number of facts that has been established since.

A first serious link with Hephaistion based on a monogram found at the tomb site was mentioned in an earlier blog (see: Amphipolis, a Heroon for Hephaistion?). Meanwhile, some have argued that this tomb was meant to contain the remains of both Alexander and Hephaistion but this does not look very plausible for different reasons.

Firstly, since only Alexander could be the one ordering the construction of a tomb for Hephaistion, most probably soon after his death in 324 BC. At that time, there was no reason for Alexander to plan his own grave next to his friend’s. We should keep in mind that Alexander could afford to call on the best professionals in every field from all over the world – which he frequently did. In the present case of building a tomb and/or memorial for his dearest friend Hephaistion, no expense was too high or too extravagant. It has, however, not been established what happened to the remains of Hephaistion after his body was burnt on the elaborate pyre that was built for him in Babylon. Most probably, the bones were washed in wine the Macedonian way, wrapped in a luxurious cloth (probably a purple one) and placed in a precious (most likely gold) casket or larnax that was lavishly decorated with precious stones. Alexander may have kept this larnax in his tent pending the burial in the tomb at Amphipolis but as the king himself died before returning to his homeland the project never materialized and it remains everybody’s guess what happened to the remains of Hephaistion. Besides, it is difficult to imagine who would have cared enough about him to take charge of the matter.

Secondly, and in spite of his deep love and affection for Hephaistion, Alexander was first and foremost the King, King of Macedonia and what’s more King of Kings. He was well aware of his kingship and what it meant for the people he had conquered, especially for the Persians. In his position, it was totally impossible for the Great King to be interred in such a far away place as Amphipolis. It may have been Parmenion to suggest that city as he still belonged to “the old Macedonian stock” and was convinced that the body of Alexander should return to Macedonia to be buried with his ancestors. But the body never arrived in Macedonia as it was diverted to Egypt instead.

On the other hand, there is the hypothesis about the image of the Rape of Persephone that is considered to be a common link between the Royal Macedonian tombs. The second chamber of the Amphipolis tomb contains indeed a mosaic floor depicting Persephone abducted by Pluto, god of the underworld. It has been suggested that this picture ties the tomb to the Macedonian royal family.

The oldest representation is to be found in the tomb of Eurydice, the mother of Philip II and Alexander’s grandmother. The next and probably most striking picture of the Rape of Persephone is the one associated with the tomb of Philip in Tumulus of Vergina. It is, however, important to note that it is not part of Philip’s tomb but painted on the wall of another tomb in the same tumulus, making it a weak candidate for belonging to Macedonian royalty. All in all, that hypothesis is not very convincing either.

A last theory or speculation that arose around the Tomb of Amphipolis is even stranger than the previous ones but, who knows, it may contain some truth after all. It has been calculated that on the day of the Equinox of 21 December the sun lights up the third room of the Amphipolis Tomb and would at some point shine in a straight line from Delphi. Well, for what it is worth …

The excavations at Kasta Hill have been stopped for now but with the material gathered so far the archaeologists have their work cut out. As always, we have to wait and see what will happen next.

[Picture of the Rape of Persephone from Vergina is from reddit]

Pausanias - Führer durch Olympia

Pausanias was born in Asia Minor in 110 AD and lived during the reign of Emperors Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius, i.e., the heydays of the Roman Empire. He traveled extensively, and he is the author of the first travel guide ever!

His trips took him to Asia Minor and Greece, including Macedonia and probably Epirus, but also to Syria and Egypt, and even to Rome with the Latium region and Magna Graecia to the south. His travel experiences have been written down in ten books and cover the Greek regions of Attica, Argolis, Laconia, Messenia, Elis, Achaia, Arcadia, Boeotia, and Phocis. They are a first-hand testimony of what the world looked like in the second century AD.

The major part of his story is about Olympia, which takes about one-fifth of his entire work, a treasure trove for those who want to drift back in time.

Pausanias, Führer durch Olympia (translated by Ernst Meyer) is thus only a part of Pausanias’ travel guide. It so happened that I came across this German version many years ago. It may only be a pocketbook, but it does contain Pausanias’ story in full.

It is wonderful to walk with Pausanias through the streets of this famous city where the Olympic Games were held for twelve centuries (from 776 BC until 393 AD). He starts with the city’s origins and myths and soon goes straight to the Temple of Zeus, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. He describes the temple in detail: the roof, the pediment, the metopes, the grand statue of Zeus by Phidias, the votive offerings, and the altars. He then walks to the workshop of Phidias, the Temple of Hera, and the Philippeon, built by Philip II and finished under Alexander III. At the Philippeon, he actually witnessed the statues of both Macedonian kings together with those of Amyntas and Eurydike, Philip’s parents, and of Olympias, his wife – all executed by Leochares in ivory and gold.

He spends time and effort to describe the unbelievably great number of Zeus statues all over Olympia, including one representing Alexander the Great as Zeus! Then follows a description of the statues erected for the winners at the Olympic Games. In between, he stops at a statue of Anaximenes, who not only wrote a history of the Greeks but also that of Philip II and his son Alexander. It is quite amazing to read that such a large number of these statues were made of bronze, silver, and even electron, and that many of them, besides the famous Zeus, were also chryselephantine sculptures with their hands and faces made of gold or ivory. This is beyond our imagination!

Next, he treats the many Treasury Houses, to end with the renowned Stadium and the adjacent Hippodrome.

Although this book dates from 1971, it contains a very pertinent list of annotations that are still very much up-to-date. To help us in picturing Olympia, there is a clear map locating the city’s main buildings. To complete the story, there is a useful Register of the buildings and memorials, as well as a list of all the Athletes and Artists treated in this book.

The Philippeon at Olympia

After his victory at Chaironeia in 338 BC, King Philip of Macedonia ordered the construction of the Philippeon at Olympia. This temple took the shape of a tholos with 18 slender Ionic columns on the outside and nine half Corinthian ones on the inside. It was enhanced with five statues representing Philip himself, his parents (Eurydice and Amyntas), his wife, Olympias, and his son, Alexander. The architect was Leochares of Athens, who had also been working at the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus – a detail that cannot be lost to the attentive observer. For Philip, only the best was good enough, it seems! This temple stood inside the sacred temenos, an indication that it was dedicated to Zeus in thanks for his recent victory over Athens and Thebes, the ultimate goal to consolidate his power and that of his successors in all Greek cities. Besides, this was the place where the Olympic Games were held every four years, and this Philippeon would stand there for everyone to see!

What strikes me is the round shape of the temple, hence the name tholos, of course. You don’t find too many of those, and I’m wondering how far Philip’s idea is related to the Tholos of Delphi, dedicated to the goddess Athena, which he must have seen since it was built somewhere between 380 and 360 BC. From what I understand, Philip liked the pomp and splendor and didn’t mind spending his money lavishly to achieve such purposes. Building a Tholos in the very center of the sacred area of Olympia was something that couldn’t be overlooked, neither by his friends nor by his enemies. 

The Philippeon must have been quite something! There are rumors that the statues were made of ivory covered with gold leaf, but detailed research has revealed that this could not have been the case, so they must have been carved in heavy gilded stone. So far, Worthington’s remarks (Philip II of Macedonia).

Olympias’ presence here, however, has been a source for many discussions (women didn’t fit into the Greeks’ concept) despite her being the spouse of Philip and the mother of Alexander, the future heir to the throne. Ian Worthington reminds us here of the five small ivory heads that were found in the Vergina Tomb, thought to belong to King Philip, representing Philip, Alexander, Olympias, and two unknown portraits, that of a man and a woman, who might well be Eurydice and Amyntas. In this context, it is not so strange to see Olympias here after all. 

This temple was not finished yet at the time of Philip’s murder, and some skeptics claim that when Alexander completed this construction, he added the statue of his mother, Olympias. But then, archaeological investigations have clearly proven that the five pedestals were cut and placed at the same time. This means that Olympias was indeed included in Philip’s original plans. Olympias’ presence here at a time when Philip was planning his wedding with Eurydice, his seventh bride, does raise some questions, though. Why would he show a preference for Olympias among all his wives, were it not to show her as the mother of the pretender to the throne, Alexander? We must make an effort to look at this through the eyes of Philip’s days, when any form of recognition for a woman was unheard of. Philip, as we know, had no sympathy left for Olympias, certainly not at this time of his career, and he certainly couldn’t afford to push Olympias to the foreground when he just managed to unite Greece under his wings – he couldn’t risk losing face, could he? My own assumption is that Olympias was represented here just like Mausolos on top of his famous Mausoleum in Halicarnassus with his wife beside him. Leochares, previously working there, may add credibility to this theory. It’s logical, isn’t it? 

Another remarkable fact is that here at the Philippeon of Olympia, the city of the Temple of Zeus, one of the Seven Wonders of the World, Alexander is, beyond doubt, being presented as Philip’s legitimate heir, while there were and still are so many theories against Alexander being the successor of his father when he was murdered. Why are there so many discussions contesting Alexander’s evident succession to the throne of Macedonia? Should we ignore this proof at Olympia and take it as a trivial detail of no importance? The shortsighted critics and writers keep surprising me time and again whenever they have the need to push their own vision and theory forward! There is no proof for any of this. We can only speculate – that’s all. 

Well, so much for Philip II and Alexander III of Macedonia …

Additional scrutiny of the Caryatids of Amphipolis (Kasta Hill) by Andrew Chugg

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 dynamism 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 have generally 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.

A wonderful analysis of Kasta Hill/Amphipolis by Andrew Chugg

Andrew Chugg is well known for his two books The Quest for the Tomb of Alexander the Great and The Lost Tomb of Alexander the Great, besides several books in which he painstakingly tries to reconstruct the lost biography which Cleitarchus wrote about Alexander the Great, e.g. The Death of Alexander the Great. A Reconstruction of Cleitarchus.

It makes me happy to learn that he published his analysis about Amphipolis in yesterday’s Mediterraneo Antigua under the title: Is the mother of Alexander the Great in the Tomb of Amphipolis?

It is definitely worth reading the entire article through the above link. As always with Andrew Chugg, he takes a fresh look at the elements we have so far, consulting the antique writers, previously published articles and old photographs. He has a thorough knowledge of Alexander’s history and all what comes with it.

I would do him wrong by trying to summarize this article, it is too well written for that but I’ll give it a try anyway. He starts by analyzing what the sphinxes stand for and compares them to other examples  like those found in the tomb attributed to Euridice I, the mother of King Philip II, and in another royal tomb nearby that belongs to the royal cemetery of Vergina, known as the “Queen’s Cluster”. It therefore seems to indicate that sphinxes were used by Macedonian queens as a symbol in the late fourth century BC and consequently the sphinxes of Amphipolis may suggest that the occupant of the tomb was a prominent queen.

Because of the time-frame, i.e. the last quarter of the 4th century BC, two queens come to mind: Olympias, Alexander’s mother, and Roxane, Alexander’s wife. Roxane was killed in Amphipolis by Cassander in 310 BC (together with her 13-year old son Alexander IV who is buried in Aegae). Olympias surrendered to the same ambitious Cassander while in Pydna in 316 BC. Cassander needed her army and demanded the surrender of her faithful troops at Pella and at Amphipolis. Pella didn’t resist, it seems, but Amphipolis is a different story and Andrew Chugg thinks that it is not unreasonable to think that Cassander rode to Amphipolis and took Olympias with him rather than leaving her behind to be rescued by her supporters. If such were the case, Olympias died at Amphipolis as well.

This being said, Andrew Chugg makes comparisons and finds architectural parallels between the tombs of Amphipolis and Vergina, including pictures to support his theory. He even finds great similarities between the façade of Amphipolis as reconstructed in 1939 and that of the tomb of Philip and the tomb of Alexander IV in Aegae – with pictures. He has even scrutinized the marble floor that matches the threshold of the Palace at Aegae – see pictures too.

For Andrew Chugg, Olympias is the great favourite for this tomb at Amphipolis as her cause to defend and preserve the homeland of her son was generally seen as identical to that of Alexander himself, meaning that by giving Olympias such a spectacular tomb was equal to honouring Alexander. Cassander allowed the tomb for Alexander IV to be build at Aegae, so why would he have refused the burial of Olympias here at Amphipolis?

Last but not least, the author draws a line of similarity with another pair of monumental sphinxes from the same time-period which stood at the Serapeum in Memphis to guard the first tomb of Alexander the Great before he was transferred to Alexandria. The pictures say it all.

[Pictures from Mediterraneo Antigua]