Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Tomb Of Philip ll
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Penelope View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Alia Atreides

Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042 		  Quote Penelope Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Tomb Of Philip ll
    Posted: 03-Sep-2006 at 00:16

The royal tomb excavated in 1977 in Aegean Macedonia near Salonica, was at first believed to be the one of Philip II. However, it was later proven that the tomb dates from around 317 BC, suggesting that it belonged to king Philip III Arrhidaeus, the son of Philip II and half-brother of Alexander the Great.

In my opinion, since King Philip ll was in fact at that time, the greatest King in Macedonian history, his REAL tomb would have been looted to the point of no recognition. I think that it is only natural that his final resting place to be lost forever, in fact, i think that it would be nearly impossible to find the final resting places of many very important leaders. What are your thoughts and opinions?
Back to Top
xristar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 05-Nov-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1028 		  Quote xristar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Sep-2006 at 09:47
I have heard also that the tomb may not be of the well known Philip II but of somebody else. About the actual tomb I wouldn't say it is certainly looted. Such tombs are of course very often looted, but there is always a chance to found intact. The fact that Philip II was one of the greatest rulers of macedonia doesn't change this fact.

Defeat allows no explanation
Victory needs none.
It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly.
Back to Top
Penelope View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Alia Atreides

Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042 		  Quote Penelope Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Sep-2006 at 23:25
Originally posted by xristar

I have heard also that the tomb may not be of the well known Philip II but of somebody else. About the actual tomb I wouldn't say it is certainly looted. Such tombs are of course very often looted, but there is always a chance to found intact. The fact that Philip II was one of the greatest rulers of macedonia doesn't change this fact.
 
True indeed.
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460 		  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2006 at 08:27
The hypothesis that the Royal Tomb was not from the Philip II but belong in to Philip III initial started from paleoanthropologist Antonis Bartsiokas of the Anaximandrian Institute of Human Evolution at the Democritus University of Thrace in Voula, Greece, and assistant professor at the Democritus who used a technique called macrophotography to study the skeleton in meticulous detail, the features identified by Musgrave, Prag, and Neave are simply normal anatomical quirks, accentuated by the effects of cremation and a poor reassembly of the remains.More in
 
Back to Top
Penelope View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Alia Atreides

Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042 		  Quote Penelope Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2006 at 01:34
Originally posted by akritas

The hypothesis that the Royal Tomb was not from the Philip II but belong in to Philip III initial started from paleoanthropologist Antonis Bartsiokas of the Anaximandrian Institute of Human Evolution at the Democritus University of Thrace in Voula, Greece, and assistant professor at the Democritus who used a technique called macrophotography to study the skeleton in meticulous detail, the features identified by Musgrave, Prag, and Neave are simply normal anatomical quirks, accentuated by the effects of cremation and a poor reassembly of the remains.More in
 
 
Yes, i have read a lot about that, and i find it to be very fascinating.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.