pothos.org

I mentioned in a previous post about an upcoming exhibition at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, which I now see will open in early April.

See you all there!

ATB

Won't see me, unfortunately. What did you make of the statement below? There has always been an abundance of theories regarding the various occupants of the tombs at Aegae, but this is one I've never heard of before:

From the tomb of Philip II comes not only his royal crown but items belonging to a woman, thought by Kottaridi to be the Thracian princess Meda of Odessa, one of his wives.

Kottaridi believes she may have committed suicide, according to Thracian practice, so as to serve her husband in death as well as life. Her beautiful, highly wrought golden crown from the tomb is, said Kottaridi, "one of the masterpieces of the exhibition".

Best regards,

amyntoros wrote:Won't see me, unfortunately. What did you make of the stament below?

Yes, I wondered who would pick up on that!

Well, put it this way ... there isn't any evidence to say that it *isn't* Meda, but there isn't any evidence to say that it *is*, either. Unfortunately, Kottadiri can do no more than produce a theory which can be neither proved nor disproved. There is no written source that tells us what happened to Meda - indeed, to any of Philip's wives apart from Olympias - and there's no epigraphic evidence in the tomb that can tell us who the occupant is. So Kottaridi can only base his theory on (a) the lack of anything to the contrary in the sources, and (b) knowledge of what *some* Thracian women traditionally did.

Not very convincing, but as possible as any other explanation.

ATB

marcus wrote:
Well, put it this way ... there isn't any evidence to say that it *isn't* Meda, but there isn't any evidence to say that it *is*, either. Unfortunately, Kottadiri can do no more than produce a theory which can be neither proved nor disproved. There is no written source that tells us what happened to Meda - indeed, to any of Philip's wives apart from Olympias - and there's no epigraphic evidence in the tomb that can tell us who the occupant is. So Kottaridi can only base his theory on (a) the lack of anything to the contrary in the sources, and (b) knowledge of what *some* Thracian women traditionally did.

Not very convincing, but as possible as any other explanation.

The first question I would ask is whether there is any historical evidence that, by the time of Philip II, this traditional practice still existed? For instance, we know that there was a period when Thracian men tattooed their faces (and I once saw a Bulgarian site which claimed that women also did so) but the murals on the 4th Century Thracian tomb of Kazanlak show no evidence of tattoos as far as I can tell from online photographs. So if that practice had died out then it is possible that the other one had ceased as well, unless someone knows of evidence to the contrary. IMO, if Philip's Thracian wife had killed herself upon Philip's death then I think it would have been worthy of mention. Strabo notes that the practice existed amongst some of the Indians, so surely the Greeks would have discussed such an event had it occurred after the death of Philip, if only to reinforce their opinion of the Macedonians as "barbarians" for allowing such a practice?

I feel Kottadiri's theory is the least convincing to date, but that's just my opinion.

Best regards,

amyntoros wrote:The first question I would ask is whether there is any historical evidence that, by the time of Philip II, this traditional practice still existed? For instance, we know that there was a period when Thracian men tattooed their faces (and I once saw a Bulgarian site which claimed that women also did so) but the murals on the 4th Century Thracian tomb of Kazanlak show no evidence of tattoos as far as I can tell from online photographs. So if that practice had died out then it is possible that the other one had ceased as well, unless someone knows of evidence to the contrary. IMO, if Philip's Thracian wife had killed herself upon Philip's death then I think it would have been worthy of mention. Strabo notes that the practice existed amongst some of the Indians, so surely the Greeks would have discussed such an event had it occurred after the death of Philip, if only to reinforce their opinion of the Macedonians as "barbarians" for allowing such a practice?

I feel Kottadiri's theory is the least convincing to date, but that's just my opinion.

I agree. I don't know of any historical evidence that Thracian women still committed ritual suicide - maybe a deep read of Strabo or Pliny?

I'm not sure I agree entirely that Meda committing suicide would have been worth a mention - after all, there's no evidence that she bore Philip any children, and hardly any other historical mention of her anyway ... she would have been almost beneath consideration, I would have thought. HOWEVER, one could argue that such a 'barbaric' practice would have merited some mention, even if only in one of the gossipy writers, such as Athenaeus, Aelian or Aulus Gellius.

Still, I agree that it's an unconvincing theory ... and as difficult to prove as it is to disprove!

ATB

marcus wrote:

amyntoros wrote:Won't see me, unfortunately. What did you make of the stament below?

Yes, I wondered who would pick up on that!

Well, put it this way ... there isn't any evidence to say that it *isn't* Meda, but there isn't any evidence to say that it *is*, either. Unfortunately, Kottadiri can do no more than produce a theory which can be neither proved nor disproved. There is no written source that tells us what happened to Meda - indeed, to any of Philip's wives apart from Olympias - and there's no epigraphic evidence in the tomb that can tell us who the occupant is. So Kottaridi can only base his theory on (a) the lack of anything to the contrary in the sources, and (b) knowledge of what *some* Thracian women traditionally did.

Not very convincing, but as possible as any other explanation.

ATB

I will be a little bit of a detail- freak, but mrs Kotaridi happens to be a SHE not a HE.

Just keeping you informed!

Press release (mini-catalogue) for the exhibition http://www.ashmolean.org/assets/docs/Ex ... essKit.pdf

Alexias wrote:Press release (mini-catalogue) for the exhibition http://www.ashmolean.org/assets/docs/Ex ... essKit.pdf

Thanks for this - very interesting to peruse.

I am currently intending to go to the exhibition in 2-3 weeks' time; but if I don't go during the Easter holidays, then I shall find a convenient Saturday shortly thereafter!

ATB

I hope that someone from Britain will post at least short impressions from their visit to this exhibition. I am still thinking about going to Oxford, but I need to go with plane and this is not cheap...

Sandra wrote:I hope that someone from Britain will post at least short impressions from their visit to this exhibition. I am still thinking about going to Oxford, but I need to go with plane and this is not cheap...

When I do go, I shall certainly post some thoughts.

ATB

Robin Lane Fox loves it

Best regards,

Amyntoros,
Great article to post! Fox was "brought to tears" over the sight of the golden crown. Stating it was the single most beutiful piece of work done in gold in the world. Too bad I have that pesky Atlantic ocean keeping me from getting to see this exhibit in person. I anxiously await a writeup here on Pothos about it! I missed my chance to see it when it was on my side of the pond.

spitamenes wrote: Stating it was the single most beutiful piece of work done in gold in the world.

I'll reserve judgement on that! The gold crown at the Afghan exhibition at the British Museum was rather special ...

ATB

marcus wrote:

spitamenes wrote: Stating it was the single most beutiful piece of work done in gold in the world.

I'll reserve judgement on that! The gold crown at the Afghan exhibition at the British Museum was rather special ...

ATB

Well Marcus, I'm really lookin forward to hearing what you have to say about the exhibit! Do you remember who's gold crown was it in the Afghan exhibit?

spitamenes wrote:

marcus wrote:

spitamenes wrote: Stating it was the single most beutiful piece of work done in gold in the world.

I'll reserve judgement on that! The gold crown at the Afghan exhibition at the British Museum was rather special ...

ATB

Well Marcus, I'm really lookin forward to hearing what you have to say about the exhibit! Do you remember who's gold crown was it in the Afghan exhibit?

Unfortunately, it was found in a Scythian(?) grave so they have no way of knowing whose it was. But it was stunning - and the best thing about it was that it was flat-packed ... as sort of IKEA-crown ... so that it could be folded up and stored away in a flat bag! It was from after the Hellenistic period, though - 3rd-4th centuries AD, if I recall correctly. Beautiful!

ATB