Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Discuss Philip's achievements and Macedonia pre-Alexander

Moderator: pothos moderators

User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Paralus »

Xenophon wrote:As to the Diyllus quote, 'honours' yes, perhaps a guard of honour,salutes, choirs and so on, but if Diyllus meant the games I referred to, he'd surely have used the word 'games'. Still, as Paralus has pointed out, the point is somewhat moot, as to whether JUST duels marked the funeral. The overall point is that 'funeral games' generally lasted no longer than the day of the funeral.....
Well, indeed. Especially considering...
Xenophon wrote:Of more significance to me is the statement that they were definitely buried at Aegae with full honours, implying a proper tomb.
And, as we agree, the a "proper" royal send off; the full box and dice for Cassander to garner the most from the burying of his "predecessor".
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Yes, agreed....some sort of formal tomb, which need not have taken very long to build. Kassandros was really doing this as propaganda to enhance and secure his position, inter alia....there could hardly be any other reason.
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by agesilaos »

You will also note that the Persian courier does a full day's stage on the same horse, lowering their speed vis-a-vis the Pony Express.

I don't think Kassandros would have rushed the tomb building, speed was not of the essence and a proper tomb must have taken a month to excavate and line with stone; the alternative would be to utilise an empty tomb. Ultimately, the timing is a detail but it would demonstrate the degree of Kassandros' feeling of security. It practically advertises his usurpation. Diodoros is insistent on Kassandros' hesitation and worry about the reaction of the Macedonians, a Royal Funeral after a sucessful campaign in Greece would set the seal on his rule, feelings would be less polarised than immediately after the fall of Olympias and its successful, or uneventful, completion could be taken as a sign of acceptance by the populace. This is purely circumstantial, of course, but lends credence to Diyllos' patent timing; Kassandros was daring, yes, but never rash; he weighs the pros and cons and acts after consideration.

A hasty funeral would undermine rather than bolster his support, alienating both the former supporters of Philip and Eurydike and failing to reconcile those of Olympias. What constitutes hasty is one of those length of a piece of string questions but it is clear that Diyllos' timing at the end of the campaign year could not be called such. Another consideration would be discovering the Royal corpses, murdered by a hostile faction in secret and disposed of with no fanfare or, probably any marker. The only objection (other than Diodoros apparent schedule) would concern the bodies, once dicovered they would presumably have left them in situ awaiting reburial, I cannot see the Greeks leaving them four or five months without a grave.

I don't think the Macedonians had the convention of the 'ram touching the wall', certainly not this early it is a Roman phrase 'aries murem tangere' I think Cicero uses it figuratively in Pro Milone to mean that things between Clodius and Milo had come to such a pass that the violence on the Appian Way was inevitable and sanctioned by Roman convention. It was only under Philip that Greek siege warfare advanced beyond building ramps and circumvallation. In later times the convention was that a town could surrender until a breach had been made and the assault had not gone in, this led to confusion at Drogheda where the Irish instrument of surrender only after Cromwell's men had begun their assault due to the bloody-mindedness of an English Royalist within the town's military council delaying the reply. Kassandros had no need to effect a breech which would have to be repaired, and would certainly have looked dimly on any assault that would bleed his modest forces, waiting was his best option and he would have known from deserters how close to capitulation the garisson were so we can't drag the fall of Pydna back to February on those grounds. Spring is an agricultural notion which in Greece would be associated with the April flowering of the winter corn or its mid March emergence from dormancy.
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Paralus »

agesilaos wrote: Ultimately, the timing is a detail but it would demonstrate the degree of Kassandros' feeling of security. It practically advertises his usurpation. Diodoros is insistent on Kassandros' hesitation and worry about the reaction of the Macedonians...
Agreed. This is something I've attempted to stress. Cassander is portrayed as being extremely concerned about the views and reactions of the Macedonians. They are described as fickle in their loyalty (a fact demonstrated many times from Antipater's death until Gonatas' 'settlement' of the throne). This plays out in two main ways.

Cassander ensures that it is not he who condemns Olympias. He arranges a show trial and makes certain Olympias cannot defend herself. To allow her to do so allows the funnel-web into his campaign boot. He cannot allow himself to be tainted by the desired conviction and murder and so has the case prosecuted by the relatives of those Olympias killed - in mourning garb. The Macedonians are volatile and their reactions untrustworthy.

As I posted way, way back in the thread, the biggest danger facing Cassander was the charge of usurpation. The rightful heir (and his mother) are still alive and Cassander cannot kill them for fear of the Macedonian's reaction. He cannot proceed in a bum's rush from murder to marriage to funeral in a matter of a few weeks without that charge being leveled (as Antigonus would do later in front of Tyre).

The entire picture Diodorus paints is of a man proceeding upon the eggshells of public perception. He will have done everything "just so".
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by agesilaos »

Apologies the Greek has not reproduced :oops:

I have now read Lane-Fox; whilst I can see how Borza and Palagia’s case has been fatally weakened on the specific grounds that they adduced as evidence it is quite fallacious to proceed to the position that this proves the opposite case.

For example, let us say that I argue Alexander was a man because he liked football, drank wine and was interested in science. A critic would then point out that football had yet to be invented and any claim in the sources must be anachronistic, many women drink wine and Hypatia was a great scientist and yet a woman. One cannot then say Alexander was a woman, neither case is proven only my poor reasoning exposed.

Lane-Fox demonstrates that he is aptly named in his discussion of Tomb I. He tells us that the excavators found the male corpse above the floor level and concluded that it was a grave robber rather than an occupant yet he still makes the point that Philip II was cremated, and so could not be this body, this is not an argument if it is a tomb-robber; the male body is irrelevant.

There follows an imaginative exegesis on the potential existence of Karanos and his age relative to Europe followed by an exaggerated belief in the specifics of one line of Plutarch’s ‘Alexander’ 10 viii
8 However, he did seek out the participants in the plot and punished them, and was angry with Olympias for her savage treatment of Cleopatra during his absence.
οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς συναιτίους τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς ἀναζητήσας ἐκόλασε, καὶ τὴν Κλεοπάτραν ἀποδημοῦντος αὐτοῦ τῆς Ὀλυμπιάδος ὠμῶς μεταχειρισαμένης ἠγανάκτησε.
Apodemountos can, indeed mean ‘abroad’ but it need only mean ‘away from home’ where home is the subject’s domicile and it may equally have the weaker meaning still of ‘absent’ ie not present at the scene of the action. It is unsafe to build an elaborate case for any child neonate at the time of Philip’s assassination necessarily being too old to count on the basis of a single ambiguous word. Naturally this does not prove the neonate is Kleopatra’s child only that contra Fox it cannot be dismissed as a possibility.
The refrain of why only one child when Kleopatra had two is equally deceptive, as has been said two pregnancies in such short order are unlikely, and Fox seems unwilling to believe Justin capable of confusing the children of two mothers by far the most economic solution if one must believe in the existence of the murdered step-brother. Also it is odd to argue that there must be two children in Tomb I if it is Philip II’s when there are none in Tomb II; another inconclusive argument.
Arguments based on Asian influence only coming after Alexander’s campaign are quite rightly excoriated but once again are not decisive nor can pottery or salt cellar shapes hope to be specific enough to pronounce on a twenty year period, the increase in evidence has not pushed the dating back so much as broadened its range.
The treatment of Kynna’s marriage leaves me aghast; it is a farrago of incorrect and forced translation and what is worse totally unnecessary. First Fox claims
‘[Polyainos’] underlying source is used here so as to present Kynna as a manly woman a true virago who killed a male enemy in battle and then ‘ having married Amyntas and quickly rejected him did not put up with making trial of a second husband'

Basilissa can NEVER be masculine it means ‘queen’ with none of the modern ambiguity, so this is a mistranslation worthy of ten laps of the playing fields and one that alerts us to the following rendering (I would not normally feel confident arguing Greek with a Classical scholar of Fox’s vintage); the Greek for the direct translation he offers is
Having married Amyntas [son of Perdikkas] is fine but the next effort would draw much red ink; apobalousa is feminine and describes her state not ‘rejected’ so much as ‘deprived of’ the loading of the translation continues with ‘put up with’ for ‘hypemeinen’ which is ‘remain behind’ - support- perhaps, the rendering is not too bad except that the previous mis-reading endows it with the picture of a man-hater, the Greek does not exclude a desire not to be disappointed nor even a deeper love between her and Amyntas. Either way it is obfuscation, as he says the crucial word is tachews, swiftly; unfortunately the guff is necessary for his view of Kynna the virago; tachews is definitely ‘relative’, but we cannot say to what it is relative nor do appeals to Philip II’s schedules impress, the evidence is simply not full enough and, unlike Alexander’s campaign in the East, he is close to home. The reason is clear, he needs Adea to have been born after October 337 to rule her out as the female in Tomb II. Needless to say this bad method does not mean that he is wrong indeed it is entirely possible that Adea was born to Amyntas posthumously, although one would have to ask how attractive a recently post-partum bride would be for Langaros.
I have said before that the pollution argument evaporates in slave societies and the fact that the corpse has to be burned, uniquely in a cremation house begs many questions. So, not as decisive for the relative arguments as Fox claims, but certainly a solid defence of Andronikos’ integrity, which is deserved and welcome.

Given the contentious nature of the dating of artefacts from I and II it does not do to cite ‘authoritative’ museum labels for IV, though I concede this may be due to publishing constraints, it is bad form indeed to pre-empt the official report.
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Agesilaos wrote:
I don't think the Macedonians had the convention of the 'ram touching the wall', certainly not this early it is a Roman phrase 'aries murem tangere' I think Cicero uses it figuratively in Pro Milone to mean that things between Clodius and Milo had come to such a pass that the violence on the Appian Way was inevitable and sanctioned by Roman convention. It was only under Philip that Greek siege warfare advanced beyond building ramps and circumvallation.
Rams are as old as walls themselves, and go back to Assyrian and early Egyptian times. Equally, they were in use in Classical Greece as Thucydides testifies (e.g. siege of Plataea II.71-78 for rams and sophisticated counter-measures, such as breaking off the rams head by dropping a beam on it, or lassoing it.Other sophisticated techniques included counter siege towers and mining.) Against timber palisades, the Greeks used flame-throwers powered by bellows, as at Delium by the Thebans [Thuc iv.100], or by Brasidas in taking Lecythus[Thuc IV.115]. Philip and Alexander's contribution to siege warfare was the invention of large torsion powered catapults which threw rocks big enough to strip battlements from walls, effectively shortening siege lengths, and allowing a breach to be effected by ram all the quicker.....the Greeks of classical times used quite sophisticated siege techniques, not just circumvallation and ramp.

As to 'custom of war', since time immemorial, a besieged place could treat freely while the circumvallation occurred, still had the option of unconditional surrender once the ramp was piling up, but was subject to massacre, rape and pillage once the breach was under way, as epitomised by the Roman phrase - and the custom went back to Assyrian times or before. The Plataeans referred to above sent their wives, families and all bar the 400 men of the garrison and some slave-women to cook for them, to Athens for precisely that reason, and one need look no further than Philip and Alexander's sieges to see that the custom existed in Macedon too.

That is why Olympias' troops wanted to surrender, hence they would have done so as soon as the weather improved, which as I said, was late Jan-Feb when average temperatures are already over 10 degrees C, machines can be moved, digging take place etc.
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Paralus »

Xenophon wrote:… hence they would have done so [surrender] as soon as the weather improved, which as I said, was late Jan-Feb when average temperatures are already over 10 degrees C, machines can be moved, digging take place etc.
This – “customs of war”, average temperatures and movement of machines - is an ingenious and technical argument. Yet, in the end, it is a strained argument made necessary by the need to somehow backdate the clear notation of spring (or its beginning) in the passage to January or early February. I agree with Agesilaos: such seasonal notions are almost always agriculturally based (if not equinox/solstice) as these are agricultural societies. Diodorus is using a source whose grasp of temporal pointers is quite keen. This source is excerpted by Diodorus as claiming that, as spring began, starvation and want increased day by day. The argument presumes that the source which, for example, tells us that Philip Arrhidaeus ruled six years and four months, that Antigonus' troops suffered under the heat “the season when the Dog Star rises” and that Antigonus set out (for Gabiene) at about the time of the winter solstice, now means that spring began in late January.

It is near universally agreed that the siege began sometime in December 317. This is based on the chronological pointer mentioned above (Arrhidaeus' death during October 317). Cassander received the news of the murder and the defiling of his brother's tomb whilst besieging Tegea in the Peloponnese. He then had to negotiate terms with the Tegeans and transport his army back to Macedon. This was no simple task as the Aetolians held Thermopylae necessitating the collecting of boats and barges to take his army around the plug and into Thessaly. He can really only have been in position to enforce a siege by December - very late November at the earliest. Here, as Olympias and her supporters go into Pydna, Diodorus provides another pertinent pointer. Having described those that Olympias takes with her the Sicilian notes that “there was not a sufficient supply of food for people who were about to endure a very long (πολυχρόνιον) siege”. A “very long” siege would hardly fit an end in late January or very early February. It would, though, rather better fit a siege ending mid to late March; spring then as now. As sieges go, the former could hardly be described as “very long”.
Xenophon wrote:…a besieged place could treat freely while the circumvallation occurred, still had the option of unconditional surrender once the ramp was piling up, but was subject to massacre, rape and pillage once the breach was under way […]That is why Olympias' troops wanted to surrender….
That Olympias’ troops wanted to surrender before the siege machinery could produce a breach can only be supposition for that is not what Diodorus writes. Dodorus plainly states the reasons for their wish to surrender:
As spring came on and their want increased from day to day, many of the soldiers gathered together and appealed to Olympias to let them go because of the lack of supplies. Since she could neither issue any food at all nor break the siege, she permitted them to withdraw.
There is nothing here about wanting to leave before a breach was made and thus being open to massacre. The soldiers want to leave due to the fact that there is no food and had not been “from day to day” as spring began. They likely will have endured the siege longer had Olympias properly supplied her redoubt for the "very long" siege as Diodorus notes in his earlier criticism. There was no likelihood of any food being provided or of Olympias breaking the siege and so she allows them to leave.

Cassander, as Agesilaos has noted, was well aware of the state of play within Pydna. One wonders how he could not be given the bodies of the dead (and emaciated one must assume) bodies that were thrown over the wall. Whatever he knew beforehand he had confirmed first hand by those Olympias let leave. There was no need for catapults or rams: the survivors would surrender or die in the very short term.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Back on March 3rd, and many, many posts ago, I said that while the digression as to just when Philip Arhiddaeus, Eurydice and Cynna her mother were buried was not relevant to the subject of tomb occupants, I would favour Spring over Autumn/Winter for extrinsic reasons, since we have no way of knowing whether Diodorus or Diyllus was correct from the literary evidence.
As we have discovered before on other threads, much can be learnt from geography, climate and weather, and time and distance. Let us apply these factors to our ‘fuzzy’ time scales and see if we can shed some light.
Let us begin with basic climate and geography. Greece/Macedon has four different climates but only two need concern us here. The geography of Macedon is roughly some 20% coastal plain and river valley, and 80 % alpine (as is the rest of Greece). The climate of the coastal plain is Mediterranean, and in Alexander’s time was broadly similar to now. The first event we are concerned with is the surrender of Olympias “at the beginning of/as Spring came on”. For reasons set out at length earlier, that is likely to be as soon as the spring thaw, or weather break in the event of no snow, occurs. At Pydna, Winter, with max daily temperatures averaging around 10 degrees C and minimums around 0-1 degree, is short and confined to December/January. By end January/February, the average daily temperature is over 10 degrees max, and minimum 4 degrees, with any snow present long gone, and the ground suitable for digging and moving siege machines on. Olympias’ troops will have surrendered around this time, when siege operations renewed, and certainly before there was any chance of a “ram touching the wall”, to borrow a later Roman expression for an age-old custom of war. Whilst the ‘official’ reason as stated by Diodorus was starvation, this cannot be entirely true, for we don’t hear of the entire general population starving to death, or the city being depopulated, and the soldiers will have had priority and the means to enforce it. For whatever reason, it seems the city, rather unusually, apparently had no reserve food stocks in its granaries to take it through the winter, at least when Olympias and perhaps a few hundred mouths were added.[Diodorus emphasises the few with her, and no army, not even all her Guards [“most of the soldiers accustomed to serve about the court.” (lit: her following) XIX.35; XIX.35.5-7 and; and Justin XIV.6 confirms the swiftness of Cassander’s arrival, catching her flat-footed, so November is preferable to December - as some argue - for the beginning of the siege. ] One suspects Diodorus’ source of exaggerating this ‘starvation’ aspect e.g. describing a siege which lasted from late November to early March at most – 3 months or so - as “a very long siege.” Olympias had no army, only ‘her following/guards’.The corpses brutally disposed of over the walls will have been civilians, of course, the soldiers being the last to ‘starve’, naturally. It is highly unlikely that all the grooms, and "no small number of the soldiers" starved in reality [DS XIX.49.4 makes this clear - it is the Queen's 'following/bodyguards' who are doing the throwing of corpses, likely civilian - "the city was being quickly filled with corpses.."]

The unspoken ‘elephant in the room’ was the prospect of being butchered in a hopeless cause. Nor does it seem likely that Olympias “allowed” her last hope/personal guards to just leave – she almost certainly had no choice, leaving she and her court the rather forlorn hope of flight by sea. Diodorus gives the game away when he refers to them as "deserters".[XIX.50.1]
Paralus believes that “beginning of Spring” here means mid-March, but, apart from the practical military reasons, to a pastoralist people, “lambing season” – end January/beginning February traditionally heralds Spring – see below. As he says, Cassander sent the surrendered soldiers ('deserters') off to “the various cities” to spread the news that Olympias’ cause was finished.[DiodXIX.50]
Our ‘fuzzy time scale’ for this event then is possibly early February, probably late February, and possibly as late as mid-march if the ‘Spring weather’ came late that year. A few days later at most, she surrendered after the escape attempt inevitably failed. Olympias, Thessalonike daughter of Philip, Roxane and Alexander IV all fell into Cassander’s hands. By the end of March, at the latest, Pella and Amphipolis were in Cassander’s hands and she was most likely dead, stoned to death by her many slaughtered enemies relatives.[Pausanias IX.7]

Now we must consider ‘Upper’ or alpine Macedonia, consisting mostly of mountains between 1,000 and 1,500 m high and mountain valleys. This is rather higher than the Scottish highlands. In winter they are covered in snow from December to March, and of course the passes are generally blocked, travel is impossible and the mountain valleys isolated.

The earliest a ‘muster call’ can be sent out is therefore end March-early April, and with the borders at furthest 120 miles or so from Pella, this would only take a couple of days at most by courier. Allowing a few days preparation by those selected to fill the muster, and 7 days marching ( 15-20 miles per day, average 17 mpd ), the earliest that the Army assembly could take place would be, say, end of April. I say earliest, rather than likely, because it allows no time for the Upper Makedones to set their affairs in order, arrange the farming schedule, round off the spring lambing season etc ( which traditionally heralded Spring in Macedonia and other parts of Europe – and occurs in late January early February – the “beginning of Spring”). Training and drilling is then required, whilst more far-flung allies such as Paeones, Agriaines or Thessalians might still be en route, or assembling to join the army en route depending where the campaign was to be. A campaign would therefore not generally begin before late-May or early June soonest, or even later [e.g. Philip II was still celebrating in Aigae in June 336, with guests from all over Greece, when he was assassinated] and would be geared to crop ripening in the targeted enemy areas. As an example, we may take Philip II’s Chaeronea campaign. Plutarch gives the date as the 12th of Mategeitnion, the second month of the Attic year which began after the summer solstice. Astronomical data [new moon 27 July] helps to date this to probably around 4th August 338 BC (Gregorian ). We can work back from this, knowing the battle was fought soon after Philip’s arrival [Diod XVI.85.6 ] “Both sides were eager for the battle....the armies deployed at dawn”. The distance via Thermopylae from Pella to Thebes is roughly 210 miles, 12 days march at 15-20 miles per day, allow a couple of rest days, roughly two weeks, therefore he left in mid-July, after “waiting for the last of his laggard allies to arrive.” [DS XVI.85.5] - perhaps Paeones and Agrianes, who had the furthest to come. Perhaps also delayed slightly by his negotiations with the Boeotians, though these most likely took place whilst the muster was occurring – the army could not sit around eating Philip out of house and home for long.
Alexander, in 335 BC, had been campaigning in the far north, as far as the Danube, when he learned of Thebes revolt and headed south immediately on a march of 400 miles or so, which is about a month – perhaps three weeks if forced marches are included, and he did not arrive at Thebes until September 335 BC, hence the campaign in the north likely began in summer, in July, perhaps as late as early August.

We can now return to our ‘fuzzy timetable’, as set out by Diodorus.
• Death of Olympias, probably some time in March – end of March latest
• April , May, June – ample time for wedding ( say a week, plus more to prepare, invite guests etc ; Foundation of city on Pallene; Funeral of Philip III, Eurydike and Cynna. Although not mentioned, there were also the funerals of Cassander’s brother Nicanor, and 100 of his friends and relations to arrange – though the latter may have already occurred, as well as the restoration of his brother Iollas’ tomb [DS XIX.11.7]. Agesilaos suggests that tomb-building might take a month, and for comparison we know Alexander buried Philip immediately [In July or beginning of August] before embarking on campaign[DS XVII.1.5], ultimately marching on Thebes, so Cassander’s tomb for King Philip III could easily, and probably, have got under way in April.
• Polyperchon, under siege in Thessaly, learns of the death of Olympias and capture of Alexander IV and Roxane, for whom he is Regent and Guardian ( Olympias is his subordinate ally officially, not the other way around as I read Paralus to be suggesting, though who was more powerful in reality might be debateable ....). He “finally” escapes and flees to Aetolia, probably in April
• End of April/early May – news of Eumenes defeat arrives in Macedon
• End June/ sometime in July: Cassander marches south, taking two weeks aprox to reach Thebes ( see above). He perhaps spends some time there ( a week or two? Pausanias confirms the actual construction of the walls occurred later, as one would expect, “in the time/reign of Cassander”. IX.7.4) before moving on the Isthmus and Megara, another week’s march away (125 miles) and thence to the Peloponnese and Messenia ( another 150 mile or so); 10 days or so march, allowing for rest days - where he carries on desultory campaigning at Argos and Messenia [DS XIX.54]. Allowing for the barge building to bypass the Isthmus, this takes us to the end of September or thereabouts – and takes no account of time for any fighting or the “negotiations” with the various Messenian cities. Retracing his steps back to Macedonia takes five weeks or so, not allowing for any ‘stopover’ in Thebes ( but perhaps a week ? They, in gratitude to their restorer, can hardly have demurred at ‘hosting’ the army and resupplying them for their homeward march. ) He arrives back in Pella around mid-November, with the southern Upper Macedonians of Tymphaioi, Elimiotai, Orestai and Lynkestis ‘peeling off’ once they crossed the borders into Macedonia, for they had another week to ten days march to reach their homes, doubtless hoping that winter did not come early. The Paiones and Agrianes too, if they were present had another 80 miles or so ( 4-5 days march) from Pella, leaving a bare week’s margin before the snows were due!! Cassander evidently had a busy year!
Now, I must emphasise that because all these timings are a bit approximate, or ‘fuzzy’, it is possible to tinker with them, or postulate forced marches here and there, and maybe get Cassander back in time to hold a funeral, but in that case there will be no Upper Macedonians or allies present, for they needed to get home, and bear in mind I have allowed no time for a ‘stopover’ in Thebes on the way back, or for actual fighting, or negotiations, or movement around, in the Peloponnese. One can also postulate an earlier departure time from Macedon, but that does not fit the other evidence in respect of campaign starts. [Alexander’s Asian campaign started early for obvious reasons – the campaign that proves the rule].The army generally don’t seem to have headed off on campaign until the ‘Lower’ Macedonians safely got their wheat harvest in, in June. [ Barley was harvested commencing in May, wheat in June, drying and threshing in July, fruits in autumn, and olives last in November.] It can be seen that there is little room for leeway with any of these timings, based on the agricultural cycle as they are. [Get your own harvest in, be eating your enemy’s grain in August-Sept, after it is threshed and stored.]
So we can say that extrinsic evidence generally favours a Spring burial, as per Diodorus, rather than a late Autumn/Winter burial, as per Diyllus.

What about moral/practical grounds ? We can perhaps assume that they had been already cremated [ c.f Craterus and Eumenes], so the much debated points about ‘fleshed’ or ‘de-fleshed’ cremation are moot, as Musgrave pointed out on purely forensic grounds. That too sweeps away arguments about handling ‘polluted’ remains, by the way.

We are, I think, all agreed that the three events – marriage, city founding ( whatever that may have actually consisted of) and funeral – most of all funeral in Paralus’ opinion, though I am less sure that it overshadowed the marriage which provided Cassander’s ‘right’ to the throne etc by that much, were all vitally important to establishing Cassander’s claim to the throne. Evidence of the importance of a ‘rightful’ King burying his predecessor can, however, be drawn from the parallel of Alexander’s accession. He too, like Cassander, ascended to the throne suddenly, beset by other Macedonian factions and rivals, threatened with war by cities in revolt, yet his first priority was to bury his predecessor, and in Alexander’s case this was hardly out of filial piety. Though urged to marry, Alexander’s birthright gave him a right to the throne which Cassander could only acquire through marriage. The founding of a city need be little more than a decree and perhaps a founding stone celebration. Then, in Diodorus’ timetable, came the funeral, followed immediately by the ‘enrolling’ for the campaign. This all makes perfect sense. The propaganda aspects of Cassander ‘staking his claim’ by his marriage and the respectful funeral – after all, Cassander supported Philip III, as opposed to Olympias’ grandson – could only take effect if the maximum number of Makedones were present, and that meant while the army was being raised. The marriage only required the country’s “great and good” to be present to witness it. Hence the sequence of events.

But, it may be argued, it is possible that the army headed off earlier, and that hence there was time for a funeral at the end of the year, as Athenaeus quotes Diyllus reporting, and it could have taken place before the army split up into winter quarters. Possible, yes. Probable? No, in my view. The ‘Upper’ Macedonians will have left the army as soon as they crossed back into home territory, and certainly won’t have gone all the way to Aigae, and then retraced their steps southwest again with the onset of winter threatening. Nor will the “Great and Good” been likely to leave their homes a second time for up three weeks ( a week’s journey there, say a week for the funeral, and a week’s return – again with the threat of being cut off from their homes by the first snows of winter ). Two costly and time consuming journeys to Aigae in one year ? Not very likely. Moreover, Cassander had no reason to put off the funeral to the end of the year – no-one has suggested why he would do such a thing, and that requires explanation. Custom dictated that burial take place as soon as possible. Cassander could hardly bury his brother and put off a Royal funeral, and he would certainly not delay the former, if only for family reasons. In my view, it is far more likely that the burial took place in the Spring, as soon as a tomb was ready, which could have been done by April-May easily. That was when it mattered – as part of Cassander establishing his right to the throne – as Diodorus[XIX.52.5] says “already conducting himself as a King in administering the affairs of the realm.” This included banishing Alexander IV, and his mother Roxane to Amphipolis, under guard, and stripping him of all Royal prerogatives, presumably implicated as ‘regicides’. That too occurred in the Spring, and he was anxious to gauge public opinion of Olympias’ death – which could be done as the ‘Makedones’ assembled for war - before doing away with the ‘regicides’. All of this was necessary before going off to war, to secure Cassander’s position ( just like Alexander). Especially the funeral, if Paralus is right about its importance in establishing ‘rightful heir’. ( It may be argued that a parallel can be seen in the wrangling over Alexander’s corpse, but this may have been because he was the legendary Alexander, rather than because of his role as recently deceased King of Macedon.)

All in all, for the reasons set out above, and others, we may conclude that Diodorus’ Spring burial is more likely and probable than Diyllus’ Autumn/Winter one.

Phew! And now, a short interlude before responding to Agesilaos and Paralus’ most recent posts........
Last edited by Xenophon on Tue Mar 12, 2013 3:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Agesilaos wrote:
You will also note that the Persian courier does a full day's stage on the same horse, lowering their speed vis-a-vis the Pony Express
.
Duly noted, though there seems to be some ambiguity over ‘stage’, and we know that from archaeology, Persian ‘stage houses’ were spaced at roughly 17 mile intervals, 5-6 parasangs, a day’s march. I took it that the ‘stage’ referred to this, so that a single courier rode a day’s journey – 17 miles – which is very similar to the distance ridden by an individual ‘Pony Express’ rider...
If a Persian courier rode all day, then the Persian system “as fast as the flight of cranes” would be no faster than a conventional courier.
I don't think Kassandros would have rushed the tomb building, speed was not of the essence and a proper tomb must have taken a month to excavate and line with stone; the alternative would be to utilise an empty tomb. Ultimately, the timing is a detail but it would demonstrate the degree of Kassandros' feeling of security. It practically advertises his usurpation. Diodoros is insistent on Kassandros' hesitation and worry about the reaction of the Macedonians, a Royal Funeral after a successful campaign in Greece would set the seal on his rule, feelings would be less polarised than immediately after the fall of Olympias and its successful, or uneventful, completion could be taken as a sign of acceptance by the populace. This is purely circumstantial, of course, but lends credence to Diyllos' patent timing; Kassandros was daring, yes, but never rash; he weighs the pros and cons and acts after consideration.


I agree there was no need to rush the tomb-building. Alexander had the army still assembled in June, after its Spring campaign under Philip against neighbouring Illyria ( little more than a border clash) and needed to campaign in Autumn because of the assassination, hence the rushed tomb for Philip. Cassander had the whole of Spring to build a tomb for Arrhidaeus, Eurydike and Cynna.
A hasty funeral would undermine rather than bolster his support, alienating both the former supporters of Philip and Eurydike and failing to reconcile those of Olympias. What constitutes hasty is one of those length of a piece of string questions but it is clear that Diyllos' timing at the end of the campaign year could not be called such. Another consideration would be discovering the Royal corpses, murdered by a hostile faction in secret and disposed of with no fanfare or, probably any marker. The only objection (other than Diodoros apparent schedule) would concern the bodies, once dicovered they would presumably have left them in situ awaiting reburial, I cannot see the Greeks leaving them four or five months without a grave.
I don’t agree with this rationalisation of a late funeral. I think such an explanation only makes sense in hindsight. In the weeks after Olympias’ death, Cassander was worried about the Makedones reaction, as we all agree. At the time, he had no idea whether he was going to achieve a successful campaign, or whether some disaster might fatally undermine his ambitions – witness the decline and fall of Polyperchon if example were wanted for the fickleness of fortune and the Makedones who deserted him. At this most stressful time, Cassander had 3 cards to play, according to DS. Marriage to Thessalonike legitimised his claim to the throne. Burying his predecessor established him as successor. Both were essential, and more or less immediate if Cassander was to succeed. Founding a city was also a ‘Royal prerogative’. All these propaganda strokes were designed to proclaim Cassander’s legitimacy, the opposite of ‘advertising his usurpation.’ Cassander would indeed have weighed the pros and cons, and his need was to gain the support of as many Makedones as possible immediately, and cementing his legitimacy as soon as possible. Delaying the ‘Royal Funeral’ ( and possibly that of his brother) for 7 months would have been an affront to the expectations of his own followers – supporters and mourners of the dead Arrhidaeus, it should be noted. Equally, Cassander could not have known that ‘polarisation’ might die down, at that time in Spring. For all he knew, by Summer he could be embroiled in a civil war, with the death of Olympias and the failure to bury King Philip Arrhidaeus as the causes. A fearful, and unacceptable risk. A delayed funeral, just to potentially ‘set the seal’ on a hypothetically successful campaign ( as it was in Spring) would have risked Cassander losing support, possibly being lynched, and hubris besides. It would downgrade the ‘Royal Funeral’ to an afterthought, carried out in a rush before the winter snows set in. Hardly likely to endear him to his supporters and family ( Nicanor could hardly be buried before the King), let alone the Makedones at large....
I certainly would agree with your last point, for whether inhumed, or as I have suggested elsewhere, already cremated ( c.f. Craterus and Eumenes), religious scruples and the Erinyes would hardly allow such a delay.
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Paralus wrote: ( Sat March 9)
This – “customs of war”, average temperatures and movement of machines - is an ingenious and technical argument. Yet, in the end, it is a strained argument made necessary by the need to somehow backdate the clear notation of spring (or its beginning) in the passage to January or early February. I agree with Agesilaos: such seasonal notions are almost always agriculturally based (if not equinox/solstice) as these are agricultural societies.
As I have already pointed out, it is not necessary as such to ‘push back’ the surrender/desertion to end Jan/Feb – my earlier posted timetable commences from end March, though I personally believe February to be more likely. In fact though, my research has tended to confirm the earlier date, for in both ancient times and now, the 'lambing season' ( late January/February) 'heralds Spring', that is to say, is the beginning of Spring in pastoralist terms. We may note in passing that each place had it's own calendar, or rather calendars. Athens for example had three. A festival calendar of 12 months based on the lunar cycle, an arbitrary democratic state calendar of 10 months, and an agricultural calendar of seasons using star risings to fix points in time. Athens calendar began in mid-summer, Boeotia's in mid-winter....
Diodorus is using a source whose grasp of temporal pointers is quite keen. This source is excerpted by Diodorus as claiming that, as spring began, starvation and want increased day by day. The argument presumes that the source which, for example, tells us that Philip Arrhidaeus ruled six years and four months, that Antigonus' troops suffered under the heat “the season when the Dog Star rises” and that Antigonus set out (for Gabiene) at about the time of the winter solstice, now means that spring began in late January.
I agree entirely with the above, but as posted in the ‘timetable post’, in a pastoralist society ‘lambing season’ heralded Spring ( from Hesiod, I think – I’ve consulted that many sources compiling the timetable post) – and that took place in late January/early February ( and still does ). Late Jan/Feb is therefore entirely consistent with the above, and a pleasant confirmation of the ‘technical’ position put forward, for I was not aware of it when I posted previously. Totally consistent with "seasonal notions....agriculturally based ."
It is near universally agreed that the siege began sometime in December 317. This is based on the chronological pointer mentioned above (Arrhidaeus' death during October 317). Cassander received the news of the murder and the defiling of his brother's tomb whilst besieging Tegea in the Peloponnese. He then had to negotiate terms with the Tegeans and transport his army back to Macedon. This was no simple task as the Aetolians held Thermopylae necessitating the collecting of boats and barges to take his army around the plug and into Thessaly. He can really only have been in position to enforce a siege by December - very late November at the earliest. Here, as Olympias and her supporters go into Pydna, Diodorus provides another pertinent pointer. Having described those that Olympias takes with her the Sicilian notes that “there was not a sufficient supply of food for people who were about to endure a very long (πολυχρόνιον) siege”. A “very long” siege would hardly fit an end in late January or very early February. It would, though, rather better fit a siege ending mid to late March; spring then as now. As sieges go, the former could hardly be described as “very long”.
Well, let us see how applying some ‘technical analysis’ affects the timings. Tegea is roughly 260 miles from Pydna via Thermopylae and the eastern coast route. A messenger could have carried the awful news in as little as three days, certainly four. Allow a week to negotiate a truce. We are told he utilised ‘forced marches’ to arrive unexpectedly early at Pydna. If he utilised the oft performed ‘double marches’ of around 35 mpd, he could have arrived 8 marching days later, but allowing a couple of rest days ( allowing stragglers to catch up) and we have 10 days, add several days to bypass Thermopylae by sea ( a favourite ploy of his when confronted with a bottleneck such as the Isthmus or Thermopylae, it seems – and including elephants be it noted.) and we have a minimum of a fortnight. Even if Arrhidaeus’ death was at the end of October, Cassander could have arrived at Pydna in mid-November, and had every incentive to do so. Even at ‘normal’ marching speed would only add another week or so, making his arrival in November certain. Those agreeing a date in December had better think again.
I have already posted Diodorus’ exaggerations on the siege above. Even mid-late November to March, the longest possible, is not ‘a very long siege’. Not even a long siege, such as Antigonus’ year long siege of Eumenes in Nora, or Alexander’s 8 month long siege of Tyre. Nor as I have said, is it likely that all the grooms perished, “and no small number of the soldiers also met the same fate...”, as a close reading of DS reveals. All this is just so much ‘apologia’ for the desertion of the guards, at the earliest opportunity.....not that I blame them ! I wouldn’t want to die in a hopelessly lost cause either. And they can hardly have been in ‘starving’ condition since Cassander welcomed them, and then sent them off to the various cities. They were obviously fit enough to travel immediately ( or he would have sent other messengers ).
Xenophon wrote:…a besieged place could treat freely while the circumvallation occurred, still had the option of unconditional surrender once the ramp was piling up, but was subject to massacre, rape and pillage once the breach was under way […]That is why Olympias' troops wanted to surrender….
That Olympias’ troops wanted to surrender before the siege machinery could produce a breach can only be supposition for that is not what Diodorus writes. Dodorus plainly states the reasons for their wish to surrender:
As spring came on and their want increased from day to day, many of the soldiers gathered together and appealed to Olympias to let them go because of the lack of supplies. Since she could neither issue any food at all nor break the siege, she permitted them to withdraw.


There is nothing here about wanting to leave before a breach was made and thus being open to massacre. The soldiers want to leave due to the fact that there is no food and had not been “from day to day” as spring began. They likely will have endured the siege longer had Olympias properly supplied her redoubt for the "very long" siege as Diodorus notes in his earlier criticism. There was no likelihood of any food being provided or of Olympias breaking the siege and so she allows them to leave.
See my ‘timetable’ post, and above remarks about ‘starving’ soldiers. Fear of a massacre will have been uppermost in the minds of her ‘followers/guardsmen’ even if unexpressed. I very much doubt they’d have resisted longer in any event. A few hundred personal bodyguards at most were never going to hold out very long against Cassander’s army, no matter how much food there was. They’d have just found another excuse to surrender/desert. The ‘starving’ story is all too likely just a face-saving apologia, as I have suggested above. Nor does she gracefully ‘allow them to leave’ – as Diodorus reveals in calling them ‘deserters’ just a few lines later.
Cassander, as Agesilaos has noted, was well aware of the state of play within Pydna. One wonders how he could not be given the bodies of the dead (and emaciated one must assume) bodies that were thrown over the wall. Whatever he knew beforehand he had confirmed first hand by those Olympias let leave. There was no need for catapults or rams: the survivors would surrender or die in the very short term
.

As with a couple of Agesilaos’ points, this too is twenty-twenty hindsight. Back in November when he likely arrived post-haste from Tegea he will have had little or no knowledge of the state of affairs in Pydna. He will therefore have proceeded with all the steps of a normal siege, including circumvallation, ramp and machines - as Diodorus confirms (DS XIX.36.1). He was only prevented from assault by the onset of winter storms,[ XIX.49.1] and everyone knew what must come when the weather improved. Knowing how few defenders there were would have encouraged an assault. Cassander was hardly going to embark on ‘sitzkrieg’ knowing that every day’s delay was costing him a small fortune just to feed the army.
Desperate defenders, though few and starving, might just take more ruthless measures in obtaining whatever the civilians had hidden, and thus eke out the siege longer. Assault as soon as possible was the inevitable course, and both sides must have known it.
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Getting back on point - who the occupants of the various tombs are - having digressed the various digressions, and perhaps opened up opportunities for future threads, I find myself broadly in agreement with Agesilaos' critique of Robin Lane -Fox's somewhat over the top arguments, ( see above) which are at times incorrect, e.g in respect of the helmet I referred to earlier for example, where he is simply wrong.....

He seems to have become decidedly eccentric on the subject of Alexander in recent years, and was fairly recently described as weeping at the travelling Alexander exhibition at the sight of the gold wreath from the Queen's Larnax from tomb II ( The 'Philip' tomb ) describing it as "the single most beautiful object in gold in the world ."[source: The Guardian online newspaper, 6/4/2011] and sundry other over-the-top pronouncements......

I'd be interested in any observations Paralus might care to make on his recent appearance in Sydney.....
I have now read Lane-Fox; whilst I can see how Borza and Palagia’s case has been fatally weakened on the specific grounds that they adduced as evidence it is quite fallacious to proceed to the position that this proves the opposite case.
It is curious that, apart from Andronicos' Greek rivals and detractors, who initiated the 'tomb II as Arrhidaeus tomb' theory, it has only really been embraced in America by the likes of Borza, Palagia and Phyllis Lehmann, and I think we can fairly say that the assertion of Arrhidaeus being the occupant of tomb II has, as Agesilaos observes, been fatally weakened. It is also true that this does not positively prove that tomb II is that of Philip II. Nevertheless, we can deduce by process of elimination to decide that he is the most probable candidate. The proponents of both camps agree that Philip II and Philip III Arrhidaeus are the only real possibilities and if one is eliminated, we are left with the other. On the basis of emerging information, it is now apparent that tomb I is most likely the tomb of a Queen who died in childbirth in the first half of the fourth century, and the identification of tomb III, 'The Prince's tomb' as that of Alexander the Great's teenage son Alexander IV is also not seriously disputed. Tomb IV dates to some time later, a coin of Antigonus Gonatus being found in the unlooted entrance way ( though the main tomb itself had been looted.)

So where is Philip, Eurydike and Cynna's tomb then ? Well, in addition to the 'Great' tumuli, there are over 500 lesser tumili at Aigae unexcavated....take your pick !! Who knows what other spectacular discoveries await future archaeologists...provided Greece's economy improves.
Given the contentious nature of the dating of artefacts from I and II it does not do to cite ‘authoritative’ museum labels for IV, though I concede this may be due to publishing constraints, it is bad form indeed to pre-empt the official report.
Indeed not, though the remains of no less than three 'archon' Athenian pots are actually date-stamped to 344/3 BC in the Eurydike tomb, proving that this tomb was likely constructed shortly after this date. It may be bad form to pre-empt official reports, but I for one am glad to see it. The 'Philip ' tomb is not properly fully reported, over 35 years after its discovery !! I probably won't live long enough to see such reports. Incidently, there are no 'proper' or 'official' reports for that other great archaeological discovery of the 20th Century, the Tutankhamun tomb of 1926 which contained over 6,000 objects. At least the 'Philip' tomb contained 'only' circa 500 objects !!
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Paralus »

Strike me pink! Go mow the lawns, do the washing and a bit of ironing, cook and eat dinner and a thesis is posted - in parts! Far too much to cover in one sitting I'm afraid.
Xenophon wrote:...but as posted in the ‘timetable post’, in a pastoralist society ‘lambing season’ heralded Spring ( from Hesiod, I think – I’ve consulted that many sources compiling the timetable post) – and that took place in late January/early February ( and still does ). Late Jan/Feb is therefore entirely consistent with the above, and a pleasant confirmation of the ‘technical’ position put forward, for I was not aware of it when I posted previously. Totally consistent with "seasonal notions....agriculturally based ."
Again, I disagree and, more to the point, so does Hesiod:
WD. 503-508; 536-545; 561-567
Avoid the month Lenaeon (late Jan/early Feb), wretched days, all of them fit to skin an ox, and the frosts which are cruel when Boreas blows over the earth. He blows across horse-breeding Thrace upon the wide sea and stirs it up, while earth and the forest howl [...] Then put on, as I bid you, a soft coat and a tunic to the feet to shield your body,—and you should weave thick woof on thin warp. In this clothe yourself so that your hair may keep still and not bristle and stand upon end all over your body. Lace on your feet close-fitting boots of the hide of a slaughtered ox, thickly lined with felt inside. And when the season of frost comes on, stitch together skins of firstling kids with ox-sinew, to put over your back and to keep off the rain [...] Observe all this until the year is ended and you have nights and days of equal length, and Earth, the mother of all, bears again her various fruit. When Zeus has finished sixty wintry days after the solstice, then the star Arcturus leaves the holy stream of Ocean and first rises brilliant at dusk. After him the shrilly wailing daughter of Pandion, the swallow, appears to men when spring is just beginning.(late Feb/March).
Hesiod clearly sees "sixty wintry days" after the solstice and thus his beginning of spring is at the end of February / early March (when Arcturus rises at dusk which would be right now on my astronomical charts). It won't do for me to widen the discussion to "pastoral" timings and "agricultural". The birthing of critters is another matter.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Perverse man !! I put in considerable work regarding the events of 316 BC, Olympias and Cassander, and you ignore all that, and want to go haring off on another digression upon a digression...... :lol: :lol:

Somebody's arithmetic is a little off here, for 60 days after winter solstice is Feb 18 or 19[modern] ! Hesiod's Spring , on that basis, begins a little after mid February. Which fits lambing season (late Jan/Feb) 'heralding Spring' very nicely, thank you.

As I remarked earlier, Greeks all had different calendars, and some used several simultaneously, such as Athens, the example I gave.

For another example of Spring beginning in February, consider the ancient Celtic calendar. Their year began with the onset of winter - 1 November. The winter months were November, December, January and Spring began 1 February. The name of the month is significant -"Imbolg", meaning literally 'ewes milk'......(Hesiod too begins his 'agricultural year' on 1 November - ploughing season.)

One thing's for sure, Spring obviously didn't begin in 'mid-March' as you originally postulated, and on which I based my timetable, precisely to avoid yet another digression on a digression, and in particular, this one . :P

It would appear I should have stuck to my own opinion, that Olympias likely surrendered mid-February to end February, both on grounds of military necessity ( Cassander was hardly going to sit on his hands until mid-March when the weather lifts some time in February ), but also because in ancient Greece Spring actually 'officially' began some time in February - undoubtedly on different dates in different places. That means my timetable should probably be moved back several weeks - which means Cassander didn't run quite such a near-run thing in getting back home and into winter quarters prior to the first snows...or alternately had more time on campaign in the Peloponnese, to accommodate the taking over of cities and negotiations I referred to.

One last point. It would be a mistake to base timings on when stars rise related to modern months, because of course these do not necessarily 'marry up' or correspond exactly with their ancient counterparts, especially with constant adjustment of adding 'inter calary' months which most ancient calendars did, and that local calendars mean the first of the month was anything but uniform....

Measuring time in the ancient world is a decidedly 'fuzzy' business....
Last edited by Xenophon on Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Paralus »

Xenophon wrote:One thing's for sure, Spring obviously didn't begin in 'mid-March' as you originally postulated, and on which I based my timetable, precisely to avoid yet another digression on a digression, and in particular, this one . :P.
No, I put Olympias' surrender in mid March or after (in some post pages back). What I said about spring was...
Paralus wrote: I'm not an ancient Macedonian and can only guess at just when such would consider spring beginning. I would guess that to be in March rather than January/February.
The reason being that she held out into spring ("spring began and their want increased day by day...").

The mathematics seem fine: two months (give or take a day) after December 22. In any case Hesiod, a Greek not a Celt, says that spring began after this when the swallow returns. But this could go on for days, months, seasons even... There are other matters to attend to - including march rates. From which authority comes the "oft performed ‘double marches’ of around 35 mpd" for these armies?
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Scientists to scan remains of King Philip II

Post by Xenophon »

Paralus wrote:
The mathematics seem fine: two months (give or take a day) after December 22
It seems measuring time in our modern era can be distinctly 'fuzzy' too ! :lol: :lol:

First, the winter solstice is Dec 21 for 3 of 4 years rather than Dec 22 and second, Hesiod says "60 days", which is two lunar months (2x 29.530 days), not two 'modern' months.....and even that does not get you into March ! ( 22 Feb give or take a day - and that's a stretch. Note that the month references given in your quote are modern interpolations, trying also to stretch the ancient period into the modern concept of Spring in March )
The reason being that she held out into spring ("spring began and their want increased day by day...").
My Loeb translates "As Spring came on...." and on checking the LSJ the word has the general meaning of "to make a beginning", so that the inference is right at the beginning of Spring, or just before it, and the Loeb seems perfectly correct, so we are definitely still in February, especially if as in several Greek (and the Celtic one) Spring began on February 1st. Hesiod's advice you quote in " Works and Days" on farming,written circa 700 BC is about how long to wear winter clothes. Hesiod has the year beginning on 1st November, implying that 'officially' Spring began on February 1st - but a moot point since we don't know whose calendar Diodorus' source is using !!
Incidently, remnant Spring festivals that survived are the Lupercalia, St Valentine's day and St Brigid's day - all occurring in February.
Nevertheless, it seems safe to assume the soldiers deserted in February, and Olympias' surrender followed very soon after - perhaps even the same day.

[Digression: Though apparently Cassander would not allow her a burial, as with others it appears she eventually got a tomb, for there are gravestone inscriptions from family members referring to her tomb at Pydna....which implies her execution was swift, if she wasn't removed to Pella or Aigae.]

It therefore seems unlikely she survived February , or at the latest, the beginning of March.......but as I perpetually warn, it's all a fuzzy business....

As to marches, if anything you will see I have erred on the conservative side. I thought you had been carefully following the 'Nora + Forced marches' thread ??

To save you having to read a lengthy thread, I've dug out the most pertinent entries for you. Have a look at the tables posted - Fri Jan 11 and Sat 12; Fri Jan 18 and Sat 19 and Wednesday Jan 23. There are plenty of examples of forced marches for a week or more, at up to 50 miles per day on occasion. The 35 miles per day is largely based on the information from Xenophon that a 'double' day's march of 10 parasangs rather than the usual 5 or 6 was marched on occasion, and the fact that Philip's soldiers routinely practised marching 35 miles per day.

In any event, even if Cassander marched at a 'normal' 17 or so mpd, he would have got to Pydna in November, and since we are told he marched quicker than that, his arrival in November rather than December is almost certain.
Post Reply