pothos.org

One more video here (in Greek), at 1:50 parts found near Kastas attributed to the lion Base, with recesses that match the placement of the lion's feet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI5LhGF ... e=youtu.be

Professor T. Mavroyannis: "Alexander had appointed Hephaestion as his successor but Cassandros wanted to erase all memory of this: damnatio memoriae"

Hephaistion pre-deceased Alexander and could, therefore, not be his successor even in Alexander's fevered mind and his relevance to anyone died with Alexander. Kassandros had no need to trouble himself with the dead chiliarch. Had he wished a damnatio memoriae it is strange that the only attested cult was within Kassandros' kingdom where the Diogenes plaque was found

The monument with the round shields is interesting but we need a date for it to be pertinent rather than simply suggestive (I see no reason to think that all Galatian shields were 'long' but I would require the date if I were arguing against that view).

Nice line drawing of part of the frieze in the tomb. Originally posted (and created by) Cri(si) nella Cripta on Twitter.



Did they show any more photographs of the paintings at the conference? I'm fairly certain that the ones posted online so far are not all-inclusive.

Best Regards,

Corso interview: http://www.xronometro.com/amfipolis-antonio-corso-2/

For anyone who wasn't aware, there is a space in the floor of the entrance chamber where a statue may have been. Corso believes it was a bronze of Hephaestion riding a horse.

I think this is the head from Schloss Faseneri; Corsoneeds to lay off the mushrooms!

For the drawing : Thank you very much Amyntoros. Is there a LITTLE DOG between the legs of the boy or am i totally confused ?

For the interview (in greek) of A.Corso : He supposes that the bronze horse ( photo) is an ensemble with the head of Hephaestion of Prado.If so , the horse must be HUGE because the head ( foto) of the alleged Hephaestion belongs to a 3+ meters figure.

Are they not aware that the Prado hasn't identified that bronze head as Hephaestion for 3 or 4 years? They now identify it as more likely to be Demetrios Polioketes, son of Antigonos https://www.museodelprado.es/en/the-col ... hMeta=heph. They date it to 310 - 290 BC. Who would have paid for such a massive bronze of Hephaestion 20 or 30 years after his death?

Incredible in all the wrong ways.

Sad too because I've yet to see a detailed chronology of the site with the evidence given for why Lefantzis believes things happened in the order they did. Especially so for a proposed re-purposed and multi-stage construction on a much older site as he seems to be suggesting.

The Faseneri is also a 1st Century BC Roman copy and so a really flawed comparandum. As for the technique of divining from an empty space just what once stood there I am in awe (or not!).The Karyatids stand c12ft from the floor, the head is from a 3.5m statue (10ft) maybe he was mounted on a Shetland pony?

I have yet to hear a transcript of the presentations where some arguments may have been explained, but regarding the square trace between the caryatids, here is a picture uploaded earlier:



I do not see this as a mark left by a statue base, e.g. due to weight - a pattern in the mosaic simply changes there (orientation of the marble pieces), marking a boundary. There is no apparent damage in the mosaic, or different colouring because something was on that part of the floor.

The three most critical points for future excavations, based on electrical tomography measurements are

1) On the east side of the tumulus (very large disturbance)
2) A small region just west of the entrance and slightly inside the peribolos
3) A region in the fields, just 10-20 meters, exactly in front of the entrance.

The rectangular infill of the floor in the first chamber probably means that that section of the floor was completed after the rest of the floor, because there was something in the way. But the area was filled in at an early stage, due to the similarity of the technique and the materials. It is also possible that the rectangle preceded the rest of the floor for some reason.

An interesting conundrum. Perhaps a mosaic panel depicting something controversial was taken out.

Best wishes,

Andrew

I am more inclined to see an artifact of the way the mosaic was laid; the floor was completed in two stages, probably to allow continued access to the work continuing in the deeper chambers. The men worked upto a straight edge, like a plank, say, then once the matrix had set and it could be walked on they completed the rest of the floor.

In a new comic interlude someone finds this convincing

Notice how the central spine/sarissa-head slips suggestively from the preserved central line and how these phalangites are carrying their sarissai, not two cubits from the butt but a similar distance from the head! so 15ft of them would project backwards into the following ranks, the butt spike would weigh about a kilo the torque would prevent any human lifting it from the ground.

That is where they found the burned wooden samples for analysis (just above the tholos, west)