Disputed Study Suggests Greek Burial Chamber Housed Tunic Once Worn by Alexander the Great
A forensic anthropologist in Greece puts forth an argument that a peculiar substance found within one of the illustrious fourth-century BCE Royal Tombs at Vergina is actually a piece of clothing that once belonged to none other than the celebrated Alexander the Great.
By implementing various examination processes and examining historical records, Antonis Bartsiokas, affiliated with the Democritus University of Thrace, concluded that the substance consists of fibers derived from a white and purple garment (a type of coat or robe) made of cotton. Taking historical references into account, he proposes that this clothing piece was attributed to the renowned young conqueror. The artifact was initially discovered during a search in a golden coffin, alongside the skeleton of a male and a golden wreath, in a chamber called Tomb II.
Bartsiokas presented his findings in an article published in the Journal of Field Archaeology last month, adding fuel to an ongoing archaeological dispute over the artifacts unveiled at the Royal Tombs at Vergina, as well as the identities of their inhabitants. However, not everyone shares Bartsiokas' beliefs.
In the late 1970s, archaeologist Manolis Andronikos discovered the Royal Tombs at Vergina in a small town of the same name in northern Greece. These tombs were divided into four distinct chambers, named Tombs I through IV. Tombs I, II, and III garnered the most interest from archaeologists due to their exceptional findings. When the archaeologists entered Tomb I, they found that it had already been plundered, while Tombs II and III displayed a remarkable collection of burial items. Both chambers contained human remains.
The tombs at Vergina are nestled near the ancient site of Aegae, which once served as the capital of the kingdom of Macedonia. King Philip II consolidated this kingdom, and his son, Alexander the Great, expanded it as far as India during the fourth century BCE. Tombs I through IV have been christened the Cluster of Philip II due to the assumption that they housed Philip II's remains.
Experts have long pondered the identities of those buried within the tombs. The conventional understanding is that Tomb II held the remains of Philip II, while the newest stance, which Bartsiokas subscribes to, asserts that Philip III Arrhidaeus was laid to rest in Tomb II, with their father being buried in Tomb I. Generally speaking, scholars agree that Alexander the Great’s son, Alexander IV, was interred in Tomb III.
There is, however, ambiguity regarding the burial site of Alexander the Great himself. Most speculate that it might be located in Alexandria, Egypt. Some researchers also contend that certain treasures from Tomb II belonged to the famous conqueror.
Bartsiokas falls into this latter camp. By employing gas chromatography – a technique that vaporizes a sample to dissect its chemical compounds – and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy, which analyzes a sample's chemical composition using infrared light, he determined the substance to be fabric. He then cited ancient literature, a frieze in Tomb II (a decorative panel of sculptures or artwork), and Alexander the Great's adoption of ancient Persian apparel as evidence for the garment's affiliation with the conqueror.
“The physical description of the garment corresponds precisely to the description in ancient sources of the sacred Persian mesoleucon sarapis [garment] belonging to Pharaoh and King Alexander the Great, which was considered the most valuable artifact in antiquity,” he writes in the study. “This sarapis is also depicted on the sixth hunter in Tomb II, who is identified as Alexander.”
In his study, Bartsiokas also presents arguments in support of the idea that Philip II was buried in Tomb I, Philip III Arrhidaeus in Tomb II, and Alexander IV in Tomb III, aligning his research with the new hypothesis concerning the Royal Tombs at Vergina. He suggests that Alexander’s belongings were buried with Arrhidaeus after his sudden demise, as he inherited them.
Bartsiokas' proposal has ignited sparks of argument among archaeologists. Stella Drougou, an archaeologist from the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki who coordinated the excavation of Vergina for a decade, declared to Greek newspaper ProtoThema that “disregarding the excavation data,” these debates with no foundation are groundless. On the contrary, James Romm, a classicist at Bard College, suggested that Bartsiokas' research may be validated. Romm goes as far as to propose that the pushback from the archaeological community could stem from a desire to protect the legacy of Andronicos.
For now, Bartsiokas' hypothesis on the identity and possession of the substance remains merely a hypothesis. If it were proven correct, however, it could drastically alter the work of one of Greece's most illustrious and revered archaeologists.
In the future, further scientific analysis and technological advancements might be able to provide definitive evidence to support or refute Bartsiokas' argument about the garment's ownership. Reflecting on historical texts and artifacts, it's intriguing to consider how the use of advanced technology in the field of science could potentially shed new light on ancient history and rewrite some of our understanding of the past.
