THESSALONIKI - The Vulci Foundation has signed an agreement with the Thessaloniki Archaeological Museum to bring a collection of artifacts and jewelry from the era of Alexander the Great, who ruled the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedonia in the 4th century BC, to Italy for the first time ever in 2018.

Vulci Foundation president Carmelo Massina and scientific director Carlo Casi signed the agreement with Thessaloniki museum director Polixeni Adam-Veleni, on the heels of a strategic cooperation agreement between the museum and Rome's Archaeological Superintendency directed by Alfonsina Russo.

"For the first time in Italy an important nucleus of the treasures from the Macedonian dynasty will go on display alongside the finest examples of Etruscan culture, starting with those from Vulci," Russo said.

"We're taking the opportunity to show the differences as well as the similarities between the two distant Mediterranean shores between the 6th and the 4th centuries BC," she said.

In addition to a series of artifacts belonging to the era of Alexander the Great, there will also be a collection of priceless gold jewelry as well as Etruscan artifacts from southern Etruria.

With this initiative the Vulci Foundation is aiming to strengthen its presence as an organiser of archaeological exhibitions.

"Thanks to this international event, the Vulci Foundation is taking a step up in terms of quality on the level of cultural tourism," said Vulci Foundation president Messina.

Source: Ansamed

The marble door that once sealed its entrance is on display at the Istanbul Archaeology Museums, the most striking find made by Greek Ottoman-era archaeologist Theodore Makridi during his excavations of a tomb in Derveni, near Thessaloniki, two years before the northern Greek port city was liberated.

The double-chambered barrel-vaulted tomb is among the greatest discoveries in the area and has been associated with Lete, one of the greatest cities of the ancient Kingdom of Macedonia. Nevertheless, it lay almost completely abandoned for over a century.

The elements did their worst and this beautiful historic structure was at the point of collapse in 2011, when it was finally slated for restoration and protection under the European Union structural funds program for 2007–2013, with a budget of 1.2 million euros. Work on the site commenced in 2012 and now the Tomb of Makridi Bey, as it is known, constitutes one of the highlights of Thessaloniki’s historic sites.

Dated to between the late 4th and early 3rd century BC, with a monumental facade in the Ionic rhythm and a marble sarcophagus in the death chamber, the tomb is a splendid sample of architecture and burial rites, as well as evidence of the incredible wealth that poured into the Kingdom of Macedonia with the return of Alexander the Great’s army from its Eastern campaign.

“When we took over, the condition of the tomb was lamentable. The structure was distorted and the antechamber had settled onto the scaffolding that had propped it up since 1997,” says architect and restorer Fani Athansiou.

An interdisciplinary team of experts conducted a dozen studies before any decisions could be taken to start restoring the structure and to protect the site with a solid shelter, part of which is submerged in the ground. The team (comprising Venetia Malama, Maria Miza, Maria Sarantidou and Alexis Papasotirou) then proceeded to restore the road that led up to the tomb, its Ionic facade and the original colors of the plaster that adorned its walls and arches.

Restored and illuminated at night, the monumental tomb – 10 meters in length and 8 meters in height – constitutes yet another piece of evidence in the narrative shaped by a plethora of other finds on the strategic significance of Lete, a city that was inhabited from early Neolithic (5,600–5,300 BC) to Roman times, archaeologist Katerina Tzanavari explains. Built before Thessaloniki, it was a fortress on the narrow stretch between the plain of Langadas and Lake Koroneia, and experienced its peak during the reign of Philip II.

Excavations in the vicinity have also brought to light the Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore (1936), unlooted graves from a large Archaic cemetery (1962), the ancient settlement and masterpieces in metal and gold (including the famed Derveni Krater, metal utensils, precious vessels, marble statues and the Derveni Papyrus). These finds grace the permanent collection halls of the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki.

Source: Kathimerini English

The Seleucid Empire (312–64 BCE) was the largest of the three Macedonian empires that emerged after the death of Alexander the Great. It was created by SELEUKOS I NIKATOR (“the Victorious”), from his satrapy of Babylonia, incorporating and transforming the infrastructure of the preceding Achaemenid Empire. The Seleucid kingdom was an archetypal imperial state: a huge, composite entity characterized by wide ethnic, cultural, religious, and political diversity. The empire in its heyday stretched from the Pamir Mountains to the Aegean Sea, reaching its greatest extent around 200 BCE under Antiochos III the Great. From ca. 150 BCE, the empire rapidly declined.Its core territories were taken over by the Romans and especially the PARTHIANS, until in 64 BCE the Seleucid Dynasty disappeared from history virtually unnoticed.

The Seleucid state was in essence a military organization exacting tribute. Kingship was charismatic and intensely martial 
(see KINGSHIP, HELLENISTIC). The monarchy’s heroic ethos required of the king to be a successful war leader able to defend  the interests of his followers and the cities under his protection. Imperial ideology was universalistic, the self-presentation of the Seleucid monarch a continuation and elaboration of the age-old Near Eastern notion of a Great King.

Hellenistic court culture developed from the Argead household of Philip and Alexander (see ARGEADS), absorbing diverse Greek, Iranian, and other influences. The Hellenistic courts in turn profoundly influenced the development of the Roman imperial court. Court culture in the smaller Hellenistic kingdoms (Pontos, Bithynia, Kommagene, Judaea, and Armenia) underwent the influence of the Macedonian, particularly Seleucid, courts too. Due to intermarriage, diplomatic exchange, competition, and a shared Greco-Macedonian background, the courts of the three major Hellenistic empires were strikingly similar. There were also differences, of course. The Ptolemaic court was firmly based in Alexandria, while the Seleucid court moved around the empire almost continually. The SELEUCIDS and notably Ptolemies maintained an elaborate court culture, while the later Antigonid court (see ANTIGONIDS) retained a more simple Macedonian appearance (see ANTIGONIDS). Royal women played a more prominent roleat the courts of the Ptolemies and Seleucids than at the Antigonid court.

Because Hellenistic kingship was personal and charismatic (see KINGSHIP, HELLENISTIC), the royal court was essentially the household of the royal family and is often referred to as oikos in Greek sources. Another common designation is aule, literally “court,” probably derived from the fact that the core of Hellenistic palaces was an open courtyard surrounded by banqueting  rooms (see PALACES, HELLENISTIC). However, in ancient historiography and documentary evidence, the royal court is usually defined in social terms like “retinue” (therapeia), “courtiers” (hoi peri ten aulen or aulikoi), and notably “the friends of the king” (hoi philoi tou basileos).

Antiochos III the Great (243/2–187) was the sixth king of the Seleucid Empire. His thirty-five-year reign (223/2–187) was the longest in the empire’s history. Antiochos, whose rule is relatively well-known from Polybius and Livy and a large number of inscriptions (cf. Ma 2000), was also one of the most capable and successful Seleucid rulers, not withstanding a disreputable defeat against Rome at the end of his career. Campaigning in areas as far apart as India and mainland Greece, Antiochos restored Seleucid hegemony in the Far East, defeated the Ptolemies, and made important but short-lived conquests in the west. His contemporary title Megas (Great) perhaps referred to his authority of Great King, especially his practice of installing vassal kings as a means to reorganize the empire – a practice that would later form the basis for the creation of the Roman Near East. Yet Antiochos’ military triumphs were of little consequence: most of his territorial gains had been lost again upon his death in 187; the empire also lost control of Asia Minor as the result of the war with Rome.

The Macedonian King Archelaos (413-399 B.C.), according to his contemporary Thukydides, the Athenian historian of the Peloponnesian War who knew the North Aegean well, built castles, forts and straight roads in the country and also invested more in war equipment – horses, armour and other weapons – than all his predecessors put together. Nevertheless, Arrian, the historian of Alexander the Great viewing Macedonia about two generations later, gained the impression that before the time of Philip II (359-336) the Macedonians led the life of poor shepherds and were a target of continual attacks from their neighbors. Safe frontiers and the affluence of an urban civilization were first attained under Philip II. 

From the Indus Valley in the east and the Aegean coast in the west, from the Iaxartes/Syr Darya river in the north to the Aswan in the south, the Persian Achaemenid empire, for more than two centuries, was the largest empire ever put together in antiquity. During a decade of conquest, Alexander had constituted it precisely to his advantage by appropriating the same boundaries (Elephantine, Syr Darya, and Indus). Already in antiquity, Greek observers highlighted what they regarded as one of the major problems of imperial government: the contrast between the immensity of imperial territories and the will of the Great Kings to establish and maintain their hold. 

During the Hellenistic Age – roughly the last three centuries BCE – the political history of the eastern Ancient World was dominated by three Macedonian dynasties: the Seleukids, ruling a vast empire in the Middle East and Central Asia (312-64 BCE); the Antigonid kings of Macedonia, who tried to control Greece and the Balkans until their kingdom was destroyed by the Romans in 168 BCE; and the Ptolemies (323-30 BCE), who ruled a maritime empire in the eastern Mediterranean from their capital Alexandria, an empire which comprised Egypt but was not therefore an Egyptian empire. In the second century BCE, the Attalid kingdom, based in Pergamon, emerged as the predominant state in the Aegean region, and around 100 Pontos on the Black Sea and Armenia temporarily became major Hellenistic powers.

In the transformations of the Classical world from Alexander to the end of the Roman Empire, the politics of the Greek polis underwent crucial changes. Yet, the city retained a vibrant urban political culture. These essays explore that culture and seek to explain the continued importance of city politics in the changing political environments of antiquity. The contributors question long-established interpretative traditions and seek to establish new ways of understanding the politics of the Greek city after the Classical age.

(c) 2011 Peeters Publishers | Series: Groningen-Royal Holloway Studies on the Greek City after the Classical Age 

This paper examines the organization, numbers and tactics of the Thessalian cavalry unit in the army of Alexander the Great. It is argued that already Philip II recognized the importance of Thessaly as a recruiting ground for heavy (noble) cavalry with regard to his planned invasion of Asia, and that it was partly for this reason that Philip closely integrated Thessaly in the Argead imperial system, cultivating personal relations with the Thessalian noble families also as a counterweight to the power of the traditional Macedonian noble cavalry, the hetairoi (Companions). Alexander inherited these arrangements. The Thessalians on their part joined Alexander’s expedition more enthusiastically than other Greeks because of these pre-existing bonds with the Macedonian royal family and because the promise of honor and booty agreed with the heroic mentality of the Thessalian aristocracy.