Go to the alexander-the-great.co.uk homepage
alexander-the-great.co.uk
Talk about the Oliver Stone movie "Alexander"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Have they found Alexander?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    alexander-the-great.co.uk Forum Index -> Discuss 'Alexander' the man
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
sikader



Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 6:07 am    Post subject: Re: Have they found Alexander? Reply with quote

Too much trouble for nothing. The tomb of Alexander the Great was located in Alexandreia of Egypt, in the location known as Sima (sign) which was also the center of Ancient Alexandreia. His tomb was not located in the palaces, and it was not sunk into the Mediterranean.

The tomb was found during the 19th century, and many agreed to the location described to them as being the tomb of Alexander the Great, including Schliemann. Someone had the chance to see the all-glass made coffin of Alexander, from a small distance.

Due to the objections by Egyptians (who ignored that the tomb belonged to Alexander the Great) that were based upon the later use of the tomb, those who visited the tomb could not even inspect the tomb from a close distance. If some collector did not manage to "snatch" the tomb, they should still be there.

O.K.?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
olympia



Joined: 01 Aug 2004
Posts: 37
Location: USA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That story is based on a hoax perpetrated in ca 1850

Quote:
Further contributing to the confusion in 1850, Scilitzis, a Greek interpreter to the Russian consulate of Alexandria, claimed when he entered the crypt of the Nabi Danial Mosque while guiding some European travelers that he saw through a hole in wooden door a body with the head slightly raised lying in a crystal coffin. He reported a golden diadem on the head and that about the coffin, there were scattered papyri, scrolls and books. However, it was immediately obvious that Scilitzis had read the works of Dion Cassius and made up the whole story, for papyri and books in the humid climate of Alexandria could not have survived for such a long period of time. 


They do not know where Alexander was buried. It would be wonderful if they did, because that would simultaneously solve the question of where the Ptolemies are buried.

There is a wonderful article called "In Search of Alexander the Great"
on touregypt. The author gives a detailed overview of where the rumored burial sites are, and the author gives a detailed overview of what is known about the burial in Alexandria from classical sources.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/alexandersearch.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikader



Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[/quote]
However, it was immediately obvious that Scilitzis had read the works of Dion Cassius and made up the whole story, for papyri and books in the humid climate of Alexandria could not have survived for such a long period of time. 
[/quote]

What is immediately obvious, my poor scholar, is that the tomb of Alexander was located under the tomb of a Muslim noble, that was also under the surface of Alexandreia. It has occurred to me that the humid climate of Alexandreia goes as far as the surface, and not below the surface, into a location that could have been sealed from the outside, in a manner than no air could get inside for centuries after the "dissappearance" of the tomb.

It is also well known that the air-tight pyramids have preserved not just whatever was enclosed inside, but even the smell of the wood that was still fresh thousands of years as if it was cut the previous day!!!

[/quote]They do not know where Alexander was buried. It would be wonderful if they did, because that would simultaneously solve the question of where the Ptolemies are buried.
[/quote]

Oh, but we do know where Alexander the Great was buried. Do not fool yourselves, even the Caesar and St. Athanasius visited his tomb, and many scholars have pointed out that he was buried exactly where I told you, at "Sima", in the very center of Ancient Alexandreia, and unless somebody moved it, it should still be there.

Nonetheless, there is no historical record that somebody moved Alexanders' body from where it was enshrined. Quite the contrary, it seems that Alexanders' tomb was forgotten, and got derelict as the time passed. All riches would have been removed, but not the coffin as nobody would have any reason to move it, but plenty of superstition not to move it. An earthquake that ruined the most of Alexandreia was the cause of its' dissappearance, and the consequent rebuilding of whatever over his burial grounds, although it would be wise to consider that few would built over a cemetery, unless if they were to build... another cemetery as the "hoax" suggests...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
olympia



Joined: 01 Aug 2004
Posts: 37
Location: USA

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
What is immediately obvious, my poor scholar, is that the tomb of Alexander was located under the tomb of a Muslim noble, that was also under the surface of Alexandreia.


That was a rather condescending comment.

The location is fiction on your part. If it was known where he was buried they would have stopped looking.

It is true that it is generally accepted that Alexander was buried in the Soma in Alexandria. People visited his tomb (see article I mentioned).
The location of the tomb was lost some centuries later after quite a bit of political upheavel.

Quote:
It is also well known that the air-tight pyramids have preserved not just whatever was enclosed inside, but even the smell of the wood that was still fresh thousands of years as if it was cut the previous day!!!

He was buried in what is described as a mausoleum, not a pyramid. Furthermore, the tomb must have been opened to allow the visitors attested to by history, hence this place was not airtight.
So that comment has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.

You may of course believe whatever you like, but the the exact location of the Soma is not known to modern egyptologists.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikas



Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:10 am    Post subject: Re: Have they found Alexander? Reply with quote

sikader wrote:
Too much trouble for nothing. The tomb of Alexander the Great was located in Alexandreia of Egypt, in the location known as Sima (sign) which was also the center of Ancient Alexandreia. His tomb was not located in the palaces, and it was not sunk into the Mediterranean.



Actually, 'Soma' is the 'Body', or in other words, the 'Tomb'. Alexander dissaappears from the written record around the time of the Arab conquest of Egypt. Augustus did indeed visit the tomb, and Caracalla later stripped it of the armour he was wearing, but we have long lost the location. To date, there is no sign of the Ptolemies, or Alexander...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikader



Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2004 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="sikader"]
Quote:
The location is fiction on your part. If it was known where he was buried they would have stopped looking.


It could not be known if some clever folk managed to bribe the Egyptians into allowing him to get in there and remove the corpse. Those folks managed to rip off Parthenon and they would have taken the Pyramids too, if they could move them...

Quote:
He was buried in what is described as a mausoleum, not a pyramid. Furthermore, the tomb must have been opened to allow the visitors attested to by history, hence this place was not airtight.
So that comment has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.


You cannnot know say if parts of it were airtight just by describing it as a masoleum. The tomb was open for several centuries, but it was sealed by a Roman emperor later who allowed no visitors, remember? It would not make sense if I suggested that the Papyrii were from Alexanders' time, but they could have been from the Roman era too, not to mention much later as well.

Quote:
You may of course believe whatever you like, but the the exact location of the Soma is not known to modern egyptologists.


Maybe, maybe not...

...Do you know what would be the value of the ruins, if they were ever to be found? Who can tell you that some folks have not cashed them already...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zoisnick



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 15
Location: ATHENS, GREECE

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the following information :
Septimious Severus, Roman Emperor created a cast of priests that worshiped him as a god. In 195 A.D. he decided to hide Alexanders' body from public view. Severus also hid away the ancient knowledge of importance (magazine trito mati, october 2004).

It is possible that the order of priests that Severus created later passed on the body of Alexander to the Vatican or to a secret order together with the important ancient knowledge.

The Vatican is known to hold plenty of the ancient knowledge as hinted in the work by U. Eco "the name of the rose".
The Vatican also holds many remains of important people. A few days ago the Vatican returned to the Orthodox Church the remains of St. Gregory the Theologian and St. John Chrysostom that lived around 350 A.D. (the remains were stolen eight hundred years ago by the crusaders that sacked Constantinople to the ground).

In the book of Kipling "the man that could be king" it is clearly said that all the treasure of Alexander (and his body?) is in the hands of an ancient massonic order.

It is naive to believe that the body of Alexander is lost. A secret order keeps it probably as a trophy together with other important ones.
All ancient techological knowledge (as shown in Abydos, Egypt -airplanes helicopters, flying saucers), is hidden away. Hitler got a hold of it, probably through the Vatican and later the Americans and the Russians.
Thus Hitler developed the Hannebus (flying saucers). The Americans as evidenced in Roswell followed with flying saucer designs that crashed.
The Russians today are fully equipped with flying saucers and there are many pictures to prove it.
On the other hand the governments are trying to convivce us that there is no interest in space.

Fiction in the West is used to portray facts in a perplexing way so that none can make out the truth.
greetings
Nikos
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikader



Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[/quote]The Vatican is known to hold plenty of the ancient knowledge as hinted in the work by U. Eco "the name of the rose".[/quote]

Umberto Eco is writing fiction, not science. Nobody knows what the Vatican is hiding, and probably they don't either, just as our orthodox folks in Hagion Oros and elsewhere.

Do you know that the second oldest copy of the bible that survives was rescued by a scientist from the hands of a monk in St. Catharine at Sina who wanted to use it as a means of getting a fire started? They have so many copies of the bible there - not to mention what else - and some of them are so worn out that one could easily dispose of them without to consider their value.

[/quote]The Vatican also holds many remains of important people. A few days ago the Vatican returned to the Orthodox Church the remains of St. Gregory the Theologian and St. John Chrysostom that lived around 350 A.D. (the remains were stolen eight hundred years ago by the crusaders that sacked Constantinople to the ground).[/quote]

Bone thieves! They had stolen the bones of St. Nicholas and they turned his figure into "Santa Claus"!!! I do not think that I need to explain to you why I believe that they are ignorant, their actions prove their it. They know that they are ignorant. None of them can explain why the patron saint of the sailors generated such a popular custom, and very little of his livehood is known.

[/quote]In the book of Kipling "the man that could be king" it is clearly said that all the treasure of Alexander (and his body?) is in the hands of an ancient massonic order.[/quote]

Kipling was just another folk who wrote fiction, and not science.

[/quote]All ancient techological knowledge (as shown in Abydos, Egypt -airplanes helicopters, flying saucers), is hidden away.[/quote]

Perhaps the Ancients did never grasp so much technology. Perhaps all of this is again the result of some fiction writers. I used to read quite a lot about the Bermuda triangle while I was younger, and I know what a science fiction writer means, the sort of Charles Berlitz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lala



Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 324
Location: Thessaloniki, Macedonia, Greece, Europe, Earth

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sikader wrote:
Umberto Eco is writing fiction, not science.

Umberto Eco is one of the most learned men though. And he very much likes to base his writtings on the things he finds out. He much closer to philosophy rather than fiction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
sikader



Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lala wrote:
sikader wrote:
Umberto Eco is writing fiction, not science.

Umberto Eco is one of the most learned men though. And he very much likes to base his writtings on the things he finds out. He much closer to philosophy rather than fiction.


Nobody denis that, but neither fiction nor philosophy have anything to do with archaeology, don't you think?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lala



Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 324
Location: Thessaloniki, Macedonia, Greece, Europe, Earth

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It depends on the way you persieve philosophy which is the science of logic. And logic is based on mathematics. And mathematics are based on rules. And rules are based on constants and variables. On the other hand, fiction is pure fantasy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
zoisnick



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 15
Location: ATHENS, GREECE

PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You did not understand my last comment I think.
Fiction was developed in the West in the same way that mythology existed in the ancient world. Back then they blended fact with fiction and the trick for the archaiologist today is to separate them.
Think of ourselves in the same position.

The writers that I am talking about are not just anybody.
U. Eco and Kipling know a lot. The matrix lets them leak out some information so that the masses can have a partial glimpse to the true events (distorted) and some satisfaction.

No institution can compare with the Vatican (its beginning was at the time of imperial Rome). They hold an immense amount of secrets. Ulrich the Goth and Attila the Hunn did not sack the Vatican. Nobody did.
The Vatican is holding as a secret even the prophecy of Fatima, holding the Catholics in the dark until today.

Mt Athos and St. Cathrine monasteries came later.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikader



Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

zoisnick wrote:
You did not understand my last comment I think.
Fiction was developed in the West in the same way that mythology existed in the ancient world. Back then they blended fact with fiction and the trick for the archaiologist today is to separate them.
Think of ourselves in the same position.


Depends upon the author. Thukydides was almost 100% accurate, I dare to say much more accurate than the modern media. Herodotus quotes others much too often, and the stories of those others are often pure fiction, but still he does not lie intentionally. The most of the others are somewhere in the middle, with a few propagandists meddling with the truth.

[/quote]The writers that I am talking about are not just anybody.
U. Eco and Kipling know a lot. The matrix lets them leak out some information so that the masses can have a partial glimpse to the true events (distorted) and some satisfaction.[/quote]

Eco and Kipling know (knew) a lot that is available to the general pulic as well, although few have (had) investigated as mcuh as the most people do. I do not think that they hold any sort of secret knowledge that we do not.

[/quote]No institution can compare with the Vatican (its beginning was at the time of imperial Rome). They hold an immense amount of secrets. Ulrich the Goth and Attila the Hunn did not sack the Vatican. Nobody did.
The Vatican is holding as a secret even the prophecy of Fatima, holding the Catholics in the dark until today.[/quote]

The only amount of secrets that the Vatican is hiding is perhaps the largest collection of porn in the world, dated back to the 10th or 11th century of "porn" (remember the Borgese family?) you should be aware that Rome had lost its' importance the very moment that the Christian faith became the official religion of the Roman empire. The most of the Christian monuments in the holy lands are still controlled by the Greek and Armenian Orthodox churches, which tells a lot about who have more in their possession. As far as I can remember the Roman Catholics have stolen quite a lot from us - and they are gradually returning them, if you have noticed - while we have never stolen anything from them, because they never had anything of value that relates to the Eastern world, that is the empire of Alexander the Great and all of the lands that are mentioned in the bible, correct?

As for the secret of Fatima, I'd rather not comment upon the hallucinations of a little girl.

[/quote]Mt Athos and St. Cathrine monasteries came later.[/quote]

No, St. Catharine is perhaps older than the Roman patriarchate, and it is certainly closer to the lands of the bible and Alexander the Great. So, the monks could have more than the Roman Catholics have in Rome, and, remember, the monastery of St. Catherine of Sina has never be sacked too, and shall never be sacked by the Muslims, I suppose that you know why...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zoisnick



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 15
Location: ATHENS, GREECE

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sikader
I agree with most of your comments.
Allow me to disagree on the Fatima issue which was experienced by many eyewitnesses. I am not a Catholic I am an Orthodox Christian.
We must not disregard divine intervention.
The fact I believe is that the important books in the library of Alexandria were not burnt. Knowledge is power and no leader would ever burn that.
That infamous R. Polanski in the movie "the ninth gate" leaks out the information that evil ones hold the books away from public eyes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    alexander-the-great.co.uk Forum Index -> Discuss 'Alexander' the man All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group