03-13-2007, 10:39 PM
Personally, I am always in two minds about remains.
I have a fascination with archaelogical facial reconstruction and obviously love to see the grave goods. Lets face it....we couldn't accurately re-enact the past if it wasn't for some of those.. :wink: and the thrill of actually being able to touch something from so long ago.....that was worn or used.... :roll: :roll:
However, I also feel it is wrong to seperate the remains from their grave goods and even, in some cases, to exhume a body.
When watching the television programme about Nefertiti, seeing the damage to the mummy's face upset me; stupid as it may sound, I thought how Nefertiti (if it were her) would feel.
If the bodily remains cannot be left in situ, I feel that most, if not all grave artifacts should be kept with the body. The Aigai-Vergina graves are a good example of what I would like to see more often.....and this would, I suppose mean returning artifacts to the original or subsequent gravesite.
Tut-ankh-amun is in his tomb, but where are most of his grave goods...?
When they finally find Alexander The Great, there is likely to be another war of the Diadochi...! Who would he actually belong to and if, for instance, Andrew Chugg is correct and they find him under St Marks in Venice posing as a saint :lol: ....does he stay there or return to Alexandria or Macedonia - Aigai...If he is under Nebi Daniel Mosque....the same question, at Siwah, the same question....etc; Are Alexander's wishes respected, or those of the government who insists they 'own' him as a result of heritage, ancestry or a long term tenancy....? :evil:
Regards
Arthes
I have a fascination with archaelogical facial reconstruction and obviously love to see the grave goods. Lets face it....we couldn't accurately re-enact the past if it wasn't for some of those.. :wink: and the thrill of actually being able to touch something from so long ago.....that was worn or used.... :roll: :roll:
However, I also feel it is wrong to seperate the remains from their grave goods and even, in some cases, to exhume a body.
When watching the television programme about Nefertiti, seeing the damage to the mummy's face upset me; stupid as it may sound, I thought how Nefertiti (if it were her) would feel.
If the bodily remains cannot be left in situ, I feel that most, if not all grave artifacts should be kept with the body. The Aigai-Vergina graves are a good example of what I would like to see more often.....and this would, I suppose mean returning artifacts to the original or subsequent gravesite.
Tut-ankh-amun is in his tomb, but where are most of his grave goods...?
When they finally find Alexander The Great, there is likely to be another war of the Diadochi...! Who would he actually belong to and if, for instance, Andrew Chugg is correct and they find him under St Marks in Venice posing as a saint :lol: ....does he stay there or return to Alexandria or Macedonia - Aigai...If he is under Nebi Daniel Mosque....the same question, at Siwah, the same question....etc; Are Alexander's wishes respected, or those of the government who insists they 'own' him as a result of heritage, ancestry or a long term tenancy....? :evil:
Regards
Arthes
Cristina
The Hoplite Association
[url:n2diviuq]http://www.hoplites.org[/url]
The enemy is less likely to get wind of an advance of cavalry, if the orders for march were passed from mouth to mouth rather than announced by voice of herald, or public notice. Xenophon
-
The Hoplite Association
[url:n2diviuq]http://www.hoplites.org[/url]
The enemy is less likely to get wind of an advance of cavalry, if the orders for march were passed from mouth to mouth rather than announced by voice of herald, or public notice. Xenophon
-
