This seems more of an effort to start with a desired result (I found
Alexander) and then arranging the data in a way that supports this theory. I'm always suspecting research that starts with an answer and works backwards to prove it. Not to say that sometimes this works - but the evidence here can easily be twisted into a number of conclusions - and that the most "exciting" one is arrived at makes me not believe it.
His hunting painting theories, specifically
his belief that there were no longer wild
animals in
Macedonia and that kings of the period would not have foreigners in attendance on a
hunt - or that the artists would not take literary license based on their personal experience (a persian artistan asked to paint a
hunt scene of the
king). Instead out of many possible explanations he concludes that this is a painting of
Alexander.
But in the end, the telling point for me is it takes to many twists and conjecture to arrive at the conclusion this is Alexanders tomb. Personally, the KISS theory (keep it simple stupid) would indicate that Alexander's army would have insisted on participating in
his funeral rights. That
his cremation would be a rather large and thorough affair - and that
his final wishes would be complied with as they were apparently widely know. Its more likely they knew the danger of Alexanders tomb being looted - for talismans if not for loot - would be irresistable. I suspect that
his tomb was in secret and more than likely was found and looted in
his recent time due to
his fame.
But then my opinions here are just those - unfortunately the facts used to support this theory - though most interesting - amounts to about the same thing - an opinion. If many unlikely things must come together to make a theory make sense - then its probably not a
good theory.
Thanks for bringing this article up though LordBest it was most interesting.
