Everyone sometime in his or her life has heard that the Vergina sun has been found on the golden larnax of Tomb II that according to M. Andronikos was Fillip II’s. What would be different if this tomb was not Fillip’s, and Fillip’s tomb was the next one, Tomb I, which long ago has been robbed containing nothing? Truth is, not much if the role of symbols had no value for the states. If one reads the arguments on an essay of two archaeologists47, presented in 2008, he/she will start to doubt over if finally the bones of Alexander’s father were found and also over whether the Vergina sun correspond to him, or to his other son, Fillip the 3rd Arrhidaeus. Said essay triggered many conflicts over the internet, between several “sleepless guards” of Macedonian and Greek nationalism.
In other circumstances this issue would have no place for nationalism, because both of them were Macedonian kings and first degree relatives to Alexander. In this sense, the Vergina sun would remain the symbol of the same Macedonian dynasty, leaving no space for further argues. The value this issue holds, depicts the semiotic factor of the Vergina sun in relation to the figure of the two kings. In collective memory Fillip the 2nd hails48 as a conqueror, as a valiant warrior of high posture, as a macho and powerful king, as someone who can easily bent the will of others. These are traits that answer to race, gender and other fascist stereotypes which complete the alphabet of values of the patriot, sexist and nationalist. On the contrary, Fillip the 3rd has been recorded in the shadow of his father Fillip 2nd and his half-brother Alexander 3rd, became a king by chance, and the dominant historiography49 has nothing of the above traits to remember him. This has as a result that the glamour and shining of the Macedonian symbols such as that of the Vergina sun, to tend to fade in the conscience of the Greek or Macedonian chauvinist; something that neither state would wish.
47 The chronology of the Macedonian royal tombs at Vergina. Eugene N. Borza and Olga Palagia 2008 p. 81-125. Back
48 Of course less than Alexander, however very wide in range. Back
49 The dominant historiography rarely mentions him. He is usually absent in the Argead hall of kings, as one can see that Alexander III is followed by his son Alexander IV. Back
Comments policy
The aim of this website is to comprise a space for fertile discourse around the concepts of nation and nationalism. It is important for everyone wishing to participate in the dialogue to express their opinion self-possessedly following the thematic categories that were formed. Therefore, all comments that don’t fit in the categories or are of abusive content do not correspond to the aims of this website. Due to the international character of the project, please include an english translation of your comments, if it is possible. You can send articles in the form of comments using the following form.