Page 58 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 10(2) (2022)
P. 58
dia universitatis her editati, letnik 10 (2022), številk a 2 / volume 10 (2022), number 2 58
hereditati
Figure 1. The distribution of the Macedonian tomb sites mentioned in the text (on the basis of Google Earth 2022;
elaborated by M. Blečić Kavur).
2009; cf. Guštin and Kuzman 2016). Therefore, types of special needs can make full use of vir-
a detailed and systematic archaeological inves- tual reconstructions and 3D models. Thus, these
tigation of the area is almost impossible under results support the main goal and perspective
these circumstances. This gave rise to the idea of of the international project Accessible and Digi-
producing a modern documentation, presenta- tized Cultural Heritage for persons with disabili-
tion, and promotion of the Ohrid archaeological ties (Lilcikj et al. 2022; cf. Karovska and Minov
monument, which is physically inaccessible to in this publication), to which this issue of Studia
the general public but is crucial for understand- universitatis hereditati is dedicated.
ing the ancient cultural heritage of this region.
Macedonian tomb in Ohrid
Another Macedonian tomb is located quite Macedonian tombs appear in the Late Clas-
far from Ohrid (66 km), in Staro Bonche, in the sical and Hellenistic periods, from the 4th to
northern Pelagonian plain (Jakimovski 2011; the 2nd century BCE as a type of burial, first of
2015, 32–41; cf. Guštin and Kuzman 2016). De- kings and then of the upper classes. In the are-
spite their distance and architectural differences, as that were under Macedonian influence or un-
according to the current state of research, they der Macedonian occupation, numerous tombs
are the only examples of this type of preserved are known. The best known are the tombs near
funerary architecture in Northern Macedonia the great centres of that time e.g. at Vergina,
(fig. 1). Lefkadia, Derveni, Amphipolis, or Philippi in
northern Greece (fig. 1; Tomlinson 1977; Mill-
In this study, an introductory overview of er 1982; Andronikos 1993; Tsimbidou-Avlonitou
the funerary architecture of the Macedonian 2005; Borza and Palagia 2007; D’Angelo 2010;
tombs is presented, as well as a history of research Schmidt-Dounas 2016). Most Macedonian
and previous findings interpreting the Macedo- tombs were plundered, so that especially the un-
nian tomb at Ohrid. The architecture, techni- looted tombs at Vergina and Derveni are impor-
cal description and state of preservation of this tant sources of information on burial customs
building are then discussed. The virtual recon- and social organisation in ancient Macedonia
struction, visual restoration and 3D digital mod- (Sismanidis 1997; Tsimbidou-Avlonitou 2005;
el of the tomb are described in detail. Finally, we
emphasize how persons with disabilities and all
hereditati
Figure 1. The distribution of the Macedonian tomb sites mentioned in the text (on the basis of Google Earth 2022;
elaborated by M. Blečić Kavur).
2009; cf. Guštin and Kuzman 2016). Therefore, types of special needs can make full use of vir-
a detailed and systematic archaeological inves- tual reconstructions and 3D models. Thus, these
tigation of the area is almost impossible under results support the main goal and perspective
these circumstances. This gave rise to the idea of of the international project Accessible and Digi-
producing a modern documentation, presenta- tized Cultural Heritage for persons with disabili-
tion, and promotion of the Ohrid archaeological ties (Lilcikj et al. 2022; cf. Karovska and Minov
monument, which is physically inaccessible to in this publication), to which this issue of Studia
the general public but is crucial for understand- universitatis hereditati is dedicated.
ing the ancient cultural heritage of this region.
Macedonian tomb in Ohrid
Another Macedonian tomb is located quite Macedonian tombs appear in the Late Clas-
far from Ohrid (66 km), in Staro Bonche, in the sical and Hellenistic periods, from the 4th to
northern Pelagonian plain (Jakimovski 2011; the 2nd century BCE as a type of burial, first of
2015, 32–41; cf. Guštin and Kuzman 2016). De- kings and then of the upper classes. In the are-
spite their distance and architectural differences, as that were under Macedonian influence or un-
according to the current state of research, they der Macedonian occupation, numerous tombs
are the only examples of this type of preserved are known. The best known are the tombs near
funerary architecture in Northern Macedonia the great centres of that time e.g. at Vergina,
(fig. 1). Lefkadia, Derveni, Amphipolis, or Philippi in
northern Greece (fig. 1; Tomlinson 1977; Mill-
In this study, an introductory overview of er 1982; Andronikos 1993; Tsimbidou-Avlonitou
the funerary architecture of the Macedonian 2005; Borza and Palagia 2007; D’Angelo 2010;
tombs is presented, as well as a history of research Schmidt-Dounas 2016). Most Macedonian
and previous findings interpreting the Macedo- tombs were plundered, so that especially the un-
nian tomb at Ohrid. The architecture, techni- looted tombs at Vergina and Derveni are impor-
cal description and state of preservation of this tant sources of information on burial customs
building are then discussed. The virtual recon- and social organisation in ancient Macedonia
struction, visual restoration and 3D digital mod- (Sismanidis 1997; Tsimbidou-Avlonitou 2005;
el of the tomb are described in detail. Finally, we
emphasize how persons with disabilities and all
