Vergina tomb is not Philip's

[Imperial Dave]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440325000834?via%3Dihub

Cripes....

[RichT]

The headline is a bit misleading - the paper finds that Tomb I is not Philip's (but that of someone who died a few decades earlier); but it is Tomb II that is usually identified as Philip's (with only those who think Tomb II is not Philip's suggesting Tomb I might be). See:

https://www.academia.edu/129011539/Possible_Identities_of_the_Bones_Recovered_from_Tomb_I_at_Vergina_A_historical_discussion_of_the_recently_published_article_titled_NEW_SCIENTIFIC_EVIDENCE_FOR_THE_HISTORY_AND_OCCUPANTS_OF_TOMB_I_TOMB_OF_PERSEPHONE_IN_THE_GREAT_TUMULUS_AT_VERGINA

And it's a tangled web, to put it mildly.
 

[Imperial Dave]

 

[Chuck the Grey]

This is beginning to sound like the archeological version of Abbott and Costello's "Who's on First" comedy routine.