Queen Teuta: Between the Land of Bones and the Homeland of Memory
Flamur Buçpapaj
The question of whether we should go to the place where the remains of Queen Teuta are said to have been found and bring them to Albania is, at its core, a test of our historical maturity. It is not merely an archaeological issue, nor a matter of state protocol. It is a question that touches our relationship with the past, with identity, and with the way we choose to honor history without turning it into an instrument of momentary emotion.
Queen Teuta stands as one of the most powerful figures of the Illyrian world, not simply because she was a queen, but because she embodied sovereignty, resistance to Roman expansion, and the political consciousness of a civilization that refused to disappear quietly. She entered history as a stateswoman, a leader, and a symbol of a Mediterranean world that had not yet been fully absorbed by Rome. For this reason, Teuta is not only an Albanian figure; she is a European historical figure, and precisely here lies the sensitivity of the issue.
First, it must be stated clearly: to this day, there is no definitive scientific proof that conclusively identifies any set of remains as belonging to Queen Teuta. Hypotheses, assumptions, and possible locations are not enough to support historical decisions. Serious history is not built on desire, but on verifiable facts. Without comprehensive archaeological analysis, clear stratigraphic context, solid historical documentation, and—where possible—genetic evidence, any claim remains in the realm of speculation.
And speculation, however attractive, becomes dangerous when it replaces truth.
But let us assume, for a moment, that science were to speak with certainty. Let us imagine that one day, through rigorous international research, it would be proven beyond doubt that a specific tomb belongs to Queen Teuta. Would the transfer of her remains to Albania then be the highest form of honor?
Not necessarily.
History teaches us that great figures are not honored by exhumation, but by understanding. Human remains are the biological residue of a life that has ended; meaning and legacy are the historical dimensions of a figure who has become timeless. Teuta is not great because she may have a tomb, but because her story still speaks.
The relocation of remains—especially when driven by emotional or nationalist motives—risks turning history into spectacle. It risks reducing Queen Teuta from a symbol of civilization into a ceremonial object. A queen who challenged Rome should not be used as an accessory of shallow political pride.
The wiser path is different. If scientific verification were ever achieved, true respect should come through:
international scholarly cooperation,
shared recognition of Illyrian heritage,
the creation of dignified memorials,
and the firm placement of Teuta within the European academic and historical narrative,
not through symbolic acts that generate noise rather than understanding.
Queen Teuta does not need to be “brought back” to Albania in order to be Albanian. She already belongs to this land through historical continuity, collective memory, and the fact that the Illyrian world forms the deep foundation of this region. Her true homeland is not merely a geographical location, but a historical consciousness.
A nation is not measured by its ability to move graves, but by its ability to build truth. The greatest honor we can give Queen Teuta is rigorous study, the liberation of her figure from myth and distortion, and her placement in the full light she deserves as a major figure of Mediterranean history.
Let the remains, if they exist, rest in peace.
Let history, meanwhile, awaken.
For Queen Teuta lives not where a body lies, but where consciousness remembers.
