Tag: Mithras

Were cultists of Mithras marked with a sign on their foreheads?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The great French scholar Pierre Petitmengin has kindly sent me an off-print of the new Chronica Tertullianea et Cyprianea (CTC 2008).  This is a list of new publications about Tertullian, Cyprian, and the other ante-Nicene Latin Fathers, with a short review of each.  It has long been essential reading for Tertullianists (at whom it was originally aimed).

Item 42 is Luc Renaut, Les initiés aux mystères de Mithra étaient-ils marqués au front? Pour une relecture de Tertullien, De praescr. 40, 4 , in : Bonnet, C., Ribichini, S., Steuernagel, D. : Religioni in contatto nel Mediterraneo: modalità di diffusione e processi di interferenza, Actes de colloque (Côme, mai 2006), Rome, 2008 (Mediterranea, IV, 2007), p. 171-190.   He questions whether Tertullian actually said that initiates of Mithras were marked on their foreheads.

Tertullian says this in De praescriptione haereticorum 40:4, as he works up to the end of the work and points out the pagan origins of what is peddled as “christian” by the heretics.  Here is the Holmes translation:

if my memory still serves me, Mithra there, sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, and before a sword wreathes a crown. 

And Refoule’s Latin text:

si adhuc memini Mithrae, signat illic in frontibus milites suos. Celebrat et panis oblationem et imaginem resurrectionis inducit et sub gladio redimit coronam.

Only Tertullian tells us of this rite.  The ritual meal that includes bread (and water, although Tertullian does not say so) appears in the mosaic in the Ostia Mithraeum that depicts the seven grades of initiands and their special meals.  The crown worn by Mithras cultists is discussed in Tertullian’s De corona militis.  The image of a resurrection is as far as I know otherwise unknown. 

Renaut proposes that the text might be corrupt.  Instead of in frontibus he suggests in fontibus.  This would translate as sets his marks on his soldiers in the waters.  In other words, this would refer to pagan “baptisms”, such as those mentioned by Tertullian in De Baptismo 5 and indeed just beforehand in De praescriptione haereticorum 40:3.

The reviewer, the great scholar Jean-Claude Fredouille, is naturally cautious.  He points out that the fontibus version would make Tertullian’s rhetoric a little “lame” (boiteux) if we end up with two references to baptism in a single sentence.  Renaut is aware of this idea, and suggests that there are two forms of the baptism meant here, paralleling Christian baptism and confirmation which Tertullian distinguishes in De resurrectione carnis 8:3 and Adversus Marcionem III, 22:7.

It’s an interesting idea.  I myself would tend to resist it, on the grounds that there is no actual evidence of a corruption, and the fact that the emendation would be convenient — as disposing of one of the “parallels” between Jesus and Mithras that dim people exult over — is not adequate reason to emend the text. 

Share

‘Ancient’ texts composed in modern times

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Before the internet, people could circulate documents containing quotations from ancient writers in reasonable safety.  It was very hard for anyone to check them.  This difficulty was enhanced by the tendency of these collections of quotations to be vague about the precise reference. 

But the internet has thrown light into quite a few dark corners.   It has also brought to light some curiosities.  I came across one such today, posted in a forum by an ignorant person who knew no more than that he had found it online.  These are supposed to be ancient texts about the cult of Mithras.  After Strabo and Statius there were these:

3. Lucius Agrius (ca.107bce-41bce) Roman soldier and Mithrasic High Priest (ca.67bce- 41bce)

“Among these soldiers was a strong and mighty warrior, whose personality drew many of the Cilicians to him. By enquiry, I discovered that he was a holy man, and was therefore sought after as a man of wisdom. He led the Cilicians in Prayer at dawn, and again at mid-day and at dusk, never failing to praise his God, Whom he called Mithras.”

– from “The Conversion of Lucius Agrius”, paragraph 2, written ca.67bce. Lucius Agrius was a soldier in Pompey’s army and became the first Roman to serve Mithras, converted by Cilician immigrants to Italy after their defeat by Pompey’s army. Lucius Agrius served as the first Roman High Priest, and his book is included in the Mithrasic Canon of Scripture.

4. Marcellinus (ca.95bce-33bce) Roman soldier and Mithrasic High Priest (41bce-33bce)

“…and the soldiers of the Faith vow to be chaste for months at a time, in dedication to the Lord. And when we marry, we marry women of pure heart, quiet disposition, and clean spirit, for women of ill repute are despised by the men of the Mysteries.”

-from “The Fragment of the Letter of Marcellinus”, paragraph 1, written between 41bce and 33bce. This, too, is included in the Mithrasic Canon of Scripture. Only this and three other paragraphs of this letter survive.

Whatever are we to make of these oddities?  I’ve never heard of either text — indeed my first reaction is that they are fakes –, and they are not referred to in any textbook on Mithras I have ever encountered.  Much of the comment is plainly by someone very, very ignorant.

The second of these items gives no results aside from the forum post.  The first gives four web pages like this one.  It’s hard to feel any confidence in such material.

In Google books I was able to find a reference to an inscription by a certain Lucius Agrius Calendio, from 162 AD, as dedicator of an inscription in a Mithraeum in Ostia.  A search of Clauss-Slaby reveals the inscription is only “Soli Invict(o) Mit(hrae) d(onum) d(edit) L(ucius) Agrius Calendio” (“L. Agrius gave a gift to the unconquered sun Mithras”).

It’s hard to imagine that any of the people quoting this have the wit to invent it.  Possibly there is some, now forgotten, novel, in which this material appears?  But if so, there is no trace of it online.

Share

Mithras, “protector of the empire”

Posted on by Roger Pearse
Altar at Carnutum dedicated to Mithras by Diocletian
Altar at Carnutum dedicated to Mithras by Diocletian (CIL III 4413, CIMRM 1698)

The silly season is well underway, and daft stories about Christian origins being really pagan — all told with glee — are circulated uncritically and believed unquestioningly by those so inclined. We might reasonably wonder, however, just why every major Christian holiday is subjected to this ritual of debunking, with the evident approval of those in power.

Today’s fairy-story is that in 307 AD the emperor Diocletian proclaimed Mithras as the official protector of the empire. Those of us who know that Mithras was a mystery cult will rub their eyes at this a bit; was Diocletian really adding Mithras to the state cults?

A general google search reveals much hearsay, and suggests that the source of all this is an inscription at Carnutum on the Danube, where Mithras is apparently described as fautor imperii sui. I find a reference to this as C.I.L. III, nr. 4413.

Off to Google books, where some scholarly books might be found. And the magic name “Cumont” starts to appear. Oh blast! Off to Textes et monumentes, and there it is, in vol. 2, page 146, item 367, with a link to 227. Curiously Cumont lists the monument and its inscription separately. Here’s the details.

367. Carnuntum, CIL, III, 4413. Voyez le monument n° 227.

D(eo) S(oli) i(nvicto) M(ithrae) | fautori imperii sui | Iovii et Herculii | religiosissimi
| Augusti et Caesares | sacrarium | restituerunt.

Iovii imperatores sunt Diocletianus et liberi eius, sc. lege adoptionis Galerius, Maximinus, Licinii pater et filius, Herculii Maximianus et filius eius Constantius, nec minus Constantii liberi ius eius nominis fuisse patet, etsi Constantinus propter dissensionem cum Galerio et factione eius eo abstinuit. Pertinet autem titulus hic omnino ad a p. C.307 quo caeso a Maxentio Severo altera Augusto Galerius Aug. die Nov. 11 Carnunti praesentibus duobus Augustis senioribus Diocletiano et Maximiano Licinium patrem Augustum creavit [Euseb. ad h. a.; Idat ad h. a.; Auct. de mort. persec. c. 29; Zosim II 10 qui male confudit cum Carnunto Carnutum Galliae]. Fuerunt eo tempore Iovii Augusti tres Diocletianus senior Augustus, Galerius, Licinius,Caesar unus Maximinus ; Herculii Augustus unus Maximianus senior, Caesar item, unus Constantinus quem quamquam exercitus iam a 308 Augustum proclamaverat, tamen Galerius adhuc pro Caesare habuit, ut mittamus hostem communem Maxentium. [Tillemont IV 103 sqq.] E quibus quos affuisse constat Carnunti quattuor Augusti videntur Mithrae votum solvisse et pro se et pro absentibus Caesaribus duobus. [Mommsen.]

Always nice to get a chunk of Latin as explanation.

Monument 227 is on p. 331-2, where there is a picture of the monument (fig. 205). It’s an altar, with a picture of Cautes on one side.

227. — Grand autel [H. 1.45m, L. 0.92 m] au xviii” siècle à Petronell dans la cour du château du comte Traun. Aujourd’hui au musée des antiques de Vienne.

Décrit : Hormayr, l. c, n° 229 ; Labus, Ara Antica di Hainburgo, 1830, p. 9; Arneth, Beschreibung der zum K. K. Miïnz- und Antikencabinet gehorigen Meilensteine, etc., n” 15; cf. CIL, III, 4413. — Reproduit : fig. 205, d’après un croquis.

Sur la face antérieure on lit l’inscription n° 367. Sur le côté gauche, un dadophore dans le costume oriental ordinaire tient de la main droite une torche élevée et de la gauche trois épis. Sur le côté droit, un porte-flambeau semblable abaisse seulement sa torche.

So, we’re dealing with an altar inscription. Consulting Manfred Clauss, The Roman cult of Mithras, I find the following:

We may mention first of all the dedication by the Tetrarchs dating to the year AD 308 (V 1698). On the occasion of their meeting at Carnuntum in Pannonia Superior, Diocletian, now in retirement, together with the ruling emperors, the Iovii et Herculii religiosissimi Augusti et Caesares, dedicated an altar to Mithras as fautor imperii sui, as protector of their empire, and thereby gave expression to an understanding of the god already shared by Mithraists for centuries. Concomitantly, the Tetrarchs had part of Mithraeum III at Carnuntum repaired.

The reference to ‘V 1698’ is to the collection of monuments by Vermaseren, making this CIMRM 1698.

The inscription is thus:

Deo Soli invicto Mithrae, fautori imperii sui; Iovii et Herculii religiosissimi Augusti et Caesares, sacrarium restituerunt.
To the unconquered sun-god Mithras, patron/protector/supporter of their imperium; the Joves and Hercules’s, the most religious Augustuses and Caesars, have restored the shrine.

Not quite the same as an official edict creating Mithras the protector of the empire, is it?

As an afterthought, I look in the Clauss-Slaby database. This reveals only 6 inscriptions which use the term fautori, always as “protector”. But… great news, the database people have included a photograph! The link won’t embed in the blog software, so I’ve had to copy the image. The original is here, although that link doesn’t look very permanent. Enjoy it, and think kindly of those chaps in Eichstatt who put it online.

CIMRM 1698 Altar of Mithras erected at Carnutum by Diocletian
CIMRM 1698 Altar of Mithras erected at Carnutum by Diocletian
Share

An interesting online colour image of Mithras killing the bull

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I was experimenting with the new Microsoft Bing image search, which gave me quite different results to Google image search.  One of these caught my eye, on a Dutch forum, here.  A better version of the image, this time with real data attached, here.  It looks as if both have been scanned from a book, the first not very well.   According to the second link, this is a relief from Sterzing in Austria, CIMRM 1400.  It says that the colours are modern restoration, based on coloured frescos from Italy. 

Sterzing Mithras Tauroctony
CIMRM 1400 Sterzing Mithras Tauroctony, modern colouring

The image is useful because it is a splendidly clear representation of the cult relief of Mithras, found in every Mithraeum.  These depictions of Mithras killing the bull — the tauroctony — vary in the details.  If you do a Google search on Mithras, you will find many images of the tauroctony, varying in what is included. 

This one contains almost a full set of all the features.

Mithras kneels on the bull and pulls back its head while looking to his right toward the view.  On either side stand the demi-god torchbearers, Cautes with torch held up, Cautopates with it down. 

Below the bull the snake and the dog reach for the blood of the bull.  There is a scorpion seizing the bull’s genitals.

The events take place in a cave; hence the roof above Mithras.  At the top left appears Sol with his flaming crown.  At the top right is Luna, with her horned moon. 

Note the raven next to Sol, and the single extra-long ray of light reaching down from Sol into the cavern and onto Mithras.

At the top there are other animals, and a tabula ansata, or ‘box with a triangle at each end’ which probably had an inscription, now lost. A larger one, again with a lost inscription, is at the bottom.

On either side are panels, showing other elements from the cult myth.  These are of great interest, since we have no literary description of them.

The left-hand column shows (from the top) Jupiter battling the giants; Mithras born from the rock; Mithras doing something unrecognisable; Mithras (or possibly Atlas) kneeling, and probably the bull.

The right-hand column shows at the bottom Mithras dragging the bull.  Above it is Mithras plus two other figures.  Then Mithras, with Sol kneeling before him; then Mithras and Sol shake hands; Mithras gets into the quadriga of the sun.  At the top the feast of Sol and Mithras which in other reliefs involves consuming parts of the bull.

Details of the relief may be found here: M.J. Vermaseren, Corpus inscriptionum et monumentorum religionis Mithriacae II (1960) 148ff. No. 1400 Abb. 360; R. Merkelbach, Mithras (1984) 368f. Abb. 132.- R. Vollkommer, s.v. Mithras, LIMC VI (1992) Nr. 156 Abb.

It is interesting that initiation into the rites of Mithras did feature a hand shake, as shown here.  Firmicus Maternus comments that they were “initiates of the theft of the bull, united by the handshake of the illustrious father (Pater).” (FM 5.2)

Share

The Paris magical codex

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris is an early fourth century papyrus codex (ms. supplement grec 574) which contains a variety of texts, spells, hymns, etc.   It is 36 folios in length – large for a papyrus, and contains 3274 lines.

The manuscript was acquired in Egypt by the collector Giovanni Anastasi (# 1073 in his collection) and bought at auction in Paris by the BNF in 1857.  It probably comes from Thebes (=Luxor).  Apparently Anastasi was told that his papyri were found in a grave there, perhaps sometime around 1825, although we cannot be sure of this.  Anastasi certainly sold a larger collection of papyri to the Dutch archaeologist C. J. C. Reuvens, the founder and first director of the Oudheidkundig Museum in Leiden, sometime after 1825.1

The codex seems to be the working handbook for an Egyptian magician, compiled from many sources.  It contains more than 50 documents, doubtless acquired from various sources, and is the single most comprehensive handbook of magic known from the ancient world.  The documents contained in it must all be 4th century or earlier — possibly much earlier — and each document has its own history prior to being copied into the codex. 

The text was printed by Karl Preisendanz, Papyri Graecae Magicae, vol. 1, Leipzig, 1928, rev. 1973, as item IV (hence PGM IV).  Various online versions of this seem to exist.  An English translation was made by H.-D.Betz, The Greek Magical Papyri in translation, 1986.  There is an enormous secondary literature.

The best known of these texts is on lines 475- 834, the so-called Mithras liturgy, a series of prayers which begins by invoking Sol Mithras and may — or may not — have some connection to the mysteries of Mithras.

Other parts show Jewish influence, and one spell, an exorcism ending with the words — Come out of NN — on line 3019, contains the words:

I adjure you by the God of the Hebrews, Jesus, Jaba, Jae, Abraoth, Aia, Thoth, Ele, …. 2

and ends with Ptah, which shows how magicians were willing to tap into supposed names of power in just the way recorded in Acts.  It also contains a string of the seven vowels of the Greek alphabet (a, e, h, i, o, u, w) which Eusebius tells us in the Praeparatio Evangelica 11.6.36 was treated by the pagans as a name of power equivalent to the Hebrew Tetragrammaton.  Its presence in the spell shows that he was right.  The same series are also used in the Mithras liturgy.

1 Pieter Willem van der Horst, Jews and Christians in their Graeco-Roman context, p. 269. Here.
2. A. Deismann, Light from the ancient East, pp.258-260 prints the full text of a two leaf spell with English translation, online here.

Share

Virgin birth of Mitra from Anahita?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve had an email directing me to a webpage supposedly containing an article by Mohammad Moqadam (Moghdam), with the subtitle “The Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies, Tehran 1975″.  This makes the claim:

The Saviour was born in the middle of the night between Saturday and Sunday, 24th and 25th of December, 272 BCE, and according to those who believed in Him from an Immaculate (Anahid) Virgin  (Xosidhag) somewhere not far from lake Hamin, Sistan, Lived for 64 years among men, and ascended to His Father Ahura Mazda in 208 BCE.

and is widely quoted by a certain sort of writer.

This article does not seem to be scholarly.  There are no real references in it to the texts being quoted, edition, etc.  Many of these texts are unfamiliar to me, although I know of al-Tabari.  But it sounds as if he is quoting this from an unspecified edition, in translation… what translation?

His quotes, if genuine — just imagine whether we could check these; it would be very difficult — suggest that by the Islamic period some of the Persians believed that the events of the life of Jesus took place during the Arsacid period.  No doubt such a confusion is possible.  But I don’t see the point of it, unless I am missing something.

The vague reference to Elise Vardapet, that the lord Mihr had a human mother…. this is really not much good.  The real reference is the Elisaeus Vardapet, “History of Vartan”, in a speech given by Christian bishops to the Sassanid governor trying to fend off a persecution.

https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/?p=2648

Some of the claims made seem rather odd to me.  But … I don’t actually see, in any of this, evidence for the claim he makes about a virgin birth of Mitra.  Is it actually there, anywhere?

A frustrating, infuriating article, I think.  It ends with another such example:

It is written in the Bayan al- Adyan, that “the Manicheans say that Jesus called men to Zoroaster.

Is it?  What is this text?  Where do we find it? And so on.

I think we can stick this article down the toilet, I’m sorry to say.  Whether the claim made is true or not, the article does not substantiate it.

Share

So who is Theo of Smyrna? (or even Theon of Smyrna)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Following on from my previous post on Mithras in Zenobius, who is this Theo of Smyrna who also mentions a list of the eight elements, probably from Persian sources?  All I have is an edition, ‘Hiller’ and “p. 104, 20”.

There are times when Wikipedia is a useful summary of whatever there is online.  Theon of Smyrna has an article.  He’s a technical writer, a mathematical philosopher of the early 2nd century AD.  At least one of his works is extant, the expositio rerum mathematicarum ad legendum Platonem utilium or exposition of mathematical ideas useful for the reading of Plato.  A look at COPAC shows me that it was edited by Eduard Hiller in the Tuebner series in Leipzig in 1878.  A photographic reprint was made in 1995.  A French translation Exposition des connaissances mathematiques utiles pour la lecture de platon was made by J. Dupuis in 1892, reprinted 1966.  Thanks to Google books, both are online.

And finally a curious English translation does seem to exist:

Theon, of Smyrna: Mathematics useful for understanding Plato; translated from the 1892 Greek/French edition of J. Dupuis by Robert and Deborah Lawlor and edited and annotated by Christos Toulis and others; with an appendix of notes by Dupuis, a copious glossary, index of works, etc. Series: Secret doctrine reference series Published: San Diego : Wizards Bookshelf, 1979. ISBN: 0913510246. 174pp. Notes: Cover title: Twn kata to mathematikon chresimwn eis ten Platonos anagnwsin.

Hmm.  That sounds like an amateur translation of the French of Dupuis.

So… what does he say?  Well, I find from the PDF that the material is actually on p.105 of Hiller, lines 4-5 (p.120 of the Google books PDF).  The magic word “Orphicos” appears above it, and then three lines of quotation.  The name of Evandros appears beneath.

In the notes at the foot  of the page is a cross-reference to Zenobius V, 78, which we examined earlier.  Then a list of related material: Porphyry De antro nympharum 24, calling Mithras “demiurgos” (creator);  and Proclus’ commentary on the Timaeus of Plato p. 93 E, where the Orphic creator-god Phanes is given the same title.  Then a couple of old scholarly works are listed, on Orphism.  All this, incidentally, in a section on numbers.

Let’s see if we can find out what the context is.

So now I go to Dupuis, who gives quite an introduction and even lists manuscripts.  The French National Library alone has a bunch of them, so this is plainly not a rare work, although I had never heard of it before.

A bit of guesswork and looking at an index for “Evandre” gives us page 173 (PDF page is 210), which is precisely the passage in question.  It is chapter 47 of the work.  Here it is, from Dupuis’ French.

47.  The number eight which is the first cube composed of unity and seven. Some say that there are eight gods who are masters of the universe, and this is also what we see in the sayings of Orpheus:

By the creators of things ever immortal,
Fire and water, earth and heaven, moon,
And sun, the great Phanes and the dark night.

And Evander reports that in Egypt may be found on a column an inscription of King Saturn and Queen Rhea: “The most ancient of all, King Osiris, to the immortal gods, to the spirit, to heaven and earth, to night and day, to the father of all that is and all that will be, and to Love, souvenir of the magificence of his life.”  Timotheus also reports the proverb, “Eight is all, because the spheres of the world which rotate around the earth are eight.” And, as Erastothenes says,

“These eight spheres harmonise together in making their revolutions around the earth.”

As a literary reference to syncretism between Mithras and Phanes, this lacks quite a bit.  But interesting, all the same, as examples of the sort of pseudo-knowledge being mixed up in antiquity.

Share

Reference to Mithras in the Commentary of Servius?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

A strange Jewish anti-Christian site here has the following claim:

Plutarch (Pompey, 24, 7) and Servilius (Georgics, 4, 127) say Pompey imported Mithraism into Rome after defeating the Cilician pirates around 70 BCEE.

This is starting to circulate around the web, and caught my eye.  We all know the Plutarch reference, and it says only that the Cilician pirates worshipped Mithras (which may be a mistake anyway).  But the “Servilius” reference is new to me.  This, I presume, is Servius, the 4th century commentator on Vergil?

The commentary of Servius on the Georgics is online at Google books here.   The comment on the Georgics 4, 127 is on p.354 of the PDF, p.329 online. So, what does it say?

127. CORYCIVM Vidisse SENEM Cilica: Corycos enim civitas est Ciliciae, in qua antrum illud famosum est, paene ab omnibus celebratum. et per transitum tangit historiam memoratam a Suetonio. Pompeius enim victis piratis Cilicibus partim ibidem in Graecia, partim in Calabria agros dedit: unde Lucanus <I 346> an melius fient piratae, magne, coloni? male autem quidam ‘Corycium’ proprium esse adserunt nomen, cum sit appellativum eius, qui more Corycio hortos excoluit: quod etiam Plinii testimonio conprobatur. Vidisse Senem ordo est ‘memini vidisse’. dicimus autem et ‘memini videre’: Terentius memini videre, quo aequior sum Pamphilo, si se illam in somnis. Relicti deserti atque contempti; quis enim agrum non sperneret nulli rei aptum, non vitibus aut frumentis vel pascuis? et aliter: ‘Corycium’ autem Cilicia, a monte et civitate Cïliciae Coryco. alii Corycium non natione, sed peritia, quod haec gens studiose hortos colat. et sic dictum est, ut Arcades ambo.

No mention of Mithras.  But this states that Pompey settled the Cilician pirates, partly in Greece and partly in Calabria. 

I wonder what Servius’ source was?

Share

Mithras and the Taurobolium

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The Taurobolium was a pagan Roman ritual in which the worshipper stood in a pit and was drenched in bull’s blood.  It was supposed to confer immortality, or something of the kind, although I’ve not researched it. 

Sometimes people assert that this was part of the cult of Mithras, which seems to be untrue; the inscriptions that record the rite are not associated with Mithras, and no Mithraic literary text mentions it.

There is an inscription which associates Mithras with the Taurobolium (CIL VI, 736).   In his article “The Mithraic bas-relief of Pesaro” (“Le bas-relief Mithraique de Pesaro”, Revue archeologique, 3rd series, t. 13, pp. 64-69, 1889), J. Lebegue raises the question of whether the inscription is authentic. I’ve been sent the article, and asked to summarise its argument for non-French speakers: here it is.

The inscription appears on a relief, found at Rome, then transfered to the Olivieri museum at Pesaro. It appears on a stone plaque which represents the familiar scene of Mithras sacrificing the bull. The inscription appears almost completely on a column to the right of the scene; some words are inscribed on the body of the bull being immolated by the god.

The inscription is almost complete, and can be restored as:

Deo magno Mithrae pollenti consenti Lari sancto suo M. Philonius Philomuses Eugenianus delibutus sacratissimis misteriis per omnia probatissimus qui et arcanis perfusionibus in aternum renatus taurobolium crioboliumque fecit et bucranium signavit.

(“To the great god Mithras, with the agreement of the holy Lares, for his health, M. Philonius Philomuses Eugenianus did this, having been anointed in the most sacred mysteries, through it all most worthy (?), who also in the secret bloodshed reborn into the eternal Taurobolium and Criobolium, and sealed the bull-head on the altar (bucranium). “)

On the body of the bull appear the words:

Absolvit | K(alendis) mart(iis) | Agria Ceresi pa(ter) | et pont(ifex) s(a)c(ris) [f]ac(iundis?) | dei magni

(“Paid off on the kalends of March, when Agria Ceresius was Father and pontiff of the holy things that must be done for the great god.”)

And further down:

Tatiano et Simacho consulibus.

Tatian and Symmachus being consuls.

This dates the inscription to 391 AD. The question is whether the inscription is authentic. There are numerous anomalies.

Line 1: Mithras never bears the title “Magnus”, but instead “Invictus”, or sometimes “summus”. The “dii magni” are part of the cult of Cybele, not Mithras. The term is not reserved entirely for that cult, tho, so might be used generically. If so, then it would be very odd that this is the only title given here to Mithras. Further, if in line 27 (on the bull) “dei magni” is correct, then it is certain that this is the only title being given in this inscription to Mithras, and so that the inscription is false. Mommsen has given a different explanation of that line, tho.

Line 3: The “dii consentes” belong to the cult of Jupiter, in which Mithras does not figure. Pollenti, next to consentes, is inappropriate.

Line 4: If Mithras is really being labelled “lare”, then this is a first. The term “lares sancti” is otherwise unknown. (?)

Line 6ff: M. Philonius Philomusus Eugenianus is a strange name for the period. In the 4th century the praenomen is generally omitted.

Line 9-11. “Delibutus sacratissimus mysteriis” is a phrase more literary than epigraphic. But it must be recognised that in the 4th century the epigraphic style had lost much of it conciseness.

Line 12: “Oia” for “Omnia” is a frequent abbreviation in manuscripts. It is only found, to my knowledge, in one inscription, now lost, and which may have been copied incorrectly.

Line 14ff: “Arcanis perfusionibus in aeternum renatus”. There is mention of someone “taurobolio criobolio q. in aeternum renatus” in an inscription discovered longer ago, and which may have served as a model for a falsification. If correctly copied, this too seems strange. The baptism in blood of the taurobolium, carried out in public, could confer immortality; but it isn’t from the taurobolium that Philonius asks this. It is *after* secret and doubtless Mithraic ablutions that he has been “regenerated for eternity”; then he was offered the taurobolium and criobolium. So this is some other baptism producing the same effects as the sacrifice of blood (and in the same terms) before receiving the aforementioned sacrifice.

The next inscription, engraved on the bull, can’t be much studied as it is very obscure and has been variously restored. This concerns the priest who carried out the sacrifice, and who is described as “pater et pontifex”; no doubt the pater of the cult of Mithras, and pontifex in the taurobolic ceremony.

The position of the inscription seems ill-chosen to me. It is engraved on the body of the bull, but the legendary bull, immolated by Mithras himself, and surrounded by allegorical personages, is not the victim of the real sacrifice of Philonius. Also, why degrade the bas-relief in inscribing it there? It would be understandable if the forger, in common with the scholars of his period, confused the bull with the sacrifice.

These anomalies fall into two groups: some against the general rules of epigraphy…; others against our knowledge of the cults themselves. If this discusses a public ceremony then there is nothing to say; this must be a fake. But it is possible that, like Alexander Severus, this relates to a private ceremony, which the dying paganism sought to revive. A special taurobolium may have been carried out, in 391, at a period when it was already illegal. This would make him the founder of a special, private cult, comprising elements from Cybele and Mithras, placing them among the ranks of the “consenting gods”, to make the god one of his lares and his great god. But this hypothesis hardly seems satisfactory. Why does Mithras not bear his characteristic epithet “Invictus”? Furthermore, it would not be Philonius who was the creator of this special cult, but Arcesius, the pater and pontifex. The latter, in mentioning the taurobolium was in public “spectatum”, and dating it by the names of the consuls, would strangely parody an official ceremony.

I believe that this inscription is false. This is fortified by the evidence taken from general epigraphy, and the font (?) declared suspect by contemporary scholarship.

But the enquiry must be completed by examining the monument itself. I have written to the learned conservator of the museum of Pesaro, who has described to me with much competence and precision the details of the Mithraic bas-relief. It is almost entirely very good. Is this a proof of authenticity, and that it cannot have been copied? I would advance another hypothesis; that the monument is ancient, but that the inscription is fake; I will furnish another remarkable example of this sort of falsification. A specialist with the aid of a stone-mason could help us here. Lacking this skill, I will merely demand that the examination is made.

Be that as it may, we can reach the following conclusion. I do not hesitate to condemn the inscription; if I am deceived, it means only that Philonius invented his own religion. There is nothing that need be considered here for the history of Roman religion and public worship.

UPDATE (13/3/2013): I have added the online link and corrected the reference.

Share

Going Dutch for Mithras

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Does anyone have access to M. J. VERMASEREN, Mithras de geheimzinnige god, (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1959)? If so, can they locate the passage for me which appears on pp.103-4 of the English translation (not made by Vermaseren), and reads:

Justin records that on the occasion of the meal the participants used certain formulae comparable with the ritual of the Eucharist, and in this connection mention may be made of a medieval text, published by Cumont, in which of Christ is set beside the sayings of Zarathushtra. The Zardusht speaks to his pupils in these words: ‘He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation….’ Compare this with Christ’s words to his disciples: ‘He who eats of my body and drinks of my blood shall have eternal life.’ In this important Persian text lies the source of the conflict between the Christians and their opponents, and though of later date it seems to confirm Justin’s assertion.

Is the portion in bold given in French, perhaps?

Share