Mithridates Chrestos – the fate of a younger brother

The sleepy little kingdom of Pontus in what is now Northern Turkey was a backwater in the Hellenistic era.  Its rulers affected a Greek culture, but ruled over a largely Persian land, that had changed little since Alexander overthrew the Achaemenid Persian empire.

Mithridates V Euergetes married a princess named Laodice, from the Seleucid dynasty that ruled Syria and was descended from one of Alexander’s generals.  She bore him two sons, and a gaggle of daughters.  The elder son was Mithridates VI Eupator, known as the Great, who achieved fame as an enemy of Rome who had the military and political talent to defy even Sulla and Pompey.  But what of his brother?

The literary sources are very limited.  Strabo tells us:

Dorylaüs was a military expert and one of the friends of Mithridates Euergetes. … But when, a little later, he learned that Euergetes, as the result of a plot, had been treacherously slain in Sinopê by his closest associates, and heard that the succession had passed to his wife and young children, he despaired of the situation there and stayed on at Cnossus…. Now Euergetes had two sons, one of whom, Mithridates, surnamed Eupator, succeeded to the rule when he was eleven years old.  Dorylaüs, the son of Philetaerus, was his foster brother; and Philetaerus was a brother of Dorylaüs the military expert. And when the king Mithridates reached manhood, he was so infatuated with the companionship of his foster brother Dorylaüs that he not only conferred upon him the greatest honours, but also cared for his kinsmen and summoned those who lived at Cnossus.[1]

Appian tells us:

He [Eupator] was bloodthirsty and cruel to all – the slayer of his mother, his brother, three sons, and three daughters.[2]

Photius includes an epitome of Memnon:

After this, the grievous war between the Romans and Mithridates king of Pontus broke out; the apparent cause of this war was the seizure of Cappadocia. Mithridates gained control of Cappadocia when he captured his nephew Arathes after breaking his oath concerning a truce, and then killed him with own hands. This Arathes was the son of Ariarathes and of the sister of Mithridates. Mithridates was a persistent murderer since his childhood. He had become king at the age of 13 years, and soon afterwards he imprisoned his mother, whom his father had left as joint ruler with him, and eventually put an end to her by violence; he also killed his brother. [3]

No literary source records the brother’s name.  Fortunately there are two inscriptions from Delos that do mention it,[4] which are accessible:

[βα]σιλέω[ς Μ]ιθραδάτου Εὐπάτο[ρ]ος [Ε][— — —]
[καὶ το]ῦ ἀ[δελφοῦ α]ὐ̣τοῦ Μιθ[ρ]αδάτο[υ]
[Χρ]ήστου Δ[ιονύ]σιος Νέωνος Ἀθ[ηναῖος]
[γυ]μνα[σιαρχή]σα[ς] ἀνέθηκεν.[5]

Διὶ Οὐρίωι ὑπὲρ βασ[ιλέως]
Μιθραδάτου Εὐπάτορος
καὶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ
Μιθραδάτου Χρήστου
καὶ τῶν πραγμάτων αὐτῶν.[6]

To Zeus Ourios on behalf of King
Mithradates Eupator
and his brother
Mithradates Chrestus
and their fortunes.[7]

His name, then, was Mithradates Chrestos or Chrestus.  He suffered the fate that rivals to the throne traditionally suffered in oriental despotisms — to be murdered by a successful sibling.

Is anything else actually known about this man, or boy?  I can’t find any other sources[8] that mention him.

My thanks to the correspondent who drew my attention to this obscure and luckless princeling.

Share
  1. [1]Strabo, Geographica, Book 10, chapter 4. Online here.
  2. [2]Appian, History of Rome, c.112.  Online here.
  3. [3]Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 224. Online here.
  4. [4]B. C. McGing, The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus, Brill, 1986, p.89, accessible sometimes in preview.
  5. [5]Ins. Delos 1560 (Durrbach, Choix D’Inscriptions de Delos 187, no. 113), ca. 115-4 BC.  Accessible online here.
  6. [6]IDelos 1561, ca. 121-111 BC.
  7. [7]A. B. Cook, Zeus: a study in ancient religion, CUP, 1914, p.154. Preview online here.
  8. [8]http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/2204.html

From my diary

I’ve continued working on the PHP scripts for the new Mithras site.  It’s slow, because I don’t do much development work in PHP.  The reason for doing this is so that I can work on the site from anywhere, work or home; and so that it will support things such as footnotes, not found in standard HTML.

I was struck today by the conviction that HTML is travelling in the wrong direction.  I remember the first HTML.  It was simple, and anyone could master it.  Today I learned that all of the attributes on the horizontal rule element, the plain old <hr> tag, are to be unsupported by HTML 5.  If you wanted a single line, all you had to do was <hr size=1>.  Now, to achieve the same effect … well, I did a google search, and had to experiment to find a CSS syntax that would work.

There is a disease that affects software products.  It happens when the developers forget that 99% of the time, the user is doing a few simple things; and start concentrating on the 1%.  In this case the HTML developers are so busy trying to separate presentation from content — a mantra of much software development, and not a bad thing — that they have forgotten that the first, most important thing is that creating a web page should be SIMPLE!!!  Idiots.

I’m still under the weather, but I also opened Daryn Lehoux’s book on ancient weather and calendars, and made a start.  I was deeply impressed by the opening pages, which gave a remarkably clear reason why such calendars were necessary, and nicely anchored it in farming in modern society.  Someone give this man a professorship: he has managed to produce a seminal piece of work on a very difficult, highly technical subject, and has done it in such a way that any reasonably educated man may get up to speed.  Marvellous!

Share

From my diary

Updated versions of the translation of the Passio Petri and Passio Pauli from the Acts of ps.Linus have arrived.  I will need to read these tonight, but they must be nearly complete, which is good news.

I have been making enquiries about the supposed existence of a third volume of Maarten Vermaseren’s CIMRM collection of inscriptions and reliefs about Mithras.  The theory is that he had composed a third volume, to contain the literary testimonies; but this was unpublished at his death.  However I am informed that this is not true; and worse, that Vermaseren gave orders before his death for all his scholarly papers to be destroyed.  I am enquiring a little further, but I suspect that CIMRM III will have to be filed with the pseudo-biblia.

I’m also interested in exploring a little whether the CIMRM can be got online.  They are, admittedly, outdated.  Plans for a supplement never came to anything.  There are scholars interested in creating some new resource, but unable to get funding.  So, as the CIMRM volumes are out of print, I wonder whether Brill would allow them to appear online?  It probably depends on finding someone friendly at Brill to ask.

 I’m still reading some of the material at the Wikipediocracy forum.   There is a book in prospect about the history of Wikipedia.  One item in this will be details of the WorldTraveller incident.   WorldTraveller was a longstanding and valued contributor, who was forced out of Wikipedia by an admin who contributed nothing, and broke all the “rules” to do down his foe.  The details are sordid, and show clearly that Wikipedia’s policies do not work, even in very blatant cases.  As Peter Damian remarks:

So, a researcher at a top UK institution, later to become a professional astronomer, is blocked by an admin who knows nothing about astronomy, and whose contributions to Wikipedia include ‘paranormal’ topics, video games and comic books. I defy anyone to find a better example of admin abuse against content contributors than that.

The later block in March 2007 caused WT to pack his bags and leave for good.

Interestingly, the UK parliament has received representations about Wikipedia.   The hearings of the Joint Committee on Privacy and Injunctions from January 2012 are online in PDF form here.  On pages 483 to 493 is the testimony of Andreas Kolbe and Edward Buckner, itemising two problems, with specific examples:

  1. Wikipedia facilitates the publication of anonymous defamatory material, and has no practical mechanism for the victim to get it removed.
  2. Wikipedia publishes significant amounts of extreme porn, and some of those at the top of Wikimedia UK are involved in this.

The witnesses call for moves to make Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation more accountable.  Specifically they propose that the Charities Commission should oblige Wikipedia to fund a small but fully independent watchdog similar to the Press Complaints Committee, as a condition of its charitable status, to help enforce the controls which Wikipedia claims are in place but which the evidence shows is not. 

These modest proposals seem very sound to me.  The problems in Wikipedia administration run deep, but these two symptoms certainly need to be addressed. 

Share

The fire of Cautopates

On a Spanish site, I find the following photograph of Cautes and Cautopates, the twin side-kicks of Mithras.  It’s remarkable because the figure of Cautopates is still partly coloured!  And so, clearly, we can see that the objects that they carry are indeed lit torches.

Considering how universally this is assumed, it is nice to see some evidence of it.

The article itself is a general one, of no special interest, but handled rather well in the automatic translation by Google translate.  The images generally seem to be from the Mithraeum under the church of S. Clemente in Rome, and are rather good.

Share

From my diary

I’ve been thinking again about how a reliable Mithras site might look. 

One of the problems has been layout.  I’ve had great difficulty finding a format for the top-level page that worked for me.  But I had something of a breakthrough last night, when I started working from the Tertullian Project home page as a basis.  I was also able to find online a quality but usable photograph of a tauroctony which, I felt, was suitable to go at the top of the page.

The structure of the Tertullian Project, into various smaller and separate pages, would also work for the Mithras material.

It needs to be done.  At present there is no reliable source for information on Mithras online.  The Wikipedia article has been carefully poisoned, and has deteriorated further since.  So something must be done.

It is a great pity that Vermaseren’s collection of reliefs and inscriptions is not online.  But if I do a proper page, possibly I might be able to get permission from Brill to host a copy?  It’s worth considering, at any rate.

Share

A newly discovered Mithraeum in Scotland

A correspondent writes to tell me of the discovery of a Mithraeum in Scotland, at Inveresk.  There is an announcement in Epistula 1 (PDF), page 5, the organ of the Roman Society, from John Gooder (AOC Archaeology Group) and Fraser Hunter (National Museums Scotland):

Excavations on the eastern edge of the fort complex of Inveresk in East Lothian have revealed the first evidence for the cult of Mithras in Scotland. The excavations, for East Lothian Council by AOC Archaeology Group, preceded the rebuilding of the cricket pavilion after it was burnt down. The findspot is over 750 m from the fort, in an area where little Roman activity was previously known.

Excavations exposed part of a sub-rectangular sunken feature 6.1 m long, at least 4.1 m wide and 0.65 m deep. Buried face-down at its north-west end were two intact altars, both offered by the same person, C Cassius Fla[vianus?], a centurion.

One is dedicated to Sol and bears a bust of the god, his pierced eyes and radiate crown allowing light to shine through from a recess carved in the rear; the capital carries busts of the four seasons.

The other is dedicated to Mithras, with imagery linked to Apollo (lyre, plectrum and griffin) and sacrificial implements carved on the sides. Traces of pigment survive on both altars. Close by was an altar base.

Inveresk was only occupied in the Antonine period … Was the sunken feature a timber-built mithraeum?

All this is immensely interesting.  I wish we could see the inscriptions!  I wish we could see photos of the altars!

AOC refers to these as the “Lewisvale Roman Altars“:

In March 2010 AOC Archaeology Group was undertaking routine archaeological investigations in advance of the erection of a new cricket pavilion in Lewisvale Park, Inveresk, East Lothian, when two large sandstone slabs were uncovered.

It soon became apparent from the ornately carved side panels that these two slabs were significant remains relating to the Roman occupation of Inveresk, and by the end of the day it had been confirmed that they were in fact Roman altars. Wider excavation revealed that they had been deposited in a pit also containing an altar base and an area of paving.

In addition to the altars and altar base the artefact assemblage includes nails, fragments of lead, Roman ceramic (including Samian, fine ware and black burnished ware sherds), and later prehistoric ceramic. …

The two rare carved Roman altars, one dedicated to the Roman God Sol and the other to Mithras are amongst the most important Roman finds ever to be made in Scotland both for the quality of the carving and the importance of the inscriptions. The Mithraic altar is the first dedication to Mithras known from Scotland and the most northerly example to date.

The discovery of Roman altars from within a secure Roman context, presents a unique opportunity to investigate a purposeful Roman-period event. The wider artefact assemblage of both Roman and local objects, along with ecofacts recovered during soil sample processing provide the opportunity to investigate activities within the pit from whence the altars were recovered, and from the adjacent area.

The AOC archaeology site also has a blog — confusingly called Diary — with photographs and details of the whole process!!!  I deeply approve of this.  Well done, AOC archaeology!  Snippets:

Today we have uncovered all of the inscription on the Mithras altar. It reads DAEO/INVICT[.]MY/C CAS/FLA, which may mean “To the invincible god Mithras” followed by the dedicators name…

Here are a couple of preliminary laser scan images of the Sol altar, there will be more to follow…

The sides of the altar have been carved with laurel wreaths. It has been suggested that these wreaths represent Sol Invictus, the unconquered Sun. …

Today we have uncovered the inscription “SOLI.C.CAS.FLA >”….  The capital is characterised by a row of four figures with an inscribed panel beneath that bears traces of red and white pigment. The figures most likely represent the four seasons.

Spring and Summer have been fully cleaned using soft brushes and wooden skewers. As can be seen Spring, on the left, has more flowers in her hair than Summer.

The final figures on the capital of the Sol altar have now been cleaned. We believe that they represent autumn and winter;  Autumn with grapes in her hair and Winter with a shawl covering her head.

Today we have finished cleaning the Mithras altar. There is a carving of a beautiful winged mythical creature on the side that we have just finished, as well as a patera (handled bowl). It is possible that the creature is a Griffin. What do you think.?

On the side of the Mithras altar you can see a finely carved lyre, a plectrum (small flat tool used to pluck or strum a stringed instrument) and a jug. Specialists have indicated that the jug is a standard vessel of sacrifice and the lyre with a plectrum are typical attributes of Apollo.

We will start with the Mithras altar….

 

I’ve linked to the original images, rather than copied them here.

This is only a tiny selection of the materials in the diary, which is very, very interesting and includes UV examination.   This blog is really a model of how material should be presented online.  Truly it is!

Share

Lanciani on the pagan revival of the fourth century

Quite by chance I found myself looking at a vivid description of the pagan revival of the late 4th century AD, in the elderly pages of Rudolpho Lanciani’s Ancient Rome in the light of recent discoveries (1888).  Lanciani was an Italian archaeologist who was digging in Rome, and unearthing all manner of ancient inscriptions.  His books seem designed to stir interest in this  very necessary work, by interweaving stories of his finds in a popular narrative of Roman history; and this they do very effectively.

The second half of the fourth century of our era was one of the most exciting periods in Roman history, on account of the stupendous fight between the Christian majority and the minority of those who still clung to polytheism in its decrepitude. Both parties were determined to put an end to a state of things which had become intolerable to each; both were determined to strike the final blow; and although the emperors themselves were disposed personally to gain the victory with time and persuasion, the impatience of the pagan leaders in Rome caused the catastrophe to be violent and marked by bloodshed.

It is rather difficult to describe the character, the feelings, the behavior, of those who distinguished themselves during the fight, because contemporary writers are not impartial; they judge of men and things from their own point of view, from the interest of their party. This discrepancy of appreciation is noticeable even in points of supreme importance, in events which had been seen and shared by thousands and thousands of witnesses. Christian writers; as a rule, attribute to their antagonists any amount of depravity, even in private life and affections; pagan writers reproach their opponents with conspiring to destroy the Empire, with being determined to open the gates of the Eternal City to the barbarians, provided the triumph of their new faith could be secured. The author of the libel against Virius Nicomachus Flavianus,[1] the leader of the pagan aristocracy in the Senate, describes him as being polluted by unmentionable vices; whereas Theodosius II and Valentinian III., in their official messages to the Senate, A. D. 431, proclaim him nominis illustris, et sanctissimce apud omnes recordationis, an illustrious name, a man whose character was as pure as gold. Another instance of this more or less sincere discrepancy of opinions is supplied by the well-known quarrel about the statue of Victory in the Curia or Senate-hall, which statue for centuries had been considered as the personification of the power and destinies of imperial Rome. This statue, formerly worshipped at Tarentum, had been placed by Augustus himself on the tribune of the Curia, and ornamented with the rarest kind of jewelry, which he had collected in Egypt. An altar stood before it, to receive the votive offerings of the patres conscripti. From the day of Constantine’s conversion to Christianity to the year 382, the statue and the altar had been left undisturbed. In 382, however, they gave rise to the memorable duel fought between S. Ambrose on the Christian and Symmachus on the pagan side before Valentinian II. and Theodosius. Symmachus accused his rivals of enmity, not toward the statue of Victory, but toward the symbol of the fortune of the Roman armies, just then engaged in trying to check the invasion of the barbarians. S. Ambrose, on the other hand, never mentions the statue, venerated by every one because of its glorious origin, wonderful beauty, and great age; he contends simply that the altar and the official worship of the goddess should no longer be imposed on the Christian senators, or offend their feelings and trouble their consciences.

The want of trustworthy contemporary documents is compensated to a certain extent by the admirable series of inscriptions collected in class five of the sixth volume of the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, which refers to Roman patrician magistrates of the fourth century, from the time of Diocletian to the fall of the Empire. These inscriptions derive their importance from the fact that, in describing the political, religious, and military career of each statesman and senator, they reveal at the same time absolutely authentic particulars otherwise unknown and events and names concerning which contemporary writers have not spoken, or have spoken with passion and prejudice. These marbles tell us the names and the exploits of the last champions of polytheism in the Senate. They describe how, during the last outburst of fanaticism, the most absurd superstitions, the most mysterious and contemptible ceremonies, were revived, — those especially which bore a certain analogy with the ceremonies of Christian worship. They throw a new light also on the catastrophe which brought to an end the worship of Vesta, and the life, eleven centuries old, of the sisterhood of the Vestal Virgins.

The leaders of the pagan faction in the Curia were Clodius Hermogenianus, Caelius Hilarianus, Clodius Flavianus, Petronius Apollodorus, Sextilius Agesilaus, the two Rufii Ceionii, Nonius Victor, Aurelius Victor, and other representatives of the old aristocracy. But, alas! how miserably they represented the former conquerors of the world! The whole party was initiated into the mysteries of secret Eastern sects, and their religious fanaticism stood in contrast to the original purity and simplicity of Roman religion as did their civil and military virtues to the wisdom and valor of the statesmen and generals of the Republic, and also of the Empire, in its first three centuries of glorious life.

They had selected as the scene of their grand exploits, as a place for confidential meetings, two sanctuaries, both of recent construction, — the shrine of Cybele and Atys on the Vatican hill, and the grotto of Mithras in the Campus Martius. The shrine of Cybele is mentioned by ancient writers among the buildings of the fourteenth region, Transtiberim, under the name Phrygianum. Although there was no doubt that such a name belonged to a place of worship of the Phrygian goddess, and that such a place was in the neighborhood of the Vatican, still no positive notice of its history and exact situation was obtained until the reign of Pope Paul V., Borghese. In laying the foundations of the southeast corner of the new facade of S. Peter’s, between 1608 and 1609, at a depth of thirty feet below the level of the ground, several altars and pedestals were discovered, on which the history of the shrine was engraved. These marbles apparently had been hammered and split into fragments at some unknown period; perhaps after the great religious catastrophe of 394, of which I shall presently speak. The sacred grotto of Mithras, in the Campus Martius, was within the limits of the seventh region, on the east side of the Via Lata, between the modern Corso and the general post – office in the Piazza of S. Silvestro in Capite, and, more precisely, in the plot of ground which is now occupied by the Marignoli palace. It was discovered at the end of the fifteenth century, but no satisfactory account of the discovery has come down to us. Fra Giovanni Giocondo and Pietro Sabino, who seem to have witnessed the event, only copied the inscriptions of the sanctuary, without describing any details of its architecture and disposition. Both places, the Vatican Metroon and the Mithraeum Campense, as they were officially named, had been filled with numberless altars and pedestals, as was said above, to commemorate the initiation of eminent men, mostly senators of the Empire, into those horrid mysteries and into the various degrees of the sect. And do the records engraved upon these marbles enumerate according to the ancient custom, the civil, military, and diplomatic offices honorably discharged in the interest of their sovereigns and country? Not in the least. These men pride themselves upon titles and names which would have made their noble and gallant ancestors blush with shame and burst with indignation. They call themselves pater sacrorum, father of mysteries; hierocorax invicti Mithrae, sacred crow of Mithras the omnipotent; archibucolus dei Liberi, great shepherd of Bacchus; hierofantes Hecatarum, high-priest of Hecate, and so forth. And they make use of a peculiar kind of phraseology, unknown in classic times, and evidently copied in a ridiculous manner from Christian models. One speaks of the gods animae suae mentisque custodes; another proclaims himself delibutus sacratissimis mysteriis, or else in aeternum renatus, after the baptism of blood; all of them, likewise, testify with unbounded pride to having received this bloody baptism, under the form of criobolium or taurobolium, or to having renewed the ceremony after a lapse of twenty years, because it appears that the abominable sacrament was thought to lose its redeeming power after a certain time, like some of our cutaneous injections.

Two senators, Nonius Victor Olympius and Aurelius Victor Augentius, presided over the Mithraeum Campense, and were the grand-masters of this kind of Free-masonry. In the tablets discovered there nearly four centuries ago, we can follow step by step the career of many illustrious adepts. Between A. D. 357 and 377 Nonius and Aurelius administered right and left the degrees of corax (raven), cryphius (secret), miles (soldier), leo, Perses, Heliodromos, and pater. In 377, the practice was stopped, probably, by the prefect of the town, Gracchus, who attempted to destroy all the Mithraic grottoes in Rome.

The worship of Vesta was not forgotten in this last outbreak, in this last revival of pagan superstitions. We are glad to acknowledge, however, that our virgins did not contaminate the last days of their life by altering the ancient purity and simplicity of the institution; they fell nobly and gallantly, faithful to the rules of the order eleven centuries old, free from any suspicion, and respected even by their enemies, in whose diatribes we are happy to find a certain sense of kindness and respect every time the Vestals are mentioned. We are also glad to testify that their name is not profaned in the records of the Phrygian and Mithraic sects; the senators, who caused those records to be engraved on marble, only occasionally call themselves pontifices Vestae and pontifices Vestales.

The infidel majority in the Senate fought the last battles under two able and determined leaders: Virius Nicomachus Flavianus, the senior (with his relatives the Symmachi), and Vettius Agorius Praetextatus. Flavianus took little or no interest in the Vestals, perhaps because the simplicity of their worship did not sufficiently excite a soul vitiated by the violent mysteries of the Phrygian and Persian rites. The author of the libel discovered by Delille, and mentioned above, ridicules Flavianus for his performances of the Amburbalia, of the Isia, of the Megalesia, of the Floralia; but he never speaks of the Vestalia, of the perennial fire, or of the Palladium. Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, on the contrary, was intensely devoted to the Virgins, as was also his wife, Fabia Aconia Paullina. Their palace stood at the corner of the Via Merulana and the Via delle sette Sale, on the site of the new palazzo Brancaccio. It was surrounded by a garden, which extended as far as the present railway station. Many monuments concerning the history of their family have been discovered within these limits. I shall mention, however, one only, on account of its connection with the events which I am relating. When the house of Praetextatus was excavated for the first time in 1591, there were found a pedestal and a statue erected in honor of Caelia Concordia, the last (or next to the last) abbess of the Atrium Vestae. The pedestal bore the following dedication: “Fabia Aconia Paullina sets up (in her own palace) this portrait-statue of Caelia Concordia, the Abbess of the Vestals, not only as a testimonial to her virtues, her chastity and her devotion to the gods, but also as a token of gratitude for the honor conferred by the Vestals upon her husband Praetextatus, to whom they have dedicated a statue in their own convent.” By a remarkable chance, this last-named statue has been discovered in our excavations. Its head, at first missing, was found by accident two years later. It is represented in the accompanying illustration. There seems to be no doubt of its being the very one alluded to by Fabia Aconia Paullina. It represents a senator in the official robe of the fourth century, and it is the only male statue found in the Atrium Vestae; its presence there would have remained almost inexplicable, had we not heard of it before, from the above-quoted inscription.

 The work is easy to read, and contains material guaranteed to interest us all on many pages, even if sometimes we may wonder whether the matter is quite as simple as it is represented!

UPDATE: I find that I am by no means the only enthusiast for this work: Bill Thayer went so far as to retype the lot!  It’s very freely available on the web: but some things are best read in book form.

Share
  1. [1]Lanciani refers here to the Carmen Contra Paganos, found on three leaves at the back of a 5th century manuscript of Prudentius.

A gem with a Mithraic tauroctony of the 1st century BC?

An email from a correspondent pointed me to an image in Wikipedia Commons, itself from the Walters Art Gallery, of an intaglio ring, and enquired about the date of the item. 

The item consists of an ancient gold ring, with a depiction of the killing of the bull by Mithras cut into a gem of sard.  It is catalogued by Vermaseren as CIMRM 2367, who gives no date for it.  

Note that the image to left is rather magnified: the item is 2.2 x 2.3 cms. 

Standard elements in the scene appear.  At top right is the sun, Sol, identifiable by the rayed crown.  A face opposite, top left, is presumably Luna, although nothing can be seen that indicates this.

The action takes place in the cavern, whose rocks form a roof to the scene.  Two individuals appear on either side, who would usually be Cautes and Cautopates, the torch bearers.  But these seem a little unusual.  Each is supporting his chin with one arm.  And where are the torches? 

But there is something more which is a little unusual about this.  Notice the position of Mithras’ head.  He is looking forwards and down, towards the dagger.  But Mithras is nearly always depicted looking back over his shoulder — why, we do not know. 

The provenance of the item is nothing.  It was bought by the Walters from a previous collection, owned by one A. Evans — not the great Arthur Evans of Knossus? –, and appears in the catalogue of his sale in 1938.  The find location is “said to be from Nemea” in Greece.  So there is no archaeological provenance for the ring. 

The date given by the cataloguer of the Walters collection is “late 1st century BC (Augustan)”, although no explanation is offered for this date. 

Such a date would precede all the archaeology for Mithras by more than a century, and, if correct, would be of the highest interest for Mithraic studies.

But it is difficult to know why we should give it any such date.  If we assume that the item is authentic, why should we not presume, what we would otherwise suppose, which is a date of the 2-3rd century AD? 

Items of this kind can only be dated from three considerations, as far as I can tell.  They may have an inscription, which tells us when they were made.  They may be found in an archaeological context where the stratigraphy tells us the date.  Or they may be dated by comparison with similar securely dated items, where the change of style identifies the period to which an unknown item should be assigned.

Yet which of this is available for this ring?  It has no inscription.  It was bought on the art market.  And not a single one of the gems published by Vermaseren has a date attached to it.

The text on the Walters’ page reflects the usual hearsay, that Mithras was a Persian deity adopted by the Romans.  This has not been the consensus of the academy since 1971.  The archaeological evidence makes clear that Mithras as we know it originated in Rome, whatever the pre-history of the cult.  So … I don’t think we need pay any attention to the date on the page.

It is, all the same, an interesting item.  I wish we could have a colour picture of it.

And I wonder whether someone might like to ask the Walters if they would consider placing an image of their other Mithraic gem, CIMRM 2364, accession no 42.868, on the web?

The gems, in general, are not numerous.  They are, however, remarkably syncretistic in nature.  Some contain magical inscriptions.  Others depict other gods, such as Iao.  I would infer from this, although I have not the slightest qualification to have an opinion, that all these items are late, and belong to the decay of paganism.  Perhaps someone who knows about gems will tell us.

Share

Using aliases to manipulate debate online

Jim Davila at Paleojudaica notes an interesting article and makes some useful comments upon it:

 Are online aliases ever justified in academic debate? Sock puppets – online commenters that create a false identity – are disrupting academic freedom and scholarly debate, says Simon Tanner (The Guardian).

If it’s just a matter of discussing evidence and debating rational arguments, it doesn’t really matter whether one knows all the names of the debaters. … But, that said, there is rarely a compelling reason to conceal one’s identity in tempest-in-a-teapot academic debates  …  human nature being what it is, Internet anonymity leads some people to do things they would never do in their own name.

Sock puppetry goes beyond presenting arguments anonymously for an unpopular position and deliberately creates the impression that more people are making the arguments than actually are. (This amounts to a twisted appeal to the authority of numbers to give the impression of a false controversy or even a false consensus.)

The showpiece example of sock puppetry run amok is the Raphael Golb affair involving the Dead Sea Scrolls (more background here and links), which Tanner mentions, citing Robert Cargill. This case moved from mere nuisance trolling to an attempt actually to damage the reputation of a prominent academic, and it illustrates sock puppetry’s potential for real harm.

The Tanner article is very sound.

Have you encountered a sock puppet recently? The answer is probably yes even if you never knew. I met one (well several) the other day and it was quite an experience – a bit like getting mugged by a chimera. Sock puppets, referencing the cute and simple hand puppets made from a sock, are intended primarily to deceive. This is not the anonymity we all sometimes seek when online; sock puppetry is about setting up a false identity so the puppeteer can speak falsely while pretending to be another person.

Some of the craziest uses of sock puppetry are when these misleading online identities end up working in unison: simultaneously praising and defending their alter egos while attacking, stalking or even libelling and defaming people or organisations they don’t like. All the while never admitting the link or affiliation to the puppeteer.

Sock puppetry, and covert campaigns to subvert the consensus of any sort, are hideously dishonest.  But the use of it to damage the reputation of real people by means of false identities, created for the purpose, is interesting.  I would never had thought that it had that end in mind.  Yet my own experience echoes that of both these writers.

The only experience that I have ever had of sock puppetry was just such a case.  After contributing for two years to the Mithras article in Wikipedia, and researching every statement in it, one worthless individual who knew nothing about the subject turned up under at least two identities and fought a war to gain control of the article.  One identity was used to provoke trouble, hurl accusations, yell insults and generally try to start a fight; while the other  was used to make complaints to Wikipedia about any response from the victims, and to engage in “brinking”.  I subsequently learned that this is a common technique from sock-puppeters.

The troll’s determination to injure my own reputation, as the only person present who really knew about Mithras, knew no apparent limits.  After several months of harassment against every editor who objected in any way, he got hold of a corrupt administrator (also anonymous), and made a false accusation of  sock puppeting against myself.  I didn’t take it seriously, since I had never edited that article under any other name, and was the only person NOT using a false name.[1]  But then I found the administrator wouldn’t hear me, and I was actually banned for something that had never occurred, on an evidently malicious accusation, made by an anonymous troll via two sock puppets, without any input from myself, and despite my attempts to defend myself.  Such is the power of a false accusation, made, apparently, by several people!  The troll then settled down to the charmless task of repeating the libel ad nauseam, to deflect attention from his own violation of the article, and for all I know may be at it yet.  His second account now being redundant, he ceased using it.

Now Wikipedia is notoriously an unsafe environment for any normal person with any actual knowledge.  The contributors are treated as meat, and chewed up by those who have no interest in contributing.  But the general problem is anonymity.   Sock puppeting is a consequence of it, facilitated by the fact that no-one knows who they are dealing with.  Bad coin drives out good.  In Wikipedia, fewer and fewer people dare use their own names.

The troll had no claim to authority, so he resorted to violence to get his way, and sock-puppeting as his method.  He made use of the fact that his victim was posting under his own name to run his smear campaign.  But it is unlikely that he would have done so, had his own identity been involved.  But even then, he could not have achieved his end without manufacturing “support”.

Likewise the administrator would have hesitated to use Wikipedia to label someone unheard guilty of something that never happened, had his own identity been at stake.

It’s worth being aware of this tactic.  But how sad it is, that the web will have to be regulated, merely to deal with these forms of dishonesty!

Share
  1. [1]After months of harassment under my own name, I had experimented with creating a pseudonymous account — like everyone else — so that I could resume contributing elsewhere.  I made a couple of edits using this identity to the Mithras liturgy article, where no edit war was in progress.  But in fact I didn’t like editing under a name other than my own, so I  stopped using it.  The existence of a second account was later on made the excuse for banning me, despite the fact that I never edited the Mithras article using it and never used it for sock puppetting.

Mithras and Jerome

A comment draws my attention to E. H. Henckel, De philtris.[1]  On page 39, there is an interesting statement.

Magnam vim Basilidiani suo Deo ABRASAX (quem Basilides pro summo habebat numine, nomine prorsus fictitio; Sed quod litteris contineret numerum dierum, quos annus habet absolutus: unde & B. Hieronymi suspicio erat, Abraxas esse non alium, quam Persarum Mithram, hoc est, Solem, qui annuo cursu hoc spatium conficit. …

The Basilidians [assigned] the great power to their god ABRAXAS (whom Basilides considered the greatest divinity, under a fictitious name; but because the letters contained the number of days in a complete year: from which also the blessed Jerome suspected that Abraxas was no other than Mithras of the Persians, i.e the sun, which in the course of the year completes this total. …

This is a reference to Jerome’s Commentary on Amos, book 5, ch. 9-10, which may be found amid all the other literary testimonies to Mithras here:

Basilides gives to the omnipotent god the uncouth name of Abraxas, and asserts that according to the Greek letters and the number of the cycle of the year this is comprehended in the sun’s orbit. The name Mithra, which the Gentiles use, gives the same sum with different letters.  (Geden)

Geden’s footnote explains:

I.e. Μειθπας = 40 + 5 + 10 + 9 + 100 + 1 + 200 = 365; Ἀβράξας = 1 + 2 + 100 + 1 + 60 + 1 + 200 = 365.

Numerology attracts a certain kind of mind, and it’s something to be aware of.

Share
  1. [1]Frankfurt, 1590