IntroductionThe Greek-Roman period has known some of the most intriguing mysteries cults, such as the Cult of Mithras. For decennia academics have tried to understand its origins, meaning and doctrine. But the cult was surrounded with secrecy and didn't have a central text, nor literary sources that we can base our study to the cults on. Therefore archeology is an important source for historic research into the cult because it has revealed some of the most well kept cult temples and their possessions inside. Inside these temples the cult imagery has been well preserved and forms our most important source of information.[1]
But how should we interpret the iconography of the Mithrascult? This research takes a stance in the debate on the origins of the Mithrascult and the way we should interpret the meaning of the iconography. Within this research many theories that came up in the last decennia are being questioned and new ones are being offered, with special attention to network theory as a new perspective. |
Opening up the debate |
The study of the Mithrascult has long been dominated by the Belgian Franz Cumont. He, for the first time, collected all the evidence found on the archaeological sites. With all the evidence combined in one volume he dedicated a second volume to his interpretation of the evidence regarding the meaning of the iconography and the doctrine of the cult. His work has therefore been a starting point for the research of many academics.[2] Since the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies in 1971 the debate about the meaning of the Mithraic iconography and the origins of the cult has burst open. Cumont claimed that the cult was of Iranian origins but Hinnels and Gordon thought different. They thought the only way to conclude the cult's origins were Iranian is when the research has started with this assumption. Therefore Cumont was said to have used fallacies in his research. New theories and points of view were brought into the debate.
|
Iconography |
The iconography in the Mithras temples differs because of local influences, the commissioner of the relief and the sculptor of the relief. But there is one similar scene on all the reliefs, the tauroctony scene. This is the scene where Mithras kills a bull. Although a fight between a god and an animal isn’t a strange thing in the mythical world, it is unusual to see an image of the act that Mithras stabs the bull. This is rarely depicted, according to Jan Bremmer, because no longer the god itself is being worshiped but an event and deed is being worshiped.[3] Because all reliefs show this scene, the tauroctony scene is claimed to be the key to unlock the meaning of the Mithras cult. The tauroctony scene is seen as the moment that Mithras becomes ‘the father and maker of everything’. It is the beginning moment of social and cosmological order. Therefore the scene is interpreted as an act of creation, an offer from which the cosmos got his existence.
What do we actually see on the tauroctony scene? First of all we see Mithras, leaning with his knee on the bull, pulling up his head and stabbing the bull while looking away. According to Payam Nabarz there are similarities between Mithras and Perseus both looking away during the act of killing. This probably has something to do with overcoming the ego by looking away so the ego won’t turn the heart and soul to stone.[4] Around Mithras there are some animals depicted like a dog, a raven, a scorpion, a snake, a lion and a cub. Wheat grow out of the tail of the bull as a symbol of fertility. Many scholars refer to the depicted animals as signs of the zodiac or as signs referring to the planets. Most of the times there are two torchbearers depicted, who are Cautes and Cautopates as signs of the equinoxes. Above Mithras we mostly see a man depicted with a crown of sunbeams. This is Sol, representing the sun, who is after the bull-slaying becoming a friend of Mithras.[5] |
Networktheory |
Mithraism spread through the Roman Empire explosively from the first century AD and reached its peak in the third century. Just like all other cults, the initiates of the Mithras cults, worshipped also other Roman gods. The Mithras cult and the Roman religion co-existed next to each other. It has been generally accepted that the Mithras cult moved through the Roman empire with the moving of the Roman army. The influence the cult had depended on the Roman armies. Besides the Roman army there were individual legions and imperial civil servants that were of great importance to the spread and influence of the Mithras cult. [6] The earlier a region was being influenced by the Roman army and their bringing of the Mithras cult the more initiates the cult got. An early development of the cult resulted in a few area’s in a development of an own style of iconography. This is especially the case for the Danube region.
We now know how the cult traveled through the Roman Empire, but what does this have to do with networks and network theory? Without the network of the traveling Roman armies the Mithras cult probably wouldn’t have been this successful and well-spread. Because the cult traveled through many different regions of the empire, the cult has been exposed to several local influences. According to Greg Woolf it is therefore necessary to see the Mithras cult as the creation and result of many transformations of previous cults and gods.[7] I believe, in accordance with Payam Nabarz, that we should look at the Mithras cult and the iconography of the tauroctony scene as a Western mystery cult, with a Persian origin, Greek mythological elements and Roman astrology combined.[8] Though this makes it difficult to trace back all the different kinds of influences and the original meaning of the cult and its iconography. But can and should we decipher all different elements from different influences to get to the true meaning of Mithraic iconography? According to Anna Collar we absolutely can use network theory to get to new questions, insights, and conclusions. She claims that human social networks are the carriers of the spread of ideas. Though there are indeed local differences and several networks with each their own influence in the Mithras cult the importance of the use of network theory lies within its egalitarian approach. First of all, every kind of evidence is as important as another piece. Second the use of network theory prevents assumptions being made about the centre of the cult as its origins. A centre and its periphery arise because of interactions within a network. And third, network theory shows the non-visible ideological connections between people and places and which roads religious ideas have taken.[9] |
Conclusion
|
The debate that has been going on since 1971 has brought many new insights into the Mystery cult of Mithras. Because of a lack of written material, scholars turn to the iconography as a key source to unravel the mysteries of Mithras. It is, almost, clear what is depicted on the tauroctony scene, though the exact meaning and their exact origins remain unknown. With the use of network theory we could trace back the influences of several networks which shaped the iconography of Mithras. Network theory, despite the differences within the Mithras iconography, uses an egalitarian approach and overcomes these differences to look for similar characteristics.
|
Bibliografie
|
Literature:
1. David Ulansey, The origins of the Mitraic Mysteries: cosmology and salvation in het ancient world (New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 4 2. Ulansey 7-8. 3. Jan Bremmer, Initiation into the mysteries of the ancient world (Berlijn: De Gruyter, 2014), 130. 4. Payam Nabarz, The mysteries of Mithras: The pagan belief that shaped the christian world (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2005), 20 and 41. 5. Nabarz, 21-24 en 34. 6. C.M. Daniels, ‘The Roman army and the spread of Mithraism’, in Mithraic Studies: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies, Volume II (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1975): 250 en 273, 274. 7. Greg Woolf, ‘A Sea of Faith?’, Mediterranean Historical Review 18, no. 2 (dec. 2013): 137. 8. Nabarz, 41. 9. Anna Collar, Religious Networks in the Roman Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 2-3. Images: Header: Taurochtony scene, http://chronopsis.com/wordpress/2012/02/19/scan-of-the-mithras-relief-in-the-mithraeum-of-circus-maximus/ Image text: Taurochtony scene, http://nicholasjames19.blogspot.nl/2015/12/is-allah-arabic-word-for-god.html Youtube-film: Payam Nabarz is interviewed by Dr Robert Beckford, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySQmbn5eqEQ |