Rather than having an image from a topic that we have already discussed in class, here is an image that has more bearing on the city of Dura Europos (although this image is not from Dura). We are looking at here…
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Transforming the Site and Object Reports for a Digital Age: Mentoring Students to Use Digital Technologies in Archaeology and Art History on Syllabus
- Transforming the Site and Object Reports for a Digital Age: Mentoring Students to Use Digital Technologies in Archaeology and Art History on Digital Project Overview
- Elizabeth Macaulay-Lewis on Late Antiquity…the emergence of “Christian Art”
- Aneta Samkoff on Late Antiquity…the emergence of “Christian Art”
- Brittany Haynes on Late Antiquity…the emergence of “Christian Art”
Archives
Categories
Meta
I LOVE the polychrome Mithras – so swanky….
Yes these space are community centers so other things happen in them! (same goes for the synagogue and the church house)
lots to discuss tonight
Brittany raises some very good points – Self-identity does not mean resistance. Also Eslner’s argument has some problems I think also connected to audience – who is viewing these works? That is very significant – who has access (something we can discuss in class)?
Also Eslner seems to assume at some level that one can only have a single identity (and this seems largely a religious identity or that this is the most fundamental identity) – I am also not sure that works especially with what we know about identity more generally.
Elsner’s interpretation of the practice of mithraism, and therefore its visual representation by the tauroctony, is not clear cut in regards to whether or not resistance was a factor in the cult of Mithras. Instead, his article demonstrates an ambivalence towards the relationship of mithraism to cultural resistance. He contextualizes religious imagery in terms of a system of cultural spaces and examines the capacity of images to invoke among their viewers a sense of self-identification with a cult and the notion of challenging a dominant Roman center. While Elsner concludes that the imagery of the mithraeum at Dura (w/ main tauroctony relief) creates a space for cultural resistance, he determines that the social composition of the cult (Roman army, elites) would discourage a challenge to Roman power. I agree with Tom that a strong self-identification of such individuals with the cult may indicate a latent identity, rather than an overt form of resistance. Roman soldiers, many of whom came from Eastern peripheries of the Empire, may have wanted to maintain, along with their allegiance to Rome, a sense of their Eastern origins or broader identity as an elite collectivity. It should also be taken into consideration that practicing Judaism and Christianity was forbidden for soldiers. The practice of worshiping a deity outside of the official imperial cult with a Persian origin may have served as a space for the expression of their own cultural identity, visually represented by the heterodox and Eastern elements of the tauroctony.
It’s true that Mithras was an empire-wide cult, but shouldn’t we also consider the local context? The two dedications in the Mithraeum are by Palmyrenes (Deleeuw 192). Was this mystery religion practiced to the exclusion of participation in the local Temple of Bel in Dura-Europas, or in conjunction? Was the practice of Mithraism attractive to Palmyrene “Romans” because of certain similarities to their local religion? As a somewhat superficial example, the Roman representations of Sol with the spiky rays behind his head seems stylistically similar to the sun god Aglibôl worshiped in Palmyra (similar figure also seen in the Hatra powerpoint).
Also, I was struck by Leriche and Coqueugniot’s comment that it’s important to understand these religious institutions not only as places of piety, but as centers for community (37). Mithraism’s ritual banqueting seems especially designed to foster communal relationships.
Finally, forgive the tangent, but I can’t help but share my favorite example of Mithraic art in all its polychrome glory. It is 3rd century Roman, displayed at the Terme di Diocleziano, Rome:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pelegrino/6409875193/in/photostream/> (there are some great photographs of details in the flickr photostream)
Ok, not to argue with myself (that’s not crazy, right?) but perhaps there is some element of resistance in Mithraism and, by extension, representations of Mithras. Perhaps not full fledged resistance, but maybe an assertion of what Elsner calls “latent identities.” As a member of the Roman military, one would have had a specific identity placed upon you from others. Where you lived, what you ate, who you associated with, etc were all determined by others a good portion of the time. Perhaps the cult of Mithras allowed these soldiers to assert an identity outside of the military one. The cult of Mithras didn’t prohibit them from sacrificing to the imperial cult so the soldiers wouldn’t get in trouble for that. But at the same time, they could have something outside the official Roman soldier identity. Of course, this cult became popular among the army so it was well inside the norm. But it did reflect some personal choice anyway. And its rites and the representations of this rites did contrast with those in the polytheistic temples in Dura (as did those of the Jews and Christians).
Oops. Haven’t gotten to Elsner yet. Never mind…
Hi Tom – I don’t think that anyone would see the image of Mithras as “resistive”, but the concept of resisting art should be in our minds to discuss the art of the synagogue and church house in Dura Europos and whether Elsner’s arguments ring true with regards to the synagogue
It doesn’t seem like this image would necessarily indicate resistance, especially due to the noted connections between the Roman army and the cult of Mithras. The Roman army adopted this god that was foreign to them and it spread all over the empire. There’s a Mithraeum near Hadrian’s Wall, so it got the the farthest reaches. So this seems more an example of appropriation, although frequently when people discuss that topic, they are talking about how the less powerful group in colonizer/colonized or conquered/conqueror relationship, take elements of the dominant elements culture and turns it to their own uses. So I am not sure if you are suppose to use that term in this context.
Thanks for that – That’s a good reminder of the close links between the army and the cult of Mithras. In the Mithraeum at Dura Europos – Sol Invictus is associated with Mithras (indeed, we have a depication of Mithras with Sol in a wall painting) – Mithras only appears once the Romans take over Dura Europos actually (well at least that we have evidence for) so it fits with the military presence.
This example is actually from the British Museum not the Vatican Museums (although they have a lot of great sculpture there!) – here is the URL:
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/gr/m/marble_group_of_mithras.aspx
But Chaya’s association of this statue with one in the Vatican Museums reminds us of how common a god Mithras was (and how he was depicted in the heart of the empire). The BM reports that the statue was found in Rome (no better context though)
Mithra was a Persian god, which in the late empire was associated with the cult of the sun: “Sol invictus” is the appelative given to this god by the Emperor Aurelianus, who built a temple (dedicated to the sun) in Rome in 274 CE. It seems that this cult was very widespread in the army. Therefore, because Dura Europos was a garrison, it is not strange that Mithra was worshipped there, in a location that was also close to the Persians and Parthians. But this statue is not from Dura Europos: It seems to me that the sculpture is a testimony to an Imperial Roman presence. The plasticity of the movements and the details of the body remind me of Greek statuary, although the dress and especially the hat are not Greek. I found out that this sculpture is in the Vatican Museum in Rome (it was familiar, though, as I have been there several times). The man depicted is Mithra slaying the “cosmic bull”; the dog and snake drink the life-giving blood.
Yup. Eastern origins for sure and very popular across the empire.
Regarding his outfit I’d like to point out that he’s wearing what appear to be leggings and a Phrygian cap, no? Perhaps this serves to underscore the prevalence of Mithraism throughout the empire – which makes sense if most practitioners were affiliated with the military –which moved around a great deal. Or perhaps this gives nod to the origins of the Mithras cult (started in the East)?
Good – we are off to the races here. The sculpture is not based on the relief of the Mithraeum from Dura Europos, but it was probably from a Mithraeum (which were found everywhere in the Empire – there is one under the baths of Caracalla and I have been to one near Lago di Nemi in Central Italy) – so why are they found everywhere in the Empire? What do his clothes tell us – despite the elegant, naturalistic Greco-Roman form?
Not sure if it would have been in a pediment (we don’t have the context for this – it’s in a Museum) but it would have probably been in niche.
Yes is this art resisting any thing? An interesting question to consider in light of Dura and Jas eslner’s views…
Think about this for class – does any of the art that we are looking at reflect / embody resistance as opposed to accommodation or negotiation?
Since I don’t know much (ok, anything) about the context of the work, I will read it formally. As mentioned above, the depicted scenario seems to involve the sacrifice of the bull. The human figure pulls the bull’s neck back as the animal resists; the tension is evident in the creature’s visage and the musculature in its neck as the man braces himself by stepping on the bull’s hoof and pulls back his head by the teeth. For all of the animal’s strength, however, it is thoroughly under the man’s control. In contrast, the man conveys a calm composure despite the violence in which he engages. His face is placid as the man peer outward onto the external space. His cape flutters in the wind, the deep folds of the drapery convey the considerable weight of the fabric. Interestingly the overall composition conveys a triangular organization of space that may suggest its location in the pediment of a building?
I really like these, especially because people rarely look at them. I am fascinated by the thoroughly Graeco-Roman visual languague: the naturalistic, even idealized body of Mithras and the beautifully rendered bull. On the other hand, the act of sacrifice is entirely un-Roman: extremely gory and brutal. I wonder if people agree with Elsner who see these as art as resistance.
This image happens to be based on a relief from the Mithraeum at Dura Europus that depicts a bull being slain by a hunter (also known as a tauroctony). Like the Mithraeum relief of the bull slaying, the statue depicts a dog attacking the dying bull. The Mithraeum was a temple that honored the god Mithras through cult reliefs and wall paintings that depicted zodiac signs and images of the god.