The mysteries of Mithras 1n the Roman Orient:

the problem of origin

Israel Roll

T he cult of Mithras which spread in the Roman Empire during the early centuries of the
Christian era is generally considered an oriental cult. This view - as well as many other
basic views concerning the mysteries - was firmly argued by F. Cumont in his monumental
work Textes et momumentsfiguris relatifs aux mysteres de Mithra (1899: 223- 278), notably
by emphasizing the gradual formation of the cult in Iran, then Mesopotamia and then
Asia Minor. 1 As such, the Mithraic mysteries were set by Cumont in the larger frame of the
religious world of the Roman Empire in a series of lectures given some years later at the
College de France and at Oxford and which were published as Les religious orientates dans
le paganisme romain ( 1929: 125- 149). The oriental character of the cult consequently
became a fundamental point de depart for scholars involved with the religious history of
the Graeco-Roman world in general, and for those engaged with the mysteries of Mithras in
particular, a presupposition which lay heavy on almost all subsequent work on the cult.
Even the challenging objection formulated by S. Wikander (1950: 15- 18) did not modify
the situation and it is still unusual to find a scholar discussing the mysteries of Mithras in a
different framework. 2
T his framework may not initially raise major problems or pressing questions for those
engaged in the study of the mysteries in Italy or in the Northern and Western provinces
of the Roman Empire. It may even be for them an attractive one. In the East, however,
the case is different. Here, such a view creates immediately a fundamental problem, even
a dilemma, which can be formulated as follows: if the mysteries were an Oriental cult, one
could reasonably expect to find in the Orient clear evidence for their formation. But the
existing evidence suggests on the contrary that the mysteries were not formed in the area
of the east Mediterranean, and that the cult was essentially an alien religion in the Roman
Orient. 3
Before further discussion, a short survey of the available evidence is needed . But we at
once face a difficult problem. U nlike the other parts of the Roman world, the Eastern part
of the Empire has given us Mithraic monuments from different periods and from different
cults. They clearly reflect different religious conceptions concerning Mithras. In the
famous clay-tablet discovered in 1907 at Bogazkoy (CIMRM 16) Mitra, together with other
'Aryan' deities (Thieme, 1960 : 301-317) is invoked to sanction a treaty concluded in the
fourteenth century B.C. between Hatti and Mitanni. Inscriptions from the Achaemenid
period discovered at Susa and Hamadan (CIMRM 7- 8) mention Mithra, together with
Ahura Mazda and Anahita, as tutelary deities of the King Artaxerxes II Memnon, while

Journal of Mithraic Studies Volume II No.

pages 53- 68

54 I srael Roll
another inscription, discovered at Persepolis (CIMRM 9), refers to him and to Ahura
Mazda as the tutelary gods of Artaxerxes III Ochus and his kingdom. In the syncretized
religious milieu of Commagene during the first century B.C., the Iranian god Mithras was
identified with the hcllenic deities Apollo, H elios and Hermes, and worshipped in a
strictly regulated royal cult of Graeco-Persian character (CIMRM 28-33; cf. Dorrie,
1964: 189- 194; Waldmann, 1973: 165- 172). On the other hand , the monuments of the
Roman period, surveyed below, belong to the mystery cult of Mithras. The difficulty is
even more apparent at Dura Europos where third-century A.D. documents affirm that
Mithras was conceived in different ways in the same town at the same time. His name
appears in a Parthian dipinto, the meaning of which is unfortunately not yet fully understood (CIMRM 70B). He is mentioned with other deities in a Greek inscription of a clearly
syncrctistic nature discovered in the Dolichencum (CJMRM 70; cf. Milik, 1967: 577- 580).
Yet the mithraeum reflects the worship of a saviour god in the framework of an esoteric cult.
My subject here is the mysterJ' cult. It means that we are dealing with that specific cult
in which Mithras, as deus, sol, and invictus, was the central deity, worshipped in peculiar
temples dedicated to him and usually decorated with a well-established iconography, the
main cult-representation being the bull-slaying scene often surrounded by accessory
panels illustrating the god's deeds, the followers of which had to pass through a whole
series of ceremonies and initiation rites in the frame of a seven-grade system. The first
requirement then is to distinguish the monuments related to that cult from the data
connected with the Aryan, Iranian or syncretistic god which bears the same name. Otherwise we will constantly run the risk of confusing one type of deity with another. By taking
the monuments related to the mysteries together we can obtain both a chronological
framework (second-fourth centuries A.D .) and a geographical one. I propose to limit my
survey to the Roman province of Syria and its immediate neighbourhood. The extraneous
nature of the cult in Egypt is unquestionable.4 The problem of Asia Minor will be discussed later.
The relevant monuments are these:
l
The Dura Europos rnithraeum. 5 The paintings, reliefs, graffiti and three architectural
phases (henceforth Dura !-Ill) constitute the most important Mithraic complex so far
discovered in the Roman Orient. Since it constitutes the main evidence for my argument, I
give a more detailed description.
Dura J was a small shrine erected in a private house c. A.D. 168 (an earlier phase, reported
by Campbell , 1954: 31 is more than doubtful). It included a nave with a column on each
side supporting the roof, two side-benches, a large and two smaller altars (cf. however
F rancis, 1975: 427), as well as two cult-reliefs set into the back wall of the shrine above an
altar. Both reliefs were initially painted with different colours and were reused in the later
phases. They represent the bull-slaying scene with the usual attributes, with the omission
of the scorpion and the two torchbearers. The smaller relief (CIMRM 37) bears a
Palmyrene inscription indicating that it was dedicated in A.D. 168 by Ethpeni, commander of the Palmyrene archers, and a Greek one mentioning the commander's name
(38, 39). The upper part of the monument has seven holes presumably for precious stones:
one hole in Mithra's cap, two in the centre of the symbols of Luna and Sol and the other
four along the upper frame; they may have represented the seven planets. The larger relief
(CIMRM 40) (see pl. VI) bears a Greek inscription indicating that it was dedicated in

The mysteries of Mithras in the R oman Orient: the problem of origin

55

A.O. 170/ 171 by Zenobios also a commander of the Palmyrene archers (41). Zenobios
himself is represented in front of the bull-killing scene, pouring incense on a thymiaterion
in the presence of two of his ancestors, Jarhiboles and Barnaadath (their names, as well as
that of Zenobios, are carved near their heads), who stand on a platform supported by two
Atlantes. 6 Both groups, of Mithras and Zenobios, are shown in an architectural frame of
two columns which support a low arch below which are the twelve signs of the zodiac. At
the apex of the latter, above Mithras' head, a bearded bust with radiate crown and kalathos
is visible, as well as the outlines of Sol and Luna (later erased). T wo other busts are shown
at the upper corners. Between the front legs of the bull are seven small altars. As for the
painted decoration of this early phase, it ' might have been very plain, perhaps merely a
painted surface of various colors' (Rostovtzeff et al., 1939: 89).
Dura II was erected by Antonius Valentinus in c. A.D. 2IO (CIMRM 53). The sanctuary
was enlarged and two more columns were added as well as an arched niche agai nst the
western end-wall. The inside walis of the shrine were covered with painted scenes : the
signs of the zodiac around the large relief; a series of accessory scenes on the front face of
the arched niche and two figures (patres ?) and a star-laden sky on its reveal. A large-scale
representation of the sacred meal of M ithras and Sol was depicted to the left of the niche
and a bull-killing scene above it. Groups of mystes performing sacrifices were pictured on
the side-walls (Rostovtzeff et al., 1939 : 90, ro 1- 102).
Dura III. The temple was extensively altered and enlarged during its last phase, c.
A.D. 240. Four more columns were added, which gave the mithraeum the shape of a basilica.
The western end of the nave, from the first pair of columns to the end-wall, was filled up
to the bench-level and covered by a vault, thus creating an elevated inner shrine to which a
stair of seven steps was attached. The walls of the sanctuary were painted once again with
scenes similar to those of phase II , but they reflect a different artistic style and are distributed in a different manner: the accessory scenes were depicted around the larger relief;
the two patres and the bull-slaying scene on the front of the arched niche and the signs of
the Zodiac on its reveal. The side walls of the inner shrine were decorated with scenes of
M ithras the hunter and those of the sanctuary with scenes of sacrifice. The painter's
name, Maraeos, is known to us from his signature in the lower left corner of the bullslaying scene (Rostovtzeff et al., 1939: 104- 105).
2
The Caesarea M aritima mithraeum. 7 T he sanctuary was erected during the third century
A.O. in a barrel-vaulted structure earlier used as a warehouse. There were benches along its
side walls, another bench across its eastern end with a dividing stone in the middle and an
altar in the central aisle. A small circular medallion, representing M ithras slaying the bull
and three accessory scenes, was found at the base of the dividing stone and may have been
originally attached to it. A line of holes running across the vault's breadth seem to have been
made for fastening a wooden screen which divided the eastern end of the sanctuary (the
inner shrine?) from the rest of it. A scuttle discovered in the roof seems to have been
created intentionally, possibly for ritual purposes. The mithraeum was undoubtedly richly
decorated with paintings but nearly all are lost. The only survivors, in very bad condition,
are some panels on the southern wall, depicting human figures.
3 The Sidon mithraeum. 8 The only surviving evidence of the sanctuary is a group of
eleven sculptures, one relief and ten statues. T he relief shows the usual bull-slaying scene
surrounded by the twelve signs of the zodiac and the busts of the four seasons (see pl. VII).

56 Israel Roll

The statues include another bull-killing scene, two torchbearers and two axebearers, a
lion-headed figure and a triple Hekate, Mithras carrying the bull, as well as two representations of the goddess Aphrodite/ Venus. Three of the statues bear inscriptions indicating
that they were dedicated by FI. Gerontios in the year 500. Using the the Seleucid era
(beginning in 312 B.c.) we get A.O. 188 (de Ridder, 1906: 54), but E. Will (1950: 261- 269)
rightly suggested that the dating-scheme here is the autonomous era of Sidon (beginning
in n1 / rro B.c.) which gives a date A.O. 389/ 390 (cf. the next monument).
4 Cippus fro m Sidon. M. Dunand (1973: pl. XIII left) has recently published a cippus
discovered in the temple of Echmoun. The monument bears a Greek inscription mentioning that it was dedicated to the holy god Asclepios by Theodotos l.ep1:vc of Mithras in the
year 25r. The date corresponds, according to the autonomous era of Sidon, to A.O. 140/ 141
which means that this inscription is the earliest dated document related to the Mithraic
mysteries discovered in the Roman province of Syria. It is worth remarking that the cippus
comes from the Phoenician coast and not from inland Syria.
5 Two reli~fsfrom Si' (Hauran, Southern Syria. (Cumont, 1918: 207-212; Frothingham,
1918: 54-62; Sourdel, 1952: 93; CIMRM 88, 89). One of these (CIMRM 88 with addition)
was found in the forecourt of the temple ofDusares (see pl. VIII), while the other (CJMRM
89), which bears the letters D(eo) I(nvicto) S(oli ) in Latin, was discovered near the mouth
of a cave. The reliefs represented the bull-slaying scene in a very similar manner and with
the usual attributes. They were probably carved by the same sculptor and seem to have
belonged to the same shrine. That shrine may have been located in the cave (Will, 1952: 68).
6 Relieffrom Arsha- wa-Qjbar (Northern Syria). (Cumont, 1933: 381- 384; CIMRM 71).
The bull-slaying scene with the usual attributes, very coarse treatment; Mithras is
represented on a much smaller scale than torchbearers. See pl. IX.
7 Fragment of a relief (CIMRM 90; Will, 1952: pl. VI, 1 and 3). Its exact provenance is
unknown (somewhere along the North Syrian coast). It represents the head of Mithras
with cap and radiate numbus below a rocky cave.
8 S acrificial knife (Seyrig, 1974: 229- 230). This recently published item was purchased
at Beirut and said to have been found at Niha or its surroundings (Central Lebanon). The
handle ends in the form of a bull's head and the two extensions of the guard in the shape of
a lion's head and a boar's head. A snake curls around the handle and a series of symbols
are depicted between its coils. Among the symbols are to be found a scorpion, a krater, a
'phrygian' cap and two busts (Sol and Luna?). The late H. Seyrig, after noting that all
these elements are well known from the Mithraic iconographic repertoire, suggested that
the knife might have belonged to the mysteries of Mithras and used during its sacrificial
rites, which seems reasonable. 9
This is the evidence directly relevant to a discussion of the mysteries of Mithras in the
Roman Orient. 10 What does it indicate? For an answer, I shall concentrate my discussion
on what appears to be the richest and most expressive component of the monuments
described above, their iconography.
The problems of the origin and the character of the Syrian Mithraic inconography in
general, and of its cult-scene in particular, have been treated by Cumont and Rostovtzeff.
In their discussion of the two reliefs from the mithraeum of Dura Europos they concluded
that ' the traits characteristic of and common to Syria and Mesopotamia are the absence of
scorpion and of wheat growing out of the tail of the bull, the change in the position of the

The mysteries of Mithras in the R oman Orient: the problem of origin

57

busts of Sol and Luna, the latter in Syria and Mesopotamia occupying the left side, the
former the right, and some peculiarities in the treatment of the bull and his killer. It is
evident that Syria had developed her own type of cult bas-relief of Mithras, derived from
the Anatolian prototype common both to Syria and to the West' (Rostovtzeff et al., 1939:
101; cf. also Cumont, 1934 : 96 and 1975: 168; Rostovtzeff, 1934: 186).
In truth, however, the evidence reflects a more complicated situation. T he traits mentioned by the two great scholars are certainly characteristic of and common to the
monuments from Dura Europos. But the case is rather different when other monuments
from the Roman Orient are considered. Their point is less persuasive when we take into
account not only the Duran reliefs but the monuments from Sidon, Si' and Arsha-wa
Qibar as well. 11 A reconsideration of the features discussed by Cumont and R ostovtzeff
will serve to make the point clear. The cult scenes from Dura, Si' Sidon and Arsha- waQibar all represent the main group of Mithras killing the bull. But the type reproduced on
the reliefs from Dura and Si' differ from that of the monuments from Sidon and Arsha- waQibar (for a more detailed discussion of the subject, see below, p. 59). The bust of Luna, or
her symbol, is placed on M ithras' right (left side of the monument) on the reliefs from
Dura and Sidon. But she appears on his left on the monuments from Si' and Arsha-waQibar. The scorpion is missing on the two reliefs from Dura and on the one from Arshawa-Qibar but is located at the usual place on the monumen ts from Si' and Sidon. The
bull's tail rises upwards on the monuments from Sidon ; it falls downwards on those from
Si' and Arsha-wa-Qibar, while on the reliefs from Dura it curls upwards then downwards.
The lack of wheat growing out of the tail does not necessarily reflect an Eastern peculiarity;
it rather results from the fact that no particular meaning was attached to the animal's tail hence the variation in its treatment. To these examples others can be added. On the
Arsha- wa-Qibar relief Cautes and Cautopates are larger than M ithras. On the painting
from Dura III they seem to have been of the same dimensions. On the reliefs from Si'
they are smaller than M ithras. On the reliefs from Dura and Sidon they are not represented
at all. Cautes is placed in front of the bull on the two cult scenes from Dura (II and III).
But he is located on the opposite side on the two reliefs from Si'. On the relief from
Arsha-wa-Qibar no distinction seems to have been made between the two torchbearers.
The signs of the zodiac completely encircle the Sidon bull-slaying scene. They are depicted
above it on the large relief from Dura. But they are lacking on the other cult-scenes. The
raven is located at the usual place, behind M ithras, on the reliefs from Dura and Si', but is
depicted in front of the god on the monument from Arsha-wa-Qibar; while on the relief
from Sidon, two ravens are represented, one in front of the god and the other behind him.
T his list of detailed differences could easily be lengthened.
It is obvious that the Mithraic cult scenes from the Roman Orient show little coherence.
The differences in the presentation and organization of their components are indeed much
more significant that the similarities. It is also obvious that the traits mentioned by Cumont
and Rostovtzeff cannot be considered as typical of the Orient. Nor are these traits peculiar
to a specific group of monuments from that area which might be considered as representing
a local version of the M ithraic cult scene. The existence of a specifically Syrian type of cult
scene is not evident at all, by contrast with the situation in the West where a Danubian
type and a Rhineland type have beeen distinguishd (Will, 1955: 356-384). What is evident
on the other hand is that no single type can be discerned among the Eastern monuments.

58

Israel R oll

It seems that the originality of the Mithraic cult scenes from the Eastern Roman provinces
lies in the variety of their forms, the source of inspiration of which may be found outside
the Roman Orient.
Here we may turn to the second notion formulated by Cumont and Rostovtzeff (see the
quotation reproduced above at p. 56), a notion extremely dear to Cumont, that of the
Anatolian prototype (Cumont, 1899: 181; cf. also Saxl, 1931: 4- II; Will, 1955: 176- 186).
But, before 1 discuss that, a brief resume of the evidence concerning the mysteries of
Mithras in Asia Minor is required. What do we actually know about the cult of Mithras in
that area? The first point to make is that the evidence is sparse. 12 Asia Minor provides us
with an extraordinarily meagre inventory of finds relating to the mysteries. Moreover, even
what has been found is of doubtful significance. Of the three alleged mithraea, that of
Trapezus (CJMRM 14) is merely inferred from a local legend, and the existence of one at
Kavak Dag (26) and at Farasa (19) is entirely speculative. Of allegedly Mithraic bullkilling scenes, the one from Isbarta (CIMRM 25) clearly depicts a Nike slaying a bull. T he
bronze coin from Tarsus (CIMRM 27 with addition) shows a cuirassed bull-killer the
Mithraic character of which is not supported by any of the usual accessory elements, nor
by the upraised dagger he holds in his right hand, least of all by his cuirass. The bust
depicted on the Savc;:ilar statue base (CIMRM 23) is too badly preserved to provide a basis
for serious discussion. Of the eleven inscriptions related to M ithras or alleged as such,
those of Amasia (CIMRM 15), Lycaonia (21) and Pergamum (24) are surely not Mithraic.
Those of Farafa (19), Gheumeh (22), Kilisse-Hissar (18) and Xanthos (Dupont-Sommer,
1974 : 146) seem not to be related to the mystery cult. The connection of the inscription
from Savc;:ilar (CIMRM 23) with the mysteries is not beyond doubt. Whereas of the three
inscriptions which can positively be ascribed to the mysteries, discovered respectively at
Anazarva (CIMRM 27 bis), Caesarea in Cappadocia (17) and Colophon (24B) , the two
latter are in Latin, from which we may well assume that we are dealing with Western or
Westernized dedicators. As for the famous testimony of Plutarch (Vita Pompeii, 24), it
provides no information whatsoever about the nature of the Mithras-cult performed by
the Cilician pirates, and less than that on its iconography and architecture if any (for the
latest discussion of the subject see Francis apud Cumont, 1975: 207). Not much of a
dossier, then.
Franz Cumont, for whom the Anatolian origin of the Western cult of Mithras was an
article of faith, could not help but see that the evidence for his belief was thin. But he
continued to believe that the lack of documentation was primarily the result of insufficient
archaeological excavations.13 But his hopes have not been fulfilled. Since World War II
the different regions of Turkey have indeed been the focus of increasing archaeological
activities of all kinds. But these new excavations and surveys undertaken all over the country
have so far not contributed much to our knowledge of the mysteries. As a matter of fact, no
new evidence of major importance related to the mysteries has been discovered in Anatolia
in the last thirty years or so. Consequently, we may properly question whether it is still
reasonable to think of Anatolia as the area where the mystery cult and its iconography, in
their Western form, were created and developed.
However that may be, one point is clear: the evidence from Asia Minor does not permit
us to assume the existence of an Anatolian prototype of the Mithraic cult-scene. T he
Anatolian dossier demonstrates that no prototype of such a scene, or indeed of any other

The mysteries of M ithrns in the Roman Orient: the problem of origin

59

Mithraic iconographical convention similar to those found in the West, has been discovered in that region. As no iconographical documents are available, there is no deduction,
no comparison, to be made. Rather than assuming an Anatolian prototype, from which a
so-called 'Syrian' type could be derived, we may better consider an alternative possibility.
T hat possibility involves shifting our attention towards another centre in the Roman
World and comparing some of the iconographical patterns depicted on its monuments with
the corresponding patterns represented on the monuments from Syria. It also involves
enlarging the frame of the subject under discussion and considering not only the cultscene, but other components as well. By this procedure, a whole series of parallels can be
discerned, which will permit a different and, as I shall try to demonstrate, a more reliable
answer to the problem of the origin of the Mithraic mysteries in the Roman Orient.
Let us begin with the scene of Mithras killing the bull. In the usual bull-slaying representation, the god succeeds in getting complete mastery over the animal by immobilizing
it at three key-points. By seizing the animal's nostrils with his left hand and wrenching
them back he paralyses the bull's head and neck. By pressing his left knee with the whole
weight of his body against the animal's back, he prevents the bull from leaving the ground.
By standing on the animal's right hind-leg he immobilizes its hindquarters. With his right
hand thus freed the god plunges the dagger into the bull's shoulder straight into the heart.
This type is regularly reproduced in the cult scene and can be considered the conventional
or, as suggested by E. Will (1955: 169), the fundamental type. But there are also divergent
cases. Among these are the bull-slaying scenes depicted on the two pairs of reliefs from Dura
and Si'. On these monuments Mithras su bdues the animal with his left hand and knee
only. The god's right foot is set not on the bull's offside hind leg but on the ground in
front of it. Consequently this part of the animal's body is not being forced to the ground
but is represented as standing. It is obvious that we have here a type which, in this respect,
is very different from the usual one. 14 We saw above that this detail was considered, by
Cumont especially (1975: 168), characteristic of the Orient. But the reliefs from Dura and
Si' are not the only monuments to depict it, for it occurs also on a group of monuments
from Italy, on a marble relief from Macerata, Picenum (CIMRM 690); on two terracotta
reliefs from Calvi, Campania (200 and 201); on a terracotta plate from Civita Lavinia,
Latium (207); on a statue (310) and bronze brooch (318) from Ostia; possibly on a relief
from Syracuse (Sfameni-Gasparro, 1973: fig. 159); and slightly differently (the bull's
hindquarters are on the ground but not held there by Mithras' foot) on a statue from Rome
(605) and on a relief from Antium (204 now lost). 15
The two reliefs from Dura Europos show further parallels with Italian monuments.
Most interesting is the similarity to the Barbarini fresco (390) (see pl. X). As on the large
relief from Dura (40), the arch above Mithras is here decorated with the twelve signs of the
zodiac. But, instead of a radiate bearded bust with kalathos, we have in the middle a figure
of the lion-headed god on a globe, which suggests that we are dealing with divinities of
identical character or, at least, of analogous nature. 16 It should be added that a bull-killing
scene surmounted by a lion-headed god occurs on another monument from Rome (335
now lost) but also on two pieces found in the Danubian region, one at Ptuj (1510) and the
other somewhere in Dacia, possibly at Apulum (2198). As for the seven small altars of the
Dura large relief, they remind us of the seven altars located below the bull-killing scene of
the relief found on the Esquiline at Rome (368) and of a relief of unknown provenance,

60

Israel Roll

today at the Cabinet des Medailles, Paris (2196), the origin of which might have been
Rome. 17
The group of seven holes for inset stones on the small relief from Dura (CIMRM 37) is
paralleled in two Italian monuments in different ways. Technically, the same method
seems to have been used in the vault decorated with stars in the Capua mithraeum, as
pointed out by Vermaseren (1971: 3). From the compositional point of view, a similar
disposition of the seven stars is to be found on the relief discovered in 1931 in the
mithraeum beneath the Palazzo dei Musei in Rome (CIMRM 435). 18
In Dura II the two reliefs were set in an arched cult-niche in the form of an elevatedaedicu!a (see pl. XI). This type of cult-niche, which gives an appropriate three-dimensional
architectural frame to the central representation of the mystery cult, is well known from
several Italian mithraea. It has been discovered in Rome at Santa Prisca (Vermaseren-van
Essen, 1965: 128), S. Clemente (CIMRM 338), the Baths of Caracalla (457) and the
Palazzo Barberini (389), and in Ostia at Casa di Diana (Becatti, 1954 : 9; cf. also D. Groh
in Laeuchli, 1967: 16) and possibly at degli Animali (Becatti, 1954 : 87). It should be
added that on the right hand side of the arch of the Barberini cult-niche was found a
fragment depicting two fish, which indicates that the arch was decorated with the twelve
signs of the zodiac. This was also the case at Dura.
Even more significant is the affinity between Italy and the Orient in the use of frescoes
as a medium for large scale or even overall decoration of the sanctuaries of Mithras. In
Italy, the large figurative mural painting is used to represent the deeds of Mithras and the
related myth, as well as initiation rites and ceremonies performed by his followers. Fullscale or partial decoration of this kind has been discovered in several Italian mithraea. In
Rome, at the Palazzo Barberini (CIMRM 390), Santa Prisca (Vermaseren-van Essen,
1965: 148), Casa di Tito near the Colosseum (CIMRM 337) and in a house on the Q~1irinal
(386). In Ostia, at the Terme del Mitra (30), Pareti Dipinte (62), Sette Porte (96) and
dei Serpenti (!04). Also at Marino (Lavagne, l974a: 191- 201), Capua (Vermaseren, 1971:
5- 51), Spoleto (CIMRM 677) and Syracuse (Sfameni-Gasparro, 1973: 287). It is evident
that painted figurative composition was widely used by the Mithraic communities of Italy.
The same extensive use is to be found at Dura Europos and Caesarea Maritima. It is
interesting to note that the case is rather different in the Northern and Western provinces
of the Empire, where significant groups are represented mainly in relief and painting tends
to be used for non-figurative decoration and for purely ornamental purposes. 19
Having made that general point, we can discern detailed parallels between some of the
painted scenes from Dura Europos and those discovered in Italy. The painted composition
of the side walls of the S. Prisca mithraeum (phase II : Vermaseren-van Essen, 1965: 148164) represents a sacrificial procession of (a) L ions and (b) initiates of the first six grades
advancing towards a Father seated on a throne (right wall), and another procession of
Lions advancing towards the sacred meal of Mithras and Sol (left wall). The earlier phase
of this sanctuary was decorated with similar scenes (1965: 165- 172) which show close
parallels in their style, if not in their nature, with those of the mithraeum delle Pareti
dipinte at Ostia (1965: 169). T his was also the case at Dura II and III, where scenes of
mystes performing sacrifices were depicted on the side walls, together with the large composition of the sacred meal of Mithras and Sol (phase II) and Fathers seated on thrones, on
the end-wall. The human figures of the Dura mithraeum are depicted frontally and it is

The mysteries of Mithras in the Roman Orient : the problem of origin

61

difficult to see any connection between them or between the separate scenes. But this is
part of the provincial Duran style which is generally followed by the local painters. So we
should not rule out the possibility of a relation between the scenes on the side walls and those
of the end wall, as at S. Prisca. All these affinities between S. Prisca I and II (202 and
c. A.D. 220) and Dura II and III (c. A.D. 210 and c. 240) are of particular interest because of
their respective proximity in dates, the accuracy of which is relatively well established.
During the second phase of the Dura mithraeum, the upper part of the arch of the cultniche was decorated with a painted representation of the bull-slaying. The same scene
was reproduced in phase III, but this time seven burning altars and seven cypress trees
were added at the side. A similar group of altars and trees appears (above the cave) on
several Italian monuments: on the Esquiline relief (CIMRM 368) and the Barberini
painting (390), both already mentioned above, on a relief from Rome (335, now lost, with
six daggers instead of trees) and on a relief from Piedimonti, Umbria (670). It should be
added that outside Italy, especially along the Danube, the situation is quite different, since
such groups usually include altars only, the combination of altars with trees being
exceptional. 20
The reredos around the large relief of Dura III (see pl. XI) is decorated with a series of
accessory painted panels of trapezoidal shape depicting different scenes from the Mithraic
myth. The series starts with the key-stone panel which represents a bust of 'Saturn' (1) and
continues counter-clockwise, leftward and downward, with the scenes of Zeus hurling the
thunderbolt (2) towards a pair of anguipede giants (3), of reclining 'Saturn' (4), of Mithras'
birth from the rock (5) and two scenes which are missing (6 and 7). It resumes at the lower
right corner of the arch with the water miracle (8) and continue upwards with the scenes of
Mithras carried by the bull (9), Mithras carrying the animal towards the cave (10), Sol
kneeling before Mithras (n), the bull transported by two acolytes (12) and ends with the
sacred meal of Mithras and Sol ( 13). The order of the scenes and their content recall Rome
once again. The same anticlockwise order and a similar set of scenes (notably the Cosmogony group, which includes the Gigantomachy, 'Saturn' reclining and the birth of Mithras)
appears on CIMRM 390 (Barberini), 650 (Nersae; here the sequence is disturbed by the
scene of Mithras and the bull which is located in the upper right corner instead of in the
lower one), 321 (O!iadraro), 729 (Trento) and most imposingly at Marino (Lavagne,
l 974a, 191- 201). 2 1 Here the right-hand side is admittedly to be read in the opposite
direction, top to bottom. On the other hand, it should be noted that the water miracle is
depicted at the bottom right and this is exactly the place where it is located at D ura. It
should also be noted that at the Ponza mithraeum this is the only scene to be preserved and
it is located in the same place as at Marino and Dura (lower right, next to Cautopates:
Vermaseren, 1974: 14).
A detailed discussion of the paintings and other details of the Caesarea Maritima
mithraeum will be possible only after the publication of a full report, promised by R. J. Bull.
All that can be said at the moment is that the badly preserved painted fragments of the
South wall are closely similar in style (and content?) to the initiation scenes of the Capua
mithraeum, as E. D . Francis has already remarked. 22
We may now summarize the discussion. These similarities, which are not exhaustive (see
for example the close resemblance between the raven-man serving at the sacred meal of
Mithras and Sol from S. Prisca II and the one from Dura III, panel 13), permit the
EMS

62 Israel Roll
inference that the Mithraic iconography of the Roman Orient is largely derived from Italy.
That at any rate is the simplest hypothesis. The Mithraic monuments from the Orient do
not provide evidence for a genuinely local variant. But there is evidence for a foreign model
and in particular an Italian, or more precisely a Roman one, Rome being itself a creative
centre. 23 Not only do the third-century paintings in the Dura mithraeum suggest an Italian
source but so do the reliefs of the period A.D. 168-170. 24 The same is true of other monuments from the Roman provinces of the Orient, all of them covering the period from the
second to the fourth centuries A.D. The evidence suggests a continual current of influence
from Italy to the Orient and not simply sporadic and isolated contacts. If this be conceded,
we have an alternative starting-point for our discussion of the problem of the origin of the
mysteries of Mithras in the Roman Orient.
We may return now to my original point, that to characterize the mysteries as an Oriental
cult poses a fundamental problem or rather a dilemma in the case of the Eastern Roman
provinces. The reasons for that observation will now be clear. Our group of Syrian monuments provides no real support for the hypothesis of an Oriental origin for the mysteries of
Mithras. Furthermore, it suggests the contrary, that Italy and in particular Rome is the
inspiration of at least some of the monuments in the Orient. This conclusion differs
sharply from that of Franz Comunt who began by assuming the Oriental origin of the cult.
But if one does not start from that assumption the problem is not quite so easily solved.
Cumont's view was based primarily on external evidence, mainly historical sources, which
are not only difficult and ambiguous in their reference to the mysteries, but probably
reflect a claim by the mysteries about their origins and not necessarily a reality. 25 On the
other hand, the conclusions formulated in the present paper are based exclusively on
internal evidence, the emphasis being laid on comparative treatment of the iconography. It
is certainly not my intention to deny that the mysteries interpreted themselves as an
Oriental cult. What I would suggest is the possibility that they were, in fact, an Occidental
one.
Tel Aviv University

Israel Roll

Notes
1 The theory was summarized by Cumont thus (1899: 220): 'Le fond de cette religion, sa

couche inferieure et primordiale, est la foi de l'ancien Iran, d'ou elle tire son origine. Au
dessus de ce substratum mazdeen s'est depose en Babylonie un sediment epais de doctrines
semitiques, puis en Asie Mineure, Jes croyances locales y ont ajoute quelques alluvions.
Enfin une vegetation touffue d'idees hellenistiques a grandi sur ce sol fertile et derobe en
partie a nos recherches sa veritable nature.' Recently, however, there has been some severe
criticism of many of Cumont's basic views - notably his definition that 'le mithraisme, en un
mot, est la forme romaine de mazdeisme' (1949: 272). See most recently some of the lectures
given by different scholars at the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies held at
Manchester in 1971, the Proceedings of which were published in 1975 (Hinnells, 1975) and
especially R. L. Gordon, 1975: 215- 248.
Note for example the monographs on the mysteries included in M. J. Vermaseren's series
Etudes pretiminaires aux religions orientales dans !'Empire romain. Other studies in the same

The mysteries of Mithras in the Roman Orient: the problem of origin 63

series which deal with the oriental religions in different provinces of the Roman Empire
regularly include a chapter on Mithras.
3 I have discussed the subject fully in my thesis Recherches sur l'iconographie mithriaque dans
/'Orient romain (directed by Professor Gilbert Picard and presented at the University of Paris
in 1970). I am preparing an enlarged and up-to-date version which will present a comprehensive survey of the cult of Mithras in the Roman Orient. Some of the topics considered in the
present paper, which are peripheral to its main subject, and therefore summarily dealt with
here, will be fully treated in that study.
4 For the cult of Mithras in Egypt see Pettazzoni, 1949: 26<)-277; Vermaseren, 1951: 19 n. 5;
Will, 1955: 147 n. l ; CJMRM 91- 105 with additions.
5 The sanctuary was discovered in 1934, during the large-scale excavations undertaken at Dura
Europos by Yale University and the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, in area J /7
between the towers 23 and 24. It was excavated during the same year, transferred to the
U.S.A. and reconstructed at the Gallery of Fine Arts, Yale University, New Haven. The
excavation was carried out under the supervision of M. I. Rostovtzeff and F. Cumont, with
R. du Mesnil du Buisson, C. Hopkins being the field director. Preliminary accounts of the
excavations were published by Rostovtzeff (1934), Cumont (1934), Hopkins (1934) and
du Mesnil du Buisson (1935) (only the account of the excavators are mentioned ; for additional
bibliography see CIMRM 34). An extensive report on the sanctuary was published by
Rostovtzeff and Cumont (1939: 62-128, additional chapters written by H . F. Pearson,
C. Torrey, L. Campbell, H . J. Gute and M. Aubert). The account in CJMRM 34-69 is based
entirely on this report. Although the future of the Final Report on the mithraeum remains
uncertain (cf. Francis apud Cumont, 1975: 160 n. 53), F. Cumont's contribution to it, written
in 1947 shortly before his death, was translated and edited by E. D. Francis (Cumont, 1975:
151-214). An introductory paper on the numerous graffiti from the temple has been published
by Francis (1975: 424- 445) in which he promises a complete edition of the material (Inscrip-

tiones Mithriacae Durnnae).

6 Cumont and Rostovtzeff disagreed about the identity of these figures (1939: 100). Cumont
regarded Jarhiboles and Barnaadath as the two sons of Zenobius and the kneeling figures as
his two grandsons, whereas Rostovtzeff considered the first pair as Zenobius' ancestors and
the second as supporting Atlantes. The sculptures discovered at Hatra which represent the
deified members of the kingdom's ruling house in a posture similar to that of Jarhiboles and
Barnaadath suggest that Rostovtzeff was right : see R. Ghirshman, 1962: figs. 100, 105, 106,
110; and D . Homes-Fredericq, 1963: pl. VI, 2.
7 T he temple was discovered in 1973, during the excavations undertaken by the Joint Expedition
to Caesarea Maritima under the direction of R. J. Bull, in field C area 8 outside the Southern
Crusader wall. Some information about the excavations has been presented by Bull on a
number of occasions, including the Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies held
at Teheran in 1975, as well as by Hopfe and Lease (1975: 2-10). For the medallion see Bull,
1974: 187-190. I am grateful to have had an opportunity to visit the excavations several times
and to discuss the mithreaum with R. J. Bull and E. D . Francis, and with J. R. Hinnells.
8 The only first-hand account of the mithreaum is an article published by Edmond Durighello in
Bosphore egyptien for 19 August 1887, reproduced by S. Reinach (1888: 91-<)3). Durighello's
description has been considered unreliable (de Ridder, 1906: 52), even a fantasy (Reinach,
1888: 91; Cumont, 1975: 159 n. 47), a judgement which seems to me too hasty. It should be
added that ancient architectural remains were found during the construction of the Greek
Catholic Archbishopric in Sidon in 1924, which may have belonged to the mithraemn. Whatever it was, it was completely covered by the foundations of the new building and nothing is
visible today (Dunand, 196T 29). The sculptures were acquired by M. Peretie, transferred to

64 Israel R oll
Paris and entered the collection de Clercq (today de Boisgelin - now kept in the Louvre). For
a description, see de Ridder 1904: 44- 45 no. 43; 1906: 14- 15 no. IO and 52- 70 nos. 46-54;
CIMRM 74-87; Jidejian, 1971: 88-g3.
9 Knives have been found in several mithraea: at Heddernheim II (CJMRM u15) and I II
(u32); Schachdorf (1412); Friedberg (1069); Sarmizegetusa (2033); Spoleto (680); and
possibly Ober Florstadt (rn8o) and Heiligkreuz (991). More relevant perhaps is a sacrificial
knife which used to be in the Collection Blanchet and whose exact provenance is unknown;
the handle ends in the form of a lion's head and, like the object from the Lebanon, is entwined
by a snake (CIMRM 589 which seem to be identical with 882 bis; cf. Walters, 1974: 144-146).
See also CJMRM 234 (the additional note).
IO Several other buildings and monuments from the Roman Orient have been suggested to be
relevant, but their Mithraic character is either unfounded or at best doubtful: R. Eisler
(1909: 425-427) claimed there was a mithraeum in a cave in Galilee (Israel), on the basis of a
treatise composed in the thirteenth century A.D. ; the idea was rightly scouted by F. Pfister
(1913: 402- 403). Noldeke's hypothesis concerning the existence of a mithraeum at Qasr-ibnWardan (Central Syria ; see Littmann, 1916: 16) cannot be considered seriously; it was rejected
as most doubtful by Cumont (1933: 382 n. 2 and 1975: 160). T he evidence from the temple F
at Soli (Cyprus) do not prove its Mithraic character as 0. Vessberg and A. Westholm suggested
(1956: 48 and rn1- rn2). The new reading of the inscription from Sahin (North-western
Syria) proposed by R. Mouterde (reproduced with discussion by J . P. Rey-Coquais, 1970:
52- 54, No. 4027) showed that Mithras is not necessarily mentioned in it as E. Renan suggested
(1864: 103). The relief from Hama seems to represent a mounted god rather than Mithras as
Rostovtzeff (1935: fig. 42) and Cumont (1975: 191- 192) thought. The Mithra ic character of
the bronze lion-headed figurine from the Lebanon recently discussed by R. D. Barnett (1 975:
466-469) is quite doubtful and its suggested provenance from the mitl1rneum of Sidon merely
speculation.
There are also a few cases in which buildings dating from prior to the Roman conquest
have been regarded as mithraea on the basis of supposed resemblance to the Mithraic temples
of the Roman West : the first-century D.C. underground complex from Arsameia on the
Nymphaios at Commagene (F. K. Dorner in Dorner and Goell, 1963: 40- 59) ; even more
extraordinary, a building dated to the sixteenth or early fifteenth century B.C. from Atchana
Northern Syria (L. Woolley, 1953: 98- 99). Other buildings from sites outside the Roman
world such as Mesopotamia and even Iran, have similarly been supposed to be temples of
Mithras : a building (H. Lenzen, 1955: 55; 1958: 18-20) as well as a relief (Lenzen, 1958: 20
and pl. 45a) from Warka ; another building, decorated with frescoes, from Sus1t (Campbell,
1968 : 54 n. 7 and 196); a square underground structure from Bishapur (S. Matheson, 1972:
237); and a basilican building from Takh-i Suleiman (D. Huff, 1975 : 159-160). It is quite
clear to me that none of these structures can be considered as evidence for the mystery cult of
Mithras or to any other Mithraic cult of similar character. See also R. N . Frye, 1975 : 67.
l 1 I am glad to see that S. B. Downey has expressed a similar view in her paper Syrian images o.,
Mitlzras Tauroctonos (presented at the Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies,
1975): see H. Lavagne, 1975 : u38; U. Bianchi, 1976: 85- 86.
12 See Cumont, 1939: 67-76; Will, 1955 : 154- 169 ; CIMRM 14-27 bis; M . P. Nilsson, 196!:
670-672.
13 He could still write as late as 1939 (67) that: 'la raison de cette indigence epigraphique et
archeologique est sans doute que les temples mithriaques ayant ete amenages d'abord clans Jes
grottes de montagnes peu accessibles, puis ayant adopte le type de spelaea souterrains, construits
a!'imitation de ces antres, pouvaient malaisement etre connus d'explorateurs qui recueillaient
Jes antiquites visibles ala surface du sol. La meme cause a produit un effet oppose clans certains

The mysteries of Mithras in the Roman Orient: the problem of origin

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

65

pays OU des fouilles systematiques ont ete entreprises: elles ont revele !'existence d'um nombre
considerable de mithreums qui, enfouis dans Jes profondeurs de la terre avaient echappe a
la destruction'.
I do not follow the elaborate classification proposed by Campbell (1954, mons. N. 171, 181,
182, 691), according to which the Dura tauroctones belong to 'subtype D' and those of Si' to
'conflate DE'. Both pairs of monuments are regarded here as belonging to the same type. For
general discussion on the iconography of the bull-killing see Cumont, 1899: 179-188; Sax!,
1931: 3-14; Campbell, 1954: 1-60, Will, 1955: 169-186.
The similarity between the Dura bull-killing scenes and some of those from Campania was
noticed by Campbell and Gute (Rostovtzeff et al., 1939: 92 n. 3). The only representations
from outside Italy which show some similarity to our type are CJMRM 1306 (Feilbach) and
2198 (Moesia-Dacia: provenance uncertain).
It is quite clear to me that the bust depicted above Mithras on the large relief from Dura (40)
represents Serapis and not a sky god or Baalshamin as suggested in Rostovtzeff et al., 1939: 95
and by Cumont, 1934: 95 and 1975: 166. Such a statement immediately raises the very
complicated problem of the lion-headed god's character and function in the mystery cult. I
leave this for a separate treatment.
The relief is reproduced in CIMRM (2196) among a group of monuments from Moesia-Dacia
the exact provenance of which is unknown. Vermaseren indicates that the relief passed 'from
the Coll. G. Froehner to the Cabinet des Medailles at Paris. In the personal description of
Froehner (in the Library of the Cabinet des Medailles X, p. 488) no provenance is given, only
"style des sculptures du Danube"'. But he adds further on (CIMRM 2197) that 'the unusual
representation of Mithras is nearly identical to the stucco-group in the S. Prisca-Mithraeum
at Rome. So it may originally have come from Rome'. I wish to thank R. L. Gordon for calling
my attention to this monument, as well as for other valuable suggestions concerning the present
article.
Again, the similarity was noted by Campbell and Gute (Rostovtzeff et. al., 1939: 94 n. 7). It
should be added that Mithras' cap on the Sidon relief is decorated with a star, just as it is on
the Dura relief and CIMRM 435.
Mural paintings have been found: (a) in the Danubian provinces at Ptuj I (CIMRM 1487) and
III (1578), Carnuntum III (1682), Budapest IV (1767), Sarkeszi (1809) and Sarmizegetusa
(2027); (b) in the Rhine area at Dormagen (rou), Fried berg (1052), Ober Florstadt (1074),
Heddernheim I (1082) and III (1l 17), and at Konigshoffen (1335). They are of a purely ornamental character and do not depict figurative scenes.
Seven altars are depicted on a large number of monuments from the Danubian provinces :
CJMRM 1475, 1650, 1797, 1818; Dacia: 1935, 1972, 2052, 2068, 2079, 2085, 2172, 2182;
Moesia : 2244, 2245, 2263, 2264, 2263, 2264, and L. Zotovic, 1966, 71 no. 13; Thracia:
CJMRM 2325, 2338; note also the gem now in the Cabinet des Medailles, Paris (CIMRM
2363; the altars are not mentioned by Vermaseren but are clearly visible; cf. Richter, 1971:
no. 209 where an enlargement can be found). Altars and trees on the other hand appear only
as follows: Pannonia, CJMRM 1791 and 1816 (four altars and three trees); Dacia, 1973
(together with daggers and sticks with phrygian caps) and 2237 (only two trees preserved).
For general discussion of the accessory scenes and their sequence see Cumont, 1899: 154-179;
Sax!, 1931: 28-44; and especially Will, 1955: 356-455, who denies the originality of the Italian
group of monuments described above and takes them to belong to a 'Raetian' group. See also
H. Lavagne, l974b: 481-504, the conclusions of which do not differ, essentially, from those
of E. Will - or at least he does not push the argument far enough. However, only one monument of this kind has so far been discovered in Raetia, at Mauls (CIMRM 1400), to which
another monument, discovered in the neighbouring province of Noricum at Virunum (1430)

66

22
23

24

25

Israel R oll

can be added. The Mauls relief appears to be a late creation and 'it is related rather to the
painted versions from Rome and Marino' as R. Turcan (1976: 68) has pointed out most
recently. Therefore, the centre of this type should be looked for rather in the Metropolis
whence the monuments of Mauls, Virunum and Dura Europos may have been derived.
See H adashot Arkhiologiyot 51 /52 (October 1974), p. 14 (Hebrew); Professor Francis made the
same point to me during one of my visits to the site.
It is worth noting that Cumont, two years before his death, after realizing the importance of
the discoveries made at Rome and at Ostia, radically modified his previous view on this point.
After arguing for the 'unite fonciere de cette religion d'un bout a l'autre de l'empire', he concluded that 'une pareille identite ne parait possible que si une autorite centrale qu'elle soit
religieuse ou civile, imposait ce conformisme artistique et dogmatique. Si le mithraisme jouit
de la faveur imperiale, la protection qui Jui fut accorde implique un controle accepte.... Or,
le pouvoir qui regla l'exercice du culte et approuva le contenu des mysteres doit avoir agi clans
cette capitale, OU la puissance du <lieu perse etait plus grande que partout ailleurs' (1945: 420 ;
see also 1947: 308 and 1975: 169 n. 100). Cumont surely went too far: although the importance
of Rome as a centre of the mysteries is indicated by its numerous known temples and monuments, but there is no adequate evidence that it was the seat of a 'mithraic papacy' (to use the
expression employed by E. Will, 1955: 418).
Rostovtzeff argued that a clear distinction should be made between the two early reliefs, which
he took to be Anatolian by derivation, and the painted panels around them which 'in ihrer
Kompositionsweise sicher Kopien aus einem im Westen Zusammengestellten mithraistischen
Musterbuch sind' (1934: 190). Cumont accepted this view and went on to draw further
conclusions (see note 23 and especially 1975: 169 n. loo). But in fact the situation is rather
different, as I have shown, so that this distinction does not impose itself.
See the remarks of R. L. Gordon, 1975: 242-243 and 247, as well as 242 n. lIO where the
sources concerning the tradition of the Persian origin of Mithras are mentioned.

Bibliography
Barnett, R. D . 1975 A Mithraic figure from Beirut. Mithraic S tudies II, pp. 466-469 (ed. J. R.
Hinnells). Manchester.
Becatti , G. 1954 Scavi di Ostia II. I M itrei. Roma.
Bianchi, U . 1976. The Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies, Tehran, September
1975, Journal of M ithraic S t udies 1, 77-94.
Bull, R. J. 1974 A Mithraic medallion from Caesarea, I srael Exploration J ournal 24, 187-190.
Campbell, L. A. 1954 Typology of Mithraic tauroctones, B erytus II, l- 60.
Campbell, L. A. 1968. M ithraic I conography and Ideology (EPROER II). Leiden.
Cumont, F. 1899. Textes et monuments figures relatifs aux mysteres de M ithra, vol. I. Bruxelles.
Cumont, F. 1918. Mithra et Dusares, Revue de l' histoire des religions 78, 207-212.
Cumont, F. 1929. Les R eligions orientales dans le paganisme romain (4th ed.). Paris.
Cumont, F. 1933 Deux monuments des cultes solaires. I , Bas relief mithriaque d' Arsha-waQibar, Syria 14, 381- 384.
Cumont, F. 1934 Rapport sur une mission archfologique a Doura-Europos. CRAJ 90- n r.
Cumont, F. 1939 Mithra en Asie Mineure. Anatolian S tudies presented to W illiam Hepburn
Buckler, pp. 67-76 (ed. W. M. Calder and J. Keil). Manchester.
Cumont, F. 1945 Rapport sur une mission a Rome. CRA I 386- 420.
Cumont, F. 1947 Le bas relief mithriaque de Baris. CR A I 303-308.
Cumont, F. 1949 L ux Perpetua. Paris.

The mysteries of Mithras in the Roman Orient: the problem of origin

67

Cumont, F. 1975 The Dura Mithraeum (translated and edited by E. D. Francis). M ithraic
Studies I, pp. 151-214 (ed. J. R. Hinnells). Manchester.
Dorner, F. K., and Goell, Th. 1963. Arsameia am Ny mphaios. Die Ausgrabungen im H ierothesion
des Mithradates Kal!inikos v on I9SJ-I956. Berlin.
-Dorrie, H. 1964. Der K onigskult des Antiochos von Kommagene im Licht neuer I nschriften-Funde.
Gottingen.
Dunand, M. 1967. Rapport preliminaire sur Jes fouilles de Sidon en 1964- 1965. BMB 20,
27- 44.
Dunand, M. 1973 (appeared in 1975). Le temple d'Echmoun a Sidon, Essai de chronologie. BMB
26, 7- 25 (pl. XIII left).
Eisler, R. 1909. Ein Mithriium in Galilea. OLZ 425-427.
Francis, E. D. 1975 Mithraic graffiti from Dura Europos. M ithraic S tudies II, pp. 424- 445 (ed.
J. R. Hinnells). Manchester.
Frothingham, A. 1918. A nevv Mithraic relief from Syria. AJA 22, 54- 62.
Frye, R. N. 1975. Mithra in Iranian history. Mithraic Studies I, pp. 62- 67 (ed. J. R. Hinnells).
Manchester.
Ghirshman, R. 1962. Iran, Parthians and Sassanians. London.
Gordon, R. L. 1975. Franz Cumont and the doctrines of Mithraism. M ithraic Studies I , pp.
215- 248 (ed.]. R. Hinnells). Manchester.
Hinnells,]. R. (ed.) 1975 Mithraic Studies, 2 vols. Manchester.
Homes-F redericq, D. 1963. Hatra et ses sculptures parthes. Istanbul.
Hopfe, L. M., and Lease, G. 1975 The Caesarea Mithraeum: a preliminary announcement. The
Biblical Archaeologist 38, 2 - 10.
Hopkins, C. 1934 A 'Flood of New Light' on Mithraism. The Temple ofMithra at Dura Europos.
ILN , 8 December, 963- 965.
Huff, D. 1975 Takht-i Suleiman. Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen 1965-73. Grabung westlich des
grossen Feuertempels. Archaeologischer Anzeiger 90, 137-180.
Jidejian, N. 1971. S idon Through the Ages. Beirut.
Laeuchli, S. (ed.) 1967. Mithraism in Ostia. Mystery R eligion and Christianity in the Ancient Port
ofRome. North Western University.
Lavagne, H. 1974a. Le mithreum de Marino (Italic). CRAI 191- 2or.
Lavagne, H. l 974b. Les reliefs mithriaques apanneaux multiples en Italic. M elanges de philosophie
de litterature et d'histoire ancienne o.Derts a Pierre Boyance (Collection de !'Ecole Frarn;:aise de
Rome, 22). Rome, pp. 481- 504.
Lavagne, H. 1975 Pour une problematique nouvelle des recherches sur la religion de Mithra. Le
ne Congres International d' erudes mithriaques. M elanges de !'Ecole Franraise de R ome,
Antiquite 87, 1131- 1142.
L enzen, H. 1955 Bericht iiber die von Deutschen Archaologischen Institut und von der
Deutschen Orientgesellschaft in Uruk-Warka am Anfang des Jahres 1954 unternommenen
Ausgrabungen. M itteilungen der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft zu Berlin 87, 26- 68.
Lenzen, H . 1958. Uruk-Warka XI V. Abhandlungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 3.
Littmann, E. 1916. Ruinenstii tten und Schriftdenkma/er Syriens. Leipzig.
Matheson, S. 1972. Persia, A n Archaeological Guide. London.
Mesnil du Buisson, R. du. 1935 Le nouveau Mithreum de Doura-Europos. Gaz ette des B eauxA rts l-14.
Milik, ]. T. 1967. Les papyrus arameens d'Hermoupolis et Jes cultes syro-pheniciens en Egypte
perse. B iblica 48, 546- 622.
Muller, W. 1912. Der Gott Mithra in Palestina. OLZ 252- 254.
Nilsson, M. P. 196r. Geschichte der griechischen R eligion II (2nd ed.). Miinchen.

68 Israel Roll
Pettazzoni, R. 1949 La figura mostruosa del Tempo nella religione mitriaca. A C 18, 265-277
(= The monstrous figure of Time in Mithraism, Essays on the History of Religions, Leiden,
1954, repr. 1967 : 180-192).
Pfister, F. 191 3. Das angebliche Mithraum in Galilaa und Alexanders Besuch in der Gotterhohle.
OLZ 402- 403.
Reinach, S. 1888. Chroniques d'Orient. RA II , 91- 93 (reproduced in S. Reinach, Clzroniques
d'Orient I. Paris, 1891: 434- 436).
Renan, E. 1864. Mission en Phenicie. Paris.
Rey-Coquais, J. P. 1970. Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, VII. Paris.
Richter, G. M. A. l97I. Engraved Gems of the Romans. London.
Ridder, A. de, 1904. Collection de Clercq, III, I, Les bronzes. Paris.
Ridder, A. de, 1906. Collection de Clercq, I V, Les marbres, les vases et les ivoires. Paris.
Rostovtzeff, M. I. 1934 Das Mithraeum von Dura. MDAI (RA ) 49, 180-207.
Rostovtzeff, M. I. et al. 1939 The Excavations at Dura Europos. Preliminary Report of the Sevmth
and Eighth Seasons of Work. New Haven.
Saxl, F. l 93I. Mithras. Typengeschiclztliche Untersuchungen. Berlin.
Seyrig, H. 1974 Un couteau de sacrifice. Iraq 36, 229-230.
Sfameni-Gasparro, G. 1973. I culti orientali in Sicilia (regio Augustea XII) EPROER, 3r. Leiden.
Sourdel, D. 1952. Les cultes du Hauran al'epoque romaine. Paris.
T hieme, P. 1960. T he 'Aryan' gods of the Mitanni treaties. JAOS So, 301-3 17.
T urcan, R. 1976. T he date of the Mauls relief. Journal of Mitlzraic Studies l , 68-76.
Vermaseren, M. J. 195r. De Mithrasdienst in Rome. Nijmegen.
Vermaseren, M. J., and van Essen, C. C. 1965. The Excavations in the Mithraeurn of the Church
of Santa Prisca in Rome. Leiden.
Vermaseren, M. J. l 97I. Mithriaca I. The Mithraeum at Santa Maria Capua Vetere. EPROER 161 .
Leiden.
Vermaseren, M. J. 1974 Mithriaca II. The Mithraeum at Ponza. EPROER 16 2 Leiden.
Vesberg, 0 ., and Westholm, A. 1956. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, IV, 3. Stockholm.
Waldmann, H. 1973 Die Kommagenischen Kultreformen unter Konig Mithridates I Kallinikos und
seinem Solm Antioclios I . EPROER 34. Leiden.
Walters, V. J. 1974 Tlte Cult of Mithras in tlte Roman Provinces of Gaul. EPROER 4 r. Leiden.
Wikander, S. 1950. Etudes sur les mysteres de Mithras, I. Lund.
Will, E. 1950. La date du Mithreum de Sidon. Sy ria 27, 26 1-269 .
Will, E. 1952. Nouveaux monuments sacres de Ja Syrie romaine. Nouveaux monuments mithriaques. Syria 29, 67- 73.
Will, E . 1955 Le relief cultuel greco-romain. Paris.
Woolley, L. 1953 A Forgotten Kingdom. London.
Zotovic, L. 1966. Les cultes orientaux sur le territoire de la M esie Superieure. EPROER 7. Leiden.

Plate VJ Relief of Zcnobios from Dura-Europos 111i1hr11e11111, CIMRM +o

Plate VII The Sid on relief, C!A1RM 7 5 (Photo: Louvre)

Plate Vl!I Relief from the

temple of Dusares, Si',
C!MRM 88

Plate
A
I IX Re1ie f from
rs
71 rn-\\'a-Qibar, C!MR,H

Plate X Th I
fresco CJA1eR ~arbcrini
)
,\J 390

Plate X
cult
. I Th c arched
- - niche at D ttra
' - II- III
], uropos mithrne11111,