- Email: [email protected]
Mithraic iconography and ideology
REVIEW ARTICLES METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM John R . Hinnells, Lecturer in Comparative Religion, Manchester University A review of L . Campbell, Mithraic Iconography and Ideology, E . J . Brill, Leiden, 1968, 44.4 pp. 26 figures and 45 plates. 112 glds . The interpretation of religious iconography is a problem of the greatest complexity, not least in the case of Mithraism where there are no texts to aid in scholarly reconstruction of the underlying ideology . It is, therefore, surprising that theories propounded at the turn of the century by Cumont have met with almost universal acceptance and little, if any, fundamental revision.' Cumont argued that the Mithraic reliefs depicted a life of the god ; beginning with the birth scenes the divine life was traced through miraculous deeds (i .e . producing water from a rock), and a series of adventures (involving Mithras hiding in a tree and struggling with the bull to capture it), before reaching his life-giving sacrifice of the bull, over whose body a ritual meal was celebrated prior to Mithras' ascension to heaven in a chariot . On the grounds of an alleged parallel with the Zoroastrian myth of Ahriman's slaughter of the bull the whole life was placed in the primeval period . Although Cumont argued that the ideology was subject to Babylonian and Hellenistic iconographic influence, he maintained that the basis of the ideology was Iranian religion, this despite the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever for an Iranian belief in the life on earth of Mithra or any god . The illogicality of this position is felt more and more by scholars and two paths are seen out of the apparent impasse ; one is to suppress, if not deny, the Iranian character of Roman Mithraism ; the other, adopted by Campbell, is to reinterpret the iconography . Campbell has amassed a wealth of material, not only Iranian and Roman but also Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, Hittite, Phoenician, the Luristan bronzes and Mitanni seals for example . In twelve chapters he considers the symbolism of the iconography of the cave, the tauroctone figures, the zodiac and Mithraic orientation, the stars, planets, winds and seasons as depicted on the reliefs, Mithras riding a horse (Mithras ephippos), Mithras and the bull (Mithras tauroctonos) and pays particular attention to the different registers on the south-east European reliefs . He makes no claim to have produced the final and authoritative work on Mithraism but sees his book more as a pioneering venture . He writes : `I have attempted to blaze a path through difficult ways for Diligence and Desire to follow' (p . 5)66
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
67
Cumont's theory of a life of the god, based consciously or unconsciously on such classical mythologies as the twelve labours of Hercules on the metopes of the temple of Zeus at Olympia (early fifth century B.C .) is not so much rejected as ignored . Instead we have the theory of iconographic expression of abstract concepts of the nature of the cosmos, man and the fate of his soul in the round of rebirth (pp . i8f) . Although Campbell occasionally stresses the non-Iranian character of particular motifs (e .g . the snake and scorpion imaginery, pp . i5ff, 25ff) his general thesis is that reliefs set forth the cosmology and soteriology of the cult and that an understanding of Mithraic cosmology `may be gained from the study of Iranian cosmology as reflected in Zoroastrian writings and checked against Mithraic iconography' (p . 107, see also p . 179) . He stresses in particular the Zoroastrian doctrine of the `spiritual' (mink) and `material' (geteh) worlds. He believes that the upper registers of the middle-east European reliefs depict the mink powers of regeneration, the middle registers the mink and gitih heneration of the world and the lower registers the initiate's geteh regeneration (pp . 335ff) . The scene of Mithras being carried on the back of the bull is a dynamic concept of the divine soul passing from the mink to the geteh world (p . 259) . The reliefs have as one of their main themes the descent of the soul into the watery cave of birth and its apogenesis therefrom (pp . 223, 262, 273, 291ff and 382), thus `the upward and downward progressions [of the chariots depicted on the reliefs] are not those of Sol and Luna only but also of the soul' (p . 141) . Campbell argues that whereas Greek iconography expressed a morphic conception of divinity, the Indo-European approach, manifest in Mithraism, has a dynamic approach (pp . 245, 393) ; the one sees divinity in a particular form, the other divinity manifest in different bodies and forms . One must be sensitive to `the difficulties which orientals experienced in trying to illustrate Persian ideas with Greco-Roman motives' (p . 302) . The book contains a number of useful discussions of specific topics in particular one might note the chapter on the cosmic imagery of the cave (ch . 1) and the significance of its orientation (ch . 4) . The method adopted in his earlier work `Typology of Mithraic Tauroctones' Berytus, II, 1954, pp. 1-6o, is applied to a number of the minor motifs, often with interesting results (e .g. pp. 7f the origins of natural and artificial cave imagery ; p. 45 the zodiac imagery ; p . 272 the birth motif) . The discussion of Mithra ephippos as an eschatalogical figure and its association with Zatspram 35 :54 (a fiery form in the shape of a man riding a fiery horse who would bring in the renovation) is speculative but interesting (pp . 201, 263), as is also the reinterpretation of the reverse of the Dieburg relief not in terms of Phaethon and Helios but in terms of the rotation of the cosmic wheel (pp . 16off) . The complexity of a number of issues is brought out more clearly than by previous writers, for example the problem of the variety of interpretations of reliefs by different members of the cult (pp. 266 and 330) . The importance given to the minor motifs and contemporary texts is also welcome . The section on the initiation rites and associated beliefs (ch . g) will be of interest to a wider audience than
68
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
Mithraic specialists. The importance of two particular arguments should not be overlooked . On pp . 15-22 and 25-28 he demonstrates the weakness of the traditional interpretation of the snake and scorpion motifs . Cumont and his successors interpreted these in Zoroastrian terms and saw them as the forces of evil fighting the forces of good (symbolized by the dog) . It was largely on this interpretation that the parallel with the Zoroastrian creation myth was established, and thereby the `date' of Mithras' life pronounced . Campbell draws attention not only to the number . of occasions on Tauroctones, birth scenes, etc ., that the snake is present with no apparent maliee, but also to the use of snake imagery in Greek religion and the mystery cults (he might have noted other forms of Roman religion also), where it is a symbol of favourable powers . To the same end he notes that only on the Sidon relief is the scorpion in a position to sting with its tail. Since the scorpion is used, in Mesopotamia for example, as a beneficial symbol, the interpretation of the central relief needs to be drastically revised, for we no longer have symbols of good and evil fighting, only the presence of good . Most pioneering works are guilty of errors ; this book is no exception. There are not only errors of fact but, more serious, errors of method . Among the former the following may be noted i . The quotation of Zoroastrian texts is often inaccurate . There is confusion in citations from the two recensions of the Bundahishn (the Indian and the Iranian) especially on pp . 94-96 . On p . 52 for Ys 50 :10 read 3o :5 ; p . 202 for Yt 10 :127 Angra Mainyu and Vohumana read Yt 19 :47-51 Angra Mainyu and Atar ; p . 21 g, Ys i o : 8 for `drink' read `intoxicants' . ii . There are errors in the quotation of inscriptions, e .g . P . 282 after CASTUS read 7 = centurion, and dates e .g. p . 192 the date of Lucius Verus for A .D . 164 . As errors of method are more serious attention will be concentrated on them, starting with the least important. The author's knowledge of secondary sources appears weak, unless he is choosing to disregard almost all previous critical opinion . True, he states in the preface that he deliberately refrains from burdening the reader with innumerable references (p . xxi) but this can lead to a failure to give due weight to alternative explanations of difficult passages . Thus he assumes on p . 105 that there has been no serious criticism of the old theory that Vohu Manah was the Zoroastrian substitute for Mithra, and on p . 203 he propounds, with no hint of caution, a speculative interpretation of the three flights of Xvarenah from Yima . His description of Roman monuments is sometimes inaccurate. On p. 159 the bust of the wind in the top left corner of the Dieburg relief is incorrectly stated to be blowing down ; p. 275 the Modena relief is questionably identified as a Mithraic birth scene and on p . 291 he claims to see on a number of reliefs the pouring of water over initiates at baptism . Many of these examples are dubious, e .g. 2034, 2050, 2267 2320-indeed water is not clear on any of them .
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
69
To move on to more serious errors of method : in his translation of Zoroastrian texts Campbell gives no hint of the difficulties which so often exist in the text he is using . Presumably he can justify his readings, but in fairness to his readers who are not Zoroastrian specialists he should indicate where there are difficulties . On p. io8, for example, he translates a passage of the Denkard without referring to the difficulties which prompted his source (R . C . Zaehner, Zurvan; a Zoroastrian Dilemma, Oxford, 1 955, P . 37 1 ) to write `I only treat this passage with reluctance since there is such a muddle in the middle section that still remains obscure.' Inaccurate statements relating to Iranian belief are so common that it is difficult to pick out individual examples . One might note above all his lack of attention to the chronological development of Zoroastrian doctrines . Four particular examples might be cited : i . P . 145 `It is not surprising that Spenta Mainyu was eventually divided into seven Immortal Spentas of which the greatest was Ahura' . Spenta Mainyu is one of the Amesha Spentas under Ahura Mazda and was partly identified with him . For Campbell's line of development there is no Zoroastrian evidence whatsoever . n . p . 261, later Zoroastrianism `looked toward a Garodman of endless light beyond a bridge of Separation and final judgement rather than toward the reclamation of this present material world from all evil' . Since our evidence for the belief in a reclamation of this present material world from all evil is contained in the later Pahlavi texts and the problem is to establish its antiquity, this is a strange statement . 111 . p . 15 `According to later Zoroastrian speculations dogs guarded the Bridge of Separation between the two worlds' . As Campbell himself quotes Rig-Vedic and Avestan texts for this belief he ought to appreciate that it is a very early one . iv . On pp . 127, 132f, 332 the Luristan bronzes (c . 1200 B .C .) and the Mitanni seals (c . 1450 B .C .) are interpreted in the light of a Zoroastrian theology for which we have no evidence earlier than the ninth century A .D . Although the section on the orientation of Mithraea is interesting it is in parts highly speculative . In his earlier `Typology' Campbell distinguished a sub-type originating from non-Hellenistic circles in Anatolia and labelled this the Iranian sub-type (pp . 23f) . This is perfectly reasonable, but in Iconography Campbell goes much further, he writes as though Mithraea are actually found in Iran . On p . 81 he writes : `If we assume that northern Iranian peoples constructed Mithraea facing north . . .' and later `If in southern Persian regions Mithraea were still orientated toward the north . . . .' Since we have no evidence whatsoever that Iranians ever built Mithraea this is wholly unwarranted speculation . A further approach sure to raise criticism, and noticeable only in the later part of the book, is his juxtaposition of Iranian and Christian
70
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
material which appears pointless . On p . 221, for example, with no introductory explanation or concluding analysis he writes In the account of the apostles at Pentecost (Acts 2 . i-6) it is said that the whole house where they were assembled was filled with an echos of a powerful pnoe (= invisible and vocal hvareno) and divided tongues of a sort of fire were visible and rested on each of them (= kavaem hvareno) and they were filled with a holy pneuma (= geteh xvarr) and began to speak in foreign tongues (= vaxs nerok) . But some said that they were filled with gleukos, new wine (= haoma) . 2 Many specialists in Roman religion will feel as sceptical about the applicability of technical Zoroastrian terms and concepts to the cult of Mithras as New Testament scholars will about their relevance in the above passage . Although the book is concerned with iconography and ideology one must ask the historical question, did the worshippers at Dieburg, Ruckingen and Osterburken, three reliefs Campbell deals with in detail, know of these concepts? Would such terms and concepts be transplanted across continents in the manner presupposed? The most serious criticism of all, however, is that at no point does Campbell note that the Zoroastrian theology he urges lies behind Mithraism is derived wholly from the Pahlavi texts whose final redaction dates from the ninth century A .D . and even later . He makes no attempt to demonstrate the antiquity of the concepts he expounds, nor does he refer to any scholar who has demonstrated this ; indeed as far as I am aware he could not do so . Thus one has not only to ask if the worshippers at Dieburg knew of such concepts, one has even to ask did the Achaemenians and Parthians know of them? It is to be hoped that in his forthcoming work, Principia Mysteriorum, such errors are rectified . One addendum must be made to the list of criticisms concerning the physical presentation of the material . Each chapter is divided into sections, sub-sections and sub-sub-sections, each denoted by a number or letter, so that one finds such references as 5-j-2 .4 . This may or may not facilitate cross-referencing, it does, however, give the distinct impression of a collection of card-index files, and permits the author to collect a vast amount of relevant and irrelevant material, making it difficult for the reader to come to grips with the basic material . The accumulation of such a wealth of material, representing over thirty years of study (p . xxi), immensely useful though it is, sometimes exceeds proper limits . Footnotes of 1,500 words (pp . 268-270, 374-376) or iooo words (pp . 6o-61, 5 6-57, 58-59, 345-347) are surely unnecessary, certainly distracting and oppressive. Criticism must also be offered of the use of fine art paper for poor drawings (e .g . figs 1, 2, 25), especially when the reverse is left blank . This book raises more problems than it solves, but that is not necessarily a fault, and in the present state of Mithraic studies it may even be a virtue. Although the errors are rather numerous and sometimes serious it does not necessarily follow that the whole approach of the author is wrong. Campbell himself writes `It would be too much to hope that all
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
71
of my many analyses and interpretations have been faultless, but at least it may be hoped that they are in the right direction' (p . 393) Campbell may, in fact, be making a major contribution to the subject by asking the right questions . Although he makes very few references to the traditional approach to, and interpretation of, Mithraic belief, Campbell does expose their weaknesses . If the reliefs show a life of Mithras as Cumont thought, then Iranian belief has been so transformed that it becomes virtually an irrelevancy . If on the other hand the basic Iranian concepts were preserved in Mithraism (and it was described as a Persian cult by contemporaries), then the theory of a life of Mithras must go and some interpretation such as that proposed by Campbell must be put in its place . Despite the book's shortcomings its author does attempt to deal with the problems of the interpretation of iconography in a way its predecessors failed to do . In many ways Campbell himself has offered a sound assessment of the book `I have attempted to blaze a path through difficult ways for Diligence and Desire to follow' (p . 5) . Diligence and Desire do need to follow and it is to be hoped that they do, for this different approach, almost a new method in the study of Mithraism, may give Mithraic studies the stimulus they need ; a searching reappraisal of Cumont's theories which have so dominated the subject that it has become almost stagnant . If scholars are led to reassess their presuppositions and methods of approach to the iconography of Mithraism, even though the theories propounded in this work may be rejected, it will have provided a major turning point in the history of the subject . NOTES
i . Textes et Monuments figures relaifs aux Mysteries de Mithra, Brussels, 1896-1888 and The Mysteries of Mithra, E . T. by T . J . McCormack, reprinted New York, 1956 . Cumont's whole theory was called in question by S . Wikander `Etudes sur les Mysteres de Mithras', Vetenskaps-societetens i Lund Arsbok, (Yearbook of the New Society of Letters, Lund) 1 950, PP. 5 -46, whose arguments were, in turn, rejected by G . Widengren, `Stand and Aufgaben der iranischen Religionsgeschichte', II, Numen, 1955, pp . 89H: The work of Cumont has been closely followed by M . J . Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae, The Hague, 1956-1g6o, and Mithras, The Secret God, E .T . by T . and V . Megaw, London, 1963. A. D. Nock, `The Genius of Mithraism' Journal of Roman Studies, 27, 1937, pp . 108-113 argued that `the Mithraism which reached the western world was a new thing, created by fusion in Asia Minor' (p . 1og) . G. Widengren, on the other hand, in `The Mithraic Mysteries with special regard to their Iranian background' in La Persia e it Mondo Greco-Romano, Rome, 1966, pp . 433-455 stresses the Iranian background . F . B. J . Kuiper, `Remarks on the Avestan Hymn to Mithra', Indo-Iranian Journal, V, 1961, pp . 36-60, esp . pp . 56ff., would stress the value of Vedic studies in reconstructing the belief of Mithraism for `the Mithraic religion seems to have preserved ancient "pagan" features of which the Avesta does not know' (p. 58) . An attempt to understand the iconography of Roman Mithraism was made by E . Will, Le Relief Cultuel Greco-Romain, Paris, 1955, although he differed but little from Cumont . The forbear of Campbell's typological studies was F . Saxl, Mithras. Typengeschichtliche Untersuchungen, Berlin 1931 . 2 . For further examples see pp . 225, 3 00 , 363, 379, 3 83 . 384, 390.
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
67
Cumont's theory of a life of the god, based consciously or unconsciously on such classical mythologies as the twelve labours of Hercules on the metopes of the temple of Zeus at Olympia (early fifth century B.C .) is not so much rejected as ignored . Instead we have the theory of iconographic expression of abstract concepts of the nature of the cosmos, man and the fate of his soul in the round of rebirth (pp . i8f) . Although Campbell occasionally stresses the non-Iranian character of particular motifs (e .g . the snake and scorpion imaginery, pp . i5ff, 25ff) his general thesis is that reliefs set forth the cosmology and soteriology of the cult and that an understanding of Mithraic cosmology `may be gained from the study of Iranian cosmology as reflected in Zoroastrian writings and checked against Mithraic iconography' (p . 107, see also p . 179) . He stresses in particular the Zoroastrian doctrine of the `spiritual' (mink) and `material' (geteh) worlds. He believes that the upper registers of the middle-east European reliefs depict the mink powers of regeneration, the middle registers the mink and gitih heneration of the world and the lower registers the initiate's geteh regeneration (pp . 335ff) . The scene of Mithras being carried on the back of the bull is a dynamic concept of the divine soul passing from the mink to the geteh world (p . 259) . The reliefs have as one of their main themes the descent of the soul into the watery cave of birth and its apogenesis therefrom (pp . 223, 262, 273, 291ff and 382), thus `the upward and downward progressions [of the chariots depicted on the reliefs] are not those of Sol and Luna only but also of the soul' (p . 141) . Campbell argues that whereas Greek iconography expressed a morphic conception of divinity, the Indo-European approach, manifest in Mithraism, has a dynamic approach (pp . 245, 393) ; the one sees divinity in a particular form, the other divinity manifest in different bodies and forms . One must be sensitive to `the difficulties which orientals experienced in trying to illustrate Persian ideas with Greco-Roman motives' (p . 302) . The book contains a number of useful discussions of specific topics in particular one might note the chapter on the cosmic imagery of the cave (ch . 1) and the significance of its orientation (ch . 4) . The method adopted in his earlier work `Typology of Mithraic Tauroctones' Berytus, II, 1954, pp. 1-6o, is applied to a number of the minor motifs, often with interesting results (e .g. pp. 7f the origins of natural and artificial cave imagery ; p. 45 the zodiac imagery ; p . 272 the birth motif) . The discussion of Mithra ephippos as an eschatalogical figure and its association with Zatspram 35 :54 (a fiery form in the shape of a man riding a fiery horse who would bring in the renovation) is speculative but interesting (pp . 201, 263), as is also the reinterpretation of the reverse of the Dieburg relief not in terms of Phaethon and Helios but in terms of the rotation of the cosmic wheel (pp . 16off) . The complexity of a number of issues is brought out more clearly than by previous writers, for example the problem of the variety of interpretations of reliefs by different members of the cult (pp. 266 and 330) . The importance given to the minor motifs and contemporary texts is also welcome . The section on the initiation rites and associated beliefs (ch . g) will be of interest to a wider audience than
68
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
Mithraic specialists. The importance of two particular arguments should not be overlooked . On pp . 15-22 and 25-28 he demonstrates the weakness of the traditional interpretation of the snake and scorpion motifs . Cumont and his successors interpreted these in Zoroastrian terms and saw them as the forces of evil fighting the forces of good (symbolized by the dog) . It was largely on this interpretation that the parallel with the Zoroastrian creation myth was established, and thereby the `date' of Mithras' life pronounced . Campbell draws attention not only to the number . of occasions on Tauroctones, birth scenes, etc ., that the snake is present with no apparent maliee, but also to the use of snake imagery in Greek religion and the mystery cults (he might have noted other forms of Roman religion also), where it is a symbol of favourable powers . To the same end he notes that only on the Sidon relief is the scorpion in a position to sting with its tail. Since the scorpion is used, in Mesopotamia for example, as a beneficial symbol, the interpretation of the central relief needs to be drastically revised, for we no longer have symbols of good and evil fighting, only the presence of good . Most pioneering works are guilty of errors ; this book is no exception. There are not only errors of fact but, more serious, errors of method . Among the former the following may be noted i . The quotation of Zoroastrian texts is often inaccurate . There is confusion in citations from the two recensions of the Bundahishn (the Indian and the Iranian) especially on pp . 94-96 . On p . 52 for Ys 50 :10 read 3o :5 ; p . 202 for Yt 10 :127 Angra Mainyu and Vohumana read Yt 19 :47-51 Angra Mainyu and Atar ; p . 21 g, Ys i o : 8 for `drink' read `intoxicants' . ii . There are errors in the quotation of inscriptions, e .g . P . 282 after CASTUS read 7 = centurion, and dates e .g. p . 192 the date of Lucius Verus for A .D . 164 . As errors of method are more serious attention will be concentrated on them, starting with the least important. The author's knowledge of secondary sources appears weak, unless he is choosing to disregard almost all previous critical opinion . True, he states in the preface that he deliberately refrains from burdening the reader with innumerable references (p . xxi) but this can lead to a failure to give due weight to alternative explanations of difficult passages . Thus he assumes on p . 105 that there has been no serious criticism of the old theory that Vohu Manah was the Zoroastrian substitute for Mithra, and on p . 203 he propounds, with no hint of caution, a speculative interpretation of the three flights of Xvarenah from Yima . His description of Roman monuments is sometimes inaccurate. On p. 159 the bust of the wind in the top left corner of the Dieburg relief is incorrectly stated to be blowing down ; p. 275 the Modena relief is questionably identified as a Mithraic birth scene and on p . 291 he claims to see on a number of reliefs the pouring of water over initiates at baptism . Many of these examples are dubious, e .g. 2034, 2050, 2267 2320-indeed water is not clear on any of them .
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
69
To move on to more serious errors of method : in his translation of Zoroastrian texts Campbell gives no hint of the difficulties which so often exist in the text he is using . Presumably he can justify his readings, but in fairness to his readers who are not Zoroastrian specialists he should indicate where there are difficulties . On p. io8, for example, he translates a passage of the Denkard without referring to the difficulties which prompted his source (R . C . Zaehner, Zurvan; a Zoroastrian Dilemma, Oxford, 1 955, P . 37 1 ) to write `I only treat this passage with reluctance since there is such a muddle in the middle section that still remains obscure.' Inaccurate statements relating to Iranian belief are so common that it is difficult to pick out individual examples . One might note above all his lack of attention to the chronological development of Zoroastrian doctrines . Four particular examples might be cited : i . P . 145 `It is not surprising that Spenta Mainyu was eventually divided into seven Immortal Spentas of which the greatest was Ahura' . Spenta Mainyu is one of the Amesha Spentas under Ahura Mazda and was partly identified with him . For Campbell's line of development there is no Zoroastrian evidence whatsoever . n . p . 261, later Zoroastrianism `looked toward a Garodman of endless light beyond a bridge of Separation and final judgement rather than toward the reclamation of this present material world from all evil' . Since our evidence for the belief in a reclamation of this present material world from all evil is contained in the later Pahlavi texts and the problem is to establish its antiquity, this is a strange statement . 111 . p . 15 `According to later Zoroastrian speculations dogs guarded the Bridge of Separation between the two worlds' . As Campbell himself quotes Rig-Vedic and Avestan texts for this belief he ought to appreciate that it is a very early one . iv . On pp . 127, 132f, 332 the Luristan bronzes (c . 1200 B .C .) and the Mitanni seals (c . 1450 B .C .) are interpreted in the light of a Zoroastrian theology for which we have no evidence earlier than the ninth century A .D . Although the section on the orientation of Mithraea is interesting it is in parts highly speculative . In his earlier `Typology' Campbell distinguished a sub-type originating from non-Hellenistic circles in Anatolia and labelled this the Iranian sub-type (pp . 23f) . This is perfectly reasonable, but in Iconography Campbell goes much further, he writes as though Mithraea are actually found in Iran . On p . 81 he writes : `If we assume that northern Iranian peoples constructed Mithraea facing north . . .' and later `If in southern Persian regions Mithraea were still orientated toward the north . . . .' Since we have no evidence whatsoever that Iranians ever built Mithraea this is wholly unwarranted speculation . A further approach sure to raise criticism, and noticeable only in the later part of the book, is his juxtaposition of Iranian and Christian
70
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
material which appears pointless . On p . 221, for example, with no introductory explanation or concluding analysis he writes In the account of the apostles at Pentecost (Acts 2 . i-6) it is said that the whole house where they were assembled was filled with an echos of a powerful pnoe (= invisible and vocal hvareno) and divided tongues of a sort of fire were visible and rested on each of them (= kavaem hvareno) and they were filled with a holy pneuma (= geteh xvarr) and began to speak in foreign tongues (= vaxs nerok) . But some said that they were filled with gleukos, new wine (= haoma) . 2 Many specialists in Roman religion will feel as sceptical about the applicability of technical Zoroastrian terms and concepts to the cult of Mithras as New Testament scholars will about their relevance in the above passage . Although the book is concerned with iconography and ideology one must ask the historical question, did the worshippers at Dieburg, Ruckingen and Osterburken, three reliefs Campbell deals with in detail, know of these concepts? Would such terms and concepts be transplanted across continents in the manner presupposed? The most serious criticism of all, however, is that at no point does Campbell note that the Zoroastrian theology he urges lies behind Mithraism is derived wholly from the Pahlavi texts whose final redaction dates from the ninth century A .D . and even later . He makes no attempt to demonstrate the antiquity of the concepts he expounds, nor does he refer to any scholar who has demonstrated this ; indeed as far as I am aware he could not do so . Thus one has not only to ask if the worshippers at Dieburg knew of such concepts, one has even to ask did the Achaemenians and Parthians know of them? It is to be hoped that in his forthcoming work, Principia Mysteriorum, such errors are rectified . One addendum must be made to the list of criticisms concerning the physical presentation of the material . Each chapter is divided into sections, sub-sections and sub-sub-sections, each denoted by a number or letter, so that one finds such references as 5-j-2 .4 . This may or may not facilitate cross-referencing, it does, however, give the distinct impression of a collection of card-index files, and permits the author to collect a vast amount of relevant and irrelevant material, making it difficult for the reader to come to grips with the basic material . The accumulation of such a wealth of material, representing over thirty years of study (p . xxi), immensely useful though it is, sometimes exceeds proper limits . Footnotes of 1,500 words (pp . 268-270, 374-376) or iooo words (pp . 6o-61, 5 6-57, 58-59, 345-347) are surely unnecessary, certainly distracting and oppressive. Criticism must also be offered of the use of fine art paper for poor drawings (e .g . figs 1, 2, 25), especially when the reverse is left blank . This book raises more problems than it solves, but that is not necessarily a fault, and in the present state of Mithraic studies it may even be a virtue. Although the errors are rather numerous and sometimes serious it does not necessarily follow that the whole approach of the author is wrong. Campbell himself writes `It would be too much to hope that all
METHOD AND MESSAGE IN MITHRAISM
71
of my many analyses and interpretations have been faultless, but at least it may be hoped that they are in the right direction' (p . 393) Campbell may, in fact, be making a major contribution to the subject by asking the right questions . Although he makes very few references to the traditional approach to, and interpretation of, Mithraic belief, Campbell does expose their weaknesses . If the reliefs show a life of Mithras as Cumont thought, then Iranian belief has been so transformed that it becomes virtually an irrelevancy . If on the other hand the basic Iranian concepts were preserved in Mithraism (and it was described as a Persian cult by contemporaries), then the theory of a life of Mithras must go and some interpretation such as that proposed by Campbell must be put in its place . Despite the book's shortcomings its author does attempt to deal with the problems of the interpretation of iconography in a way its predecessors failed to do . In many ways Campbell himself has offered a sound assessment of the book `I have attempted to blaze a path through difficult ways for Diligence and Desire to follow' (p . 5) . Diligence and Desire do need to follow and it is to be hoped that they do, for this different approach, almost a new method in the study of Mithraism, may give Mithraic studies the stimulus they need ; a searching reappraisal of Cumont's theories which have so dominated the subject that it has become almost stagnant . If scholars are led to reassess their presuppositions and methods of approach to the iconography of Mithraism, even though the theories propounded in this work may be rejected, it will have provided a major turning point in the history of the subject . NOTES
i . Textes et Monuments figures relaifs aux Mysteries de Mithra, Brussels, 1896-1888 and The Mysteries of Mithra, E . T. by T . J . McCormack, reprinted New York, 1956 . Cumont's whole theory was called in question by S . Wikander `Etudes sur les Mysteres de Mithras', Vetenskaps-societetens i Lund Arsbok, (Yearbook of the New Society of Letters, Lund) 1 950, PP. 5 -46, whose arguments were, in turn, rejected by G . Widengren, `Stand and Aufgaben der iranischen Religionsgeschichte', II, Numen, 1955, pp . 89H: The work of Cumont has been closely followed by M . J . Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae, The Hague, 1956-1g6o, and Mithras, The Secret God, E .T . by T . and V . Megaw, London, 1963. A. D. Nock, `The Genius of Mithraism' Journal of Roman Studies, 27, 1937, pp . 108-113 argued that `the Mithraism which reached the western world was a new thing, created by fusion in Asia Minor' (p . 1og) . G. Widengren, on the other hand, in `The Mithraic Mysteries with special regard to their Iranian background' in La Persia e it Mondo Greco-Romano, Rome, 1966, pp . 433-455 stresses the Iranian background . F . B. J . Kuiper, `Remarks on the Avestan Hymn to Mithra', Indo-Iranian Journal, V, 1961, pp . 36-60, esp . pp . 56ff., would stress the value of Vedic studies in reconstructing the belief of Mithraism for `the Mithraic religion seems to have preserved ancient "pagan" features of which the Avesta does not know' (p. 58) . An attempt to understand the iconography of Roman Mithraism was made by E . Will, Le Relief Cultuel Greco-Romain, Paris, 1955, although he differed but little from Cumont . The forbear of Campbell's typological studies was F . Saxl, Mithras. Typengeschichtliche Untersuchungen, Berlin 1931 . 2 . For further examples see pp . 225, 3 00 , 363, 379, 3 83 . 384, 390.