Hadrian's Wall › The Evil Spirit of Mithraic Religion » Origins and History
Articles and Definitions › Contents
- Hadrian's Wall › Ancient History
- Another Ariamanus Statue Found: The Evil Spirit of Mithraic Religion › Antique Origins
Ancient civilizations › Historical places, and their characters
Hadrian's Wall › Ancient History
Definition and Origins
Hadrian ’s Wall (known in antiquity as the Vallum Hadriani or the Vallum Aelian ) is a defensive frontier work in northern Britain which dates from 122 CE. The wall ran from coast to coast at a length of 73 statute miles (120 km). Though the wall is commonly thought to have been built to mark the boundary line between Britain and Scotland, this is not so; no one knows the actual motivation behind its construction but it does not delineate a boundary between the two countries. While the wall did simply mark the northern boundary of the Roman Empire in Britain at the time, theories regarding the purpose of such a massive building project range from limiting immigration, to controlling smuggling, to keeping the indigenous people at bay north of the wall. Its military effectiveness has been questioned by many scholars over the years owing to its length and the positioning of the fortifications along the route. Regarding this, Professors Scarre and Fagan write,
Archaeologists and historians have long debated whether Hadrian's Wall was an effective military barrier…Whatever its military effectiveness, however, it was clearly a powerful symbol of Roman military might. The biographer of Hadrian remarks that the emperor built the wall to separate the Romans from the barbarians. In the same way, the Chinese emperors built the Great Wall to separate China from the barbarous steppe peoples to the north. In both cases, in addition to any military function, the physical barriers served in the eyes of their builders to reinforce the conceptual divide between civilized and noncivilized. They were part of the ideology of empire. ( Ancient Civilizations, 313)
THE SUGGESTION THAT HADRIAN'S WALL, THEN, WAS BUILT TO HOLD BACK OR SOMEHOW CONTROL THE PEOPLE OF THE NORTH DOES NOT SEEM AS LIKELY AS THAT IT WAS CONSTRUCTED AS A SHOW OF FORCE.
This seems to be the best explanation for the underlying motive behind the construction of Hadrian's Wall. The Romans had been dealing with uprisings in Britain since their conquest of the region. Although Rome ’s first contact with Britain was through Julius Caesar ’s expeditions there in 55/54 BCE, Rome did not begin any systematic conquest until the year 43 CE under the Emperor Claudius. The revolt of Boudicca of the Iceni in 60/61 CE resulted in the massacre of many Romancitizens and the destruction of major cities (among them, Londinium, modern London) and, according to the historian Tacitus (56-117 CE), fully demonstrated the barbaric ways of the Britons to the Roman mind. Boudicca's forces were defeated at The Battle of Watling Street by General Gaius Suetonius Paulinus in 61 CE. At the Battle of Mons Graupius, in the region which is now Scotland, the Roman General Gnaeus Julius Agricola won a decisive victory over the Caledonians under Calgacus in 83 CE. Both of these engagements, as well as the uprising in the north in 119 CE (suppressed by Falco) substantiated that the Romans were up to the task of managing the indigenous people of Britain. The suggestion that Hadrian's Wall, then, was built to hold back or somehow control the people of the north does not seem as likely as that it was constructed as a show of force.Hadrian's foreign policy was consistently “peace through strength” and the wall would have been an impressive illustration of that principle. In the same way that Julius Caesar built his famous bridge across the Rhine in 55 BCE simply to show that he, and therefore Rome, could go anywhere and do anything, Hadrian perhaps had his wall constructed for precisely the same purpose.
Hadrian's Wall Gate
Emperor Hadrian (born Publius Aelius Hadrianus in 76 CE) ruled the Roman Empire from 117-138 CE. His building projects, especially in Greece, are legendary and his penchant for ambitious monuments is exemplified in his eponymous wall. The work was begun in stone (unlike other fortifications which began with timber) in the east and proceeded westward across uneven terrain to create an impressive reflection of the power of Rome. The wall was originally 9.7 feet wide (3 metres) and 16-20 feet high (six metres) east of the River Irthing, all built of stone, and 20 feet wide (6 metres) by 11feet high (3.5 metres) west of the river, made up of stone and turf, stretching 73 miles (120 km) across the breadth of the land. This ambitious building project was completed within six years through the labour of the Roman legions stationed in Britain. Plans for the construction of the wall were in place prior to Hadrian's visit to Britain in 122 CE and, perhaps, construction had already begun before the traditional date assigned for the initial work on the wall, possibly as early as 118 CE. There were between 14-17 fortifications along the length of the wall and a Vallum (a ditch purposefully constructed of earthworks) which ran parallel to the wall. The Vallum measured 20 feet (6 metres) wide by 10 feet (3 metres) deep, flanked by large mounds of tightly packed earth. It is this composition of the site which has given rise to the traditional interpretation of the wall as a defensive work built to repel invasion from the north.
Hadrian's Wall Milecastle 37
The Vallum was built after the construction of the wall and the forts as evidenced by its deviation from existing ruins and the clear indication of causeways across the ditch at intervals which correspond to established fortification sites. When the Antonine Wall was constructed further north (in c. 142 CE by Emperor Antoninus Pius ) the Vallum appears to have been partially filled in for easier passage. The Antonine Wall was built after Hadrian's Wall had been abandoned as an outpost and was positioned further to the north in present-day Scotland between the Firth of Forth and the Firth of Clyde. The Antonine Wall was perhaps constructed to serve the same purpose as Hadrian's Wall but is thought to have functioned more pragmatically than the earlier construct. Hadrian's Wall is thought to have been plastered and white washed so that it would be a shining beacon of the might of Rome, visible from considerable distances. The Antonine Wall does not suggest this same grandeur nor, in spite of the many fortifications along its route, the same intent in design and construction. Emperor Marcus Aurelius (ruled 161-180 CE) drew the Roman legions back from the Antonine Wall to Hadrian's Wall under his reign and fortified the garrisons in his efforts to maintain the boundaries of the Empire. Hadrian's great monument to Rome's might continued as an impressive affirmation until 410 CE when the Roman legions left Britain. Activity around and along the wall seems to have continued as evidenced by archaeological finds but a disciplined Roman presence after 410 is not signified.
Following the Roman withdrawal, large portions of the wall were carried off for personal building projects by the local inhabitants. Huge sections were removed to provide paving for British troops heading north on muddy tracks to quell the Jacobite Uprising of 1745 CE. Hadrian's Wall may have disappeared entirely were it not for the efforts of one man, the antiquarian John Clayton (1792-1890 CE) who, in 1834 CE, began buying the land around the wall in an effort to preserve it.Clayton's excavations and enthusiasm for the site kept what remains of Hadrian's Wall intact and, in 1987 CE, it was declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. Today it is under the care of English Heritage commission and is cared for largely by volunteers who recognize its immense historical significance.
Another Ariamanus Statue Found: The Evil Spirit of Mithraic Religion › Antique Origins
Ancient Civilizations
It is rare when a new find creates renewed interest in an old subject. Here, the new find is a leontocephaline (lion-headed) figure of unknown provenance, weighing 5.8 kg and 37 cm in height with a width of 14 cm. Its base is partially broken, so it is unclear if the figure was standing on a globe, an expected position, or not. The main figure is a standing, naked leontocephaline figure with only a loin cloth in the front and two closed wings on the back; from the front, the wings appear as a mantle around the figure, but they are clearly wings, probably belonging to an eagle.
Ahriman Statue Front View
A serpent, bound around the figure's ankles and continuing up to his chest in five folds and through his back, finally rests its head on top of the lion's head. The leontocephaline figure holds a cylindrical object in his right hand, which is raised above the shoulder and folded over it to rest the end of the object on the right shoulder, and is also artistically connected to the head to support the weight of the arm and the cylindrical object. The left hand of the figure rests on what appears to be the handle of a sword on the left side of the figure, although the actual scabbard is not visible, disappearing into the folds of the serpent. At the back, below where the wings of the monster meet, there is a hole which suggests it was hooked to a wall or a shelf from the back. Otherwise, the statue is in very good condition and a new addition to the iconographic typology of the beast, which is known from the Mithraic religious current in the Roman and the Mediterranean world and perhaps the Caucasus.
Ahriman Statue Back View
Mithraism is among the most important mystery religions in the Eurasian world. This cult, with its origins in the Iranian world, was centered around an Indo-Iranian deity known as Mithra (from Avestan Mithra-; cf Sanskrit Mitra). Mithra was primarily a god of contracts, by whom people swore and took oaths. In the Avesta, the sacred hymns of Zoroastriansm, Mithra's hymn (Mihr-yasht) is the longest and often considered to be the most interesting, as it details the pre-Zoroastrian importance of the deity who is then adapted into the new religion of Prophet Zarathustra. Besides presiding over contracts, the secondary and tertiary functions of Mithra in the Indo-Iranian world were his identification with the sun and love/friendship – the latter itself an extension of the contract function.
This deity was also important in Armenia and the Caucasus, where it became well-known starting in the Achaemenid period.Mithra's cultic features such as Cautes and Cautopates (the twin torch bearers), the cave, and the birth of Mithras from a rock are in fact mainly associated with the Armenian world and its manifestations, such as the Epic of Sassoun. We hear of Roman contacts with the cult of Mithra in Armenia through the stationing of the Legio XV Apollinarius, first created by Octavian and sent to the East. This legion was then stationed in Armenia during the emperorship of Nero. Mithra must have been taken to Rome, where the Cult of Mithra became the most important mystery religion in the Mediterranean basin and the rest of the Roman Empire.
There were hundreds of Mithraeums, which are caves or cave-like structures where a statue or fresco of a young boy with a “Phrygian” cap in the process of slaying a bull was featured as the main iconography. Men broke bread and drank wine in these caves and believed that Mithra (the young boy) comes to earth to sacrifice the bull to absolve humanity of its sins and then ascends to heaven. The cult indeed had many features which were borrowed by Christianity. Due to its peaceful nature and with the triumph of the latter religion, Mithraeums were either closed down without being molested or were simply turned into churches, signifying the victory of Christ over the pagan traditions. The sacred topography, though, remained the same.
Another iconographic representation was also present in many, but not all, of the Mithraeums: the statue of a lion-headed man with wings (sometimes closed and sometimes opened), who usually is holding a staff or a thunderbolt in one hand and in his other hand he holds a key (sometimes in both hands), a staff, or a torch. A snake usually coils around the body of the figure and its head appears from the back, resting on top of the lion's head. At times there are zodiac signs placed on the body or vestments of the leontocephalinic figure. The lion's mouth is open and usually a hole is seen between the fangs of the lion.
The identification and function of the statue, which was no doubt a deity, are subject to intense speculation. One of the early and important scholars of Mystery religions, Franz Cumont, supported the idea that the leontocephaline figure represented the Mithraic Kronos, whose Iranian form is Zurvan, the God of Time in the Zoroastrian tradition. Some scholars such as G. Widengren, Vermaseren, and Clauss accepted the suggestion that the figure represents Zurvan, the god of eternal time. In this myth, Zurvan became the father of both Ohrmazd (Av. Ahura Mazda “the Wise Lord”), the supreme deity of Zoroastrianism, and Ahriman (Av. Angra Mainiyu), the Evil Spirit and Ohrmazd's main adversary.
Ahriman Statue Side View
However, another interpretation has rightly gained favor over the identification of Zurvan. In 1953, J. Duchesen-Guillemin suggested that we were not dealing with Zurvan, but rather the Evil Spirit himself, ie Ahriman. This identification is now widely accepted, and there are several reasons why identifying the figure as Ahriman in the context of Mithraic belief, and perhaps beyond, might make sense. In terms of iconographic precedence, one can point to Mesopotamian reliefs from Assyria. The lion-headed image, for example, is seen in the reliefs from the time of Senacherib from Kuyunjik (705-681 BCE), providing an early model.
Additionally, not only in Zoroastrianism but also in Manichaeism the descriptions of the Evil Spirit or the Devil have similarities to our figure. For example, RC Zaehner identified the figure not with the Ahriman of the Zoroastrian tradition, but with the Ahriman of the devil-worshippers. This Evil Spirit according to Zaehner is depicted as: “the source of power and riches, the Prince of this World, who would prevent the soul from rising up again to its true home, which is the Endless Light of heaven”.
The gaping mouth of the lion, according to scholars of mystery religions, is a specifically Mithraist feature, functioning as a way of breathing fire. An inscription from Santa Prisca on a lion-headed statue refers to “lions who burn incense... through whom we are consumed ourselves”. In the Gnostic explanation of the mouth of the serpent, too, the serpent-dragon's mouth is said to be fiery, coming from an icy belly. In Zoroastrianism, lions are demonic creatures and are part of the “wolf species,” created by Ahriman, while serpents are the worst of the Khrafsatars (noxious creatures) who creep on the ground. In a passage from the Muslim bibliophile, Ibn Nadim, he describes the image of the Satan in Manichaeism who has the head of a lion and wings.However, there are further details that differ from the complete description of our lion-headed figure.
Most interestingly, in Iran in the province of Luristan, a tale recounts the existence of an evil deity which can be translated as the “Lionish-God.” RC Zaehner, who saw the manuscript of this tale, provides the following excerpt in which the Lionish-God states:
Behold, I have created the earth and what is in it and all that are living in it. I have created you, I am giving you your daily bread. Your living is in my hands, and your death too…I will excuse you and send you to my paradise if you put your trust in me, and forget about the God who is in Heaven. But you will be cast into Hell for ever if you worship the god who is in Heaven any more. Behold my wrath is going to fall upon you; it is waiting only for an answer from you. Turn you souls from the Heavenly God quickly. Signed – Lionish God. (Zaehner 1967: 29-30)
This could in some ways be corroborated by the symbolism of serpents in the Yazidi mystery cult prominent in northern Iraq and Armenia, as it is depicted on the walls of the sanctuary of Shaikh 'Adi, but is never explicitly mentioned in Yazidi literature. Its function is probably most closely related to the older Gnostic understanding of the black snake as the Destructive-Creator functionary in the world.
Thus, it seems that from the Near East to the Mediterranean, the idea of a leontocephaline figure was often associated with evil. The resonance of these lion-headed figures spreads from the British Isles (York) to southern Europe (Rome), and from Eastern Europe (Pannonia) to the Eastern Mediterranean ( Sidon ) and North Africa ( Alexandria ). There are also four of these statues with an inscription in Latin, stating that this figure is Arimanius (Ahriman).
Ahriman Statue Side View
The lion-headed Ahriman thus appears to have had a specific role in the Mithraic cult. Standing on a globe and among the zodiac – although outside its boundary – the symbolism connects the figure to the cosmos outside the zodiac. According to Ulansey, the leontocephaline figure bound by the serpent represented a Platonic world-soul and marked the ultimate boundaries of the cosmos. In this function, the leontocephaline deity represented a concept close to that of Oceanus in Greek mythology. If he is the gatekeeper, then where the lion-headed figure is holding a key, it is because the Evil Spirit then may also be holding the keys of heaven. In a sense the Ahriman of Mithraism kept the souls bound to this world which he ruled over and allowed the humans to reach their spiritual realm.
The function of the leontocephaline man bound by a serpent thus represents a series of related and interdependent mythological and cosmological iconographies in the Near Eastern and Mediterranean world. The precedents of such figures are well established in Mithraic monuments and cultic representations, and related occurrences appear in iconographies of religions and cults concerned with the ideas of Evil Spirits, Gnostic Destructive-Creator gods, and primeval deities. This latest piece provides similar visual functions, which, if genuine and with established provenance, could add to our better understanding and extent of the use of such iconographies. Although in the absence of a proper provenance and art historical placement, it cannot be confidently assigned, the state of the status, its complete provision of the iconographies including the staff, and its possible previous function as a cultic object as evidenced by the presence of the hole in the back, provide compelling evidence for its placement within such an iconographic program.
LICENSE:
Article based on information obtained from these sources:with permission from the Website Ancient History Encyclopedia
Content is available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. CC-BY-NC-SA License