Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T04:13:45.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Isis, Sarapis and Demeter in Antioch Of Syria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Frederick W. Norris
Frederick W. Norris
Affiliation:
Emmanuel School of Religion
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When we deal with religious phenomena, we are not always fortunate enough to find explanatory texts. That is particularly true of the mystery religions and thus should be expected when we look at the materials concerning Isis, Sarapis and Demeter at Antioch of Syria. But in this instance we are faced with special problems. First, the texts are so meager that we are forced to turn to the artifacts in order to grasp at all the influence of these religions within the third largest city of the ancient world. Second, and more important, the effort to collate all the artifacts is at present impossible. The reports of the excavations in Antioch from 1932–39 were only published in a shortened preliminary form. For that we must be thankful, but it does mean that exact locations and dates of certain finds are quite difficult to obtain. Furthermore, the collections of materials primarily are divided between the McCormick Art Museum at Princeton University, the Louvre in Paris, and the local museum in Antakya, Turkey. Separate pieces, however, are scattered over the world. The materials at Princeton and Paris are accessible, but those at Antakya are limited in most instances to the ones on display. The major difficulty in retrieving the excavated materials comes not from bureaucratic obstinacy in Turkey. I received significant assistance from both Selhattin Asim, cultural director of the Hatay region, and Nizamettin Bati, director of the museum, during two visits to Antakya in 1976 and 1977. The major problem lies in the fact that the serial numbers recorded in Antakya bear no resemblance to those published in the preliminary reports. Literally hundreds of artifacts are housed in the Antakya museum which have not been studied in any thorough way. If this serial number conundrum could be broken, much more light could be shed on conditions in Antioch. For now, only preliminary studies of available pieces can be offered. Within such studies, arguments from silence are quite questionable. The task in this article is to discuss the texts and artifacts known to me in order to correct some inaccuracies of interpretation and to add color to the picture of Hellenistic religion in Antioch of Syria.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 75 , Issue 2 , April 1982 , pp. 189 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Libanius 11.114. There are further references in Libanius to the worship of Isis or Sarapis in the time of Julian; cf. 18.171 and 30.35 and 44. Julian himself mentions such activity (Misopogon 346B).

2 Wroth, Warwick, A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum: Calatia, Cappadocia and Syria (London: The Trustees, 1899; reprint ed., Bologna: Forni, 1964) 154 no. 21.Google Scholar

3 Newell, Edward T., The Seleucid Mint of Antioch (New York: American Numismatic Society, 1918; reprint ed., Chicago: Obol International, 1978) 25 no. 60.Google Scholar

4 Tacitus Ann. 4.84.

5 Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 4.48.1–6 [ed. Stählin, GCS, 37–38]. Clement also notes that according to Athenadorus the Sarapis statue was not brought from elsewhere but was constructed in Egypt.

6 The article “Isidoros,” PW 9/2 (1916) 2060–81, lists thirty-three different persons. Eighteen, 20 and 22 appear to be possibilities, but none of them is known well enough to be identified with this Isidore.

7 The temple is described by Stillwell, Richard, “Outline of the Campaigns,” Antioch-on-the-Orontes III (Princeton: Princeton University, 1941) 32–34 figs. 39–42. The statuette is described in idem, “Catalogue of Sculpture,” Antiochon-the-Orontes III, 124. Cf. no. 365 pi. 16.Google Scholar

8 Idem, “Outline of the Campaigns,” 34.

9 Robert Wild, “The Known Isis-Sarapis Sanctuaries of the Roman Period,” to be printed in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt.

10 Mommsen, Theodor, Römische Geschichte (Berlin: Weidmann, 1917) 460.Google Scholar

11 Jalabert, Louis and Mouterde, René, Inscriptions Grecques et Latines de la Syrie (Paris: Beuthner, 1953) 3. 623–24.Google Scholar

12 Vidman, Ladislav, Isis und Sarapis bei den Griechen und Römern (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 29; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1970) 84. Libanius (Or, 9) refers to a festival in which sailors took part, but his statements are too general to indicate that it was an Isis celebration.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Stlllwell (“Catalogue of Sculpture,” 118) describes the possible Sarapis head, no. 257 pi. 9. He also identifies (Ibid., 120) no, 288 pi. 4 as a possible representation of Harpocrates. Waagé, Frederick (“Lamps,” Antioch-on-the-Orontes I [1934] 63) thinks that lamp no 247 pi. IX originally had a bust of “Hippocrates” beside that of Isis. His statement is surely a misprint for Harpocrates.Google Scholar

14 Keskil, Süheyla, “Hatay Hadesi,” Türk Arkeologi Dergisi XII/2 (1963) 88–90.Google Scholar

15 Waage, Dorothy, “Greek, Roman, Byzantine & Crusaders' Coins,” Antioch-onthe-Orontes IV/2 (1952) 11 no. 112. Newell, The Seleucid Mint, 25 no. 60. He also describes nos. 58 and 59 as representations of Zeus-Sarapis, but that identification is not supported.Google Scholar

16 D. Waage, “Coins,” 17 nos. 180–84, 186,188,190. Newell, The Seleucid Mint, 81 fig. 11.

17 D. Waage, “Coins,” 26 and 28, nos. 270,272,274 and 296.

18 Wroth, Catalogue, 154 nos 26–28.

19 D. Waage, “Coins,” 104 and 107, nos. 1183 and 1239. Mattingly, HaroldCoins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum 5 (2d ed. by Carson, R. A. G. and Hill, Philip V.; London: British Museum Publications, 1975) 279 no. 617 depicts Isis and was struck during the time of Julia Domna, 196–202 or later. The mint, however, is uncertain, although Laodicea is suggested as a possibility.Google Scholar

20 D. Waage, “Coins,” 115 no. 1353.

21 Wild, “Isis-Sarapis Sanctuaries.”

22 F. Waagé, “Lamps,” 62–63 pi. IX. The McCormick Art Museum has some of these lamps available for study and pictures of most of them.

23 Dobbins', Ph.D. dissertation, “Terra-cotta Lamps of the Roman Province of Syria” (Michigan, 1977), is a study not only of the lamps from Dibsi Farag, an excavation in which he took part, but also one of the lamps from Antioch and Dura Europas. It is his opinion (1. 5) that the major lamp types which Waagé described are basically correct. Cf. Wild, “Isis-Sarapis Sanctuaries.”Google Scholar

24 Jalabert and Mouterde, IGLS 511–12 and 477.

25 Levi, Doro, Antioch Mosaic Pavements (2 vols.; Princeton: Princeton University, 1947) vol. 1, 27, 49–50, 163–65; vol. 2 pls. Vb, VIIIb, XXXIIIa-c, and XXXIVa-b.Google Scholar

26 Ibid., vol. 1, 49–50; vol. 2 pl. VIIIb.

27 Apuleius Metamorphoses 11.4.

28 Levi, Mosaic, vol. 1, 37; vol. 2 pl. Vb.

29 Vidman, Ladislav, Sylloge inscriptionum religionis Isiacae et Sarapiacae (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 28; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1969) 180 no. 355a, and the similar inscription 58–59 no. 130. Jalabert and Mouterde (IGLS 1144) did not see the connection which Vidman uses in his interpretation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Levi, Mosaic, vol. 1, 164–65; vol. 2 pi. XXXIIIb. Levi himself suggests that his identification of this mosaic “would perhaps be incomprehensible if it were not for the scene of the other mosaic in the same house,” that is, the fourth mosaic to be discussed below.

31 Ibid., vol. 1, 163–64; vol. 2 pi. XXXIIIa. His “Mors Voluntaria: Mystery Cults on Mosaics from Antioch” (Berytus 7 [1942] 19–55) is a much fuller treatment.

32 Ibid., 30.

33 Ibid., 19.

34 Ibid., 20.

35 Ibid., 21.

36 Ibid., 29.

37 Ibid., 23

38 Ibid., 25.

39 Witt, R. E. (Isis in the Graeco-Roman World [Aspects of Greek and Roman Life; London: Thames and Hudson, 1971] 161–62Google Scholar and pl. 46) argues for the Hermanubis identification.

40 Tinh, V. Tran Tam(Essai sur le Culte d'Isis à Pompéi [Paris: de Boccard, 1964] 81–82Google Scholar) identifies Hermanubis on the basis of the caduceus and sistrum held in his hands. Pls. VI and XVIb depict such a figure in the reception of Io by Isis. Drexler, W. (“Hermanubis,” Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie [Leipzig: Teubner, 1886–1890]Google Scholar 1/2. 2311–12) mentions falsified coins depicting Hermanubis with a sistrum and scepter, and genuine ones which picture him with the caduceus and a palm branch. But he does not indicate any representations with the caduceus and a wand.

41 Levi, Mosaic, vol. 1, 150–56; vol. 2 pl. XXIXb.

42 Ibid., vol. 1, 49–50 and 150–56; vol. 2 pls. VIIIb and XXIXb. Mylonas, George E., Eleusis and the Eleusian Mysteries (Princeton: Princeton University, 1961) 211.Google Scholar

43 Libanius 11.21, 125; 15.79; Theodoret Hist. eccl. 4.21; IG 22, no. 1672. To my knowledge, these are the only pieces of information about Demeter in Antioch. Yet it must be noted again that numerous artifacts in Antakya have not yet been investigated.

44 Mylonas, Eleusis, 6.

45 On some coins a ship is the symbol of Felicity and has no connection with Isis. Levi, “Mors Voluntaria,” 34. Also see Alfoldi, Andreas, A Festival of Isis in Rome under the Christian Emperors of the IVth Century (Dissertationes Pannonicae 2/7; Budapest, 1937Google Scholar). Dunbabin, Katherine M. D.(The Mosaics of Roman North Africa: Studies in Iconography and Patronage [Oxford: Clarendon, 1978] 147Google Scholar) refers to mosaics found at Dougga which contain ship figures but represent Ulysses’ escape from the Sirens and Dionysus’ punishment of the Tyrrhenian pirates.

46 Mylonas, Eleusis, 239–43; cf. Julian Oration 5 173.