The Perception Of The Divine - I

The Alexander Romance (a series of fictional stories about Alexander the Great) doesn’t just celebrate Alexander’s virility and skill in warfare; it also portrays him as insatiably curious about the world. In one story, Alexander descends deep under the sea in a primitive diving bell. He brought with him a rooster (to help him keep time by crowing), a dog, and a cat.

We have a version of the story from the Mughal Empire in the late 1500s:

And another from Germany in the 1400s:

Medium

The Bizarre Afterlife of Alexander the Great

The Alexander Romance turns history into a superhero story

{WHF} {Ko-Fi} {Medium}

A Roman shrine to the god Mithras (Mithraeum), ca. A.D. 240, from Dura-Europos (Syria).

The cult of Mithras first became evident in Rome towards the late 1st century AD. Having originated in Persia, during the next two centuries, it spread to the frontiers of the Western empire. It is referred to as a Roman “mystery” cult, for an initiation ceremony was required in joining, and the members kept the activities and liturgy of the cult strictly secret. Due to the highly secretive nature of the cult, our evidence for it is essentially entirely archaeological. Here we have a rare of example of a Mithraeum from Dura-Europos, which appears to be originally set in private house -a rare case indeed. The Yale University Art Gallery give the following description:

A shrine to the god Mithras, the Mithraeum at Dura-Europos was commissioned A.D. 168/69 by Palmyrene archers serving in the Roman army. It was renovated and enlarged in A.D. 209/11. The reconstruction on view here represents the third and final phase, dating to around A.D. 240. Unlike most Mithraea, which were underground to commemorate the god’s birth in a cave, the Dura Mithraeum was built into a private house.

The cult of Mithras attained popularity in the Roman period among soldiers and merchants. Restricted to men, it was a mystery religion thought to include initiation, ritual banquets, and the promise of salvation after death. The primary cult image was the tauroctony, or Mithras slaying the Cosmic Bull, often paired with an image of Mithras banqueting with Sol, god of the sun (as seen in the painting at left). Other common images included events from the life of Mithras and zodiac signs. While the subjects depicted in most Mithraea are similar, style and composition vary. The Dura Mithraeum contained two tauroctony reliefs, one above the other. The side walls showed Mithras as a mounted archer in a presentation that would have resonated with the Palmyrene archers who founded the shrine. (Yale)

Courtesy of & can be viewed at the Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven, CT. Via their online collections: 1935.100.

Nilotic mosaic originally found in the Via Nazionale in Rome. Dating to the 1st century BCE and shows crocodiles being crowned with wreaths of flowers.

Golden Throne of Tutankhamun

The throne of Tutankhamun is made of wood, covered with gold and silver, and ornamented with semi-precious stones and colored glass. Two projecting lions’ heads protect the seat of the throne while the arms take the form of winged serpents wearing the double crown of Egypt and guarding the names of the king.

It was discovered in the Antechamber of the tomb of Tutankhamun (KV62) beneath the Hippopotamus funerary bed. The throne is called (“Ist”) in ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs after the name of the mother goddess Isis, who was usually depicted bearing a throne on her head as her characteristic emblem. Now in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo. JE 62028

Kalabalık bir şehir ve içi sessiz hayatlar. yol uzun ama nereye varırsan var yüzü hep mutsuz insanlar..

Images from a 13th-century Armenian gospel from modern-day eastern Turkey. It shows the four gospel authors standing together and then, on the back, Jesus' disciples discovering his open tomb.

{WHF} {Ko-Fi} {Medium}

Bulgarians Mentioned in Egyptian Papyri from Fayoum

What was Ordinary in the Antiquity looks Odd today, due to the Greco-centric Fallacy of the Biased European Colonial 'Academics'

A while back, I received a brief email from a Bulgarian friend, who urgently asked me to watch a video and comment on the topic. The video offered links to a blog in Bulgarian and to an Austrian site of academic publications. The upsetting affair was the mention of a Bulgarian, or to put it rather correctly of a Bulgarian item or product which was imported in Coptic Egypt. As I understand Bulgarian to some extent, due to my Russian, I read the long presentation of the informative blog, and then replied to my friend. The video was actually a most abridged form of the article posted on the blog of a non-conventional Bulgarian blogger.

Contents

Introduction

I. Fayoum, Al Bahnasa (Oxyrhynchus), and Ancient Egyptian Papyri

II. Karl Wessely and his groundbreaking research and publications

III. Papyrus fragment 1224 of Karl Wessely's SPP VIII 

IV. Βουλγαρικ- (Vulgarik-)

V. Eastern Roman Emperor Maurice's Strategicon and the Bulgarian cloaks

VI. Historical context and the Ancient History of Bulgars  

VII. Historical context, the Silk Roads, and Bulgarian exports to Egypt  

VIII. Academic context and the Western falsehood of a Euro-centric World History

i- the conceptualization of World History

ii- the contextualization of every single document newly found here and there

iii- the stages of historical falsification that were undertaken over the past 500 years

iv- the forgers themselves and their antiquity

v- and last but not least, several points of

a) governance of modern states

b) international alliances, and

c) the ensuing captivity of all the targeted nations, each one well-adjusted into the preconceived role that the forgers invented for it

Introduction

What follows is my response on the topic; although it concerns an undeniably very specific affair, it helps greatly in making general readership aware of how deeply interconnected the Ancient World was, of how different it was than it is presented in conventional publications, and of how many layers of fact distortion, source concealment, systematic forgery, academic misinterpretation, and intellectual falsification have been adjusted to what average people worldwide think of as 'World History'. In brief, the modern Western colonial presentation of World History, which was dictatorially imposed worldwide, is nothing more than a choice-supportive bias and a racist construct. You can also describe it as 'Hellenism', Greco-centrism or Euro-centrism.

----- Response to an inquisitive Bulgarian friend -----

My dear friend,  

Your question and the associated topic are quite complex. 

The video that you sent me is extremely brief and almost introductory.

Папирусът от Фаюм

However, in the description, it offers two links.

I read the article in the blog; I noticed that it was published before 12-13 years (13.10.2011). Папирусът (който щеше да бъде) с истинското име на българите?

d3bep.blog.bg

d3bep :: ( ) ?

The author seems to have been taken by surprise due to the Fayoum text, but as you will see, there is no reason for that.

The second link included in the video description offers access to Tyche, an academic annual (Fachzeitschrift) published by the Austrian Institut für Alte Geschichte und Altertumskunde, Papyrologie und Epigraphik der Universität Wien. But this is an introductory web page (https://tyche.univie.ac.at/index.php/tyche) that has links to many publications, which you can download in PDF.

You must not be surprised by such findings; they are old and known to the specialists; there are many Bulgarian professors specializing in Ancient Greek. Some of them surely know about the text. But it is in the nature of the Western sciences that scholars do not write for the general public; it is very different from what happened in the Soviet Union and the other countries of the Socialist bloc. Reversely, all the average bloggers, who find every now and then a historical document known but not publicized, think that they discovered something incredible, but in most of the cases, we don't have anything to do with an extraordinary discovery. Simply, History has been very different from what average people have been left to believe.

I. Fayoum, Al Bahnasa (Oxyrhynchus), and Ancient Egyptian Papyri

Fayoum by the way is an enormous oasis. It has cities, towns and villages. In our times, it was one of the strongholds of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Former president Muhammad Morsi got ca. 90% of the votes locally. About:

en.wikipedia.org

Faiyum - Wikipedia

The discoveries of papyri in Egypt started mainly in the 19th c.; excavators unearthed tons of valuable documentation, unfortunately in fragmentary situation most of them; indicatively: 

Internet Archive

Fayûm towns and their papyri : Grenfell, Bernard P. (Bernard Pyne), 1869-1926 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Book digitized by Google from the library of the University of Michigan and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb.

Internet Archive

Fayûm towns and their papyri : Grenfell, Bernard P. (Bernard Pyne), 1869-1926 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The present volume is a record of two years' excavations in the Fayûm, the first in 1895-96 conducted by D. G. Hogarth and B. P. Grenfell, w

Such is the vastness of the documentation that either Egyptologists or Coptologists or Hellenists, there are many scholars of those disciplines who specialize in papyri only: the Papyrologists. 

Fayoum map with Ancient Greek names

Fayoum Lake (above) - Wadi El Rayan waterfalls (below)

Temple of Soknopaios at Soknopaiou Nesos (Island), Fayoum (viewed from the SE)

Fayoum: a tourist destination

Another major site of papyri discovery is Oxyrhynchus (Ancient Greek name of the Egyptian site Per medjed / Oxyrhynchus is merely the Ancient Greek translation of Per medjed), i.e. the modern city of Al Bahnasa. Indicatively: 

en.wikipedia.org

Oxyrhynchus - Wikipedia

To get a minimal idea of the vastness of this field of research, go through the following introductory readings:

Cairo Fayum Papyri: http://ipap.csad.ox.ac.uk/Fayum.html

sv.wikipedia.org

Fayoum papyri – Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Nag Hammadi library - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

List of New Testament papyri - Wikipedia

II. Karl Wessely and his groundbreaking research and publications

The fragment of papyrus that mentions in Ancient Greek an adjective, which means «Bulgarian» in English, was found in the Fayoum (you can write the word with -u or -ou). It was first published by a great scholar C. (Carl or Karl) Wessely (1860-1931).

en.wikipedia.org

Karl Wessely - Wikipedia

He was one of the 10 most prominent scholars and philologists of the 2nd half of the 19th and the 1st half of the 20th c. He published a voluminous series of firsthand publications of discoveries, which was named Studien zur Paleographie und Papyruskunde (SPP). As you can guess, this took decades to be progressively materialized. Here you have an online list: 

Unfortunately, the volume VIII (Leipzig 1908), which is mentioned in the article of the blog, is missing in the wikisource list!

No problem! You can find the PDF in the Internet Archives site. Here is the link: 

You will find the text’s first publication on page 189 of the book; this is the page 63 of 186 of the PDF. This means that you will find this indication at the bottom of the PDF:  189 (63 / 186).

This volume, as stated on p. 7, contains «Griechische Papyrusurkunden kleineren Formats», i.e. Greek papyri documents of smaller format. If you find it strange that on the first page of the main text (137 (11 / 186) as per the PDF), the first text has the number 702, please remember that this is an enormous documentation published in the series of volumes (SPP) published by Wessely between 1900 and 1920.

III. Papyrus fragment 1224 of Karl Wessely's SPP VIII  

As you will see, the text slightly differs from what is shown in either the blog article or the video. It is indeed the 1224 papyrus fragment as per the enumeration of the publication. Similarly to many other cases, most of the text is lost; this is quite common. Few things are easy to assess, if you through the entire volume; apparently the background reflects Coptic Egypt, which means that all the texts date between the early 4th and 7th c. CE. This is clearly visible because the dating system is based on indiction, which was a Roman system of periodic taxation and then chronology. About: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiction 

This Latin word was accepted in Greek: ινδικτιών, 

We can also understand that the person, who wrote this specific document, was following (not the Julian calendar but) the Coptic calendar, because on the 8th line the remaining letters αρμουθί (armouthi) help us reconstitute the well-known Coptic month of Pharmouthi (or Parmouti) which corresponds to end March-beginning April (in the Julian calendar) or April and early May in the Gregorian calendar. In Arabic, it is pronounced 'Bermouda' (unrelated to the Bermuda islands).

About: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parmouti

It has to be noted that the pagan Greek calendar was abolished, and that the use of 'Greek' ('Alexandrine Koine, to be correct) in the Fayum papyri texts and elsewhere does not imply 'ethnic' membership but rather religious affiliation (in this case, in contrast to Coptic).

About the Coptic calendar: 

In addition, you can see the first letter of the word «indiction» ι (ι) after Pharmouthi. 

Apparently, this papyrus documented a transaction effectuated by a certain Cyril (Cyrillus / Κύριλλος). Only the letters «rill» (ριλλ) are saved, as you can see, but the high frequency of the name among the Copts makes of this word the first choice of any philologist. By the way, the name is still widely used among today’s Copts as «Krulos». 

I fully support Wessely’s reconstitution of the document on lines 7, 10 and 11.

Line 7 (εγράφη out of εγρα-), i.e. «it was written»

Line 10 (απείληφα out of -ειλ-), i.e. «I received from»

Line 11 (και παρών απέλυσα out of -αρω-), i.e. «I set free by paying a ransom or I disengaged or I released». Details:

Now comes a thorny issue, because on line 6, Wessely wrote «λαμιο(υ)» (: lamio reconstituted as lamiu), and went on suggesting a unique term «χαρτα-λαμίου» (charta-lamiou). This is not attested in any other source. Λάμιον (lamium) is a genus of several species of plants, whereas Lamios (Λάμιος) is a personal name. About:

Also: (ἡμι-λάμιον) https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dh(mila%2Fmion 

But «χαρτα-λαμίου» (in Genitive declension) is a hapax. Still the opinion of the first explorer and publisher is always crucial; but as in many other cases, these people publish such an enormous volume of documentation that they do not have enough time to explain their suggestions and reason about their choices. To them, publishing hitherto unpublished material is undisputedly no 1 priority. 

Other scholars attempted a different approach; they hypothetically added «υιός» (yios), i.e. «son», before λαμίου (Lamiou)

Personally, I find it highly unlikely. First, I most of the times support the first explorer’s / publisher’s approach. 

Second, I believe that those, who add «υιός» (yios), i.e. «son» on line 6, are forced to reconstitute Βουλγαρικ̣[ὸς on line 5. This is most probably wrong.

But Wessely did not attempt something like that, preferring to leave the only saved word on line 5 as it is «Βουλγαρικ̣».

Now, what stands on lines 1 to 4 is really too minimal to allow any specialist to postulate or speculate anything. Perhaps there was something «big» mentioned on line 3 («-μεγ-»/«-meg-»), but this is only an assumption. Also, on line 4, we read that something (or someone) was (or was sent or was bought) from somewhere, because of the words «από της» (apo tis), i.e. «from the» (in this case, «the» being the feminine form of the article in Genitive declension). 

IV. Βουλγαρικ- (Vulgarik-)

Now, and this is the most important statement that can be made as regards this fragment of papyrus, the word that stands on line 5 is undoubtedly an adjective, not a substantive! This is very clear. This means that the word is not an ethnonym. In English, you use the word «Bulgarian», either you mean a Bulgarian man (in this case, it is a noun) or a Bulgarian wine (on this occasion, it is an adjective). Bulgarian is at the same time a proper noun and an adjective in English.

However, in Greek, there is a difference when it comes to names of countries and nations. When it is a proper noun (substantive), you say «Anglos» (Άγγλος), «Sikelos» (Σικελός), «Aigyptios» (Αιγύπτιος), etc. for Englishman, Sicilian man, Egyptian man, etc. But you say «anglikos» (αγγλικός), «sikelikos» (σικελικός), «aigyptiakos» (αιγυπτιακός), etc. for adjectives of masculine gender. 

Discussing the word attested on line 5 of the papyrus fragment 1224 of Karl Wessely's SPP VIII, I have to point out that in Ancient 'Greek' and in Alexandrine Koine, there is a vast difference between Βούλγαρος (Vulgaros) and βουλγαρικός (vulgarikos). 

The first denotes a Bulgarian national, someone belonging to the ethnic group / nation of Bulgars and/or Bulgarians. At this point, I have to also add that these two words in English are a modern academic convention to distinguish Proto-Bulgarians (Bulgars) from the Bulgarians, who settled in the Balkan Peninsula. However, this distinction did not exist in Late Antiquity Greek texts and in Eastern Roman texts. 

The second is merely an adjective: βουλγαρικός (vulgarikos), βουλγαρική (vulgariki), βουλγαρικόν (vulgarikon) are the three gender forms of the adjective: masculine, feminine and neutral. 

So, as the preserved part of the word being «βουλγαρικ-» (vulgarik-), we can be absolutely sure that the papyrus text mentioned a Bulgarian item (a product typical of Bulgars or an imported object manufactured by Bulgars) — not a Bulgarian man.

All the same, it makes sure the following points:

a. in 4th-7th c. CE Egypt, people imported products that were manufactured by Bulgars in their own land (Bulgaria).

b. since the products were known, imported and listed as «Bulgar/Bulgarian», people knew the nation, which manufactured them, and its location.

c. considering the magnitude of the documentation that went lost, we can safely claim that there was nothing extraordinary in the arrival of Bulgar/Bulgarian products in in 4th-7th c. CE Egypt.

d. the papyrus in question presents the transaction in terms of «business as usual». 

This is all that can be said about the papyrus text, but here ends the approach of the philologist and starts the viewpoint of the historian. However, before presenting the historical context of the transaction recorded in the fragmentarily saved papyrus from Fayoum, I have to also discuss another issue, which was mentioned in the blogger's interesting discussion.

V. Eastern Roman Emperor Maurice's Strategicon and the Bulgarian cloaks

Of course, as anyone could expect, several historians and philologists would try to find parallels to the mention of Bulgarian imports made in this papyrus fragment.

And they did. In his presentation, the blogger already mentioned several academic efforts. So, the following paragraphs, which are to be found almost in the middle of the article (immediately after the picture), refer to two scholarly efforts to establish parallels:

«Публикуван е за пръв път от SPP VIII 1124, Wessely, C., Leipzig 1908 и по - късно препубликуван от Diethart, в публикация с многозначителното заглавие  „Bulgaren“ und „Hunnen“, S. 11 - 1921. Въпреки това папирусът не стига много бързо до родна публика.

"По пътя" един учен, Моравчик, стига и по - далеч при превода. Той разчита в откъсите и думата "Пояс" и включва в теорията ново сведение(Mauricii Artis mllltaris libri duodecim, Xll (ed. Scheffer), p. 303) , където се казва, че пехотинците трябвало да носят "ζωναρία bм λιτά, xal βουλγαρική cay ία" - т.е. смята, че става дума за носен в Египет от военните "български пояс"(сведенията за публикациите дотук са по Иван Костадинов).

Вдясно виждате лична снимка. Коптска носия от 4-ти век н.е. Пази се в етнографския музей на александрийската библиотека. По необходимост за пустинния климат е от лен. Оттам вече аналогиите оставям изцяло на вас.

Папирусът "идва в България" късно. По спомени казвам ,че мисля, че първият публикувал го е доста уважаваният Иван Дуриданов, който с радост представя на българската публика вече 4 деситилетия предъвкваният от западната лингвистика български папирус. Той публикува радостна статия, с която приветства откритието».

Certainly, Gyula Moravcsik (1892-1972) and Johannes Diethart (born in 1942) proved to be great scholars indeed. About: 

The adjective Vulgarikos, -i, -on («Bulgarian» in three genders) is attested in a famous Eastern Roman text, which is rather known under the title «Maurice’s Strategicon»; this was a handbook of military sciences and a guide to techniques, methods and practices employed by the Eastern Roman army. It was written by Emperor Maurice (Μαυρίκιος- Mauricius /reigned: 582-602) or composed according to his orders. About:  

I did not read Moravcsik’s article, but I read the Strategicon; it does not speak of «Bulgarian belts», but of «Bulgarian cloaks». In this regard, the blogger mentions a very old edition of the text, namely Mauricii Artis mllltaris libri duodecim, Xll (ed. Scheffer), p. 303). This dates back to 1664:

At those days, all Western European editions of Ancient Greek texts involved Latin translations. Scheffer's edition of the Strategicon can be found here:    

https://books.google.ru/books?id=77NODQEACAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=ru&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false (page 303)

George T. Dennis' translation (1984) makes the text accessible to English readers:

In the 12th chapter, which is the last of the Strategicon, under the title "Mixed Formations, Infantry, Camps and Hunting", in part I (Clothing to be Worn by the Infantry), on page 138 (University of Pennsylvania Press), the word σαγίον (sagion) is very correctly translated as "cloak". The author refers to "βουλγαρικά σαγία" (Latin: sagia Bulgarica) in plural; this is rendered in English "Bulgarian cloaks", which are thought to be very heavy. Already, the word σαγίον (sagion) is of Latin etymology. About:

and https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100436640

Also: https://greek_greek.en-academic.com/151302/σαγίον 

In that period and for more than 1000 years, what people now erroneously call «Medieval Greek» or «Byzantine Greek» (which in reality is «Eastern Roman») was an amalgamation of Alexandrine Koine and Latin. There were an enormous number of Latin words written in Greek characters and in Alexandrine Koine form. Indicatively: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koine_Greek

At this point, I complete my philological commentary on the topic. I read the Strategicon of Emperor Maurice when I was student in Athens in the middle 1970s. 

I did not remember the mention of Bulgarian cloaks, but I know however that the Bulgars, who founded the Old Great Bulgaria, appear in Eastern Roman texts at least 100 years before the purported establishment and growth of that state (632–668). The academic chronology for the First Bulgarian Empire may be correct (681–1018), but the dates given for the Old Great Bulgaria and the Volga Bulgaria (late 7th c.–1240s) are deliberately false. General info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Great_Bulgaria  and  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Bulgarian_Empire 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_Bulgaria  and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars#Etymology_and_origin

VI. Historical context and the Ancient History of Bulgars  

It is now time for me to briefly discuss the historical context within which the aforementioned topics took place. Let’s first ask some questions: 

Is it strange that a Fayoum papyrus of the 3rd-7th c. CE mentions Bulgarian products that arrived in Egypt? 

Is it odd that in Emperor Maurice’s Strategicon we find a mention of Bulgarian cloaks used or not used by the Eastern Roman army?

In both cases, the response is «no»!

From where did these Bulgarian products come?

Where did Bulgars (or Bulgarians) live at the time?

My personal response is somehow vague: they came from some regions of today’s Russia’s European soil, either in the southern confines (the Azov Sea, the northern coast of the Black Sea, and the North Caucasus region) or in the area of today’s Tatarstan and other lands north-northeast of the Caspian Sea. 

It is not easy to designate one specific location in this regard, and this is so for one extra reason: it seems that there were several tribes named with the same name, and they were distinguished among themselves on the basis of earlier tribal affiliations, which may go back to the Rouran Khaganate (330-555 CE). There are actually plenty of names associated with the early Bulgars, notably the Onogurs, the Kutrigurs, etc. About:

Many readers may be taken by surprise because I go back easily from the time of the Old Great Bulgaria (630-668 CE) to that of the Rouran Khaganate and the Huns. All the same, there is no surprise involved in this regard. Western European historians deliberately, systematically and customarily underestimate across the board the value of Oral History and attempt to dissociate Ethnography from History; these approaches are wrong. It is quite possible that, from the very beginning of the establishment of Rouran Khaganate, many tribes, clans or families (which later became nations) started migrating. The very first Bulgars (Bulgarians) may have reached areas north of the Iranian borders in Central Asia or in Northern Caucasus much earlier than it is generally thought among Western scholars. See indicatively:

Now, the reasons for which I intentionally date the first potential interaction of Bulgars/Bulgarians with other tribes (or nations) in earlier periods are not a matter of personal preference or obstinacy. There is an important historical text named «Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans». It has not been duly comprehended let alone interpreted thus far. About: 

Three Russian copies of the text have been saved (in Church Slavonic); they date back to the 15th and 16th c. They are generally viewed as later copies of a potential Old Bulgarian text of the 9th c. Other specialists also pretend that there may/might have been an even earlier text, in either Eastern Roman («Medieval Greek») or Bulgar, which was eventually a stone inscription. 

In this document, the highly honorific title «Knyaz» (Князь) is given to Asparuh (ca. 640-700) and to his five predecessors. I must add that the said document was always an intriguing historical source for me due to two bizarre particularities to which I don't think that any scholar or specialist gave due attention, deep investigation, and persuasive interpretation.

First, the antiquity of the document is underscored by the fact that the early Bulgar calendar, which is attested in this text, appears to be an adaptation of the Chinese calendar. This fact means that the primeval Bulgars, when located somewhere in Eastern Siberia or Mongolia, must have had dense contacts with the Chinese scribal and imperial establishment; perhaps this fact displeased other Turanian-Mongolian tribes of the Rouran Khaganate and contributed to the emigration of those «Ur-Bulgaren». The next point is however more impactful on our approach to the very early phase of the Bulgars.

Second, although for most of the rulers immortalized in the historical document, the duration of their lifetimes or tenures are of entirely historical nature (involving brief or long periods of 5 up to 60 years of reign or lifetime), the two first names of rulers are credited with incredibly long lifetimes. This is not common; actually, it does not look sensible; but it is meaningful.

More specifically, Avitohol is said to have lived 300 years, whereas Irnik is credited with 150 years. But we know who Irnik was! Irnik or Ernak was the 3rd son of Attila and he is said to have been his most beloved offspring. Scholars fix the beginning of his reign in 437 CE, but this is still not the important point. The crucial issue with the partly «mythical» and partly historical nature of the text «Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans» is the fact that the two early rulers, whom the Bulgarians considered as their original ancestors, are credited with extraordinarily long and physically impossible lives. General reading: 

This can therefore imply only one thing: at a later period, when the earlier memories were partly lost for various reasons, eventually because of the new environment namely the Balkan Peninsula, in which the then Bulgars were finding themselves, Avitohol and Irnik were retained as the leading figures of ruling families, and not as independent rulers. Consequently, the dates given for their lives were in fact those of their respective dynasties. It was then that the very early period of Bulgar History was mythicized for statecraft purposes, mystified to all, and sanctified in the national consciousness.

Many Western scholars attempted to identify Avitohol with Attila, but in vain; I don’t think that this attempt can be maintained. So, I believe that the Bulgars were one of the noble families of the Huns (evidently involving intermarriage with Attila himself), and that before Attila, the very earliest Bulgars were ruled by another dynasty which had lasted 300 years. But if it is so, we go back to the times of the Roman Emperor Trajan (reign: 98-117 CE), Vologases III of Arsacid Parthia (110–147 CE) and the illustrious Chinese general, explorer and diplomat Ban Chao (32-102 CE) of the Eastern Han dynasty. About:

The latter fought for 30 years against the Xiongnu (Hiung-nu/匈奴, i.e. the earliest tribes of the Huns, consolidated the Chinese control throughout the Tarim Basin region (today's Eastern Turkestan or Xinjiang), and was appointed Protector General of the Western Regions. He is very famous for having dispatched Gan Ying, an envoy, to the West in 97 CE. According to the Book of the Later Han (Hou Hanshu/後漢書), which was compiled in the 5th c. CE by Fan Ye, Gan Ying reached Parthia (Arsacid Iran; in Chinese: Anxi, 安息) and gave the first Chinese account of the Western confines of Asia and of the Roman Empire. About:

It is n this historical environment that we have to place the very early ancestors of the Bulgars.

VII. Historical context, the Silk Roads, and Bulgarian exports to Egypt  

Consequently, I believe that it is more probable that the Bulgarian products of those days were first appreciated by the Iranians and later sold to Aramaeans, Armenians, Iberians and other nations settled in the western confines of the Arsacid (250 BCE-224 CE) and the Sassanid (224-651 CE) empires, i.e. in Mesopotamia and Syria, and thence they became finally known in Egypt as well.  

The incessant migrations from NE Asia to Central Europe and to Africa, as a major historical event, were not separate from the 'Silk Roads'; they were part, consequence or side-effect of that, older and wider, phenomenon. Actually, the term 'Silk Roads' is at the same time inaccurate and partly; the magnificent phenomenon of commercial, cultural and spiritual inter-exchanges, which took place due to the establishment (by the Achaemenid Shah Darius I the Great) of a comprehensive network of numerous older regional trade routes, is to be properly described as 'silk-, spice-, and perfume-trade routes across lands, deserts and seas'. About: https://silkroadtexts.wordpress.com/

It has to be said that, after the Achaemenid Iranian invasion, annexation and occupation of Egypt, Sudan and NE Libya (525-404 BCE and 343-332 BCE), Iranian settlers remained in Egypt; they were known to and mentioned by the Macedonian settlers, who manned the Macedonian dynasty of Ptolemies (323-30 BCE). General info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Achaemenid_conquest_of_Egypt

Those Iranian settlers were called 'Persai (ek) tis epigonis' (Πέρσαι τῆς ἐπιγονῆς), lit. 'Iranian settlers' descendants'. About:

Pieter W. Pestman, A proposito dei documenti di Pathyris II Πέρσαι τῆς ἐπιγονῆς

Xin Dai, Ethnicity Designation in Ptolemaic Egypt https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329265278_Ethnicity_Designation_in_Ptolemaic_Egypt

See a text from the time of the Roman Emperor Domitian (reign: 81-96) here: https://papyri.info/ddbdp/p.athen;;23

See another text from the time of the Roman Emperor Nerva (reign: 96-98) here:

There were also in Egypt Jewish Aramaean descendants of the early Iranian settlers: "οἱ τρ(ε)ῖς | Ἰουδαῖοι Πέρσαι τῆς ἐπιγονῆς τῶν [ἀ]πὸ Σύρων κώ- | μης" (lit. Jewish Iranians, who were the descendants of an Aramaean town) - From: Database of Military Inscriptions and Papyri of Early Roman Palestine https://armyofromanpalestine.com/0140-2

Please note in this regard that the title given to the web page and the document is very wrong and extremely biased: "§140 Loan between Jews and Lucius Vettius"; the three persons who received the loan were not ethnic Jews. Their religion was surely Judaism, as it was the case of the renowned Samaritan woman with whom Jesus spoke according to the Gospels. Several other nations accepted Judaism, notably Aramaeans in Palestine, Syria and Mesopotamia (they were called 'Syrians' by the Macedonians and the Romans). It is well known that there were many clashes and strives between them and the ethnic Jews. The latter were few and lived either in Jerusalem (and its suburbs) or in Egypt (in Alexandria and many other locations) or in the centers of Talmudic academies in Mesopotamia (namely Nehardea, Pumbedita and Mahoze / Ctesiphon). About:

If I expanded on this topic, it is precisely because the merchants, who were most active across the Silk Roads, were the Aramaeans, and that is why Aramaic became almost an official language in the Achaemenid Empire of Iran, whereas at the same time it turned out to be the lingua franca alongside the trade routes. Furthermore, a great number of writing systems in Central Asia, Iran, India, and Western Asia were developed on the basis of the Aramaic alphabet. Last but not least, Arabic originates from Syriac, which is a late form of Aramaic. About:

It is therefore essential to state that the Bulgarian products, which (either from North Caucasus and the northern coastlands of the Black Sea or from the regions around the north-northeastern shores of the Caspian Sea) reached Egypt (via most probably North Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine), were transported on camels owned by Aramaean merchants and due to caravans organized and directed by Aramaeans.

It is also noteworthy that, during the Arsacid times, several buffer-states were formed between the eastern borders of the Roman Empire and the western frontiers of Parthia: Osrhoene, Sophene, Zabdicene, Adiabene, Hatra, Characene, Elymais, Gerrha (the illustrious port of call and major trade center of the Persian Gulf that rivaled with Alexandria in the Mediterranean), the Nabataean kingdom, and the short-lived but most formidable Tadmor (Palmyra). This situation favored the world trade between East and West, as well as North and South. General info:

The great rivalry and ferocious antagonism between the Romans (and later the Eastern Romans) and the Iranians after the rise of the Sassanid dynasty (224 CE) did not affect in anything the good relations and the trade among Egyptians, Aramaeans, and Iranians; there were numerous Aramaean populations in both empires, so, we feel safe to conclude that any products from lands north of Caucasus mountains and north of Iran were transported by Aramaeans via Palestine or Nabataea to Egypt.

There have been additional reasons for the good feelings of the Egyptians toward the Iranians, and they were of religious nature. The Christological disputes generated enmity and great animosity between

a) the Copts (: Egyptians) and the Aramaeans, who adopted Miaphysitism (also known as Monophysitism), and

b) the Eastern Romans and the Western Romans, who thought they preserved the correct faith (Orthodoxy).

One has to bear always in mind, that in order to define themselves, the so-called Monophysites (also known more recently as 'Miaphysites') used exactly the same term (i.e. 'Orthodox'), which means that they considered the Eastern Romans and the Western Romans as heretics. The patriarchates of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem were split. Atop of it, other Aramaeans (mostly in Mesopotamia and Iran) accepted the preaching of Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, who was also deposed as a heretic (in August 431). For the aforementioned religious reasons, the Eastern Roman armies were most loathed in Syria, Palestine, North Mesopotamia (today's SE Turkey), and Egypt as oppressors. About:

In addition, one has to take into consideration the fact that the Jews, who inhabited the eastern provinces of the Roman (and later the Eastern Roman) Empire, were also pro-Iranian and they expected that the Iranians would liberate them one day from the Roman yoke pretty much like the Achaemenid Iranian Emperor Cyrus delivered their exiled ancestors from the tyranny of Nabonid Babylonia (539 BCE).

The Axumite Abyssinian invasion of Yemen (ca. 530 CE; in coordination with the Roman Emperor Justinian I), the ensued Iranian-Axumite wars, the Iranian invasion of Yemen (570 CE; known as the Year of the Elephant among the Arabs of Hejaz), and the incessant battles and wars between the Eastern Roman and the Sassanid Iranian armies were closely watched by all populations in Egypt. The third Iranian conquest of Egypt (618 CE) was a matter of great jubilation for Copts and Jews; Egypt was annexed to Iran for ten (10 years), before being under Eastern Roman control again for fourteen years (628-642 CE) and then invaded by the Islamic armies. General info:

Indicative of the good Egyptian feelings for the Sassanid emperors and Iran is a tapestry weave found by Albert Gayet in his 1908 excavations in Antinoe (also known as Antinoöpolis, i.e. the town of Sheikh Ibada in today's Egypt); this is a textile fragment of legging that dates back to the late 6th and early 7th c. (Musée des Tissus, in Lyon-France; MT 28928). It features the scene of an unequal battle that has been identified as one of the engagements between the Sassanid and the Axumite armies in Yemen; Iranian horse-archers are depicted at the moment of their triumph over Abyssinian infantry opponents, who appear to be armed with stones. In the very center of the scene, an enthroned figure was often identified with the great Iranian Emperor Khosrow (Chosroes) I Anushirvan (Middle Persian: Anoshag ruwan: 'with Immortal Soul'), who was for Sassanid Iran as historically important as Justinian I, his early rival and subsequent peace partner, for the Roman Empire. About:

This was the wider historical context at the time of the arrival of the first Bulgarian exports to the Sassanid Empire of Iran, the Eastern Roman Empire, and Egypt more specifically. And the Bulgarian cloaks, as mentioned in Maurice’s Strategicon, make every researcher rather think of heavy winter cloaks, which were apparently not necessary for the Eastern Roman soldiers, who had to usually fight in less harsh climatological conditions. It is possible that those heavy cloaks were eventually used by the Iranian army when engaged in the Caucasus region, and thence they were noticed by the Eastern Romans.

With these points, I complete my philological and historical comments on the topic. However, the entire issue has to be also contextualized at the academic-educational level, so that you don't find it bizarre that not one average Bulgarian knew about the topic before the inquisitive blogger wrote his article and the YouTuber uploaded his brief video. 

VIII. Academic context and the Western falsehood of a Euro-centric World History

This part does not concern the Fayoum papyri and the Strategicon of Emperor Maurice; it has to do with what non-specialists, the average public, and various unspecialized explorers do not know at all.

This issue pertains to

i- the conceptualization of World History;

ii- the contextualization of every single document newly found here and there;

iii- the stages of historical falsification that were undertaken over the past 500 years;

iv- the forgers themselves and their antiquity, and last but not least; and

v- several points of

a) governance of modern states,

b) international alliances, and

c) the ensuing captivity of all the targeted nations, each one well-adjusted into the preconceived role that the forgers invented for it.

As you can guess, one can write an encyclopedia on these topics, so I will be very brief. Attention: only at the end, you will understand that all these parameters fully precondition the topic that we already discussed, and any other that we have not yet discussed, because simply it does not exist as a standalone entity but as a fact entirely conditioned by what I herewith describe in short.

What I want to say is this: if tomorrow another Fayoum discovery brings to light a 3rd c. BCE papyrus with the mention of something Bulgarian (Voulgarikon), this will not affect in anything the prevailing conditions of the so-called academic scholarship. In other words, do not imagine that with tiny shreds of truth unveiled here and there, you are going to change anything in the excruciatingly false manner World History was written.

i- the conceptualization of World History

It may come as a nasty surprise to you, but what we know now about History is not the conclusion or the outcome of additional discoveries made one after the other over the past 400-500 years. Contrarily, it was first preconceived, when people had truly minimal knowledge of the past, and after they had forged thousands of documents and manuscripts for at least 500-600 years, long before the early historiographical efforts were undertaken during the Renaissance.

After they destroyed, concealed and rewrote tons of manuscripts of Ancient Greek and Roman historiography from ca. 750 CE until 1500 CE, Western European monks and editors, philosophers and intellectuals, popes, scientists and alchemists started propagating their world view about the assumingly glorious past of their supposedly Greek and Roman ancestors – a nonexistent past that the Renaissance people were deliberately fooled enough to believe that they had lost and they had to rediscover it. In fact, all the discoveries made afterwards, all the decipherments of numerous ancient writings, and all the studies of original material from Mesopotamia, Egypt, North Africa, Caucasus, Central Asia, China and India was duly processed and adjusted in a way not to damage or challenge in anything the preconceived scheme which was named 'World History' by the vicious and criminal Western European forgers.

This means that you should never expect 'new discoveries' to challenge the officially established dogma of the Western academia; it is not about Bulgars and the past of today's Bulgarians, Thracians, Macedonians, etc., etc., etc. It is about all. What type of position the Bulgarians, the Russians, the Turks, the Iranians, the Egyptians and all the rest occupy in today's distorted historiography had been decided upon long before the establishment of the modern states that bear those names. 

ii- the contextualization of every single document newly found here and there

Any finding unearthed by anyone anytime anywhere means nothing in itself; this concerns every historiographer, truthful or dishonest. What truly matters for all is contextualization. It so did for the original forgers. Theirs was an arbitrary attempt; they contextualized the so-called 'Ancient Greece' in a way that would have been fully unacceptable, blasphemous and abominable for the outright majority of all the South Balkan populations during the 23 centuries prior to the foundation of Constantinople by Constantine the Great.  

It was peremptory, partial and biased; according to the fallacious narratives of the forgers, centuries were shrunk and shortened in order to fit into few lines; moreover the schemers stretched geographical terms at will; they did not use various terms, which were widely employed in the Antiquity; they passed important persons under silence, while exaggerating the presentation of unimportant ones. This is what contextualization was for the forgers: they applied a Latin recapitulative name (Graeci) to a variety of nations, which never used this Latin term or any other recapitulative term for them; they applied a non-Ionian, non-Achaean, and non-Aeolian term (Hellenes) to them and to others; and after the decipherment of many Oriental languages, they did not rectify their preposterous mistakes, although they learned quite well that the two fake terms about those populations (Graecus and Hellene) did not exist in any other language of highly civilized nations (Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Hittite, Hurrian, Canaanite, Phoenician, Aramaic, Hebrew, Old Achaemenid Iranian).

Consequently, every other information, data and documentation pertaining to any elements of the said context was concealed, distorted or misinterpreted in order to be duly adjusted to the biased context that had been elaborated first.

iii- the stages of historical falsification that were undertaken over the past 500 years

Following the aforementioned situation, many dimensions of historical falsification were carried out and can actually be noticed by researchers, explorers, investigators and astute observers. The 'barbarian invasions' (or Migration Period) is only one of them; I mention it first because it concerns the Bulgars. Long before distorting the History of Great Old Bulgaria and that of Volga Bulgaria systematically, Western historical forgers portrayed Bulgars and many other highly civilized nations as barbarians. Why?

Because the historical forgers of the Western World hate nomads! This is an irrevocable trait of them; that's why they fabricated the fake term 'civilization' in their absurd manner: originating from the Latin word 'civitas', the worthless and racist term 'civilization' implies that you cannot be 'civilized' unless you are urban. This monstrous and unacceptable fact reveals the rotten roots of the hideous, vulgar, sick and villainous Western world and colonial academia.

In the Orient, there was never a cultural divide between urban populations and nomads; some nomadic tribes were considered as barbarians; that's true. But also settled populations and urban inhabitants were also considered as barbarians (like the Elamites, who were considered as inhuman by the Assyrians). The rule was that the settled nations were nomads in earlier periods. But the status of a society was irrelevant of the consideration and the esteem (or lack thereof) that others had about a certain nation. This started with the Romans and their interpretation of the South Balkan, Anatolian, and Cretan past. It was then re-utilized and modified by Western Europeans. To some extent, the papal approval was tantamount to acquisition of credentials and to promotion to 'civilized nation status'. Actually, this is today the nucleus of the whole problem concerning Ukraine.

That is why the so-called Migration Period was so terribly distorted by Western historians. Western historians deliberately preferred to stay blind and not to study the Ancient Mongol chronicles (notably the Secret History of The Mongols) in order to avoid assessing the Mongol-Turanian standards and principles of civilization. Had they proceeded in the opposite way, they would have discovered that, for the nomads, it is the settled people and the urban populations, who are barbarians, decayed and shameful.

The truth about the fallacious term 'Migration Period' is simple: there was never a migration period before 1500 CE (and certainly none afterwards), because every century was actually a migration period. Human History is a history of migrations.

The distorted linguistic-ethnographic division of the migrant nations helped forgers to dramatically increase the confusion level; as a matter of fact, there was no proper ethnic division (in the modern sense of the term) among Mongols, Turanians, Slavs and several other migrant nations. The languages change when people migrate and settle, resettle, move again, and end up in faraway places. For Muslim historians, the khan of the Saqaliba (: Slavs) was the strongest of all Turanian rulers. The arbitrary distinction of the migrant nations into two groups, namely Indo-European and Ural-Altaic/Turco-Mongolian nations was done deliberately in order to intentionally transform the face of the world and adjust it to the so-called Table of Nations, a forged text that made its way into the biblical book of Genesis in later periods (6th–4th c. BCE). General reading:

The Western academic tyranny is so deeply rooted that, irrespective of your political, ideological or philosophical affiliation (fascist, Nazi, communist, conservative, social-democrat, liberal, atheist, evolutionist, creationist, anarchist, etc.), you always have to adjust your seminars, courses, lectures, contributions, books and publications to the fallacy of Genesis chapter 10. The absurd logic of this system is the following: "since no Bulgars are mentioned in the Table of Nations, they must be a later tribe". Then, believe it or not, whatever documentation may be found in Aramaic, Middle Persian, Pahlavi, Brahmi, Kharosthi, Avestan, Sogdian, Tocharian, Chinese or other texts about the Bulgars will be deliberately presented as irrelevant to Bulgars. If a new Sogdian document is found in Central Asia (dating back to the middle Arsacid times: 1st c. CE) and there is a certain mention of Bulgars in the text, the criminal gangsters and the systematic fraudsters of the Western universities and museums will write an enormous amount of articles to stupidly discredit the document or attribute the word to anything or anyone else.

iv- the forgers themselves and their antiquity

The above makes it clear that the foundations of today's Western academic life, historiographical research, sector of Humanities, and all the associated fields of study were laid by the Western European Catholic monks and only after the end of the Eastern Roman imperial control, appointment and approval of the Roman popes (752 CE).

This changes totally the idea that you and the entire world have of the History of Mankind because it means that the Benedictine-Papal-Roman opposition to and clash with the Eastern Roman Empire (and the subsequent schisms of 867 and 1054) were entirely due to the resolute papal attempt to forge the World History, to substitute it with a fake History, and to diffuse all the Anti-Christian schemes that brought the world to today's chaos. As the Muslims were totally unaware of the confrontation, the Crusades were undertaken against (not the Caliphate but) Constantinople. All the Christian Orthodox monasteries and libraries were controlled by Catholic monks, scribes, copyists and priests who had the time (from 1204 until 1261) to rob whatever manuscripts they had to rob, destroy whatever manuscripts they had to destroy, and leave all the rest as 'useless' to their enterprise.  

That is why modern scholars are ordered to jubilate every time a papyrus fragment is found in Egypt with few lines of verses from Homer, Hesiod and the Ancient 'Greek' tragedians, historians or philosophers! They publicize these discoveries in order to make every naïve guy believe that the bulk of their forged documentation is genuine. But it is not.

v- and last but not least, several points of

a) governance of modern states

The consolidation of the historical forgery was top concern for the colonial puppets of the Western European powers and for the powers hidden behind the scenes. I still remember the blogger's comments about the late 19th and early 20th c. Bulgarian statesmen, politicians and academics, who were not so enthusiastic about the Fayoum papyrus! He made me laugh at; of course, he was very correct in writing what he did. Absolutely pertinent! But also very naïve!

He failed to remember that the top Ottoman military officer in Salonica during the First Balkan War, lieutenant general Hasan Tahsin Pasha (also known as Hasan Tahsin Mesarea; 1845-1918), as soon as he learned that the 7th Bulgarian Division was coming from the northeast, decided on his own to surrender the Salonica fortress and 26000 men to the Greek crown prince Constantine, being thus deemed a traitor and sentenced to death by a martial court.  

No Bulgarian (or other) official had ever the authority to go beyond the limits specified as regards either borderlines or historical approaches and conclusions.

b) international alliances, and

The same is valid today; it would be bizarre for Bulgarian professors of universities and academics to teach, diffuse, publish and propagate ideas, concepts and interpretations that contravene the worldwide norm that the Western colonials imposed across the Earth. It is as simple as that: Bulgaria, as EU member state, participates in many academic projects like Erasmus, etc. The professor, who would challenge the lies and the falsehood, which are at the basis of the so-called European values, principles and standards, would automatically become a problem for his rector, who would be receiving most unpleasant if not threatening calls from every corner of the Earth, as well as demands to fire the uncooperative, 'controversial' professor.

c) the ensuing captivity of all the targeted nations, each one well-adjusted into the preconceived role that the forgers invented for it

Actually, it is not a matter of Bulgaria and how the true History of Bulgaria is hidden from the Bulgarians; the same is valid in Egypt, Iraq, Turkey, Iran, Sudan, Israel, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, etc. As I lived in all these countries, I have personal experience and deep knowledge as regards their pedagogical systems and the contents of their manuals. In Egypt, schoolchildren study the History of Ancient Egypt down to Ramses III only (ca. 1200 BCE) and next year, they start with the beginning of Islam (642 CE). Why?

Because during the falsely called Roman times, Egyptian mysticisms, religions, spirituality, cults, sciences, arts, wisdom, cosmogony, cosmology, and eschatology flooded Greece, Rome, the Roman Empire, and even Europe beyond the Roman borders. The Egyptian pupil must not learn that the Greeks, the Romans, and the Europeans were dramatically inferior to his own cultural heritage. That's why stupid and illiterate sheikhs, ignorant imams, and evil theologians intoxicate the average Egyptians with today's fake Islam, which is not a religion anymore but a theological-ideological-political system at the antipodes of the true historical Islam. It cuts the average Egyptian from his own cultural heritage, thus making him stupidly care about the wives and the prematurely dead children of prophet Muhammad, as well as other matters of no importance for the spiritual-cultural-intellectual phenomenon of Islam.

Best regards,

Shamsaddin

Μίθρας, Μιθραϊσμός & Μιθραϊκά Μυστήρια: Όλα τα Αρχαία Ελληνικά και Λατινικά Κείμενα που αναφέρονται στον Μίθρα και τους Μιθραϊστές

Mithras, Mithraism & Mithraic Mysteries: All Ancient Greek and Latin Texts Relating to Mithras and the Mithraists

ΑΝΑΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ ΣΗΜΕΡΑ ΑΝΕΝΕΡΓΟ ΜΠΛΟΓΚ “ΟΙ ΡΩΜΙΟΙ ΤΗΣ ΑΝΑΤΟΛΗΣ”

Το κείμενο του κ. Νίκου Μπαϋρακτάρη είχε αρχικά δημοσιευθεί την 7η Μαΐου 2019.

Αναδημοσίευση από το https://www.tertullian.org/ όλων των αρχαιοελληνικών και λατινικών κειμενικών αναφορών στον Μίθρα. Οι αρχαίες ιρανικές ιστορικές πηγές των αχαιμενιδικών, αρσακιδικών και σασανιδικών και οι αναφορές των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων και Ρωμαίων στον Μίθρα μας βοηθούν τόσο στην ανασύσταση της τρομερής θρησκευτικής διαπάλης των αχαιμενιδικών χρόνων (550-330) ανάμεσα στον Ζωροαστρισμό και τον Μιθραϊσμό, όσο και στην κατανόηση της μεγάλης άγνοιας των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων και Ρωμαίων σχετικά με τις θρησκείες του Ιράν. Με άλλα λόγια, οι Αρχαίοι Έλληνες και Ρωμαίοι δεν στάθηκαν ικανοί να διακρίνουν την τρομερή αντιπαλότητα των Ζωροαστριστών και Μιθραϊστών Ιρανών με τους οποίους συνδιαλέγοντο. Έτσι, η τεράστια σύγχυση σχετικά με το αχαιμενιδικό Ιράν διατηρήθηκε επί μακρόν και επέδρασε αρνητικά στις ρωμαιοϊρανικές σχέσεις κατά τα αρσακιδικά και τα σασανιδικά χρόνια. Αυτή η σύγχυση βρήκε την συνέχειά της στα χριστιανοϊσλαμικά χρόνια, όταν οι Ρωμιοί ιστορικοί δεν μπορούσαν να εννοήσουν τις θρησκευτικές, ψυχικές-πνευματικές, μυστικιστικές και θεολογικές έριδες οι οποίες εκδηλώθηκαν εντός του ισλαμικού χαλιφάτου.

-----------------------------------------

http://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2019/05/07/μίθρας-μιθραϊσμός-μιθραϊκά-μυστήρι/ ====================

Οι Ρωμιοί της Ανατολής – Greeks of the Orient

Ρωμιοσύνη, Ρωμανία, Ανατολική Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία

Ύστερα από το μεγάλο ενδιαφέρον που προκλήθηκε σχετικά με την διάδοση του Μιθραϊσμού ανάμεσα στους Έλληνες, τους Ρωμαίους, την Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία και ολόκληρη την Ευρώπη εξαιτίας δύο πρώτων κειμένων μου σχετικά, δημοσιεύω σήμερα ένα πλήρη κατάλογο (στα αγγλικά) όλων των αποσπασμάτων αρχαίας ελληνικής και ρωμαϊκής γραμματείας που αναφέρονται στον Μίθρα και στους Μιθραϊστές.

Η επιστημονική εργασία αυτή δεν έχει βεβαίως γίνει από μένα, ούτε κι η ηλεκτρονική παρουσίαση του θέματος είναι δική μου. Παραθέτω τον σύνδεσμο. Είμαι όμως σίγουρος ότι όσοι ενδιαφέρονται σοβαρά θα βρουν εδώ όσα τους χρειάζονται για να κάνουν μόνοι τους την δική τους έρευνα.

Αποσπάσματα από τον Ηρόδοτο και τον Ξενοφώντα μέχρι τον Θεοφάνη και τον Φώτιο, περνώντας από τους Δίωνα Χρυσόστομο, τον Λουκιανό, τον Δίωνα Κάσσιο, τον Ψευδο-Καλλισθένη, τον Γρηγόριο Ναζιανζηνό, τον Ιουλιανό Παραβάτη, τον Ιερώνυμο, τον Κοσμά Ινδικοπλεύστη, τον Κοσμά Μελωδό, και πολλούς άλλους δείχνουν σε ποιον βαθμό είχε προχωρήσει ο πολιτισμικός εκπερσισμός των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων και των Ρωμαίων. Οι φιλολογικές μαρτυρίες παρουσιάζονται καταταγμένες χρονολογικά.

Εννοείται ότι δεν περιλαμβάνονται εδώ οι επιγραφικές μαρτυρίες: οι χιλιάδες επιγραφών σε αρχαία ελληνικά και λατινικά που έχουν ανασκαφεί κι ανευρεθεί από την Κομμαγηνή και τον Πόντο μέχρι την Γερμανία και την Βρεταννία κι από την Αλγερία και την Ιβηρική μέχρι τις στέππες της Ουκρανίας.

Επίσης δεν περιλαμβάνονται εδώ κατάλογοι αναγλύφων, αγαλμάτων, μνημείων, ναών του Μίθρα (: ‘Μιθραίων’) και γενικώτερα αρχαιολογικών χώρων που έχουν εντοπισθεί δυτικά του Ιράν και μέχρι τον Ατλαντικό, ή από την Βόρεια Ευρώπη μέχρι το Σουδάν.

Τα τρία πρότερα κείμενά μου για το θέμα βρίσκονται εδώ:

Οι Ατελείωτες Επελάσεις του Μίθρα προς την Δύση κι ο Πολιτισμικός Εξιρανισμός Ελλήνων, Ρωμαίων κι Ευρωπαίων

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2019/04/29/οι-ατελείωτες-επελάσεις-του-μίθρα-προ/

(και πλέον: https://www.academia.edu/58627059/Οι_Ατελείωτες_Επελάσεις_του_Μίθρα_προς_την_Δύση_κι_ο_Πολιτισμικός_Εξιρανισμός_Ελλήνων_Ρωμαίων_κι_Ευρωπαίων)

Ταυροθυσίες και Μιθραϊκά Μυστήρια στην Κορυφή του Ολύμπου – Η Απόλυτη Επιβολή του Περσικού Πνεύματος ανάμεσα στους Έλληνες & το Τέλος της Αρχαίας Ελλάδας

https://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2019/05/06/ταυροθυσίες-και-μιθραϊκά-μυστήρια-στ/

(και πλέον: https://www.academia.edu/62212919/Ταυροθυσίες_και_Μιθραϊκά_Μυστήρια_στην_Κορυφή_του_Ολύμπου_Η_Απόλυτη_Επιβολή_του_Περσικού_Πνεύματος_ανάμεσα_στους_Έλληνες_and_το_Τέλος_της_Αρχαίας_Ελλάδας)

και

Η Απόλυτη Κυριαρχία των Μιθραϊστών Πειρατών στο Αιγαίο, την Ελλάδα και τον Θεσσαλικό Όλυμπο στον 1ο Αιώνα π.Χ. – Τι λέει ο Πλούταρχος

http://greeksoftheorient.wordpress.com/2019/05/07/η-απόλυτη-κυριαρχία-των-μιθραϊστών-πε/

(και πλέον: https://www.academia.edu/62228155/Η_Απόλυτη_Κυριαρχία_των_Μιθραϊστών_Πειρατών_στο_Αιγαίο_την_Ελλάδα_και_τον_Θεσσαλικό_Όλυμπο_στον_1ο_Αιώνα_π_Χ_Τι_λέει_ο_Πλούταρχος)

Για όσους έχουν δυσκολία στα αγγλικά, τονίζω ότι θα επανέλθω συχνά-πυκνά εστιάζοντας σε πολλά από τα παρακάτω κείμενα.

—————————————————-

Ο Μίθρας στο Ιράν, Ανάγλυφο του Ταγ-ε Μποστάν (Taq-e_Bostan): στέψη του Αρντασίρ Β’ 379-383 μ.Χ. (αριστερά, κραδαίνοντας το μπαρσόμ)

Ο Μίθρας στο Ιεροθέσιον Κορυφής (Νέμρουτ Νταγ) και άλλα μνημεία της Κομμαγηνής

Ο Μίθρας στην Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία και την Ευρώπη

Ο Μίθρας στην Αυτοκρατορία της Μερόης (‘Αιθιοπία’: Αρχαίο Σουδάν), Αναπαράσταση των χρόνων του βασιλέως Σορκάρορ (Shorkaror – 20-30 μ.Χ.) από το Τζέμπελ Κέιλι (Jebel Qeili), ανατολικά του Χαρτούμ

——————————————————–

Mithras: all the passages in Graeco-Roman literature

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/literary_sources.htm

This page contains a list of all the passages in Greek or Latin literature that refer to “Mithra(s)”, in English translation. This includes all the material for both the ancient Persian cult of Mitra, and the Roman cult of Mithras, as it is sometimes not clear which is intended here, and the Romans themselves tended to suppose that Mithras and Mithra were the same, and used the same word for each.

I have indicated in each case, where possible, which is intended: the Persian cult by P, the Roman one by R. and those which could be either as ?.

The material here has mainly been gathered as follows:

· Use the bibliography from Manfred Clauss The Roman cult of Mithras.

· Use Geden Select passages illustrating Mithraism

· Use Cumont, Textes et Monuments 2. A number of passages which don’t mention Mithras, or else are from late saints’ lives, are omitted.

I have tried to link to complete English translations online where possible, and to indicate where the original language text can be found using {}. In some cases where more than one translation was available to me, I give both. Dates given for the works are approximate, for the convenience of the reader.

I have excluded Persian and Armenian material, which presumably would be inaccessible in the Greek and Roman world anyway. Geden translates a small selection of this.

· Herodotus (5th c. BC) P

· Ctesias (4th c. BC) P

· Xenophon (4th c. BC) P

· Duris of Samos (4th c. BC) P

· Strabo (20 BC) P

· Pliny the Elder (ca. 50 AD) P

· Quintus Curtius (40-50 AD) P

· Plutarch (c. 100 AD) P

· Dio Chrysostom (50-120 AD) P

· Statius (80 AD) R

· Justin Martyr (150 AD) R

· Lucian (120-200 AD) P

· Zenobius the Sophist (2nd century AD) ?

· Tertullian (ca. 200 AD) R

· Cassius Dio (ca. 200 AD) P

· Origen (200-254 AD) R

· Ps.Clement (200 AD) ?

· Porphyry (ca.270 AD) R

· Commodian (3rd c. AD) R

--------------------------

· Arnobius the Elder (295 AD) ?

· P.Oxy.1802 (2-3rd c. AD) P

· Ps.Callisthenes (300 AD) P

· Greek Magical Papyri (3rd c. AD) ?

· Acts of Archelaus (Early 4th c. AD) R

· Firmicus Maternus (350 AD) R

· Gregory Nazianzen (370 AD) R

· Julian the Apostate (361-2 AD) R

· Himerius (ca. 362 AD) R

· Libanius (ca. 362 AD) R

· Epiphanius (late 4th c.)

· Jerome (ca. 400 AD) R

· Eunapius (late 4th c. AD) R

· Augustan History (late 4th c. AD) R

· Ambrose of Milan (late 4th c. AD) P

· Claudian (ca. 400 AD) P

· Prudentius (ca. 400 AD) ?

· Ps.-Paulinus of Nola / Carmen ad Antonium (ca. 400 AD) R

· Carmen ad Flavianum / contra Paganos (ca. 400 AD) R

· Augustine (early 5th c. AD) R

· Ambrosiaster (5th c. AD) R

· Dionysius the Areopagite (late 5th c. AD) P

-------------------------

· Martianus Capella (5th c. AD) ?

· Socrates Scholasticus (early 5th c. AD) R

· Sozomen (5th c. AD) R

· Proclus (5th c. AD) P

· Hesychius (ca. 400 AD) P

· Zosimus the alchemist (300 AD) ?

· Zosimus (6th c. AD) ?

· Nonnus of Panopolis (ca. 400 AD) P

· Lactantius Placidus (5th century AD) R

· John the Lydian (6th c. AD) R

· Damascius (6th c. AD) ?

· Cosmas Indicopleustes (ca. 550 AD) P

· Maximus the Confessor (7th c. AD) P

· Nonnus the Mythographer (6th or 7th c. AD) R

· John the Lydian (6th c. AD) R

· Theophylact Simocatta (ca. 600 AD) ?

· Cosmas of Jerusalem (ca. 750 AD) R

· Theophanes (650+ AD) R

· The Suda (9-10 c. AD) R

· Photius (9 c. AD) R

· Panegyrici Latini (9th c. AD) ?

================================

Herodotus (5th c. B.C.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.16-17}

Histories, book 1, ch. 131 (Geden p.24):

Others are accustomed to ascend the hill-tops and sacrifice to Zeus, the name they give to the whole expanse of the heavens. Sacrifice is offered also to the sun and moon, to the earth and fire and water and the winds. These alone are from ancient times the objects of their worship, but they have adopted also the practice of sacrifice to Urania, which they have learned from the Assyrians and Arabians. The Assyrians give to Aphrodite the name Mylitta, the Arabians Alilat and the Persians Mitra.

Cumont notes that Ambrose of Milan also calls Mithra female.

————————————————–

Ctesias (after 398 B.C.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.10}

Quoted by Athenaeus, Deipnosophists, book 10, ch.45 (2nd c.). Geden p.25:

Ktesias reports that among the Indians it was not lawful for the king to drink to excess. Among the Persians however the king was permitted to be intoxicated on the one day on which sacrifice was offered to Mithra.

Cumont adds that the passage from Athenaeus is reproduced in part by Eustathius, Commentary on the Odyssey, XVIII, 3, p.1854; and Commentary on the Iliad, p.957.

—————————————————–

Xenophon (ca. 397-340 B.C.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.51}

Oeconomicus, IV. 24. Cyrus the Younger, addressing Lysander:

Do you wonder at this, Lysander? I swear to you by Mithra that whenever I am in health I never break my fast without perspiring. (Geden)

Cyropaedia, VII. 5. Spoken by Artabazus to Cyrus the Elder.

By Mithra I could not come to you yesterday without fighting my way through many foes. (Geden)

———————————————————–

Duris of Samos (Mid. 4th c. B.C.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.10}

Quoted by Athenaeus, Deipnosophists, book 10, ch.45, immediately after the quote from Ctesias above. (2nd c. A.D.) Geden p.26.

In the seventh book of his Histories Duris has preserved the following account on this subject. Only at the festival celebrated by the Persians in honour of Mithra does the Persian king become drunken and dance after the Persian manner. On this day throughout Asia all abstain from the dance. For the Persians are taught both horsemanship and dancing; and they believe that the practice of these rhythmical movements strengthens and disciplines the body.

Cumont adds that the passage from Athenaeus is reproduced in part by Eustathius, Commentary on the Odyssey, XVIII, 3, p.1854; and Commentary on the Iliad, p.957.

——————————————————–

Strabo (20 B.C.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.49}

Geographica, XI. 14:

The country (i.e. Armenia) is so excellently suited to the rearing of horses, being not inferior indeed to Media, that the Nisaean steeds are raised there also of the same breed that the Persian kings were wont to use. And the satrap of Armenia used to send annually to Persia twice ten thousand colts for the Mithraic festivals. (Geden)

Geographica, XV. 3:

The Persians therefore do not erect statues and altars, but sacrifice on a high place, regarding the heaven as Zeus; and they honour also the sun, whom they call Mithra, and the moon and Aphrodite and fire and earth and the winds and water. (Geden)

Cumont notes that the second passage reproduces Herodotus.

—————————————————–

Pliny the Elder (23-79 A.D.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.32}

Natural History, book 37, chapter 10: (Jewels derived from the name)

Mithrax is brought from Persia and the hill-country of the Red Sea, a stone of varied colours that reflects the light of the sun. … The Assyrians prize Eumitren the jewel of Bel their most honoured deity, of a light-green colour and employed in divination. (Geden)

—————————————————–

Quintus Curtius (40-50 A.D.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.10}

Geden p.27. History of Alexander, book 4, chapter. 13. The scene is before the battle of Arbela.

The king himself with his generals and Staff passed around the ranks of the armed men, praying to the sun and Mithra and the sacred eternal fire to inspire them with courage worthy of their ancient fame and the monuments of their ancestors.

Cumont adds that there is a variant here: mithrem rather than mithram.

—————————————————–

Plutarch (ca. 100 A.D.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.33-36}

De Iside et Osiride, ch. 46. Theopompus lived in the 4th c. B.C.

The following is the opinion of the great majority of learned men. By some it is maintained that there are two gods, rivals as it were, authors the one of good and the other of evil. Others confine the name of god to the good power, the other they term demon, as was done by Zoroaster the Magian, who is said to have lived to old age five thousand years before the Trojan war. He calls the one Horomazes, the other Areimanius. The former he assserts is of all natural phenomena most closely akin to the light, the latter to darkness, and that Mithra holds an intermediate position. To Mithra therefore the Persians give the name of the mediator. Moreover he taught men to offer to Horomazes worthy and unblemished sacrifices, but to Areimanius imperfect and deformed. For they bruise a kind of grass called molu in a trough, and invoke Hades and Darkness; then mixing it with the blood of a slaughtered wolf they carry it to a sunless place and throw it away. For they regard some plants as the property of the good god, and some· of the evil demon; and so also such animals as dogs and birds ,and hedgehogs belong to the good deity, and the water rat to the evil. Of these last therefore it is meritorious to kill as many as possible.

They have also many stories to relate concerning the gods, for example that Horomazes was born of the purest light, Areimanius of the darkness, and these are hostile to one another. The former created six gods, the first three deities respectively of good-will, truth, and orderliness, the others of wisdom, wealth, and a good conscience. By the latter rivals as it were to these were formed of equal number. Then Horomazes extended himself to thrice his stature as far beyond the sun as the sun is beyond the earth, and adorned the heaven with stars, appointing one star, Sirius, as guardian and watcher before all. He made also other twenty-four gods and placed them in an egg, but Areimanius produced creatures of equal number and these crushed the egg . . . wherefore evil is mingled with good.

At the appointed time however Areimanius must be utterly brought to nought and destroyed by the pestilence and famine which he has himself caused, and the earth will be cleared and made free from obstruction, the habitation of a united community of men dwelling in happiness and speaking one tongue. Theopompus further reports that according to the magi for three thousand years in succession each of the gods holds sway or is in subjection, and that there will follow on these a further period of three thousand years of war and strife, in which they mutually destroy the works of one another. Finally Hades will be overthrown, and men will be blessed, and will neither need nourishment nor cast a shadow. And the deity who has accomplished these things will then take rest and solace for a period that is not long, especially for a god, and moderate for a sleeping man. To this effect then is the legendary account given by the magi.

Life of Alexander, c. 30:

If thou art not false to the interests of the Persians, but remainest loyal to me thy lord, tell me by thy regard for the great light of Mithra, and the royal right hand ….

Life of Artaxerxes Memnon, c.4:

Presenting a pomegranate of great size a certain Omisus said to him: By Mithra you may trust this man quickly to make an insignificant city great.

Vita Pompei (Life of Pompey) c.24, 5, 632CD. (This is often quoted as if it had some connection with Mithras of the legions; but surely relates to Mithridates and Persian Mithra in Asia Minor?).

There were of these corsairs above one thousand sail, and they had taken no less than four hundred cities, committing sacrilege upon the temples of the gods, and enriching themselves with the spoils of many never violated before, such as were those of Claros, Didyma, and Samothrace; and the temple of the Earth in Hermione, and that of Aesculapius in Epidaurus, those of Neptune at the Isthmus, at Taenarus, and at Calauria; those of Apollo at Actium and Leucas, and those of Juno in Samos, at Argos, and at Lacinium. They themselves offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them. (Dryden)

They were accustomed to offer strange sacrifices on Olympus and to observe certain secret rites, of which that of Mithra is maintained to the present day by those by whom it was first established. (Geden)

(Ps.Plutarch) De fluviis, XXIII. 4.

Clauss says that the story is that Mithras spilled his seed onto a rock, and the stone gave birth to a son, named Diorphos, who, worsted and killed in a duel by Ares, was turned into the mountain of the same name not far from the Armenian river Araxes.

Near it also (i.e. the Araxes) is a mountain Diorphus, so called from the giant of that name, of which this story is told: Mithra being desirous of a son, and hating the female race, entered into a certain rock; and the stone becoming pregnant after the appointed time bore a child named Diorphus. The latter when he had grown to manhood challenged Ares to a contest of valour, and was slain. The purpose of the gods was then fulfilled in his transformation into the mountain which bears his name. (Geden)

———————————————–

Dio Chrysostom (ca. 50-120 A.D.) [=Mithra] {Cumont, ii, p.60-64}

Oration 36. Marked as doubtful by Cumont.

In the secret mysteries the magi relate a further marvellous tradition concerning this god (Zeus) that he was the first and faultless charioteer of the unrivalled car. For they declare that the car of the sun is more recent, but on account of its prominent course in the sky is familiar to all. Whence is derived, it would seem, the common legend adopted by almost all the leading poets who have told of the risings and settings of the sun, the yoking of the steeds, and his ascent into the car. But of the mighty and perfect car of Zeus none of our writers hitherto has worthily sung, not even Homer or Hesiod, but the story is told by Zoroaster and the descendants of the magi who have learnt from him.

Of him the Persians relate that moved by love of wisdom and righteousness he separated himself from men and lived apart on a certain mountain, that fire subsequently fell from heaven and the whole mountain was kindled into flame. The king then with the most illustrious of the Persians approached wishing to offer prayer to the god. And Zoroaster came forth from the fire unharmed and gently bade them be of good courage and offer certain sacrifices, since it was the divine sanctuary to which the king had come.

Afterwards only those distinguished for love of the truth and who were worthy to approach the god were permitted to have access, and to these the Persians gave the name of magi, as being adepts in the divine service; differing therein from the Greeks who through ignorance of the name call such men wizards. And among other sacred rites they maintain for Zeus a pair of Nisaean steeds, these being the noblest and strongest that Asia yields, but one steed only for the sun. Moreover, they recount their legend not like our poets of the Muses who with all the arts of persuasion endeavour to carry conviction, but quite simply. For without doubt the control and government of the Supreme are unique, actuated always by the highest skill and strength, and that without cessation through endless ages.

The circuits then of the sun and moon are, as I said, movements of parts, and therefore readily discernible; most men however do not understand the movement and course of the whole, but the majestic order of its succession removes it above their comprehension. The further stories which they tell concerning the steeds and their management I hesitate to relate; and indeed they fail to take into account that the nature of the symbolism they employ betrays their own character. For it may be that it would be regarded as an act of folly for me to set forth a barbarian tale by the side of the fair Greek lays.

I must however make the venture. The first of the steeds is said to surpass infinitely in beauty and size and swiftness, running as it does on the outside round of the course, sacred to Zeus himself; and it is winged. The colour also of its skin is bright, of the purest sheen. And on it the sun and the moon are emblematically represented; I understand the meaning to be that these steeds have emblems moon-shaped or other; and they are seen by us indistinctly like sparks dancing in the bright blaze of a fire, each with its own proper motion. And the other stars receive their light through it and are all under its influence; and some have the same motion and are carried round with it, and others follow different courses. And the latter have each their own name among men, but the others are grouped together, assigned to certain forms and shapes.

The most handsome and variegated steed then is the favourite of Zeus himself, and on this account is lauded by them, receiving as is right the chief sacrifices and honours. The next to it in rank bears the name of Hera, being tractable and gentle, greatly inferior however in strength and swiftness. Its colour is naturally black, but that which is illuminated by the sun is always resplendent, while that which is in shadow during its circuit reveals the true character of the skin. The third is sacred to Poseidon, and is slower in movement than the second. His counterpart the poets say is found among men, meaning I suppose that which bears the name of Pegasus; a spring, according to the story, breaking forth in Corinth when the ground was opened.

The fourth is the strangest figure of all, fixed and motionless, not furnished with wings, named Hestia; but they do not hesitate to declare that this also is yoked to the car, remaining however in its place champing a bit of steel. And the others are on each side closely attached to it, the two nearest turning equally towards it, as though assailing it and resenting its control; but the leader on the outside circles constantly around it as though around a fixed centre post. For the most part therefore they live in peace and amity unhurt by one another, but eventually after a long time and many circuits the powerful breath of the leader descends from above and kindles into flame the proud spirit of the others, and most of all of the last.

His flaming mane then is set on fire, in which he took especial pride, and the whole universe. This calamity which they record they say that the Greeks attribute to Phaethon, for they refuse to blame Zeus’ driving of the car, and are unwilling to attach fault to the circuits of the sun … and again when in the course of further years the sacred colt of the Nymphs and Poseidon rouses itself to unaccustomed exertion, and incommoded with the sweat that pours from it drenches its own yokefellow, it gives rise to a destruction the contrary of the preceding, a flood of water. This then is the one catastrophe of which the Greeks have record owing to their recent origin and the shortness of their memory, and they relate that Deucalion reigned over them at that time before the universal destruction.

And in consequence of the ruin brought upon themselves men regard these rare occurrences as taking place neither in harmony with reason nor as a part of the general order, overlooking the fact that they occur in due course and in accordance with the will of the preserver and ruler of all. For it is just as when a charioteer chastises one of his steeds by checking it with the rein or touching it with the whip; the horse gives a start and is restless before settling down into its accustomed order. This earlier control then of the team they say is firm and the universe suffers no harm; but later a change takes place in the movement of the four, and their natures are mutually altered and interchanged, until they are all subdued by the higher power and a uniform character is imposed on all.

Nevertheless they do not hesitate to compare this movement to the conduct and driving of a car, for lack of a more impressive simile. As though a clever artificer should fashion horses out of wax, and should then smooth off the roughnesses of each, adding now to one and now to another, finally reducing all to one pattern, and forming his whole material into one shape. This however is not the case of a Creator fashioning and transforming from the outside the material substance of things without life, but the experience is that of the very substances themselves, as though they were contending for victory in a real and well-contested strife; and the crown of victory is awarded of right to the first and foremost in swiftness and strength and in every kind of virtue, to whom at the beginning of our discourse we gave the name of “chosen of Zeus.”.

For this one being the strongest and naturally fiery quickly consumed the others as though they had been really wax in a period not actually long, though to our limited reasoning it appears infinite; and absorbing into himself the entire substance of all is seen to be far greater and more glorious than before, having won the victory in the most formidable contest by no mortal or immortal aid, but by his own valour. Raised then proudly aloft and exulting in his victory, he takes possession of the widest possible domain, and yet such is his might and power that he craves further room for expansion. Having reached this conclusion they shrink from describing the nature of the living creature as the same; for that it is now no other than the soul of the charioteer and lord, or rather it has the same purpose and mind. (Geden)

————————————————–

Statius (ca. 80 A.D.) [=Mithras] {Cumont, ii, p.46}

Thebaid, book 1, v.719-20:

(Mithras) ‘twists the unruly horns beneath the rocks of a Persian cave’ (Clauss)

717 …… seu te roseum Titana vocari Gentis Achaemeniae ritu, seu praestat Osirim Frugiferum, seu Persei sub rupibus antri Indignata sequi torquentem cornua Mithram.

Or:

Whether it please thee to bear the name of ruddy Titan after the manner of the Achaemenian race, or Osiris lord of the crops, or Mithra as beneath the rocks of the Persian cave he presses back the horns that resist his control. (Geden)

Geden suggests the horns must be those of the bull.

The scholia on Statius are attributed to a certain Lactantius Placidus.

—————————————————–

Justin Martyr (ca. 150 A.D.) [=Mithras] {Cumont, ii.20-21}

1st Apology, ch. 66

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body; “and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood; “and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (ANF)

Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 70

70. And when those who record the mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah’s words? For they contrived that the words of righteousness be quoted also by them. But I must repeat to you the words of Isaiah referred to, in order that from them you may know that these things are so. They are these: `Hear, ye that are far off, what I have done; those that are near shall know my might.

The sinners in Zion are removed; trembling shall seize the impious. Who shall announce to you the everlasting place? The man who walks in righteousness, speaks in the right way, hates sin and unrighteousness, and keeps his hands pure from bribes, stops the ears from hearing the unjust judgment of blood closes the eyes from seeing unrighteousness: he shall dwell in the lofty cave of the strong rock. Bread shall be given to him, and his water [shall be] sure. Ye shall see the King with glory, and your eyes shall look far off. Your soul shall pursue diligently the fear of the Lord. Where is the scribe? where are the counsellors? where is he that numbers those who are nourished,-the small and great people? with whom they did not take counsel, nor knew the depth of the voices, so that they heard not.

The people who are become depreciated, and there is no understanding in him who hears.’ Now it is evident, that in this prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks. And this prophecy proves that we shall behold this very King with glory; and the very terms of the prophecy declare loudly, that the people foreknown to believe in Him were foreknown to pursue diligently the fear of the Lord. Moreover, these Scriptures are equally explicit in saying, that those who are reputed to know the writings of the Scriptures, and who hear the prophecies, have no understanding.

And when I hear, Trypho,” said I, “that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this. (ANF)

78. … I have repeated to you,” I continued, “what Isaiah foretold about the sign which foreshadowed the cave; but for the sake of those who have come with us to-day, I shall again remind you of the passage.” Then I repeated the passage from Isaiah which I have already written, adding that, by means of those words, those who presided over the mysteries of Mithras were stirred up by the devil to say that in a place, called among them a cave, they were initiated by him. … (ANF)

Geden (p.39-40) renders these passages as:

(Apol. 1, 66) Accordingly in the mysteries of Mithra also we have heard that evil spirits practise mimicry. For at the initiatory rites bread and a cup of water are set out accompanied by certain formulae, as you know or may ascertain.

(Dial. 70) And when in the tradition of the Mithraic mysteries they relate that Mithra was born of a rock, and name the place where his followers receive initiation a cave, do I not know that they are perverting the saying of Daniel that “a stone was hewn without hands from a great mountain,” and likewise the words of Isaiah, all whose sayings also they endeavour to pervert? Noteworthy sayings too besides these they have artfully contrived to use.

(Dial. 78) According to the tradition of the Mithraic mysteries initiation takes place among them in a so-called cave, … a device of the evil one.

———————————————–

Lucian (120-200 A.D.) [=?] {Cumont, ii.22}

The Gods in Council, chapter 9.

Momus. Ah; and out of consideration for him I suppose I must also abstain from any reference to the eagle, which is now a God like the rest of us, perches upon the royal sceptre, and may be expected at any moment to build his nest upon the head of Majesty?–Well, you must allow me Attis, Corybas, and 9 Sabazius: by what contrivance, now, did they get here? and that Mede there, Mithras, with the candys and tiara? why, the fellow cannot speak Greek; if you pledge him, he does not know what you mean. The consequence is, that Scythians and Goths, observing their success, snap their fingers at us, and distribute divinity and immortality right and left; that was how the slave Zamolxis’s name slipped into our register. However, let that pass. But I should just like to ask that Egyptian there–the dog-faced gentleman in the linen suit — who he is, and whether he proposes to establish his divinity by barking?

Or:

And Attis too, by heaven, and Korybas and Sabazius with what a flood have these deluged us, and your Mithra with his Assyrian cloak and crown, maintaining even their foreign tongue, so that when they give a toast no one can understand what they say. (Geden)

The Tragic Zeus, ch. 8:

There is Bendis herself and Anubis yonder and by his side Attis and Mithra and Men, all resplendent in gold, weighty and costly you may be sure.

Menippus, ch. 6:

Once as with these thoughts I was lying awake I determined to go to Babylon and there make inquiry of one of the magi, the disciples and successors of Zoroaster. I had heard that by incantations and magic rites they open the gates of Hades, and lead thither in safety whom they will, and restore him again to the upper world . . . so I arose at once, and without delay set out for Babylon.

On arrival I betook myself to a certain Chaldaean, a man skilled in the art of the diviner, grey-haired and wearing an imposing beard, whose name was Mithrobarzanes. With much trouble and importunity I won his consent, for whatever fee he liked to name, to be my guide on the way. He took me under his charge, and first for twenty-nine days from the new moon he conducted me at dawn to the Euphrates and bathed me, reciting some long invocation to the rising sun, which I did not fully understand; for like the second-rate heralds at the games he spoke in obscure and involved fashion. It was clear however that he was invoking certain deities.

Then after the invocation he spat thrice in front of me and conducted me back without looking in the face of any whom we met. For food we had acorns, and our drink was milk and honey-mead and the waters of the Choaspes, and we made our couch upon the grass in the open air. These preliminaries concluded he took me about midnight to the Tigris, cleansed and rubbed me down and purified me with resinous twigs and hyssop and many other things, reiterating at the same time the previous invocation. Then he threw spells over me and circumambulated me for my defence against the ghosts and led me back to the house, as I was, on foot; and the rest of the journey we made by boat. He himself put on some sort of a Magian robe, not unlike that of the Medes. And he further equipped me with the cap and lion’s skin and put into my hands the lyre, and bade me if I were asked my name not to answer Menippus, but to say Herakles or Odysseus or Orpheus ….

Arrived at a certain place, gloomy and desolate and overgrown with jungle, we disembarked, Mithrobarzanes leading the way, and dug a pit, and sacrificed the sheep, pouring out the blood over it. Then the Magian with lighted torch in his hand, no longer in subdued tones but exerting his voice to the utmost, invoked the whole host of demons with the Avengers and Furies, “and Hecate the queen of night and noble Persephone,” joining with them some foreign names of inordinate length. (Geden)

Cumont adds that the name of Mithras is explained in two of the scholia on Lucian. The second is similar to Hesychius. Scholia, c. 1. 1 (p.173 ed. Jacobitz), Cumont p.23. Translated by Andrew Eastbourne:

Cumont cites two scholia on Lucian which discuss Mithra(s), from the edition of Jacobitz. For a more recent edition, see Rabe, Scholia in Lucianum (1906).[1]

Scholion on Lucian, Zeus Rants / Jupiter tragoedus 8 [cf. Rabe, p. 60]

This Bendis…[2] Bendis is a Thracian goddess, and Anubis is an Egyptian [god], whom the theologoi[3] call “dog-faced.” Mithras is Persian, and Men is Phrygian. This Mithras is the same as Hephaestus, but others say [he is the same as] Helios. So then, because the barbarians would take pride[4] in wealth, they naturally also outfitted their own gods most expensively. And Attis is revered by the Phrygians…

Scholion on Lucian, The Parliament of the Gods / Deorum concilium 9 [cf. Rabe, p. 212]

Mithrês [Mithras]… Mithras is the sun [Helios], among the Persians.[5]

[1] I have noted points where Rabe’s edition differs in substance from the text printed by Cumont. Rabe’s edition is available online at http://www.archive.org/details/scholiainlucianu00rabe

[2] Lucian’s text here mentions Bendis, Anubis, Attis, Mithrês [Mithras], and Mên.

[3] The Greek term normally refers to poets who wrote about the gods, like Hesiod or Orpheus. Note that this is an emendation; the mss. read logoi (“words / discourses / accounts”), which Rabe adopts in his edition.

[4] Gk. ekômôn; lit., “wore their hair long / let their hair grow long.”

[5] Rabe’s text: “Mithras is the same as Helios, among the Persians.”

——————————————————–

Zenobius the Sophist (2nd century A.D.) [=?]

A Greek sophist of the reign of Hadrian. His collection of proverbs is partly extant.

Proverbia, book 5, 78 (in Corpus paroemiographorum Graecorum vol. 1, p.151). Quoted in Albert de Jong, Traditions of the Magi: Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin literature, p.309:

Evander said that the gods who rule over everything are eight: Fire, Water, Earth, Heaven, Moon, Sun, Mithras, Night.

Not in Geden or Cumont.

Clauss p.70 n.84 also mentions literary evidence of syncretism of Mithras with the Orphic creator-god Phanes (no citation). This refers to a similar list from Iranian sources appearing in Theon of Smyrna’s Exposition of mathematical ideas useful for reading Plato, ch. 47 (from Exposition des connaissances mathematiques utiles pour la lecture de platon, J. Dupuis in 1892, p.173):

47. The number eight which is the first cube composed of unity and seven. Some say that there are eight gods who are masters of the universe, and this is also what we see in the sayings of Orpheus:

By the creators of things ever immortal, Fire and water, earth and heaven, moon, And sun, the great Phanes and the dark night.

And Evander reports that in Egypt may be found on a column an inscription of King Saturn and Queen Rhea: “The most ancient of all, King Osiris, to the immortal gods, to the spirit, to heaven and earth, to night and day, to the father of all that is and all that will be, and to Love, souvenir of the magificence of his life.” Timotheus also reports the proverb, “Eight is all, because the spheres of the world which rotate around the earth are eight.” And, as Erastothenes says,

“These eight spheres harmonise together in making their revolutions around the earth.”

The real basis for identification of Mithras and Phanes is some inscriptions.

........

Continue in the Word doc. that you can download (see below!)

---------------------------

Bibliography

· Manfred CLAUSS, The Roman Cult of Mithras: The God and his Mysteries. Edinburgh University Press (2000). Tr. Richard GORDON.

· Franz CUMONT, The Mysteries of Mithra. London: Kegan Paul (1910). Tr. Thomas J. McCORMACK from the second French edition.

An Image of the Tauroctony

[Museo Nazionale, Roma. Photographed by R.Pearse, February 2004]

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/literary_sources.htm

--------------------------

Κατεβάστε την αναδημοσίευση σε Word doc.:

https://www.slideshare.net/MuhammadShamsaddinMe/ss-250716152

https://issuu.com/megalommatis/docs/mithra_mithraism_and_mithraic_mysteries.docx

https://vk.com/doc429864789_621839366

https://www.docdroid.net/5YzE1Mw/mithras-mithraismos-mithraika-mistiria-docx

Ancient Egyptians were African. This is a facial reconstruction of King Akhenaten.