(Mithraism - 'A Pilgrim's Progress by 'Paternus2001')

 

Chapter One.

   

Where does Mithras come from?

Mithras, in his outward form at least, is a derivative of the Persian 'Mithra' who is in his turn a derivative of the Indo-Iranian 'Mitra'.

Mitra comes to us from the ancient Indo-Iranian text, the Rig-Veda (Penguin Classics) hereinafter abbreviated to (IIM)

Mitra translated means 'Contract' or mutual obligation, or treaty, and our first knowledge of him comes from Turkey, formerly, Asia-Minor.

A people called the 'Hurrians' had established a kingdom called the Mitanni (the people of Mitra?) in what is now termed 'Kurdistan'.

In 1400BC, they concluded a peace treaty with the neighbouring Hittites in which Mitra is invoked along with two Ashvins?

Taken in sequence, this means that Mitra/Mithra/Mithras is the oldest known deity to the European consciousness who is still actively worshipped, as the present day Zoroastrians still worship him albeit only as a Yazad, or Yazatas. (Yazatas; worthy of reverence, worthy of praise?)

The Persian Mithra, hereinafter abbreviated to (PM) comes to us from the Persian Avesta.

The subject of the evolution of Mithra, at the hands of the Persian Prophet Zoroaster (Zarathustra) over the three considerable epoch's of the Persian Empire, that is Achaemenid-Parthian-Sassanid, would justify a library of its own, so I will restrict the Persian Mithra to the section on Zoroaster as the object of this discourse is to establish who Mithras with an 's' really is, at least as it has occurred to myself?

Mithras, it is my contention, comes to us not from Persia, except in sartorial and regnal terms, but has his genesis as the 'Bull-slayer' in Alexandria in Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy Ist (Sotar) following the death of Alexander the Great?

I therefore call the Bull-slayer form of Mithras the Alexandrian Mithras hereinafter (AM).

In his closing comments on Mithraic Studies (Vols I & II), Professor Hinnells laments that if there is a bridge linking the Persian Mithra, with the Mithras that some of the Romans came to revere, that that bridge is proving extremely difficult to find!

I believe I have found that bridge!

That bridge is Alexander the Great?

Alexander as the anointed and embodiment of Mithra (PM)

"This much must I also know, that all men are mortal, except only Soshyans ( the Saviour ) and the seven kings that help him!"

R.C. Zaehner; 'The teachings of the Magi'

Zaehner's work is translated from the Pahlavi texts, which is middle Persian; Parthian.

The Parthian epoch followed on the death of  Antiochus Ist (Epiphanes; God revealed) who went to great efforts to record his Greek and Persian origins at his mausoleum at the Nemrud-Dagh, more anon?

Alexander was given 7 companions to be schooled with, and it is tempting here to read into the situation the ambitions of Philip II of Macedon to realize his ambitions to conquer Persia and hold it through his son?

It has to be said, that the portents and predictions surrounding the birth of Alexander-the-Great were less remarkable than the actual facts of his life!

It is known that Alexander was well tutored in the Gods and the religious customs of the surrounding nations which were the target of his coming life, and that he would seek legitimacy for his rule through the deities and religious lore of the conquered territories?

Remember that famous excursion to the Oasis at SIWA, to be proclaimed a 'Son of Zeus-Ammon' and a Pharaoh Incarnate - thereby taking his right to rule Egypt through the authority of its own Priest's and supreme God?

Nobody disagrees with this in respect of Egypt, but for some strange reason the same process is not acknowledged in respect of claiming his right to rule Persia through its Regnal deity - Mithra ?(PM)

At the time of Alexander's invasion of Persia (331BC) it was the Persia of the Achaemenid dynasty.

Vermaseren (Mithras - The Secret God) informs us that during this dynasty Mithra was the deity that caused the glowing nimbus (halo) to fall on the head of the anointed of Persia, and no one ruled Persia except by his favour, and, in addition, Mithra was the guarantor of victory on the battlefield?

This is certainly born-out by the relief's and inscriptions of Antiochus Ist at the Nemrud-Dagh whereby Antiochus is seen receiving the handshake of contract and approval from the figure of Mithra/Mithras?

Mithra also could, and sometimes would, remove his favour from a King, and bestow it on someone else!

It is worth remembering here, that we are speaking of an epoch in which it was possible for antagonists to appeal to the Gods of their enemies?

The Romans, only a little later, appealed to the God of their enemy, the Carthaginians, promising that God that a Temple would be built in its honour it if it bestowed victory on the Roman cause?

The Romans victored, and the Temple was duly built!

To back-up my point, at a later epoch, King Tiridates of Armenia (66AD) made a remarkable journey to Rome to receive his authority to rule his own country from the Emperor Nero, why did he do this?

Because Tiridates worshipped in Nero a manifestation of Mithra/Mithras (not the Bull-slayer type I contend) and only Mithra/Mithras could grant authority to rule; Nero permitted himself to be inducted into this version of the Mithraic faith [Seleucid manifestaion of Mithra, hereinafter (SM)] in a Eucharist performed by the Magi who had traveled with Tiridates, and we have here direct evidence for the inception of Mithra/Mithras into Roman society

Tiridates I contend was subject to the same manifestation of Mithra/Mithras as recorded at the Nemrud-Dagh which was an amalgam of Greek and Persian influences propagated by the Seleucids, where the influence of Zoroaster was still very strong giving rise to what is termed 'Mazdian'?

It took Tiridates 6 months to journey to Rome - overland?

He could have made the journey much quicker by sea, but, being a Mazdian, and following the prohibition of Zoroaster, he would not pollute the sacred element of water?

So, it would be manifest with the defeat of Darius at the hands of the 'little Greek boy' that Mithra (PM) had removed his favour from Darius, and bestowed it on Alexander who would now rule over Persia and its satraps in his name?

Aristotle, the tutor of Alexander, had revered Zoroaster, but for reasons I hope to make clear, Alexander, in a departure from his usual character, overturned many Fire Temples, and slaughtered many Magi, the sum result of which is that the modern Persian Holy Book, the AVESTA, represents only a quarter of that which once existed!

At first sight this behaviour of Alexander's is hard to explain unless one is aware that Zoroaster had attempted in his lifetime to submerge or actually expel Mithra from Persian worship; Zoroaster, it would appear, was to be assassinated for his efforts as the appeal of Mithra was too strong, and this had led to a division within the ranks of the Magi? 

Perhaps that faction which had favoured Zoroaster's attempts with regard to Mithra were the sect that Alexander took exception to, as Mithra was the deity who's authority Alexander sought to rule through, but this is only a guess?

There is a precedent in history whereby an anointed of Mithra (PM) does slay a Sacred Bull?

This is recorded by Herodotus in his Histories, and concerns the case of the Persian King - Cambyses, who, during his occupation of Egypt committed many outrages, but most significantly stabbed with contempt the Sacred Apis Bull! (the Apis died of the wound)

All this apparently as the result of having 'a bad day'?

But this of course was not an act of piety, and outraged his Egyptian subjects, following the act, and in agreement with Egyptian religious lore, there began the search for a new Apis, which was duly enthroned, and a new epoch began for the Egyptians, although the rule of Cambyses continued?

We have a record from the Serapaeum at Saqqara, where Apis Bulls were interred after mummification, detailing the burial of an Apis with full honours during the sixth year of the reign of Cambyses; 523BC.

The poetic justice which befalls Cambyses at a later date, if true, makes interesting reading, but more of the Apis later?

Having made the statement, that I believe Alexander-the-Great to be the embodiment of Mithra, later to become Mithras, it remains to secure further evidence to support the same?

a)      From Egyptian Alexandria, we have a bust of Alexander as 'Helios-Kosmokrator, that is, Sun-Ruler of the Universe? Now as the Persian for 'Sun' is Mihr (Mithra) this description is one and the same for Alexander

b)      It has been stated by some observers that the countenance of  Mithras is that of Alexander as recorded by his sculpters and painters; there is nothing new in this, the reasons given are these; Alexander, like his Father Philip, was of short stature and whether standing or sitting in council on his Throne was obliged to 'look upwards! There is testimony to the intensity of his liquid 'gaze' with his head turned slightly to one side, essentially identical to the 'gaze' of Mithras, as recorded in the 'Walbrook Mithras'?

c)      Antiochus Ist Epiphanes 69-34BC, founder of the City of Antioch, is depicted at his 'Hierothesion' at the Nemrud-Dagh shaking hands with the figure of Mithra/Mithras, along with other characters from Greek Myth which Alexander held himself to be descended from? The Phrygian Cap being worn by Mithra/Mithras is festooned with the 6-rayed star of the house of Philip II of Macedon?

 

Some say 8-rayed stars, but I haven't been to this monument to check, and the photo I have says 6-rayed stars?

This I term the 'Regnal' Mithras, the one who in Seleucid and Parthian terms conferred the 'right to rule' as with Tiridates example, this regional form of Mithras was 'non-cultic' and was the purview of the likes of what the Romans termed 'Cilician Pirates' and the Mithras-worshipping Parthians, in other words, he was and could be the purview of the 'vulgar', in addition, as with the Persian Depictions of Mithra on their monuments, this Mithra/Mithras, was open to public display?

None of these things sit easily with what we know of the constitution of the followers of Mithras of the Bull-slaying kind, with their very small Temples, and secret

 Initiations, and who tended to be persons in receipt of an education, or as Richard Gordon points-out, the upwardly mobile?

 

d)      Mithras is always depicted as wearing Persian clothing - or is he? There is a very telling exception from the Mithraeum at Ostia, the port of the City of Rome. It would appear that whoever it was who paid for the sculpting of the Bull-slayer here made a point that Mithras should be depicted wearing a Greek Chiton, and it is tempting here to reflect on why this was permitted, and, permissible? Could it be that the commissioner had lost a son at the hands of the Persians, and grief and prejudice had its way, and as Greek garb was a permissible alternative, the commissioner was very aware as to who the real figure of Mithras had been originally; the 'upward gaze' of Alexander is very evident here, together with his reported hairstyle?

e)      There is some contention, but the consensus of opinion is that the birth-sign of Alexander was "Leo' and the fourth grade of Mithraism was 'Leo' - the grade of the adept? Significantly, the only astrological sign within the grade system, and occurring 'half-way' in that grade system? Alexander went into battle wearing a 'Lions-head' helmet, and at other times a lion's headdress after Heracles whom Alexander believed to be one of his antecedents - the Lion Grade also wore a Lions headdress?

f)        Inductees into Mithraism would undergo endurance tests, being subjected to heat and cold, thirst and hunger; what were these ordeals if they were not celebrations of the privations of Alexander himself?

g)      The Apis Bull of Egypt (Apis being his Greek name; Egyptian = Hapy) featured prominently in Mithraism, the worship of the Apis bull proper, was centered on Memphis in Egypt where Alexander was crowned Pharaoh in 332BC, Alexander for his part did not simply make sacrifice to the Apis, but, according to Arrian, the most sober of Alexander's chroniclers made 'special' sacrifice to the Apis, and visited the Serapaeum where the Apis bulls were interred. Finds of definite Mithraic origin have been found both at Alexandria and Memphis, of itself, this does not prove anything, but it would be harder to make my case if nothing had been found at these places? 

These are a selection of some of the clues that convinces me that Mithraism of the 'Bull-slaying' kind is a posthumous cult of Alexander-the-Great, who was looked upon as Messianic in his time, and believed himself to be a God in any event, the more one looks, the more one finds?

In conclusion to this section, let us review that which we know is already believed to be the case;

1)      The Persians of the Achaemenid dynasty did not know of a Mithra who

Ritualistically slew a Bull?

2)      The Seleucids and Parthians followed on from the Rule of Alexander-the-Great and their societies had been an amalgam of Persian and Greek values? During the reign of Caesar Augustus there was a settlement between the Romans and the Parthians, that the 'Eagles' that had been lost by Crassus at the Battle of Charrae (Formerly "Harran') be returned together with Roman Prisoners of War, these returning P-O-W's are postulated by some to be one of the vectors by which Mithraism of the Bull slaying kind entered Roman consciousness, but I do not believe that this Mithras was of the Bull-slaying kind, but the Mithra/Mithras of the common soldiers who was non-cultic, and had been for centuries to the Persian Army?

3)      The Sassanids, who followed-on from the Parthians apparently rebounded on the legacy of Alexander and the Parthians claiming their descent from Cyrus-the-Great, and basing their State religion on the reforms of Zoroaster in which the figure of Mithra was subordinated to the office of the Just Judge of the Chinvat Bridge, the Bridge of the Separator, who with the assistance of Sraosh and Rashn, decide who will go to heaven or purgatory? Present day Zoroastrians still revere him in this office?

4)      For me Alexander was the anointed and posthumous embodiment of the Persian Mithra who was transposed into the Mithras that some of the Romans came to revere, that this transition was at the hands of the Greeks living in what Alexander intended to be his 'World City' at the center of the then known world, the Neo-platonists of Alexandria? As the Hermetica makes clear 'Greece, Egypt, and Persia, shall all play their part, and this is reflected in the grade system? Roman soldiers had no problem bending the knee to a deity in the garb of an implacable foe, as they knew the true identity of the Bull-slayer - the soldier's soldier par excellence - Alexander, as they did at Ostia?

5)      Is there a depiction of Alexander in a Phrygian Cap? Included in the 'Hersch Collection which I viewed in the British Museum when it was on loan there, there is a silver medallion reputedly released after Alexander's conquest of Persia, and here he is depicted wearing a Phrygian Cap? This was part of a display entitled 'Images of Power on Ancient Coins' from Alexander to Mark Anthony, and it is telling that all these coins depict different rulers all vying to adopt the upward gaze of Alexander? 

6)      The term 'invicto' or 'nabarze' unconquered, or victorious, surely fits only one  man - Alexander?

7)      If Mithras the Bull-slayer was the icon of a purely Persian religion as Cumont supposed, why was there the need for a separate 'Persian' grade?