Posted by: aediculaantinoi | April 8, 2011

Felix Megalensia (Quinta)!

Before getting into the specifics of today’s festival, I would like to note that on The Wild Hunt today, the Maetreum of Cybele was mentioned again, which is most appropriate given the festivals we’re currently celebrating! Best of luck to them in their further appeals for success in this entire legal difficulty…

I’d also like to note that yesterday, April 7, would have been the 99th birthday of Harry Hay, an Ekklesía Antínoou Sanctus and founder of the Radical Faeries and the Mattachine Society, whose death in late October of 2002 occurred just as we were about to have the first modern Foundation Day in Antinoan devotion. So, a belated Felix Dies Natalis to our Sanctus–may we sing Ignis Corporis Infirmat, Ignis sed Animae Perstat for The Duchess always!

This is now the fifth day of the Megalensia, the festival in honor of Magna Mater; the fourth, we spoke more of Cybele herself; the third, we spoke of her consort Attis; the second, we devoted to Agdistis. Today, I wish to focus upon a particular ritual associated with her, and some of the inaccuracies about it. This ritual is the taurobolium.

The taurobolium is a particular ritual in which a bull is sacrificed and bled, and a person stands beneath a grate upon which the bull is sacrificed and has the blood shower down on them as they do so. Perhaps one of the most well-known portrayals of this ritual takes place in the HBO/BBC series Rome in the very first episode in the first season, showing the self-flagellating galli as well as some sort of divinatory sacrifice attached to the ritual quite vividly and lavishly. However, the main historical inaccuracy involved there was that the ritual is not actually attested in Rome (or perhaps anywhere, for that matter) before the early second century CE.

The history of the ritual suggests that it was originally carried out in Asia Minor, and the pursuit and hunting down of the bull in question was a part of the rite in its oldest form. The first recorded performance of the ritual in Italy was at Puteoli near Naples, in honor of the goddess Venus Caelestis, in the year 134 CE–so, during the late reign of Hadrian! Venus Caelestis would correspond to the Greek Aphrodite Ourania, the patroness of male homoerotic love (honored by Hadrian in his Thespiae inscription); though there is no direct Hadrianic connection to this first Italian taurobolium to my knowledge, the coincidence is intriguing. I should also add that Venus was honored in various Roman festivals during the month of April, including on the Veneralia on the 1st of April, and the Vinalia Prima (a festival associated with wine-making) on the 23rd.

However, there are other interesting Antonine period and Antinoan connections to the taurobolium ritual. During the late reign of Antoninus Pius, Hadrian’s successor, a taurobolic sacrifice took place on behalf of the emperor’s health in Lugudunum in Gaul (modern Lyon), in which the bull’s testicles were removed and offered, perhaps in place of a prospective gallus doing the same, since the Romans often didn’t like this particular aspect of devotion to Magna Mater. Cybele was the recipient of the sacrifice on this occasion, but the date of the entire occasion is interesting, because it was the year 160 CE, on November 27–the Natalis Antinoi! Had Antinous still been living, he would have been around 50 years old on that date. From that date forward, taurobolia were always connected to Cybele/Magna Mater in the inscriptions and altars that record them, so it is a significant date in the history of this particular goddess’ cultus, as well as in Antonine and Antinoan reckoning.

As a side matter, I would note that it is often suggested that bull sacrifices, perhaps similar to the taurobolium, took place in relation to the cult of Mithras. This is a severe exaggeration, and in fact there is almost no evidence that such sacrifices took place. Yes, the central iconography of the cult of Mithras is the tauroctony or “bull-slaying” scene, but that may have been a one-off, singular instance that the god himself did for the benefit of the cosmos, and not something that was re-enacted in his honor. Mithraea that exist (and there are many!) are not areas in which such rituals could have taken place, and the refuse piles that show what sorts of foods and animal remains were associated with the sites do not have bull bits aplenty by any stretch of the imagination–in the Romano-British Mithraeum on Hadrian’s Wall, there is lots of evidence for boar being consumed in their communal feasts, but not bulls.

On previous days in this Megalensia festival, I have often tried to connect something in terms of the ongoing matters of transgender exclusion from various modern pagan groups and events to the theme of the day. I think I’ll keep it very simple for today, and note that just as there have been many exaggerations and misappropriations in terms of knowledge of taurobolic rituals in various places in modern pagan religions, so too is there a lot of bullshit in many other ways that needs to be seen through, sometimes cut through, and often shoveled through, to prevent it from raining down on those below who are devotees of Magna Mater.

May Cybele and Attis and Antinous, therefore, continue to harmonize amongst each other in their past and in their future histories, and may they make sure that each of us who are devoted to them are well-armed with shovels!


Responses

  1. Very interesting!

    I actually recognized the ritual immediately when watching Rome, but thought, “Really? I thought it was supposed to be Mithraic”. (I blame Edward Rutherford’s novel Sarum for my confusion.)

    • Among the many misapprehensions about Mithraism out there, this is a more minor one than things like “born of a virgin in a cave, just like Jesus; had twelve disciples just like Jesus; crucified and arose from the dead just like Jesus,” as in Bill Maher’s Religulous, Zeitgeist, &c. But, nonetheless, in the interests of full disclosure and good information, it’s important to note.

      At least they got the overall cultus and various aspects of it right, even if the timing isn’t quite right…

  2. How much evidence is there that the Taurobolium actually existed as described – a person standing in a pit underneath a sacrificed bull with blood pouring over him/her? Or is this really a falsehood that has, for various reasons, become embedded in the scholarly tradition?

    Comments were made recently on a Roman list that this is a fictional idea, primarily invented by the fourth century Christian writer Prudentius, who was trying to cast negative aspersions on the disgusting practices of those terrible pagans. In other words, that a sacrifice to Magna Mater called the Taurobolium did actually exist, but that it did not involve bathing in bull’s blood. The implication being that Prudentius invented all the sensational details and that the academic community, which at least used to be Christian, has until very recently uncritically accepted that invention.

    Any thoughts, or contra-indications? I will point out that any ancient inscriptions that mention the Taurobolium are not especially relevant to this question unless they actually describe the ceremony. Are there any specific ancient detailed descriptions of the Taurobolium other than the one given by Prudentius? Are the postings on the Roman list questioning the accuracy of the Taurobolium description valid or not?

    • You’re quite right, the only full description of it we have is from Prudentius, and he was a biased witness/source…

      However, that doesn’t mean that biased and hostile sources can’t or don’t contain things that may be possible…Looking at all the things we have about Antinous that are only from Christian sources (e.g. Clement of Alexandria’s info on the Sacred Nights; Tatian the Assyrian’s info on Antinous being revered as the face in the moon; etc.), we can have some pause about some of them, but others seem fairly reasonable. Just because the Christians disapproved of these practices described and spoke of them derisively doesn’t mean they’re making it up or exaggerating just to make their negative points.

      As a modern example of this phenomenon, I know that some Christian groups who are anti-pagan and anti-gay don’t like the Ekklesía Antínoou, and have even made threats against me. What might they say about us? “They worship some gay boy from the past, kiss statues of him, and bow down to them.” Many people in a variety of Christian denominations would shudder at the very thought of that…and yet, that’s exactly what I do on a regular basis (apart from the thing about Antinous being a “gay boy”–but that’s an interpretive question!). They don’t need to make up stories about orgies and blood sacrifices to be conveying details that would be horrific to their viewpoint; so, when they do have these details, I don’t think they’re necessarily being excessive or are distorting the info on the matter.

      I think we have to ask what about bathing in bull’s blood is “disgusting”–from whose viewpoint? From a Christian viewpoint, it certainly is; but what about from a pagan viewpoint? If one thinks animal sacrifice is an acceptable thing, why not shower in the bull’s blood as part of the ritual? In other words, even if Prudentius is a hostile witness, and the (passively) Christian academic community has accepted his info as valid and accurate, and even knowing those biases, what about the details do pagans object to or feel are inappropriate? I know that many people, who have heard Clement of Alexandria’s reports on the homoerotic and sexual excesses of the Sacred Nights of Antinous do not object to such practices, and in fact wouldn’t object to seeing them enacted and brought back–whether or not they were actually done is still a valid question, but assuming that the disgust and the scandal is in the eye of the beholder rather than inherent to the action, I think, is an important matter to which one should attend.

      So, it is very possible that in many places the taurobolium may not have been as Prudentius said–perhaps only the testicles were removed; perhaps the bull was chased down, sacrificed as normal, and some of the blood was thrown on the recipients in the manner of an aspergement; perhaps they had the complex structures (permanent or temporary) depicted above, as Prudentius said, in some locations. (If they did, they were probably some of the ones to be completely destroyed by the Christians later, it would seem.) The taurobolium, I would therefore agree with you, did exist in some form, but what exactly isn’t clear…and the mythology and attraction of that possible scenario is interesting in itself.

      Does that make sense at all? I hope so…

  3. [...] over its basic history, its main goddess, a related god, a divine androgyne associated with it, and a major ritual that was probably part of the proceedings from the mid-second century CE onwards. Today, we treat the main priesthood of Magna Mater, the [...]

  4. Thanks for expanding on the subject of the Taurobolium. My own opinion is that the event as described by Prudentius is possible but not absolutely proven. I do not have any objection to animal sacrifices, but I would probably side with those ancient Romans who regarded some of the practices of the Galli as excessive.

    In spite of being a gay male pagan who obsessively loves GraecoRoman art, likes hard edge military scifi (and the Wheel of Time), and runs a phantom empire as a hobby, I really am a very conventional sort of person, and actually seeing the Taurobolium as described would probably disturb me.

    • Understandable.

      The smell seems to me like it would be the thing most upsetting about the entire experience, whether just watching from a distance or actually being in it.

      I wonder if, to an extent, this entire idea of the ritual is an idea of getting “knee-deep” into something. If having animal’s blood on one in a sacrifice is required, why not just go “whole hog” (or “whole bull,” as the case may be) and bathe/shower in it? Why be ginger about it, since nothing is going to be done with the blood anyway under most circumstances, other than it being burned in sacrifice? It’s another possible angle of looking at the matter–making even the “run-off” blood a sacred component in a ritual as a way of trying to get as much “use” out of the animal and all of its parts as possible…it’s a kind of strange “sustainability” angle on the matter, as well as one that attempts to respect every part of the animal and not neglect it. It’s hard not to be affected and to have “blood on one’s hands” for sacrifice if one is under it and being showered in its blood when one sacrifices. So, “full commitment,” as it were, may be part of the issue, and the intended effect…

      If, indeed, that version of the ritual was ever performed. ;)

  5. [...] history of the festival itself, the divine androgyne Agdistis, the god Attis, the goddess Cybele, the taurobolium ritual, and the galli priesthood. On this final day, a few further reflections on the festival, and some [...]

  6. [...] that Rome got right (even though some bits weren’t quite right in terms of timing, e.g. the taurobolium in the first episode)–the religious aspects of Spartacus: Blood and Sand and its successors is very off. In the [...]

  7. [...] is the fifth day of Megalensia, and last year, I used it to examine the ritual of the taurobolium. Continuing with the “Thracian exegesis” that I’ve done on the first three days [...]

  8. [...] arrives, and our thoughts turn to bulls…But, before they do, here’s what was written in 2011 and in [...]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 206 other followers