Rumor and the Roman Religions by April Rose Fale

8/3/2019 Rumor and the Roman Religions by April Rose Fale

1/17

Fale 1

Rumor and the Roman Religions

Applying Gordon Allports Theory of Rumor Transmission

to the Roman Transition from Mithraism to Christianity

BY APRIL ROSE FALE

Introduction

Joseph Campbell, in Masks of God: Primitive Mythology, said of mythologies:

The sense of it allor rather nonsense of it allis to be made forever in the festivals

and monstrous customs of the community itself; but is also evident in every part and

moment of the universe, for those who have been taught by way of the rites to see and

know the world as it truly is. In a sense, Campbells words describe this study, for

religionssignificant subjects in this work--are not far removed from mythologies.

In the study of religions and mythologies, can Gordon Allports theory of rumor

transmission be applied, particularly in the context of the Roman Empires transition

from being largely paganparticularly, Mithraic--to becoming the seat of Christianity

within a few centuries? Did the Roman religions, especially Christianity, transform

during antiquity in the same way that rumor transforms as it travels from one rumor

agent to another? In the course of attempting to model how religious content traveled

within and among the Roman religions through time, it is inevitable that what Campbellreferred to as festivals and monstrous customs of religious groups be studied as well.

From a larger perspective, the study of the Roman religions and the communication of

religious content during antiquity is one way to see and know the world as it truly is,

as the fate of the present most influential religious denomination was initially decided

only a few centuries after Jesus of Nazareth.

The study of ancient religions poses certain challenges: the rarity of historical

records regarding mystery religions, especially Mithraism, and the impossible task of

satisfactorily recreating historical scenarios necessary for demonstrating Gordon

Allports rumor transmission theory. It is also important to remember that, in the

discussion of Mithraism and Christianity, the roles and influences of other pagan Romanreligions cannot be discounted; it is imperative that they too be examined with a

reasonable degree of critical thought. This examination can be used as a foundation in

analyzing the transformation of the Roman religions as seen from Allports theory of

rumor transmission.


2/17

Fale 2

Definitions

The following terms are defined according to their meanings during antiquity.

The term Christian will be used in two respects: first, as an adjective, in which

form the term pertains to the quality of being Christian by virtue of being derived fromthe teachings of Jesus Christ or by being associated with a group of people considered

Christians; second, as a noun, in which form we refer to the person who considered

himself a Christian. It is important to note that during the New Testament Era, when the

Christian Church was only beginning to establish itself in the Roman Empire, there were

many variants of the Christian belief, which allowed one Christian to call another a

blasphemer, as in the case of Origen, the second century Christian theologian who was

later branded by early Church fathers as a Gnostic heretic. Early Christianity historian

Bart Ehrman defines the Christian of antiquity as anyone who understood him or

herself to be a follower of Christ (Ehrman, e-mail interview). We will adhere to this

definition as we attempt to isolate what defined the Christian person during that era. In

this way, we may account for the disagreements among early Christians with regards to

who or what could be considered Christian.

The term pagan is very subjective. Ehrman asserts: Pagan is not a term

pagans used on themselves (Ehrman, e-mail interview). The word stems from the Latin

pagus, a collection of homesteads distinctly separated from other areas (A Short History

of Religions 100). However, use of the term in history is strongly tied to the Christian

belief, as in the use of the word gentile by the Jews. Historians designate the word to

the large majority of people in antiquity that was neither Jewish nor Christian (Ehrman,

e-mail interview).

By Mithraism, Mithraicism and Mysteries of Mithra, we refer to the worship of

Mithras (used interchangeably with Mithra), the Persian god of the sun, justice, contractand war (Mithraism). One of the major Roman religions, its monuments dotted almost

all parts of the Empire, from the Tyne to Euphrates (Kellett 262). While believed to have

sprung from Persia, some scholars argue that the Mithraism of Rome is an entirely new

Roman invention because in Persian myth, Ahura Mazda is the supreme deity; Mithras is

simply a soldier or right hand (Ulansey). This study will pertain to the Romans version of

the Mithraic faith: that Mithras is god of the sun, of soldiers and of loyalty toward the

king (Mithraism).

Overview of Gordon Allports Theory on Rumor Transmission

Gordon Allports theory of rumor transmission was born in the uncertain yearssurrounding the Second World War. Rumor--of the outcome of the war, of possible

horrors and wishes of peace--was becoming a national concern because of its effects on

American soldiers posted in battlefronts (Allport and Postman, Analysis 501). Allport, a

Harvard professor and psychologist, proposed his theory in 1947 with the help of his

student, Leo Postman. With it, he appended a mathematical formula for rumor:

R ~ i x a


3/17

Fale 3

The formula states that rumor is created and transformed according to the

importance of the subject to the agent of the rumor times the ambiguity of the evidence

related to the topic. Allport effectively specified that two criteriaambiguity and

interestmust first be present in order for rumor to be created (502). According to

Allport, ambiguityarises when there is little available information on a subject or when

there are conflicting versions of it. Nowadays, for instance, rumors about approaching

weather may be created, but anyone with access to a current news medium can easily

check weather forecasts to confirm or deny the information. Interest is the level of

significance a subject holds for the agents of the rumor (Allport and Postman,

Psychology 2). A Virgin Islander is not likely to create rumors about the weather in a

rural town in Azerbaijan as this does not directly affect his life. If either ambiguity or

interest is absent, Allports theory will not stand.

Allport adds that, as a story travels from one agent to another, it undergoes

three distinct but mutually dependent processes: leveling, sharpening and assimilation.

This basic course of distortion modifies the story with each retelling (Allport and

Postman, Analysis 504).

Leveling is the decline in details that causes stories to grow shorter and more

concise (505). When a listener hears a narrative, rather than absorbing the whole story,

he becomes selective in what he retains of it, remembering only the details that are

resonant in his own field of experience (Abel 272). Fewer and fewer details are

preserved, and the narrative becomes more leveled the further along it travels (276).

V. Taylor asserts that this is especially true in a setting where the norm is oral

transmission; stories told and retold tend to go in the direction of abbreviation (qtd. in

Abel 276).

Sharpening is a necessity of leveling: when details are taken out, the remaining

details are necessarily sharpened. Especially in the oral tradition, the general plotremains the same as narratives are transmitted, but the details, according to Bultmann,

are subject to the control of fancy and are usually made more explicit and definite

(qtd. in Abel 275). Ernest Abel calls the process temporal sharpening, putting

emphasis on the effects of the passage of time (i.e. the amount of time the narrative has

been in circulation) to the degree of change that the details undergo (279).

Assimilation has to do with the interests, habits and sentiments in the listeners

mind. It accounts for leveling and sharpening, because decisions about what to retain or

disregard in a narrative received lie in the interests of the agent of rumor. Assimilation

moves toward a central theme and conforms to expectation, taking into account what

are central and significant in a groups life and using these in the processing andinterpretation of information, from its receipt to its transmission. Every story has a

leading theme, a generic motif, which has an equivalent in the agents personal

experiences or, if not, for which an equivalent is assigned. In the reception and

interpretation of a narrative, the agent makes sense of the story by leveling and

sharpening so it resembles his own expectations of the theme (Allport and Postman,

Analysis 504).


4/17

Fale 4

When a story has undergone a certain amount of leveling, sharpening and

assimilation, it eventually stabilizes, reaching a point where it can be approximately

reproduced purely by memory. At this point, the story no longer becomes subject to

distortion (Abel 276).

Applicability ofGordon Allports Rumor Theory

The changes that occur in a narrative after undergoing Allports basic course of

distortion are more evident on a smaller scale. Applying his theory in the observation of

large scale transformations--in this case, those that occur in whole religions--is another

matter entirely. An intensive investigation into assimilation in the person-to-person

level must somehow be connected to the changes in the larger picture. Did the Roman

Catholics begin the tradition of communion in their masses because earlier Christians

somehow managed to observe it in Mithraic ceremonies, or did they pluck details of it

from the grapevine? Was this Mithraic tradition in some way documented? If so, where

did this documentation come from and how reliable would it be , given the Mithraists

penchant for secrecy?

Application of Allports theory may be more easily accepted if we consider

religious systems to be extended forms of the individual narratives that are passed

around in rumor transmission. A religion may be regarded as a larger, more complicated

story or system of stories that allows the person to explain the supernatural and

reconcile himself with it. In this view, Allports rumor theory may be applied on two

levels: on the entire religion treated as one, unified story, or on the individual stories

within the religious system. It may also be applied if material artifactsbas reliefs,

inscriptions, architecture, paintingsare treated as stories or fragments of stories that

can be interpreted in various ways.

Moreover, an important similarity between the evolution of religions and thatof rumor content may warrant application of Allports rumor theory. Religions are

personified, are treated as if they were personal. The believer selectively identifies

objects of worship from his environmentthe sun or sacred stoneswhich he believes

can place him in a beneficial relationship with the supernatural. Some find the cause of

this mental attitude in fear, or dreams, or regard for ancestors, or the appetencies of

sex (Matthews 60). In a similar manner, an agent of rumor, upon receiving a malleable

piece of information, molds it, consciously or unconsciously, into a personalized

narrative that makes sense according to his own experiences, his interests ranging from

fear, or wishes, or wedge-driving motives (Allport and Postman, Analysis 504). His own

consciousness is projected onto the information he receives.

Ambiguity and Interest in the Roman Empire During the First Five Centuries

In order to look at the Roman religious transition through the lens of Gordon

Allport, it is necessary to establish that ambiguity and interest were present in the

milieu against which this phenomenon was set.


5/17

Fale 5

The margin for ambiguity in the Roman Empire, especially with regards to

Mithraism and Christianity, was high during the first five centuries CE. To exacerbate the

lack of efficient, centralized methods of disseminating information to the Roman public,

the messages propagated by early Christianity were open to subjective interpretation,

especially as varied types of people were brought into the fold. The early Church itself

was divided: the Eastern Church has never been quite the same as that of the West,

and each upheld different doctrines, even regarding such fundamental elements as the

divinity of Jesus Christ (Slack). Until the fourth century, different variants of beliefs

about the new religion of Christ existed. Bart Ehrmans Lost Christianities offers a list of

apocrypha that the Church fathers deemed unsuitable for inclusion in the Holy Book: 16

Gospels, 6 Acts and 22 Epistles and related literature in varying degrees of deviation

from the Judeo-Christian Bible. The lack of standardization meant inconsistencies in

early Christian teachings (Martin 9).

Ambiguity increased as early preachers and scribes of the Christian gospels took

particular liberties in modifying textual content. In Misquoting Jesus, Ehrman describes

how radically the texts have been altered over the years at the hands of scribes, who

were not only conserving scripture but changing it (207). They were no longer seen asreporters, but as theologians and historians who examined the material they had

available, and interpreted it in conformity with their own particular biases (Abel 277).

Third-century philosopher Porphyry, referring to what he saw as contradictions in the

gospels, called evangelists fiction writersnot observers or witnesses of the life of

Jesus Christ (Ehrman, Misquoting 199). When pagan philosopher Celsus criticized Jesus

Christs being a carpenter, Origenrushed to Christianitys defense, calling Celsus blind

and declaring that in none of the Gospels current in the Churches is Jesus himself ever

described as a carpenter (qtd. in Ehrman, Misquoting 203). It is possible that Origen

may have forgotten about Mark 6:3 or the gospel text in his possession left out it this

detail altogether. It is now known that such a manuscript--simply called P45

--exists

among the latent collection of New Testament manuscripts (204).

Early Christianity did not have the central regulating mechanisms at the disposal

of more recent church systems. No rigid distinctions existed between bishops and

elders, nor indications of a single chief priest at the head of a church. There was hardly a

separation of clergy from laity, giving any Christian the liberty to preach the gospel

according to his own understanding of it. Before the writing of the gospels, groups of

Christians commonly met in the house of one of their members (Slack). Christian

teachings and traditions circulated orally within the scattered Christian community in

the form of individual, self-contained units known as pericopae, from which

information spread by word of mouth, later to be collected and edited by evangelists.

Unlike Judaism, which requires rigorous study and memorization of sacred texts, early

methods of retelling the Christian message were not standardized (Abel 270). The

absence of uniform, written gospels deprived early Christians of a formula that may

have been intended to be memorized by simple Christians so that they should be able

to give an account of their faith (Ehrhardt 76).

Mithraic adherence to a strict code of secrecy is a major contributor to

ambiguity. Religious information was rarely shared to the outside world. During

sacramentum, the initiation, candidates for Mithraic membership were made to vow,


6/17


7/17

Fale 7

deadly rivals for importance, engaged in a ferocious and implacable duelfor the

domination of the world (qtd. in Martin 1).

The significance of one faith to the other was summed up in the words of

French theologian Ernst Renan: If the growth of Christianity had been arrested by some

mortal malady, the world would have been Mithraic (qtd. in Martin 2).

Interreligious Assimilation in the Roman Empire during the First Five Centuries CE

There exist different opinions regarding the similarities between Christianity and

preexisting Roman religions. Some believe that Christianity is built upon pagan religions,

and since Mithraism predated Christianity, similarities between the two must be

elements borrowed from the Mithraic faith. Others believe that Mithraism borrowed

concepts from Christianity. Some believe these are the work of the devil to promote

confusion; still, others believe these to be no more than interesting coincidences

(Morse). It cannot be denied, however, that during the first five centuries of the

Common Era, the different religions of the Roman Empire made such energetic contact

that a multi-directional assimilation between religions was inevitable. That the path of

the early Christian Church, especially its Eastern division, intersected with that of the

ancient Mysteries and Greek religions is not to be disputed (Slack).This is notably true

for Mithraism and Christianity, given their position in the hierarchy of Roman religions.

And in the struggle between the two may be found signs of Gordon Allports leveling,

sharpening and overarching process of assimilation.

The first century bore the first contact--and friction--between Christianity and

Roman Mithraism. Jesus of Nazareth began his ministry at around 25 CE, when Rome

was seeking to solidify its authority through the swaying power of religion. Augustus and

the cult of Rome were designating national religions in the hope of uniting its

remarkably diverse population (National Geographic 92). Caligula himself resolved tobe worshipped as a god (Rogers 11).

Paul of Tarsus was an infinitely significant element in the picture. James E. T.

Rogers called him the one man *who+ saved Christianity; and this at a time when the

words and acts of Christ had been recorded in no written gospel (Rogers). Paul added

Christianity to the pool of Roman religions at around 50 CE, preaching to the Gentiles in

busy towns and cities: first in Phillipi, then Thessalonica, Beroea, Athens and Corinth

(Rogers 34). His early Christian teachings thrived in the eastern provinces of Rome, even

as the imperial seat prescribed state religions. This is partly due to the attitudes of the

provincial Roman nobles, who looked upon the faith of the conquered with

condescension and viewed foreign gods as eventual subjects of the Roman deities. It isalso due to the Roman habit of identifying foreign religious systems with its own, a form

of assimilationaccording to Allport--in itself. The Roman nobles, for instance,

recognized Jehovah Sabaoth under the name of Jupiter Sabazius (Rogers 6). An

archaeological find along the Via Severiana, Ostia provides insight into the Romans

reception of Pauls evangelistic efforts. In January of 1867, an inscription in a pagan

tomb believed to belong to the Anneis (the family of the philosopher Anneus Seneca)

was discovered. Beneath an invocation to the infernal gods (Diis Manibus), the words


8/17

Fale 8

PAVLO and PETROPaul and Peterwere carved into stone. The artifact is either a

testament to Pauls friendship with Seneca or an expression of the famed Roman

tolerance for different faiths (Lanciani). This tolerance is mirrored, to a certain degree,

by early Christian teachers, who were not skeptical toward the Greco-Roman gods. Of

this attitude, Slack said: They did not tell the heathen that their gods were a delusion,

but rather that they need not worship them...since the Christian was able to triumph

over them and defy them (Early Christianity).

The appeal of Pauls messianic message also lies in the way it resonates in the

consciousness of a people steeped in the religion of the Greek gods. Joseph Campbell

asserted that at the moment of Pauls conversion on the road to Damascus, what he

actually realized was that the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross could be interpreted in

terms of the mystery religions understanding of the death and resurrection of the

savior (Transformation of Myths 190). Some scholars also believe that the reference to

Jesus Christ as divi filius--Son of Godis an element sharpened from older Greek ideas.

The story of an earthly savior fathered by a powerful deity mirrored the affairs of gods

with human women, who eventually bore saviors and heroes: Zeus fathers the Greek

hero Hercules by Alcmene, the human queen of Tiryns, and Perseus, later to found thePerseid dynasty, by Danae, princess of Argos. Such was the adherence to the concept of

divi filius that even in Greek history, the wife of king Archon of Athens was officially

betrothed to the god Dionysius (Slack).

It may have also been Roman policy, the goal of which is to make subjects

rather than create converts, that urged along the growth of the young religion of Christ

worship (Rogers 6). The story of the Jewish Messiah had not yet posed the threat of

disruption caused by fanaticism, such as the Jewish revolt against Vespasian and Titus;

thus, in the Roman provinces, Pauls teachings flourished and spread relatively

unmolested. Systematic persecution of Christians began only when the political and

social system of the Roman Empire felt jeopardized by the new faith. It was only towardthe end of the first century that the emperor Domitian began a widespread execution of

Christians (National Geographic 94).

The second and third centuries were marked by the rise of Christian ideology, as

well as opportunities for the intermingling of the different religions in the Empire. This

particular time in the history of Rome is seen as exceptionally fertile soil for the growth

of new religions (Ulansey 130). The growth of the Gnostic Christian sects insp ired the

Christian community to push for the canonization of the Scriptures (National Geographic

98). The New Testament was finally canonized under Irenaeus in 185 CE. Tertullian

wrote his Apologia and Clement and Origen, bishops of Alexandria, wrote extensive

theological treatises. Augustines Acts of the Martyrs, stories of the suffering of the

saints, also proliferated (100). As Christianity grew stronger, so did the attempt to

somehow fuse the assortment of religious ideas that ran rampant on the streets of

Rome. Greek philosopher and theologian Justin Martyr reconciled Platonic philosophy

with Christian teachings (98). The prophet Mani, in 250 CE, preached a religion that

attempted to blend Zoroastrianism (a possible root of Mithraism), Christianity and

Buddhism into a cosmopolitan message (102). Uncovered artifacts from antiquity testify

to the blending of faiths through religious icons sharing the same space. Toward the

middle of the second century, a potter in Ostia who exported to different Roman


9/17

Fale 9

provinces created lamps that feature the Good Shepherd of the Christians, alongside

Hercules and Diana, the Greek goddess of the hunt (Lanciani). Even the religiously

reticent Mithraists made attempts to mingle with other faiths, moving their meeting

places from private houses to public baths, barracks and circuses. Recent archaeological

finds show Mithraic sanctuaries regularly discovered in close proximity to Christian

churches (Martin 4). According to Lampridius, it was during this period that Mithraism

reached its peak and became so important that the emperor Commodus decided to

become its initiate (King).

During the fourth century, leveling and sharpening on the political level, in the

interest of maintaining control and sovereignty, is seen in the fluctuating attitudes of

the emperors toward the different Roman religions. In 303 CE, Diocletian issued four

edicts on non-toleration for Christianity, a mandate that led to the darkest time of

Christian martyrdom (National Geographic 104). The imperial decree provided an

opportunity for interreligious assimilation when the followers of Jesus Christ,

undeterred, responded by paying homage to the Roman gods in order to escape

persecution, holding secretly in their hearts the religion of Christ. Some Mithraic

scholars suggest the probability that under the permitted symbols of Mithras, Christianscontinued to practice their ceremonies and worship the Son of God. In this view, the

Mithraic monuments abundant in Germany may be evidences of the secret faith of the

early Christian Romans (King). Barely a decade later, Constantine overturned

Diocletians edicts with one of his own: the Edict of Milan. While Christianity was not yet

declared the single official religion of Rome, it was elevated in status as one of its

principal religions (National Geographic 104).

Constantine presents a prime example of assimilation in the highest levels of

government, which created a social climate rife for assimilation between religions. His

radical conversion to Christianity occurred after the famed battle at Milvian Bridge in

312 CE, in which he ascribed his victory to a vision of the Christian cross going beforehim in battle (Mithraism). History has since branded him the first Christian emperor.

On the other hand, Constantine has been described by some scholars as "devoid of

religious feeling, although not an irreligious man, and, perhaps more shrewdly, as a

keen politician who embraced the faith of the Christians in order to get their support

(Luce 73). R. A. Lanciani casts light on Constantines motives, saying that the

transformation of Rome from being a pagan to a Christian city was the natural result of

the work of three centuries, brought to maturity under Constantine by an inevitable

reaction against the violence of Diocletians rule (Pagan and Christian Rome).

Whichever the case, when news of Constantines triumph under the Christian symbol

spread throughout the Empire, dedications to Mithra ceased almost immediatelyat

least, in public--even though there was no official prohibition of Mithraic ceremonies.

When imperial favor turned away from the Mithraists, the religion appeared to collapse

(Mithraism).

However, the nature of religious evolution makes it impossible to annihilate

one religion by another (Matthews 81). It is likely then that Roman Mithraism did not

die with Constantines conversion, the nature and integrity of which currently remains

under scrutiny. J.B. Carter, former director of the American School of Classical Studies in

Rome, said of Constantine:


10/17

Fale 10

It was quite clear however that when he became Christian he thought

he was embracing the cult of Mithras. That Constantine might learn

exactly what he was worshipping, the Council of Nicaea was held. (Luce

73)

Indeed, long after his conversion, Constantine retained elements of solar

worship, such as the figure of the sun in his copper coinage. On it is the inscription, To

the Invincible Sun, my companion (or guardian), a well-crafted phrase which could be

satisfactorily interpreted by Christians and pagans alike (King). On the other hand,

retention of the solar figure may be attributed to the fact that management of the

currency fell under the prerogative of the Roman senate, a large majority of which

remained pagan. Nonetheless, the emperor made political compromises, showing the

various religions such leniency that the authenticity of his conversion became the

subject of skepticism (Lanciani).

The religious turmoil continued. In 380 CE, Theodosius I finally made

Christianitythat is, the type practiced by the Byzantine throne--the official religion of

the Roman Empire (Campbell 190). By the end of the fourth century, Mithraic templeswere being sacked and destroyed. In the mithraem of S. Prisca, Italy, the eyes of figures

in Mithraic frescoes were gouged out, bas reliefs shattered and the temple ruins filled

with rubbish, presumably by Christians in the area (Martin 5). Then, in 382 CE, Gratian

broke away from religious toleration and restored the pagan religions in what was to be

called the pagan revival (Martin 6). In light of all the religious activity, it is important to

note a suggestion by Augustine of Hippo: Mithraic worship was not an isolated,

exclusive faith centered on Mithras alone. He spoke of members of the Mithraic clergy

and their opinion of their Phrygian-capped god, saying, I know that the priests of him in

the cap (istius pileati) used at one time to say, our capped one is himself a

Christian(qtd. in King).

By the fifth century, Christianity was reinforcing its authority by making

doctrines official under the Catholic Church. When, again, the human nature of Jesus

Christ was raised by Nestorius, the Catholic Church rose up in conflict. In 451 CE, the

Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon finally institutionalized the doctrines of Christianity

according to the Nicene Creed (National Geographic 106). By this time, Christian

churches were capitalizing on destroyed Mithraic temples, some of which still contained

their original iconography, by building on top of them. At around 395 CE, for example,

the Christian clergy of S. Clemente, Italy expanded their church to a building across the

street, which was formerly a mithraeum (Martin 6).

Across centuries of changing religious preferencesfrom the state-endorsedpagan religions to the evangelical advances of Christianity--it is important to explore the

responses of the common Roman citizen to the shifting religious climate. While it would

be ideal to find a document that speaks clearly of pagans adapting Christian practices or

Christians emulating Mithraic traditions, history documented only the words of

historians with indifferent accounts of the mysterious Mithraic cult, or the verbal attacks

of early fathers of the Catholic Church (Cumont). The available records of Christian-

pagan interaction, which can provide the most insight into how Mithraists and Christians


11/17

Fale 11

could have exchanged religious information, only amount to opportunities for

assimilation, and refutable evidence of it at best.

One such opportunity lies in pagan-Christian intermarriages. In 1877, a

demolition near the Porta del Popolo uncovered a fragment of a second-century

inscription:

If anyone dare to do injury to this structure, or to otherwise disturb the

peace of her who is buried inside, because she, my daughter, has been

[or has appeared to be] a pagan among the pagans, and a Christian

among the Christians (Lanciani)

It was suggested at first that the father was hinting at his daughters religious

inconsistency. However, Tertullian described the resulting apostasy (the disaffiliation

from a certain religion, in this case, Christianity) of Christian girls married to pagan men.

He related how these girls were seen to commit acts of idolatry by simply accompanying

their pagan husbands to ceremonies. The revelation that the Christian girls viewed their

affiliation with their husbands as risks suggests that their ties to Christianity were not

completely severed, and their conformity to pagan traditions were not absolute

(Lanciani).

The parallels between Christianity and Mithraism are so striking that the only

defense the early Church fathers could build against accusations of borrowing was that

Satan himself had been mimicking Jesus Christ (Kellett 262). These parallels continue to

generate much speculation as to the cause of the remarkable--and at times, very

specific--similarities. Morse lists 23 similar ingredients found in both religions

(Mithraism and Christianity). Tishken expresses how the similarities between the two

are too many to be mere coincidence (Ethnic vs. Evangelical 308). King goes further

with an outright assertion of the singular affinity between the ceremonial of the two,and the transfer of so much originally Mithraic into the usage of the Orthodox *church+

(Gnostics and their Remains).

Evidence that Gordon Allports assimilation took place in this religious transition

may be seen by looking at particular Mithraic and Christian ingredients that bear

similarities to each other.

The birth date of Jesus Christ, precisely set on the same date as that of

MithrasDecember 25th

in the Gregorian calendaris a product of assimilation urged

by political necessity. In 530 AD, Dionysius Exiguus, a Roman abbot and astronomer

commissioned to fix the birth date of the Messiah adopted the 25th

of Decemberbecause it was already in popular use as the date of birth of the pagan sun gods, the

most important among which was Mithra. John Chrysostom, archbishop of

Constantinople, later stated that the date was selected so that whilst the heathen were

busy with their profane ceremonies, the Christians might perform their holy rites

undisturbed (Carpenter). Indeed, December 25th was originally a pagan festival in

honor of The Birthday of the Invincible One, which was later transferred to the

commemoration of the birth of Christ (King). The deliberate adoption of this date


12/17

Fale 12

shows elements of Allports assimilation process in the sense that the birth date of the

new deity was made to conform to the expectation of the Roman populace and takes

into account the significance of that time of year to peoples lives.

Mithraic belief also dictates that salvation comes through the shedding of holy

blood. Merkelbach writes of an inscription in the tauroctony, depicting Mithras slaying a

bull, which states, Thou hast saved us also by pouring out the blood eternal (qtd. in

Morse). While Mithraism prohibited female participation in its mysteries, the wives and

daughters of the Mithraists performed their own Mithra-esque ritual, worshipping

female gods--Artemis, Cybele, Anahita and Magna Mater--and holding their own version

of baptism by blood. In a ceremony called taurbolium, the neophyte lay in a pit while a

bull was slaughtered over her (Peronne, qtd. in Morse). The taurbolium served a similar

purpose: the washing away of human faults and the obtaining of a new and eternal life.

During the celebration of the vernal equinox, it was said that the blood spilled in the

taurbolium was equivalent to the blood shed by Jesus Christ during the Christian Easter

(Morse). Baptism in itself had been a Christian theological dilemma, drawing comments

from Augustine in the West and Saint Cyril in the East. It was apparent, however, that it

was not a unique creation of Christianity. There have been writings of the Baptism ofMary, the purification baths of the Jews, the lustration before prayer of the Greeks

and Romans, and the ancient Assyrians blessing of the water through supplication. That

the Church during the time of Saint Augustine believed in the mystical, healing

properties of consecrated baptism water is reminiscent of pagan beliefs in magic (Slack).

The Roman Catholic communion appears to have assimilated elements of

Mithraic communion as well. The Last Supper is described as a tradition in which the

Bread and Wine of which the Christian partook were a heavenly food and drink,

elements of Divine Life, which were able to transform this mortal body to an immortal

body (Slack). In the practice of Mithraism, a typical worship service culminated in a

common meal, which was a regular feature in Mithraic ceremonies (Gnoli, qtd. inMorse).Interestingly, the bread used by Mithraists, termed the mizd, was a round cake

of the same shape and dimension as the Roman Catholic host. The similarity was

dismissed by Christian apologist Justin Martyr, who stated, The wicked devils have

imitated in the mysteries of Mithra, commanding the same thing to be done (qtd. in

Carpenter). The Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation (the belief of the literal

transformation of bread and wine into Christs flesh and blood during communion)

became part of the Latin Church dogma in 1215 CE, but it is not originally Christian.

Older belief systems, such as the Thracian worship of Dionysius Sabazius, include the

idea that gods may enter the body of a person, animal, or representations of these,

which, when sacrificed and consumed, bestow on the partaker the nature of the said

deity or form a special bond between the god and the partakers, or among the

partakers themselves(Slack). The wafer of wheat that the priest raises at the

culmination of the Roman Catholic mass is sometimes considered the equivalent of

Persephone, as in the Eleusinian mysteries (Campbell 193).

The Roman Catholic festival of the three kings also appears to have elements of

the sun god Mithras. The traditional names of the three magi appear to be merely

expressions of the properties of the solar deity: Caspar means The White One,

Melchior means The King of Light, while Baltazar means Lord of Treasures (King).


13/17

Fale 13

The retaining of names with connection to the sun god shows the selective sharpening

of such characteristics that may also be applied to the Christian deity. The date for

Easter as the celebration of Jesus resurrection, according to Tartakowski, was

undoubtedly taken from Mithraism and possibly other religious cults being practiced at

the time. The motive of the early church fathers was to ease membership into

Christianity (qtd. in Morse). The Catholic celebration of Ash Wednesday also appears to

have assimilated a Mithraic tradition. Tertullian compared the confirmation of members

of the Christian faith to a rite in which the forehead of a follower of Mithras was

marked. While the nature of the marking is different (In Mithraism, the mark may have

been made by pressing red-hot iron against the flesh), many Catholic churches still

observe a similar tradition: the smearing of the symbol of the cross on the foreheads of

their members (Carpenter). Greek mythology offers similar incidents: Achilles sprinkles

ashes on his head when he hears of Patroclus death and so did Priam when he learns

his son Hector is killed. Some scholars believe that this ritual, including the Christian

version, has mystical significance (Durand, qtd. in Stopford).

Conclusion

Gordon Allports theory of rumor transmission specifies the conditions of

ambiguity and interest in the creation of rumor. It is clear that the social condition in the

Roman Empire in late antiquity displays these two factors. Early Christianity contributed

to ambiguity through the lack of unity in the teachings and methods of preaching of the

early Christian church. The division of the Church into the East and West, the existence

of different variants of Christian belief and the subjective modification of textual

content of the gospels in the hands of the scribes and evangelists resulted in disunity.

Ambiguity was exacerbated by the lack of regulation within the Church in terms of who

were qualified to preach, the oral circulation of the gospels, the scattered nature of the

Christian community, and the lack of a standard formula for the Christian message. The

secretive nature of the Mithraic Mysteries is also a major contributor to ambiguity. Therigorous initiation rituals, the oaths of secrecy, the enigmatic worship gatherings, and

the preclusion of women prevented the outward flow of Mithraic information, which

could have led to a more accurate description of Mithraism. The absence of a sacred

text similar to the Christian Bible and the fact that what little information that exists

about the Mysteries of Mithra came from early Church fathers allowed inaccuracies in

the publics perception of Mithraism.

The setting also fulfills the requirement of interest. Mithraisms dominance in

Europe, North Africa and Southwest Asia, its popularity among Roman soldiers and its

endorsement by emperors assures its importance to the Roman populace. On the other

hand, the radical message of Christianity and its promise of freedom from oppression

provided an appeal that rapidly produced converts and followers. The struggle for

dominance between the two religions also assured the significance of one to the other.

The first five centuries of the Common Era, heralded by the arrival of the Jewish

Messiah, was inundated by religious and political events that fueled the interaction and

overlap of the different Roman religions. These events elicited in the larger Roman

public a reaction akin to Gordon Allports process of assimilation.


14/17

Fale 14

However, while Gordon Allports rumor theory does apply in analyzing how the

Roman religions assimilated elements from each other, the application is limited by

several factors. First, while leveling and sharpening are distinctly observable in the

passing of information from person to person, they become vaguely applied in the

passing of information between large groups of people. In a context larger than person-

to-person transmission, its principles can only be applied in a very general sense.

Second, direct observation of the actual reaction of the Romans to the religious

shiftsthe content of the stories they spread by word of mouth about the new god

introduced by Paul, the method by which they spread these stories, the specific changes

that they made to the gospel narrative and the reason for these subjective alterations

is virtually impossible. However, we can reasonably speculate from passages written by

historians as well as the early Church fathers and from the art ceramics, inscriptions,

sculptures--of late antiquity, which present themselves as the best type of evidence

(Campbell 190). These allow us to appeal to certain traditions of the Catholic Church

that appear to have assimilated elements of or stemmed directly from Mithraism, as

well as other pagan religions. The birth date of Jesus Christ, the Roman Catholic festival

of the three kings, the traditional names of the three magi, the date for Easter as thecelebration of Jesus resurrection, salvation through baptism and the shedding of holy

blood, the Roman Catholic communion and the Catholic celebration of Ash Wednesday

are elements sharpened from preexisting Roman religions. In some of these cases, such

as the adaptation of the birth date of Mithras, sharpening was conscious, deliberate,

and politically rooted. In others, such as baptism and salvation, sharpening simply acted

upon the common, almost archetypal beliefs regarding the mechanisms of the spiritual

and supernatural. Whichever the case may be, the process aided greatly in conforming

the new religion of Christ to the expectation of the Roman populace.

Third, assimilation itself, while perfectly reliable in understanding how

information is distorted by the individual personalities of the agents of rumor, can onlybe reasonably applied in analyzing the transmission of religious content if the process by

which it operates and the driving force behind it are treated in a similar manner as those

of natural selection as proposed by Charles Darwin.

Between the evolution of religions and Darwins natural selection, we find

parallels that encourage the use of the latter in analyzing how certain characteristics of

Mithraism and other pagan religions survived even after the parent religions have long

died. Matthews stated two key things in the evolution of religion: first, the

transformation of the original organism through its relation with its environment and

the nucleating about itselfof the cells of other experiences (The Evolution of

Religions 63). Meanwhile, Darwin defined natural selection as the preservation of

favourable individual differences, and the destruction of those which are injurious

(Natural Selection 28). Christianity, around the time of its birth, was not a unified

religion in terms of its doctrines and its internal hierarchical structure. The Council of

Nicaea, the textually varied Gospel manuscripts from late antiquity and the institution of

doctrines in the Council of Chalcedon are among the many historical testaments that it

did undergo transformations. It can even be argued from a historical viewpoint that

during the first five centuries, Christianity experienced its formation, not

transformation. Whichever the case, we can assert from Matthews and Darwin that


15/17

Fale 15

Christian elements that seem to derive from pagan Roman religions are evidence of the

nucleation around Christianity of the traits that Darwin called favourable individual

differences (Darwin 28). The traditions and festivals absorbed by Christianity reflect

their favorability and the ease of their adaptability. The inverse is Christianitys own

ability to assimilate elements from other religions. In A Short History of Religions, Kellett

asserted that Mithraism died because it did not possess the power of assimilating

culture and philosophy; in contrast, Christianity was always borrowing, and had been

borrowing from the onset (264).

The natures of Christianity and Mithraism, as those of all religions, are difficult

to explain, much less define, and innumerable attempts have been made at explaining

aspects of these religions. Looking at the transformation of the Roman religions through

Gordon Allports rumor theory, this particular attempt submits that to some extent,

whole religions, when received and interpreted by individuals, do suffer changes similar

to those that rumor undergoes. Details that are irrelevant are leveled; those that

resonate in the individuals world are sharpened and retained. In the end, the individual

possesses a system of religious beliefs that is the product of assimilation of a very

personal nature. It may stray from its original form, but therein lies the beauty ofreligion: it is, by nature, personal. Gordon Allport, speaking of myths and religious

beliefs, said that they deal with themes that are among the most important that man

ever has to face and that proofs pertaining to them are eternally ambiguous (Allport

and Postman, Psychology 165). Each human being then, in dealing with themes crucial

in his life, may be justified in laying claim to a personalized religion.


16/17

Fale 16

Works Cited

Abel, Ernest. The Psychology of Memory and Rumor Transmission and Their Bearings

on Theories of Oral Transmission in Early Christianity. The Journal of Religion

51.4 (1971): 270-281. 20 February 2010

.

Allport, Gordon, and Leo Postman. The Psychology of Rumor. New York: Henry Holt and

Company, 1947.

Allport, Gordon, and Leo Postman. An Analysis of Rumor. The Public Opinion Quarterly

10.4 (1947): 501-517. 20 February 2010

.

Campbell, Joseph. Transformations of Myth Through Time. New York: Harper and Row

Publishers, 1990. Print.

Carpenter, Edward. Solar Myths and Christian Festivals: The Pagan Origins of Christian

Beliefs. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing, 2005. E-book.

Cumont, Franz. The Mysteries of Mithra. Trans. Thomas McCormack. Chicago: The Open

Court Publishing Company, 1903. E-book.

Darwin, Charles. Natural Selection. London: Bibliolis Books Ltd., 2010. E-book.

Ehrhardt, Ahrnold. Christianity Before The Apostles Creed. The Harvard Theological

Review 55.2 (1962): 73-119. 03 March 2010

.

Ehrman, Bart. Re: Defining the terms Christian and pagan during the New Testament

Era. Message to the Author. 03 Nov. 2010. E-mail.

Ehrman, Bart D. Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never

Knew. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2003.

Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why.

New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2005.

Grant, Robert. Religion and Politics at The Council of Nicaea. The Journal of Religion

55.1 (1975): 1-12. 03 March 2010 .

Kellett, E. E. A Short History of Religions. Suffolk: Pelican Books, 1962. Print.

King, Charles William. The Gnostics and Their Remains, Ancient and Mediaeval.

Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, & Co., 1864. E-book.


17/17

Fale 17

Lanciani, Rodolfo A. Pagan and Christian Rome. Cambridge: Houghton Mifflin and

Company/The Riverside Press, 1823. E-book.

Luce, S. B. Professor Carters Lowell Lectures on the Religious Life of the Romans.The

Classical Journal 7.2 (1911): 70-74. 26 February 2010

.

Martin, Luther. Roman Mithraism and Christianity. Numen 36.1 (1989): 2-15. 26

February 2010 .

Matthews, Shailer. The Evolution of Religion. The American Journal of Theology 15.1

(1911): 57-82. 03 March 2010 .

"Mithraism." Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010. Web. 26 Feb. 2010.

Morse, Donald. Mithraism and Christianity: How Are They Related? The Journal of

Religion and Psychical Research 20.5 (1994): 40-53. 03 March 2010

.

National Geographics Concise History of the World: An Illustrated Timeline. 2006.

Rogers, James E. T. Paul of Tarsus, An Inquiry into the Times and the Gospel of the

Apostle of the Gentiles. London: Macmillan and Co., 1872.

Slack, Samuel Benjamin. Early Christianity. London: Archibald Constable and Co. Ltd.,

1908.

Stopford, Joshua. Pagano-papismus; or, An exact parallel between Rome-pagan and

Rome Christian, in their doctrines and ceremonies. London: J. Hatchard and Son,

1844.

Tishken, Joel. Ethnic vs. Evangelical Religions: Beyond Teaching the World Religion

Approach. The History Teacher 33.3 (2000): 303-320. 26 February 2010

.

Ulansey, David. Solving TheMithraic Mysteries. Biblical Archaeological Review 20.5

(1994): 40-53. 03 March 2010 .

Ulansey, David. The Mithraic Mysteries. Scientific American 261.6 (1989): 130-135. 26

February 2010 .

Documents

Rumor and the Roman Religions by April Rose Fale