MUZEUL JUDEŢEAN MUREȘ MARISIA S T U D I I Ș I M AT E R I A L E XXXII ARHEOLOGIE Târgu Mureș 2012  CONTENTS ARTICLES Marius-Mihai Ciută A Neolithic Feature Discovered at Alba Iulia–Lumea Nouă 7 Rita E. Németh Prehistoric Wheel Models from the Collection of the Mureş County Museum 15 Botond Rezi Prehistoric Bronze Finds from the Collection of Kolumbán Árpád 33 Sándor Berecki An Early Iron Age Zoomorphic Clay Figurine from Târgu Mureș 47 Britta Burkhardt Some Considerations on the Symbolism of the Lion Motif in Scythian Art 59 János Németi Celtic Grave from Moftinu Mic, Satu Mare County 71 Iosif Vasile Ferencz Late Iron Age Brooch with Enamelled Plaque from Ardeu 79 Nicoleta Man–Daniel M. Cioată Archaeological Researches in the Military Vicus from Călugăreni 85 István Gergő Farkas–Szilamér Péter Pánczél–András Szabó A New Roman Altar from Gurghiu, Mureș County 101 Szilamér-Péter Pánczél–László Lenkey–Mihály Pethe–Nándor Laczkó Updating our Knowledge about the Roman Fort from Brâncovenești, Mureș County 105 Koppány Bulcsú Ötvös–Katalin Sidó The Analysis of the Ceramic Material from Glodeni. Preliminary Considerations 117 Maria-Corina Nicolae Isiac Reliefs in Roman Dacia 127 Csaba Szabó Searching for the Light-Bearer. Notes on a Mithraic Relief from Dragu 135 Imola Boda Apollo and Iuppiter Dolichenus in Roman Dacia 145 Zsolt Nyárádi A Perished Medieval Settlement in Udvarhelyszék 155 Regina Bakonyi–Zoltán Soós The Medieval Church of Vălenii de Mureș, Mureș County 193 Kármen Anita Baráth Cloak Jewels on Transylvanian and Hungarian Mural Paintings of the Angevin Period 205 Attila Pokorny A Standpoint on the Restoration of Medieval Ceramics 215 BOOK REVIEWS Bondár, Mária, Agyag kocsimodellek a Kárpát-medencéből (Kr. e. 3500–1500) [Prehistoric wagon models in the Carpathian Basin (3500–1500 BC)], Archaeolingua, Budapest, 2012, 132 pages, 5 figures, 28 plates, 2 maps. (by Rita E. Németh) 221 Ramsl, Peter C., Das latènezeitliche Gräberfeld von Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Flur Reinthal Süd, Niederösterreich, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophich–historiche Klasse, Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission, Band 74, Wien, 2011, 669 pages, 204 figures, 234 plates. (by Sándor Berecki) 225 Carbó García, Juan-Ramón, Los cultos orientales en la Dacia romana. Formas de difusión, integración y control social e ideológico, Ediciones Univesidad De Salamanca, Junio 2010, volume 1–2, 1270 pages. (by Imola Boda) 227 ABBREVIATIONS 229  SEARCHING FOR THE LIGHT-BEARER. NOTES ON A MITHRAIC RELIEF FROM DRAGU Csaba SZABÓ PhD, University of Pécs, HU The Roman cult of Mithras was a widespread mystery cult in the Roman Empire in the 2nd–4th century AD. With more than 300 objects, the Roman province of Dacia was a regional centre of the cult, especially because of the massive presence of the army. An important category of this large amount of material sources consists of Mithraic reliefs. As the most important part of the stellar–language of the Mithraic cosmos represented by the sanctuary, the iconography and local variety of Mithraic reliefs represents a fertile historiographical topic. The exact place and context of discovery of the small Mithraic relief from Dragu village, Salaj County remain uncertain (CIMRM 1919). The iconography of the relief is quite unusual: a flying person appears on the right of Mithras and is identified by Vermaseren – without arguments – as Lucifer-Phosphoros. In this paper we make an attempt to better identify the flying person analyzing it not only in the larger context of Mithraic iconography and religious concepts using analogies from other provinces and Dacia, but also as an example of Roman provincial religious art. Keywords: Mithras, mysteries and initiation, Lucifer, Nymphus grade, provincial art, Dragu The cult of Mithras represents a religious phenomenon unique among the Roman cults spread in the Roman Dacia not just because of the great number of adepts – over 100 names (Garcia 2010, 176–180) – or the great number of cultic artefacts – over 300 pieces – but also because of their iconographic and artistic variety. The present article deals with a votive piece that due to its iconography is apparently unique, not only in the provincial mithraic art of Dacia but also in the Roman Empire. If we accept that in manifestations of the mithraic cult reliefs contain a symbolic, astral language (Porphyrios: De antro nympharum, 24–25), also called ‘star- talk’ (Beck 2006, 105) one can interpret the relief from Dragu as an iconographic hapax. The relief from Dragu, Sălaj County (Pl. 1/1–3) represents a scientific challenge due to its iconography and the place of its discovery. Questions are being raised about the role and symbolism of the votive object, the integration of the follower and of the object in the mithraic hierarchy in Dacia and also the difficult relation between provincial art and mithraic canonical iconography. The unique character of the object is due to the flying figure left of the god. The purpose of the present article is in fact an attempt to identify this character and to decipher the atypical iconography while also trying to integrate the place of discovery in the historical and spiritual context and outline of Roman Dacia. The methodological base of this paper is the comparative and iconographic analysis of the analogies from Dacia and the Empire in order to identify the role and message of this important relief that is ignored in specialized literature. MARISIA XXXII, p. 135‒143  Cs. SZABÓ 136 Cs. Szabó The context of the discovery and the Dragu settlement is an uncertain and poor point on the historical and religious map of Roman Dacia. In the area, that is marginal relative to the important Roman road between Porolissum and Napoca (Torma 1880, 20; Finály 1904, 243; Bărbulescu 2005, 107; Fodorean 2006, 121) archaeological finds dating from the Roman Age were made – bricks, gravestone, quarry rock, Roman pottery from Pusta Mică, Zăpodea de Piatră, Lespezi hill and Dealul Podurilor (Torma 1880; Finály 1904, 243–46, Gudea 2008, 76, nr. 16) – that prove the existence of a Roman settlement. Finding and researching the Roman settlement in the area is however problematic due to the lack of systematic diggings.1 According to the inventory sheet2 the relief was found near the southern border of Dragu village on the field belonging to Aurel Borșa in the area Dealul Podurilor. A corner of the piece was pointing out from the tilled earth. It was removed with a plough in the autumn of 1935; it was then that the piece was broken in 3 large pieces (Pl. 1/1). It got into the possession of the Institute of Medicine History, in 1936 being passed to the National Museum of Transylvanian History where it is today (inv. no. V 15812–1326). The place of discovery was visited by Constantin Daicoviciu on 14th September 1936. Although the object is mentioned in several monographs and repertoires (CIMRM 1919, 273–274; Beck 1984, 2044; Popa 2002, 80, nr. 246; Gudea 2008, 76, nr. 16; Gudea–Luca 2010, 49, nr. 98) it was not published or analyzed besides the lacunose resume by Vernaseren. The statue of Jupiter, of human proportions, donated by János Paget to the Transylvanian Museum and the eagle found in 1902 by Endre Orosz (Torma 1880, 20; Finály 1904, 244) and also the mithraic relief prove a spiritual and religious activity in the supposed Roman settlement, known in Romanian specialized literature as ‘rural’ (Bărbulescu 1998, 202; Popa 2002, 80; Gudea 2008, 76). The relief from Dragu is an eloquent but not unique example out of the multitude of votive monuments dedicated to the Roman god Mithras that originate from settlements that are considered to be rural (CIL III 968, 7730, 12547, 12548, IDR II, 133, 145) from Dacia and from the Empire. Roman finds from the territory of the supposed settlement prove that the mithraic relief is not an isolated discovery but that it belongs in a well defined religious and historical context, thus its interpretation must be analyzed in this context, taking into account the essential factors of a religious phenomenon: who, how, by what means, where and to whom is the votive object dedicated to (Flood 1999, 42–57; Biehl–Bertemes 2001, 11–27). Either the inhabitant of a villa rustica or a pagus, the anonymous worshipper, originating probably from an urban centre such as Napoca or Porolissum, knew the myth and cult of Mithras, a god formed or created in the 1st century AD, with a strict and uniform iconography, defined by means of a syncretistic theology and an astrological message (Tóth 2003, 44–56; László et al. 2005 I, 120–122; Beck 2006, 41–67). The relief from Dragu reflects the problematic relation between theological dogma of the cult and the influence of provincial art and workshops on the art piece (Gordon 1996, 10–11; Biehl–Bertemes 2001, 11–27; Bărbulescu 2003, 75–84). Besides a few other eloquent examples (CIMRM 187, 188, 191, 194, 240, 299, 480, 481, 782, 988, 1896, Merkelbach 1995, 6), in the cult of Mithras it is hard to define and distinguish the votive and iconographic manifestation of the mystery cult, that of initiates – sacra mystica – and that of the private cult – sacra private –, provided we can make such a differentiation. Though the problem is not raised in the Romanian 1 The only attempt at digging was initiated by Gábor Finály at the beginning of the 20th century. Torma (1880, 17–20) lists Dragu among the settlements belonging to Ager Napocensis. 2 The author wishes to thank Sorin Nemeti and Irina Nemeti for their help in finding the inventory sheet.  Notes on a Mithraic Relief from Dragu 137 specialized literature and the sources are lacunose when it comes to the rituals of mithraic initia- tions in Dacia (Merkelbach 1984, 86–133; Nemeti–Nemeti 2005, 109) it is more than likely that the rite and process of initiation mean the existence of a sanctuary, or a relief or of a central statue (Kultbild, Götterbild: CIMRM 34, 181, 230, 310, 352, 390, 415, 548, 592, 593, 1083, 1149, 1292, 1935, 1958, 1972, 1973, 2063) and of a community (László et al. 2005 II, 67–103; Beck 2006, 105; Nicolae 2011, 71). If they are not present the religious role and context of small sized mithraic reliefs from marginal areas is harder to interpret, especially in lack of evidence about the existence of a sanctuary. The relief from Dragu has a height of 32–41 cm, a length of 50 cm and a width of 2.5–6.5 cm thus being part of medium sized votive monuments that form the mithraic repertoire from Dacia. The material is tuff stone. The existence of the relief is not proof strong enough for the existence of a sanctuary or a mithraic community in Dragu, the same case is valid for several settlements with Roman finds from Dacia (CIMRM 1918, 1934, 2011, 2026, 2153, 2154, 2162, 2163); thus we cannot define for certain the votive, sacral nature of the object, being either an ex-voto from a sanctuary or a relief belonging to the private cult of the Roman god Mithras (Latteur 2011). With a single main registry the piece belong to type 1.b in the present typology of mithraic reliefs from Dacia (Sicoe 2004, 287–289) or reliefs with just one registry. The hard material and the poor design indicate a local or regional workshop (Napoca – maybe Porolissum or Gherla) but not a central one (Sarmizegetusa or Apulum: Sicoe 2004, 285–287), being part of the products of provincial art with many iconographic “anomalies”. The shape of the relief is a rarely found one in the mithraic repertoire: the central scene is in an aedicula-naiskos, with two well designed columns with outlined capitals, decorated with vegetative motifs and in the tympanum one can find the well known elements of mithraic iconography but in an untypical disposition (left to right): the lion that moves, looking to the right, Sol’s bust (the head is missing), covered with a mantle decorated with an oval fibula, holding the whip from the quadriga in his right hand (CIMRM 1919, 274), Luna’s bust with the typical symbol, highly disproportionate when compared to that of Sol and the raven looking to the left, towards the lion. Both animals are represented on complex reliefs in the main registry (the lion under the bull, the raven on Mithras’ mantle, Beck 2006, 194–195). The aedicule shape of the relief has few analogies in Dacia but also in the Empire (CIMRM 1127, 1345, 1902, 1907, 2018, 2037, 2216, 2244, 2305, indirectly on the relief from Dieburg, CIMRM 1247), imitating a Roman classical building, unusual for a mithraeum, but we find analogies in the repertoire of other Oriental or syncretistic cults (Tudor 1976, 66; Piso 1993, 830; Nemeti 1998, 96, 99; Boda–Szabó 2011, 275). The main scene in the central registry is that of the slaying of the bull, the main motif of ‘star talk’ (László et al. 2005 I, 206–226; Beck 2006, 194–222): Mithras in Persian garments, with the tunic tight around his waist, the mantle in the wind, the god looking in front of him and not towards Sol as is usual, holding the dagger in the right hand at the bull’s neck and in the left hand he holds the jaws of the animal. Under the bull out of the typical symbols only the scorpion and the snake are represented, the last being a later addition (the dog being an alternative and polysemantic element in the ‘star-talk’ is not featured on the relief, although Vermaseren claims it does: CIMRM 1919, 273). The scene of the killing of the bull is surrounded by torchbearer, in a typical stance, but with unusual elements (Hinnells 1976, 38–40): the character from the right part of the relief is dressed in Oriental garments, with a short tunic, the Phrygian cap and the right 138 Cs. Szabó leg crossed, holding – according to Vermaseren (CIMRM 1919, 273) – an axe. We believe that it is more likely to be a torch or a pedum, canonical symbols, but much too varied, of the torchbearer (Hinnells 1976, 43–44; László et al. 2005 I, 136–142; Beck 2006, 212). The character to the left sits on a base, wears unusual clothes, with a Phrygian cap and with his left hand raised to his chest holds the mantle coming down from both shoulders. In his right hand he holds, according to Vermaseren, a patera or a lamp, an unusual phenomenon in the iconography of torchbearer. The last and most interesting atypical element is the flying character in the main registry, to the right of Mithras (Pl. 1/3). The half-naked character is poorly elaborated, details are not shown clearly but we can notice that he is represented smaller than the other characters, wears on his shoulders a short mantle and probably a petasos or a Phrygian cap on his head. In his right hand he holds a raised object, according to Vermaseren a torch. The position, nature and role of the character represent a unique element in Roman provincial art, thus needing an ample analysis. Mithraic studies from the last decades have made a remarkable progress in deciphering the evolution and origin of Mithras, invented in Rome, 1st century AD, following a Hellenistic, preliminary stage in Asia Minor (Tóth 2003, 28–29; Beck 1998, 115–128; László et al. 2005 I, 70–81). In the archaeological material and the mithraic iconography we notice a series of secondary, divine figures, besides the typical ones, known especially from complex reliefs, with an important role in initiations and mithraic theology (CIMRM 1247, 1292, 1685, 1727, 2340). The role of these secondary divinities in the mithraic myth, the mystery and the ‘star-talk’ is hard to interpret, their presence reflecting a community that knew in small detail mithraic theology but also a tendency towards syncretism with other local or oriental cults. The secondary divine characters in the mithraic cult are: personifications of the seven planets that govern the initiation grades (Merkelbach 1984, 85; László et al. 2005 II, 5–37), Sol (CIMRM 1592; Nemeti 2005, 309–311), Mercurius (CIMRM 821), “Arimanius” or Mithras – Phanes – Chronos – Saturnus (CIMRM 543, 695, 777; László et al. 2005 I, 143–153), Saturnus – Serapis (CIMRM 479, 812 often interpreted as mithraic genius, Nemeti–Nemeti 2005, 92), Hekate (CIMRM 85; Merkelbach 1984, 234–235; László et al. 2005 I, 153–158), Venus (CIMRM 784), Minerva (CIMRM 1086), Oceanus (CIMRM 1247), Tellus (CIMRM 1247), Caelus (CIMRM 1247), Amor and Psyche (CIMRM 186, 2356; Merkelbach 1984, 314) and the twins Lucifer (Phosphorus) – Hesperus (Merkelbach 1984, 207–208). The divinity that appears on the relief from Dragu has the following defining attributes that can be used as a starting point towards its identification: he flies towards Mithras from the right, is half-naked with a mantle on his shoulders, he does not have a beard – probably a sigh of youth – and holds a torch in his hand. From the crowded ‘pantheon’ of the mithraic symbolic language only three divinities with these attributes can be found: Amor, Lucifer (Phosphorus) and Mercurius. Amor or Eros rarely appears in representations, most often in Italy, the origin place of Roman mysteries (CIMRM 186, 2356; Merkelbach 1984, 314). Son of Venus (CIMRM 480), the most powerful daimon in the Graeco-Roman mythology (Platon: Symposion, 23–25; Apuleius: Metamorphoses, IV, 28), Eros (Phanes in the orphic theogony, Kern 1922, 22–24; László et al. 2005 I, 151) represents the essence and divine will of the world created by Mithras and his repre- sentation with Psyche in mithraic iconography symbolizes the holy commitment (covenant) of the initiate of the second grade (nymphus, Clauss 1990, 183) that becomes thus fiancé (sponsus, Firmicus Maternus: De errore, 19.1) of Eros. The soul and other celestial concepts presented in  Notes on a Mithraic Relief from Dragu 139 the form of a flying young, naked boy often appear in ancient iconography and conception, but rarely in the mithraic one. Amor (Eros) is represented only in Italy, in the provincial art from Dacia we have no example for this intellectual concept (the one from Porolissum is disputable, see Nemeti–Nemeti 2005, R 16), thus it is difficult to believe that a follower from Dacia Porolissensis knew the orphic symbolism from Italy of the nymphus grade. Mercurius (Hermes) is one of the main secondary divinities of the mithraic ‘pantheon’. The planet Mercury governs the first initiation grade, called corax in the sources (CIMRM 473, 480; Clauss 1990, 183), meaning the difference between those that were not initiated and those that were. The symbol of the first degree of initiation is the raven, the mystical animal of antiquity (Gordon 1980, 25–32; Merkelbach 1984, 86–87) and on the mosaic floor of the sanctuary of Felicissimus from Ostia next to the raven are a cup and a caduceus (Merkelbach 1984, 295). The raven (Mercurius) appears in several stances in mithraic iconography (László et al. 2005 II, 14), most often on the left side of the relief, on Mithras’ mantle as messenger as Sol, but often this iconographic canon is not followed, as is our case. The association between Mercurius and the raven – the holy animal of Apollo (Ovidius: Fasti II, 243–266) is based on myths and well known characteristics of the divinity and of this animal, respectively his role as messenger and robber (László et al. 2005 II, 15). Thus the Raven (Mercurius) appears not only because of astronomic reasons in the mithraic star-talk but also because of religious reasons: the messenger of the solar god and also the first initiate is the helper of the community, the one who leads and serves the follower (or his soul), in another world, the world of Kronos – Mithras. Worshipping Mercurius in the mithraic cult is due to his role as ψυχοπομπός, guide of the souls in the other world (Pseudo-Apollodorus: Bibliotheca, 3, 112–115; about the role of Mercurius in the mystery cults see Kerényi 1984, 78–94). Mercurius is attested in epigraphy (CIMRM 1090, 1128, 1179, 1257, 1258, 1284, 1317, 1475, 1755, 1815, 2202), sometimes in syncretism (CIMRM 1351), but also by sanctuaries or rooms dedicated to the god (CIMRM 1750). We know a few iconographic representations of the god or of the corax initiate (CIMRM 780, 821, 1089, 1176, 1178, 1210). For the relief from Dragu the closest analogy could be Mercurius’ representation on the complex but very fragmented relief from Virunum (CIMRM 1430) where the god is naked, with the mantle on his shoulders, with the caduceus in his left hand, pointing the way of the solar quadriga, but the representation from Dragu does not have any attribute specific to the god and from Dacia we do not know any iconographic analogy regarding the representation of Mercurius or the corax initiate in the mithraic repertoire. The planet and goddess governing the nymphus degree was Venus (CIMRM 299, 488, 784, Merkelbach 1984, 91; László et al. 2005 II, 72), also known by the ancients as Lucifer- Phosphoros: “Stella Veneris, quae Φωσφόρος Graece, Latine dicitur Lucifer, cum antegreditur solem, cum subsequitur autem Hesperos” (Cicero: De natura, II.20). The sons of Astraeus and Eos (Hesiodos: Theogonia, 378–381), Lucifer and Hesperus appear in Graeco-Roman iconography as young flying men that are naked or wear a mantle on their shoulders, associated with Sol or Luna (Pl. 1/4). In the cult of Mithras Lucifer and Hesperus appear in several hypostases (as Cautes– Lucifer and Cautopates–Hesperus, Merkelbach 1984, 81, 118; Nemeti–Nemeti 2005, 109; László et al. 2005 I, 142; Hijmans 2009, 76–77, 99, 159), and their interpretation in the cult and their association with mithraic degrees is problematic in the specialized literature (Beck 2006, 206–214). Lucifer-Phosphoros appears on several reliefs (CIMRM 415, 1359; Bradley 140 Cs. Szabó 2009, fig. 10) as a naked youth in front of Sol’s quadriga in the upper registry, in a secondary stance (Pl. 1/5). Hesperus represented on several monuments (CIMRM 1216, 1292, 1359) always in the upper registry, also in secondary scenes. Indirectly the two figures are represented as stars. Out of over 30 monuments where stars appear, the relief from Tavalicavo, Moesia Inferior (CIMRM 2244) is worth mentioning, where in the upper part of the central registry appears Mithras on the back of the bull as a hero associated with a star to his right (Pl. 1/6). This represen- tation is very similar to two examples from Dacia (CIMRM 1985, 2186; Nemeti–Nemeti 2005, 109), associated to the degree heliodromus. This degree in Mithras’ mysteries is poorly known, archaeological and literary sources being sporadic about this degree (CIMRM 419, 480; Alvar 2008, 366). The term in itself is probably an invention of the cult (Clauss 1990, 183; László et al. 2005 II, 29) also known as στερεότες (CIMRM 60). The initiate of the 6th degree is governed by the Sun (Sol) and has as symbol the torch, the solar diadem and the whip. In the mithraeum from Santa Prisca it appears in the typical clothing of solar divinities (the short mantle on the shoulders, László et al. 2005 II, 28). Sometimes he appears as a follower in Sol and Mithras’ quadriga (Jobst 1992, 47, 57). A unique representation of the initiate heliodromus is on the pot from Mogontiacum (Merkelbach 1995, 2, 6), where he appears as a young, naked man with a whip in his hand and the solar diadem with other followers in an initiation process, evoking ritually the solar road (László et al. 2005 II, 30, 100). Following the interpretation of Reinhold Merkelbach the 5th degree initiate – perses – is prepared by the mystagogos of the second degree – nymphus – in the ritual of initiation, that is why we find sometimes together Amor–Cupidon, symbol of the second degree with Lucifer–Cautes, symbol of the sixth degree (CIMRM 186, 1083, 784; Merkelbach 1984, 121). We also know representation of the newly initiated, represented in the mithraic iconog- raphy as a young, naked, virile man, similar to the description of initiates given by Apuleius (Metamorphoses, IX.23–26), symbol of spiritual rebirth (CIMRM 775). The interpretation of the mysterious character on the relief from Dragu and of the piece itself raises a highly disputed problem in classical archaeology but only recently adopted in mithraic studies. The relativism of religious art (Gordon 1996, 5–8) present in Roman provincial art indicates the difficulty of transmitting the religious ‘message’: its essence changes not only in time, space and society but also through the process of its rendition. The follower from Dragu – even if he met the mysteries of Mithras in an urban environment – interpreted the mithraic theology and message in his own language, not all of the initiates being masters in astrology, studiosi astrologiae (CIMRM 708, Cumont 2010, 168), and the artist that made the relief knew partially and superficially the original message. As the latest research have proven this religious ‘message’ of the mithraic cult was not dogmatic, as Franz Cumont claims. The varied and rich manifestation of mithraic art in Roman provinces strongly disputes Cumont’s dogmatist program and based on some innovative studied today even the doctrinaire nature of the mysteries cults is disputed; we do not know for sure the universal existence of seven degrees of initiation, of highly intellectual, created theology of mysteries (Beck 2006, 39–64; Alvar 2008, 17–25). Using this relativist process the relief from Dragu is not an exception anymore but rather a usual example, often encountered in Roman provincial art that reflects the ‘customization’ of the sacred, lost message, transformed, combined or simplified in the process of transmission from the follower to the creation of the piece. A religious object is always determined by the sacred message, the personal interpretation of the follower, its financial state and by the artist who designs the object  Notes on a Mithraic Relief from Dragu 141 (Biehl–Bertemes 2001, 11–27), thus the iconographic variety is somewhat predestinated by the nature of the sacred message, itself relative. The relief from Dragu is an eloquent example for the Roman provincial art, being a piece with several elements that are not typical – the aedicule shape, the position of the raven, of the lion, of the torchbearer – and with a character we could consider being an iconographic hapax. Based on the examples provided we tried to prove however that the religious message of a mystery cult, unreachable for the uninitiated and only partially known for most followers, appears so varied and rich in Roman provincial art that the theological ‘doctrine’ – and thus also visual – of the cult must be reinterpreted. The piece from Dragu is an example where we see with certainty the influence of regional workshops (place of discovery, poor craftsmanship), a possible influence of the different Eastern cults (the aedicule shape) and a tendency to minimize the mithraic, religious message. The flying figure from the right side of the relief can be interpreted, based on the given examples, as an over-sized symbol of a degree of initiation – most likely heliodormus or possibly nymphus –, as a symbol of the human soul in the world of the dead or simply as a mistake of the artist. The search for the torchbearer or the light-bearer – lucem ferre – through the eyes of a modern man is an attempt that is paradoxical and absurd, born from the essential nature of mystery cults, reflected by the famous quote “dicerem, si dicere liceret, cognosceres, si liceret audire” (Apuleius: Metamorphoses, XI. 23). REFERENCES Alvar 2008 Alvar, J., Romanising Oriental Gods: Myth, Salvation and Ethics in the Cult of Cybele, Isis and Mithras, Leiden–Boston. Bărbulescu 1998 Bărbulescu, M., Cultes et Croyances dans le Milieu rural en Dacie, IN: La politique édilitaire dans les provinces de l’Empire romain IIéme–IVéme siècles après J.-C., Tulcea. Bărbulescu 2003 Bărbulescu, M., Interferenţe spirituale în Dacia romană, Cluj-Napoca. Bărbulescu 2005 Bărbulescu, M. (ed.), Atlas-dicţionar al Daciei romane, Cluj-Napoca. Beck 1984 Beck, R., Mithraism since Franz Cumont, ANRW, II, 17.4, 2003–2115. Beck 1998 Beck, R., The Mysteries of Mithras: A New Account of Their Genesis, JRS, 88, 115–128. Beck 2006 Beck, R., The Religion of the Mithras Cult in the Roman Empire, Oxford. Biehl–Bertemes 2001 Biehl, P.–Bertemes, Fr., The archaeology of Cult and Religion: an Introduction, IN: Biehl, P. F.–Bertemes, F.–Meller, H. (eds.), The archaeology of Cult and Religion, Budapest, 11–26. Boda–Szabó 2011 Boda, I.–Szabó, Cs., Notes on a Dolichenian Relief from Mehadia, Marisia, XXXI, 273–283. Bradley 2009 Bradley, M., The importance of colour on ancient marble sculpture, Art History, 32, 427–457. CIMRM Vermaseren, M., Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae I–II, Hague, 1956–1960. Clarac 1828 Clarac, F., Musée de Sculpture antique et moderne, ou description historique et graphique du Louvre, Paris, vol. 2. Clauss 1990 Clauss, M., Die sieben Grade des Mithras-Kultes, ZPE, 82, 183–194. Cumont 2010 Cumont, F., Religiile orientale în păgânismul roman, Herald, (traducere după originalul francez din 1906). Finály 1904 Finály, G., A Limes Dacicus és a pogojuri földvár, ArchÉrt, 24, 243–246. Flood 1999 Flood, G., Beyond Phenomenology: Rethinking the Study of Religion. 142 Cs. Szabó Fodorean 2006 Fodorean, Fl., Drumurile din Dacia romană – The roads of Roman Dacia, Cluj-Napoca. Garcia 2010 Garcia, J. R. C., Los Cultos Orientales en la Dacia romana, Salamanca. Gordon 1980 Gordon, R., Reality, evocation and boundary in the Mysteries of Mithras, JMS, 3, 42–63. Gordon 1996 Gordon, R., Image and Value in the Graeco-Roman World, Studies in Mithraism and Religious Art, Variorum, Aldershot. Gudea 2008 Gudea, N., Aşezări rurale în Dacia romană (106–275). Schiţă pentru o istorie a agriculturii si satului daco-roman, Oradea. Gudea–Luca 2010 Gudea, N.– Luca, S. A., Repertoriul arheologic al judetului Salaj, Sibiu. Hijmans 2009 Hijmans, S., Sol – the Sun in Art and Religions of Rome, Ph.D. dissertation, manuscript. Hinnells 1976 Hinnells, J. R., The iconography of Cautes and Cautopates I, JMS, I, 36–67. Jobst 1992 Jobst, H., Die Römische Mithrasmysterien, IN: Jobst, W., Carnuntum. Das Erbe Roms an der Donau. Katalog Archäologisches Museum Carnuntinum, Wien. Kerényi 1984 Kerényi, K., Hermes, a lélekvezető, Budapest. Kern 1922 Kern, O., Orphicorum Fragmenta. László et al. 2005 László, L.–Nagy L.–Szabó, Á., Mithras misztériumai I–II, Budapest. Latteur 2011 Latteur, O., Le culte de Mithra a-t-il été intégré dans certains panthéons civiques?, Latomus, 70, 3, 741–754. Merkelbach 1984 Merkelbach, R., Mithas, Hain. Merkelbach 1995 Merkelbach, R., Das Mainzer Mithrasgefäss, ZPE, 108, 1–6. Nemeti 1998 Nemeti, S., Cultul lui Sucellus – Dis Pater şi al Nantosueltei – Proserpina în Dacia romană, EphemNap, VIII, 95–121. Nemeti 2005 Nemeti, S., Sincretismul reigios în Dacia romană, Cluj-Napoca. Nemeti–Nemeti 2005 Nemeti, I.–Nemeti, S., Planets, grades and soteriology in Dacian Mithraism, ActaMN, 41–42, I, 2004–2005, 107–125. Nicolae 2011 Nicolae, C., Cult images and Mithraic reliefs in roman Dacia, Transylvanian Review, vol. XX, suppl. 2:1, 67–78. Piso 1993 Piso, I., La tablette de Baudecet (Gembloux, Belgique): éléments d’études comparatives, Latomus, LII, 826–841. Popa 2002 Popa, D., Villae, vici, pagi. Aşezările rurale din Dacia romană intracarpatică, Sibiu. Sicoe 2004 Sicoe, G., Lokalproduktion und Importe. Der Fall der mithraischen Reliefs aus Dakien, IN: Marteens, M.–de Boe, G. (eds.), Roman Mithraism: the Evidence of the Small Finds, 285–302. Torma 1880 Torma, K., A Limes Dacicus felső része, Budapest. Tóth 2003 Tóth, I., Mithras, a misztériumok istene?, IN: Tóth, I. (szerk.), Mithras Pannonicus. Esszék, SpecNova, 17, Budapest–Pécs, 45–56. Tudor 1976 Tudor, D., Corpus monumentorum religionis equitum Danuvinorum, 1–2, 1969–1976, Leiden. LIST OF PLATES Pl. 1. 1. The relief from Dragu before restoration (photo: Winkelmann Institut, Berlin); 2. The relief from Dragu (photo: S. Nemeti); 3. The flying figure (detail); 4. Lucifer, Luna and Hesperus (after Clarac 1828, 170); 5. Lucifer before quadriga (after Bradley 2009, nr. 10); 6. Mithraic relief from Tavalicavo, Moesia Inferior (CIMRM 2244).  Notes on a Mithraic Relief from Dragu 143 1 2 3 4 5 6 Plate 1. 1. The relief from Dragu before restoration (photo: Winkelmann Institut, Berlin); 2. The relief from Dragu (photo: S. Nemeti); 3. The flying figure (detail); 4. Lucifer, Luna and Hesperus (after CLARAC 1828, 170); 5. Lucifer before quadriga (after BRADLEY 2009, nr. 10); 6. Mithraic relief from Tavalicavo, Moesia Inferior (CIMRM 2244).  ABBREVIATIONS Acta Acta (Siculica), Muzeul Naţional Secuiesc, Sfântu Gheorghe ActaArchHung Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Budapest ActaMD Acta Musei Devensis ActaMN Acta Musei Napocensis, Cluj-Napoca ActaPraehistArch Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica, Berlin ActaTS Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, Sibiu Agria Agria, Annales Musei Agriensis / Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve (1982), Eger AJA American Journal of Archaeology Alba Regia Alba Regia, Annales Musei Stephani Regis, Székesfehérvár AMND Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Nordwestdeutschland Analele Banatului Analele Banatului, Muzeul Banatului, Timişoara Angustia Angustia, Muzeul Carpaţilor Răsăriteni, Sfântu Gheorghe ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt Apulum Apulum, Acta Musei Apulensis, Alba Iulia ARA Annual review of anthropology ArchAustr Archaeologia Austriaca, Wien ArchBBonn Archäologische Berichte Bonn ArchÉrt Archaeologiai Értesítő, Budapest ArchKorr Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum in Mainz ArchPfalz Archäologie in der Pfalz ArhMold Arheologia Moldovei, Iași ASGE Arheologičeskij Sbornik Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaža, Leningrad Banatica Banatica, Muzeul de istorie al judeţului Caraș-Severin, Reșiţa BAR British Archaeological Reports, International Series / British Series, Oxford BayerVorgeschbl Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter, München BB Bibliotheca Brukenthal, Sibiu BerRGK Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission BM Bibliotheca Marmatia, Baia Mare BMÉ A Bihari Múzeum Évkönyve, Berettyóújfalu BMM Bibliotheca Mvsei Marisiensis, Seria Archaeologica, Târgu Mureș / Cluj-Napoca BMN Bibliotheca Mvsei Napocensis, Cluj-Napoca BT Bibliotheca Thracologica, București CCA Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice din România CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum ComArchHung Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, Budapest Crisia Crisia, Muzeul Ţării Crișurilor, Oradea Cumania Cumania, A Bács-Kiskun Megyei Önkormányzat Múzeumi Szervezetének Évkönyve CsSzMÉ Csíki Székely Múzeum Évkönyve, Csíkszereda 230 Abbreviations Dacia (N. S.) Dacia, Recherches et décuvertes archéologiques en Roumanie, I–XII (1924– 1948), București; Nouvelle série (N. S.), Dacia. Revue d’archéologie et d’histoire anciene, București EA Eurasia Antiqua, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut EAF Ethnographisch-Archäologische Forschungen, Berlin EAZ Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift, Berlin EM Erdélyi Múzeum, Kolozsvár EMÉ Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve EphemNap Ephemeris Napocensis, Cluj–Napoca EPRO Études préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain FBBW Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden- Württemberg FolArch Folia Archeologica, a Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Évkönyve, Budapest FVL Forschungen zur Volks- und Landeskunde, Sibiu Godišnjak Sarajevo Godišnjak Centra za Balkanoloska Ispitivanja Akademije Nauka i Umjetnosti, Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo Germania Germania, Frankfurt am Main HelvArch Helvetia Archaeologica, Archäologie in der Schweiz HOMÉ A Miskolci Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve IDR Inscripţiile Daciei romane, București IPH Inventaria Praehistorica Hungariae, Budapest Jahrbuch RGZM Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz JahrIVFM Jahresbericht des Institut für Vorgeschichte des Universität Frankfurt a. M. JAMÉ A Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múzeum Évkönyve, Nyíregyháza JIES Journal of Indo-European Studies JMC Journal of Material Culture JMS Journal of Mithraic Studies JRS Journal of Roman Studies Közlemények Kolozsvár Közlemények az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem- és Régiségtárából, Cluj LAF Linzer Archäologische Forschungen Latomus Latomus, Société d’Études Latines de Bruxelles Marisia Marisia (V–), Studii și Materiale, Târgu Mureș Marmatia Marmatia, Anuarul Muzeului Judeţean Maramureș MCA Materiale şi Cercetări Arheologice, Bucureşti MemAnt Memoria Antiquitatis, Acta Musei Petrodavensis, Bucureşti MFMÉ A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, Szeged MIMK Molnár István Múzeum Kiadványai, Cristuru Secuiesc/Székelykeresztúr MittBGAEU Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte MΩMOΣ MΩMOΣ, Őskoros Kutatók Összejövetelének konferenciakötete MPK Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommision, Viena OH Opuscula Hungarica, Budapest OpArch Opuscula Archaeologica, Arheološki zavod, Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu PA Patrimonium Apulense, Alba Iulia PAS Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa, Berlin, Kiel, München PBF Prähistorische Bronzefunde, München, Stuttgart PPS Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, London PZ Praehistorische Zeitschrift, Berlin PVM Pravěk Vychodní Moravy, sborník pro pravěk a časnou dobu historickou v Gottwaldovském kraji RBPA Regensburger Beiträge zur Prähistorischen Archäologie RCRFA Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum Acta, Abingdon  Abbreviations 231 RevBis Revista Bistriţei, Complexul Judeţean Muzeal Bistriţa-Năsăud Sargetia Sargeţia, Buletinul Muzeului judeţului Hunedoara, Acta Musei Devensis, Deva SCIV(A) Studii și Cercetări de Istorie Veche (și Arheologie 1974–), București SlovArch Slovenská Archeológia, Nitra SovjArh Sovjetska Arheologija SpecNova Specimina Nova Dissertationum ex Institutom Historico Universitatis Quinqueecclesiensis de Jano Pannonio nominatae, Pécs StC Maramureșene Studii şi Cercetări Maramureşene, Baia Mare StComCaransebeș Studii şi Comunicări de Istorie Veche Caransebeş StCom Satu Mare Studii și Comunicări Satu Mare StCom Sibiu Studii și Comunicări, Muzeul Brukenthal, Sibiu SymThrac Symposia Thracologica, Institutul Român de Tracologie, Bucureşti StudiaAA Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, Iaşi Terra Sebus Terra Sebvs, Acta Mvsei Sabesiensis, Sebeș Thraco-Dacica Thraco-Dacica, Institutul de Tracologie, București Tisicum Tisicum, A Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok Megyei Múzeumok Évkönyve, Szolnok Transylvanian Review Transylvanian Review, Center for Transylvanian Studies, Cluj-Napoca TVMK Tapolcai Városi Múzeum Közleményei UPA Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, Bonn VAH Varia Archaeologica Hungarica, Budapest VMMK A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei WArch World Archaeology, Oxford, Oxbow Zalai Múzeum Zalai Múzeum, Közlemények Zala megye múzeumaiból, Zalaegerszeg ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik