Pagan Roman Religious Acculturation? an Inquiry Into the Domestic Cult at Karanis, Ephesos, and Dura-Europos: the First to Fifth Centuries Ce
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PAGAN ROMAN RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION? AN INQUIRY INTO THE DOMESTIC CULT AT KARANIS, EPHESOS, AND DURA-EUROPOS: THE FIRST TO FIFTH CENTURIES CE A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY by Amy C. Yandek August 2013 Examining Committee Members: Dr. Jane DeRose Evans, Advisory Chair, Art History Dr. Elizabeth S. Bolman, Art History Dr. Philip P. Betancourt, Art History Dr. Marcus Rautman, External Member, University of Missouri © Copyright 2013 by Amy C. Yandek All Rights Reserved ii ABSTRACT The ancient Roman domestic cult is often overlooked and marginalized in favor of state sponsored practices, monuments, and temples; yet it can give us insights into daily life, cultural interactions, and personal identity in the Empire. In my dissertation, I recreate a selection of domestic contexts in order to learn more about private cultic practices, thus illuminating those activities and behaviors that may be far removed from what appears in the literary sources or in monumental reliefs and paintings. Furthermore, the era considered is a crucial period in the history of the western world that included the rise of Christianity and dramatic changes in Roman pagan cults. By concentrating on the Roman East, I produce information relating to these changes outside of Italy and study the impact on cross-cultural exchanges and identities formulated by the Roman colonization of these cities. The Roman domestic cult in Italy invoked specific gods to maintain the well- being of the home in small shrines within the house. Material evidence for these practices survives in the form of statuettes and wall paintings of the gods, incense burners, and altars. Other divinities chosen by the head of the household could join or supplant the traditional domestic deities. These additions to private shrines acted as protective patron gods of the household and they reveal a personal relationship between deity and devotee. One barrier to the understanding of the domestic cult in its original context is the nature of multiculturalism in the Roman Empire. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, scholars tended to equate the Roman Empire with the concept of the modern nation-state. The Empire was seen as a cultural juggernaut that disseminated a uniform Roman identity that was sent out from Italy to the provinces. Evidence for iii “Romanization” was noted in the introduction of the Roman city plan, and Roman habits were seen in new types of public buildings such as baths or amphitheaters, the adoption of Roman coinage, the toga and the Latin language, and the introduction of Roman cults, especially the cult of the emperor. Most scholars today prefer to view the expansion of the Empire as a process that included reciprocal acculturation between natives and their Roman masters. Using this model, I examine religious cross-currents on a domestic scale, thus contributing to the current scholarly discussion. By exploring the cult in the home, we can get a better indication of the interaction between native and Roman in the private sphere. Scholars agree that we can learn more from smaller, regional studies; it cannot be assumed that the same things occurred in all parts of the empire and at all times. The case-study approach has replaced the sweeping and sometimes vague histories of years past. I have chosen three sites from the Roman East since they have an abundance of material evidence that has not been exploited to its full potential: Karanis (modern Egypt), Ephesos (modern Turkey), and Dura-Europos (modern Syria). The significance of my project is three-fold. I present previously unpublished material from important sites in the Roman East. By looking at these three sites, I expand the dialogue from the singular discussion of domestic religion in first-century Italy, thus enriching it substantially. Through the consideration of acculturation between east and west I contribute to the discussion of “Romanization” in the first to fifth centuries CE. By comparing these sites with those better published, such as Pompeii and Ostia (Rome’s port, largely abandoned in the second half of the third into the fourth centuries), I can more clearly show the contrast between the two halves of the Empire. My goals will be to iv determine how (and if) “Romanization” can be seen in these locations, what the impact of local artistic styles and indigenous deities is, and how the reciprocal relationship manifests in daily religious practices within the home. v To My Parents vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank my advisor, Jane DeRose Evans. She has been with me every step of the way, dedicating large amounts of her time to ensure my successful completion of the requirements for this degree. Her advice, feedback, and encouragement are invaluable. I would also like to thank my committee members, Elizabeth Bolman, Philip Betancourt, and Marcus Rautman for their comments, which greatly improved the contents of this dissertation. Dr. Bolman especially offered her assistance at various stages of this project. The completion of this dissertation was aided in part through two grants from Temple University. The first was an Art History dissertation research grant in Rome for the fall semester of 2012. The second was the Dissertation Completion Grant from the Graduate School for 2013. I thank Marcia Hall for her assistance in making this possible. I would also like to thank the individuals who facilitated my archival research. Susan Matheson and Lisa Brody permitted me to visit the Dura-Europos archives at the Yale University Art Gallery. I additionally thank them for their time, advice, and encouragement. Megan Doyon was also a great help to me in the archives. From the University of Michigan I would like to thank Terry Wilfong who provided me with excellent advice and enabled me to access archival materials. I would also like to thank Sebastian Encina who assisted in the logistics of receiving object lists and photographs. I am grateful to Sabine Ladstätter of the Österreichischen Archäologischen Instituts. She expedited my addition to the team list for 2012 and permitted me access to vii all parts of the Terrace Houses. I also express my thanks to her assistants, Gottfried Parrer and Filiz Öztürk. Lastly I would like to thank the additional readers. Thanks to Maite Barragán Bothwell for her suggestions and comments. And most of all I would like to thank my parents for their unrelenting support and for the proof-reading they have done all through my academic career. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………….. ii DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………….. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………………. vii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………... xii ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………... xvi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………. 1 Overview of the Project……………………………………………………... 1 “Romanization:” Approach and Methodology……………………………… 5 The Domestic Cult in Italy…………………………………………………... 13 Exempla…………………................................................................... 19 2. THE HISTORY OF KARANIS AND OVERVIEW OF THE SITE……………… 28 History of the Town…………….................................................................... 28 Excavation History and Problems…………………………………… 30 Identity of Inhabitants……………………………………………………….. 33 Greek………………………………………………………………… 35 Egyptian in the Roman Period………………………………………. 36 Roman……………………………………………………………….. 38 Art…………………………………………………………………………… 40 Religion at Karanis………………………………………………………….. 44 Domestic Religion…………………………………………………… 46 3. KARANIS CATALOG…………………………………………………………….. 50 Karanis Catalog 1: House C29………………………………………………. 52 Karanis Catalog 2: House C45………………………………………………. 54 Karanis Catalog 3: House C50/51…………………………………………… 59 Karanis Catalog 4: House C57………………………………………………. 64 Karanis Catalog 5: House C62………………………………………………. 70 Karanis Catalog 6: House B11………………………………………………. 76 Karanis Catalog 7: House B47………………………………………………. 79 Karanis Catalog 8: House B507……………………………………………... 81 Karanis Catalog 9: House 5002……………………………………………... 84 Karanis Catalog 10: House 5008……………………………………………. 86 4. KARANIS DISCUSSION…………………………………………………………. 90 Niches………………………………………………………………………... 90 Altars………………………………………………………………………… 91 Sculptural Medium…………………………………………………………... 91 Sculptural Style and Subject………………………………………………… 92 ix Conclusions……………………………………………………………….. 94 5. THE HISTORY OF EPHESOS AND OVERVIEW OF THE SITE……………. 97 History of the City………………………………………………………… 98 Terrace Houses……………………………………………………. 102 Excavation History………………………………………………... 103 Identity of Inhabitants…………………………………………………….. 105 Greek……………………………………………………………… 105 Roman……………………………………………………………... 106 Art and Architecture………………………………………………………. 108 Religion…………………………………………………………………… 111 Artemis……………………………………………………………. 111 Imperial Cult………………………………………………………. 113 Other Cults………………………………………………………… 115 Domestic Religion………………………………………………… 116 6. EPHESOS CATALOG…………………………………………………………... 117 Terrace Houses Catalog 1: Hanghaus 1, “Domus”………………………... 118 Terrace Houses Catalog 2: Hanghaus 1, Housing Unit 3…………………. 123 Terrace Houses Catalog 3: Hanghaus 2, Housing Unit 2…………………. 126 Terrace Houses Catalog 4: Hanghaus 2, Housing Unit 4…………………. 135 Terrace Houses Catalog 5: Hanghaus 2, Housing Unit 7…………………. 147 7. EPHESOS DISCUSSION………………………………………………………... 151 Altars………………………………………………………………………. 151 Style of Sculpture and Wall Decoration…………………………………... 152 Subjects of