Roman Soldiers in Official Cult Ceremonies: Performance, Participation and Religious Experience

Tomasz Dziurdzik

The religious ceremonies of the Roman Imperial army present a very complex issue, the consideration of which is of the highest importance for reconstruct- ing both the official military religion and its impact upon the soldiers. The rites and holidays are believed to be major factors in the Romanization and promo- tion of loyalty to the state and ruler. The aim of the present paper is to recon- struct the soldiers’ position and experience in official cult ceremonies. It is of crucial importance to determine two things: who attended the ceremonies, and what role was played by those present at the rites. Further factors, such as piety or indifference, and also readiness to accept what was encouraged or enforced by military authorities, made the scope of any influence strongly variable between individuals. For masses of soldiers, however, it is mostly the extent of presence and performance that amounted to the “basic”, average experience of participants. This, in turn, should provide better understanding of the overall importance of official ceremonies in shaping the identity and attitudes of the military. The literary sources concerning the official religion of the Roman Imperial army are surprisingly limited, making the evidence of inscriptions, papyri and archaeological sources especially valuable. The single most impor- tant source of our knowledge about the cult ceremonies held by the Roman army is feriale Duranum, a religious calendar preserved on a papyri found in Dura Europos.1 Internal evidence allows us to date it to the reign of , most likely between AD 225 and 227.2 It was probably used by cohors XX Palmyrenorum miliaria equitata, but is nonetheless assumed to be a standard calendar used in all Roman units,3 as none of the festivals mentioned

1 R.O. Fink, A.S. Hoey, W.F. Snyder, “The Feriale Duranum,” YClS 7 (1940) 1–222; C.B. Welles, R.O. Fink, J.F. Gilliam, The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Report V, Part I: the Parchments and Papyri (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959) no. 54; R.O. Fink, Roman Military Records on Papyrus (Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University, 1971) no. 117. 2 H.W. Benario, “The Date of the ‘Feriale Duranum,’ ” Historia 11/2 (1962) 192–6. 3 A.D. Nock, “The Roman Army and the Roman Religious Year,” HThR 40/4 (1952) 202; J. Helgeland, Roman Army Religion in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II, 16, 2

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���6 | doi ��.��63/9789004324763_020 Roman Soldiers In Official Cult Ceremonies 377 in the feriale Duranum could be specific only to a unit of Palmyrenians or to Dura Europos.4 Although only entries pertaining to three quarters of the year are preserved, several observations can be made as to the nature of festivals and anniversaries celebrated. To this one can add several official ceremonies that were not celebrated on a regular basis, but only when specific conditions applied.5 Together with information drawn from inscriptions on altars and statue bases dedicated by units and officers as part of their obligations, a list of deities worshipped by the Roman military has been reconstructed.6 Among the official army cults the Capitoline Triad, and several gods and lesser deities connected with the military sphere received the greatest veneration, with a high number of ceremonies mentioned in the feriale Duranum being also devoted to the memory of deified emperors and empresses of the past. One of the most important issues in the study of Roman military religion is reconstructing the attitude of soldiers towards official rites. Some scholars view them as imposed by the authorities,7 with an admitted purpose of main- taining the pax deorum, proper relations with the gods, and an implicit pur- pose of promoting loyalty and Romanizing the soldiers.8 Such understanding suggests also that a certain dichotomy existed between official cults and pri- vate activities.9 The first had social importance, while the second provided for the spiritual needs that could not be satisfied by the uninspired observance of ceremonies imposed by the military hierarchy. This division between state and private religion has been suggested in the “polis religion” theory.10 However, regardless of whether the idea proposed in relation to the Greek polis could

(eds. H. Temporini, W. Haase, Berlin-New York: de Gruyter 1978) 1481; D. Kossmann, “Römische Soldaten als Teilnehmer von Festen” in Festrituale in der römischen Kaiserzeit (ed. J. Rüpke, Tübingen: Siebeck, 2008) 134–5. 4 Nock, “The Roman . . ., 192–202. 5 Kossmann, “Römische . . ., 141–2. 6 E. Birley, “The Religion of the Roman Army: 1895–1977” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II, 16, 2 (eds. H. Temporini, W. Haase, Berlin, New York: de Gruyter, 1978) 1506–41; building upon the classical A. von Domaszewski, Die Religion des römischen Heeres (Trier: Arno Press, 1975). 7 Birley, ‘The Religion . . ., 1515. 8 Nock, ‘The Roman . . ., 203–29. 9 D. Fishwick, “Dated Inscriptions and the “Feriale Duranum”,” Syria 65 Fasc. 3/4 (1988) 351. 10 C. Sourvinou-Inwood, “Further Aspects of Polis Religion,” AION(archeol) 10 (1988) 259–74; C. Sourvinou-Inwood, “What is Polis Religion?” in The Greek City from Homer to Alexander (eds. O. Murray, S. Price, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990) 295–322.