|
| the
cybele stone |
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 1994
From:
Kirk Summers
Subject:
Cybele Stone
Does
anyone know what happened to the black Magna Mater stone after the
Romans brought it to the city in 204 B.C. (Livy 29.10; Dion. Hal.
2.19.4-5). At first it was placed in the temple of Victory, and then
was placed in its own temple - but I'm wondering where it was in the
late Republic. Did it survive? Did it play a part in the procession
and cult for Cybele at Rome?
Date:
Wed, 19 Jan 1994
From:
Brian L Chaffin
Subject:
Re: Cybele Stone
I
don't know about the late republic, but I've always assumed it was
seized in 220 or 221 C.E. by Elagabalus and placed in the 'inmost
shrine of his god' (SHAVII). Though the text is a bit vague here,
the context strongly indicates to me that 'Aelius Lampridius' was
trying to convey this notion (what you want to make of 'his'
veracity is another affair--the account, in the preceding paragraph,
of the attempted abduction of the Palladium is delightful, I
think--but this is in the supposedly more reliable half of the
biography). What became of the object on the dissolution and
destruction of the Elagabalus-cult at Rome, assuming 'Lampridius''
story to be 'founded on fact,' I do not know, but somewhere (I don't
have the reference handy) there's a blanket statement about the
return of artifacts to their respective cults. A very nebulous
response to your querry, Kirk, but I hope not entirely devoid of
interest.
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 1994
From:
Eugene Numa Lane
Subject:
cybele stone
I
have been following with interest the discussion on the black stone
of Cybele but didn't want to start talking about it until I had a
chance to get to the l ibrary and check a few sources out, - which I
have not yet had. But I doubt if the passage in SHA Elagabalus can
be referring to the famous black stone when i t says "ut typum
eriperet." A 'typus' would have to be something formed or scul
pted. Interestingly, it is the same word as that used by Polybius in
the first two recorded instances of Galli on the pages of history
(21.6.6 and 21.37.5),where they are described as having "typous
kai prostethidia" (drat this thing that can't write Greek!). I
have assumed that Polybius' words are a kind of hendiadys,
indicating that they were wearing pectorals with images of the
goddess on them, such as are archaeologically known. Interesting
also is the fact tha t an aniconic representation of Cybele is
otherwise unparalleled. See Friederik e Naumann's book on Cybele
iconography. As I say I haven't been to the library yet so can't
give exact reference. Also accept my grovelingest apologies for fo
llowing my source and misspelling Yeats' name. I will let the list
know what el se I can find out if anything. The question interests
me.
Date:
Thu, 20 Jan 1994
From:
Eugene Numa Lane
Subject:
Cybele stone
As
I half-remembered from my office, Friederike Naumann's Die
Ikonographie der Kybele in der phrygischen und der griechischen
Kunst (Istanbuler Mitteilungen B eiheft 28, Tubingen, 1983) pp.
284-5, provides a good run-down of what is known of the later
history of the black stone. There is a surprising lack of talk about
it from Livy to the time of the late empire. Then, if we can trust
the hoti le sources Arnobius and Prudentius to know what they are
talking about, it reem erges as something not only still around, but
encased in silver, like a Christi an relic, forming the face of a
cult-image, and still taken out for rides on a vehicle. The passages
which, in spite of some turgid and turbid syntax, seem to tell us
this, are as follows: Prudentius, Peristephanon, X, 156: lapis
nigellus evehendus essedo muliebris o ris clausus argento sedet, and
Arnobius,Adversus gentes, VII, 47: adlatum ex Phrygia nihil aliud
scribitur mis sum rege ab Attalo nisi lapis quidam non magnus, ferri
manu hominis sine ulla inpressione qui posset, coloris furvi atque
atri, angellis prominentibus inaeq ualis, et quem omnes hodie ipso
illo videmus in signo oris loco positum, indola tum et asperum et
simulacro faciem minus expressam simulatione praebentem. I think
this is as close as anyone can come to answering the original quest
ion.
Date:
Thu, 20 Jan 1994
From:
Brian L Chaffin
Subject: Re: Cybele Stone
Eugene
Lane writes: >I doubt if the passage in SHA Elagabalus can be
referring to the famous >black stone when it says "ut typum
eriperet." A 'typus' would have to >be something formed or
sculpted.
Point
well taken, but bearing in mind the immediately succeeding material
which discusses 'lapides qui divi dicuntur,' ('lapides,' I take it,
referring to the sort of amorphous, probably meteoric stones sacred
to both the Magna Mater and Elagabalus himself) I thought the
author(s) here might be being typically confused and confusing in
his choice of terminology. This impression of imprecision is
heightened by the immediate mention of a 'simulacrum Dianae' as an
example of the said 'lapides.' I still lean toward my original
suspicions, but acknowledge that my evidence is almost non-existent
and is of an impressionistic character.
|
| Culled
from
classics.log9401d. |
|