Navigation – Plan du site
Articles

A new altar of the “triad” of Heliopolis (Baalbek) at the Museum of Adıyaman

Andreas J. M. Kropp
p. 141-150

Résumés

Dans le cadre de l’étude des dieux d’Héliopolis (Jupiter, Vénus et Mercure), fondée sur une riche tradition, cet article offre un nouvel exemple d’Héliopolitana, un autel votif inédit du Musée d’Adıyaman en Commagène (Turquie du S-E). Ce petit autel est l’une des rares additions au corpus de Hajjar de1977 et livre des données stylistiques et iconographiques nouvelles grâce à la représentation sur son quatrième coté d’une figure solaire méconnue.

Haut de page

Notes de la rédaction

Résumé arabe par R. Bertaux.

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 Hajjar 1977 and 1985, as well as 1988 = LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei”; id. 1990; Kropp 2010.

1Jupiter of Heliopolis was one of the most popular of “Oriental” gods in the Roman world. From his hometown of Heliopolis (Baalbek) in the Beqa‘ Valley of modern Lebanon, a settlement of Augustus’ veterans which became a Roman colony in ad194, his cult spread with soldiers and merchants to all the shores of the Mediterranean, reaching Rome, Marseille and Pozzuoli, and to the northern frontiers in Pannonia and Germania Superior. In view of a large bibliography and recent discussion of the material evidence for Heliopolitan cults, there is no need to reiterate the arguments here.1 The aim of this article is rather to present a new piece of the jigsaw, an unpublished votive altar in the Museum of Adıyaman in Kommagene (south-eastern Turkey). Its likely provenance from the northern parts of the provincia Syria makes it a welcome addition to an under-represented region in Hajjar’s near-comprehensive corpus of1977. Furthermore, this small altar with its peculiar “rustic” appearance is of considerable stylistic interest, and it offers an iconographic novelty, an image of an unidentified solar figure on the fourth side, a divinity not attested in any other Heliopolitana.

Catalogue entry

2Four-sided limestone altar depicting one deity in relief on each side (fig.1).

M. Blömer, courtesy of the Directorate General of Antiquities, Adıyaman

3Acquired from a private collector, no record of acquisition, or of provenance. Made of hard white limestone, which does not match the local limestones in Kommagene.

4Height: overall 34cm (socle 8.5cm, shaft 18cm, top moulding 7.5cm).

5Width: socle 26cm, shaft 20cm, top moulding 26cm. Width and depth are identical due to the square layout of the altar.

6Condition: Most of the top mouldings are broken off as well as many chips of the architectural framework and bottom mouldings. Faces of all four figures are destroyed. Jupiter lacks the left arm and right part of the chest; the two bulls are almost entirely destroyed. Venus’ body is destroyed, as are her acolytes. Mercury and the fourth figure are largely intact except the faces, and parts of the latter’s attribute. Many bruises all across the surface.

7Inscription: The socle carries a very brief, almost illegible graffito on sideA, which will be published in a corpus of inscriptions in the Adıyaman Museum by C.Crowther and M.Facella.

8Mouldings: The socle consists of plinth, torus, cyma reversa (Lesbian kymation), torus, fillet. The top mouldings consist of fillet, dentils, torus, cornice with cyma recta; the top is broken away. The shaft has pilasters with simplified Corinthian capitals at the corners and aediculas with concave niches at the centre of each side, consisting of Doric pilasters and flat arches.

9SideA. Jupiter Heliopolitanus depicted frontally, flanked by one miniature bull on each side and standing on a small base too mutilated to discern any decoration. His feet were probably not shown. The god is dressed in an ependytes (tight-fitting robe) consisting of two registers subdivided into square compartments decorated with five-petalled rosettes and ending in a “skirt” of elongated leather flaps of a military cuirass at the bottom. Further cuirass elements are vertical straps tied to the chest and leading over the shoulder (visible on the left shoulder), and again leather flaps on the upper arms. Around the neck the god wears three thick colliers. The right arm is raised, with the hand holding a whip whose tip almost touches the right cheek and whose flails, indicated by two simple incisions, touch the right shoulder. The left hand and its attribute (corn ears) are broken off. Due to the mutilation of the head, no facial features are visible and only faint traces of the characteristic corkscrew locks remain on the right side. The tapering kalathos is decorated with simple incisions perhaps representing a stylised uraeus and sun disc.

10SideB. Venus Heliopolitana enthroned in frontal view. Though depicted in seated position, with her feet resting on a footstool, no part of the throne is depicted. The goddess shares her statue base with two beastly acolytes (sphinxes), which are too badly damaged to be recognisable. She is dressed in a chiton (i.e. tunic) girded below the chest. The right arm is broken off and no traces are visible on the sculptural background, indicating that it stuck out, presumably in a gesture of benediction with the open right palm forward. The left arm is preserved down to the elbow leaning by the side of the chest. The face is mutilated, but the sides show a long veil falling over the hair and onto the shoulders. The decoration of the kalathos is again very stylised, with the same patterns as that of Jupiter, plus two central drill holes.

11SideC. Mercury in the shape of an elongated, footless herm standing on a base. The ependytes appears slab-like, slightly tapering towards the bottom. It is divided into three registers, the lower two decorated with five-petalled rosettes and the upper one hidden underneath the folds of what appears to be a chlamys thrown diagonally over the torso. A damaged protrusion on the chest may be interpreted as a thick collier. The head is badly mutilated. The kalathos has the same shape and decoration as that of Venus.

12SideD. Radiate figure standing frontally in slight contrapposto pose with relaxed left leg. The figure is dressed in a full-length, short-sleeved chiton touching the floor, and a himation wrapped around the hips. In his outstretched right hand he is holding a patera, and the left arm holds what looks like a cornucopia leaning against the shoulder. The destroyed face is framed by voluminous locks. The radiate crown is peculiar. Individual rays do not stand out in relief, but are worked in “negative”, as incisions on the flat surface of a nimbus.

Commentary

  • 2 Overview in Kropp 2010.
  • 3 See Fleischer 1973, passim.

13In order to contextualise this votive altar through comparison, it is worth recapitulating in brief the main aspects of the iconography of the gods of Heliopolis, attested by ten documented bronze statuettes, six stone statues and statuettes, eight reliefs and a dozen cippi and altars.2 Jupiter Heliopolitanus is a youthful, unbearded god, with voluminous corkscrew locks and wearing a vase-shaped kalathos. The attributes of Jupiter are a whip in the raised right hand and grain ears in the lowered left hand, and he is accompanied by two bulls facing forward like him. Unlike comparable Anatolian divinities who stand on flat ground together with their acolytes, Jupiter is elevated on a separate base, sometimes decorated with a temple façade or a Tyche. His tight-fitting robe, the ependytes, is wrapped around the entire body front and back unlike the apron of Ephesian Artemis.3 Its front side is subdivided into registers with square fields, the back has a similar structure, and the sides show elongated vertical fields under the armpits. Despite much variation in number and design, the more elaborate specimens (e.g. bronze statuettes) have busts of deities such as Helios and Selene at the front; simpler ones, such as the Adıyaman altar depict merely rosettes or stylised flowers. The image on this altar has in fact an extremely simplified ependytes. Unique among all known examples, it only has two registers of fields, while all others vary from three to eight.

14Venus is depicted on six altars and two stelae together with Jupiter and Mercury, and on her own only in two statues and perhaps in a statuette and three bronze medallions. The iconography follows one consistent type, frontally, seated on a throne and flanked by two sphinxes. Her right hand is raised for benediction. In the left hand she holds ears of grain. She is dressed with a tunic with a high belt and a himation. From her tall kalathos, a large, inflated veil falls to the floor and forms an oval niche surrounding her and her acolytes. Surprisingly, this veil is missing on the Adıyaman altar. This is, to my knowledge, the only example of Venus missing this key feature. This is not due to a lack space, since there are smaller specimens from Lebanon where Venus has the veil.

15Mercury appears in two forms, either in the guise of Hermes with caduceus and money bag (e.g. on civic coins of Heliopolis), or as an armless herm with an ependytes with several registers of decorated fields and usually accompanied by his acolyte rams. The latter is the standard type employed in most reliefs. The parallels between Jupiter and Mercury in the decoration of their robes are likewise a standard feature.

16Like most reliefs with depictions of the Heliopolitan gods (stelae, altars and cippi), this small altar is of medium to low quality of carving, no doubt produced by a small-scale local workshop supplying a local market of worshippers. The figures have a “rustic” appearance. Though in this case the deities are by and large depicted with correctly proportioned anatomies, the surfaces are sculpted with much stylisation and simplification. Limbs are stiff, folds of garments fall unnaturally, and their surfaces form stereotypical, repetitive patterns rather than naturalistic imitation. Simplification is not only obvious in the style, but also in the iconography. Details of decoration such as the customary busts on Jupiter’s ependytes are replaced by stylised rosettes. Also the radiate figure shows signs of simplified sculpting: By representing the rays with simple incisions on the flat surface of a nimbus, the sculptor avoided the effort and necessary skill of sculpting each ray in relief.

17In keeping with other examples, the architectural framework too is rather negligently carved. The top mouldings slope to one side, the corner pilasters are of uneven lengths, and even the aediculas are clumsily lopsided. This means that much of the architectural elements were carved by eyesight rather than measurements and preparation.

18The deliberate damage on all sides of the altar is likewise the typical fate of this kind of monument. That this is not accidental damage is shown by the fact that all the faces are thoroughly chiselled, including those of figures whose bodies were left intact.

  • 4 Hajjar 1977, no. 130; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 103; Jidejian1975, fig. 162-65; Kropp 2009, (...)

19A marked difference to Lebanese altars is the lack of “interaction” between figures and architectural relief. On altars from the Beqa‘, the figures are made to overlap the architectural mouldings at the top and bottom. Their kalathoi often project beyond the field, and their bases seem to jut out from the bottom profiles. The most original solutions were created by the artist of the smallest example, the Beshwāt altar.4 Here the mouldings continue underneath the bulls of Jupiter and become part of the image. This playful approach culminates on the fourth side where Bacchus is shown stepping on the base mouldings as if climbing down from the background, thus even adding a humorous note.

20None of this is visible on the Adıyaman altar. The artist here was keen to keep the figures firmly restricted to their space in the niches. His intention was to provide a close imitation of actual aediculas with statues rather than experimenting with the greater possibilities that relief sculpture had to offer.

21Though the provenance of the altar cannot be pinpointed with certainty, it is clear that the material, hard white limestone, makes a Kommagenian origin unlikely. The territories of modern Syria and Lebanon, by contrast, offer many possible locations where such limestone may have been quarried. For the altar to be purchased by a private collector in Adıyaman, a city not known as a hub of antiquities trade, it seems likely that it did not travel too far. Hence the region of northern Syria is the most likely candidate.

  • 5 Hajjar 1977, no. 170; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei”, no. 106; Jidejian 1975, fig. 169-72.

22There are further arguments in favour of this general localisation. The closest parallel to the Adıyaman altar comes from Antioch, a marble altar now in Paris (fig. 2)5 which depicts Jupiter, Venus and Mercury plus a kalathos.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Antioch altar, front side depicting Jupiter Heliopolitanus. H 32cm. Louvre AO 10230

2009, Musée du Louvre / Th.Ollivier

  • 6 See also Hajjar 1977, nos. 33, 108, 110, 153, 221 and 235.

23Though of finer material (fine white marble) and superior sculpting, there are close correspondences in proportions, architectural structure and iconography. The Adıyaman altar appears like a rustic version of the Antioch altar, carved with less skill and detail and in shallower relief. One peculiarity both altars share is that the figure of Jupiter is “cut off” at the bottom, i.e. unlike in most other examples, the feet are not shown and the cylindrical body is placed directly on the base.6

24Unfortunately only the lower half of the Antioch altar is preserved, thus not allowing further comparison of the figures or the architectural framework. On the Adıyaman altar, the arches surmounting the aediculas are flat and shaped like the tip of a circle (exc. the bulging arch above Jupiter). This contrasts with arches attested in Phoenicia and the Beqa‘ where, e.g. on the coinage, arches often have a more pronounced bulge and describe approximate half-circles.

25The date of production can hardly be determined, since there are no precisely dated comparanda or solid information about the stylistic developments of local workshops. Technical traits, such as the conspicuous traces of drilling between rosette petals, may suggest a date in the later imperial period.

Solar cult?

  • 7 Cf. Kunckel1974, passim. My thanks to an anonymous referee for this suggestion.

26The radiate figure depicted on the fourth side of the Adıyaman altar invites further comments. Its iconography of this figure appears to be a unique amalgam. In terms of pose (frontal in slight contrapposto) and attributes (patera in the right, cornucopia in the left), it resembles a Roman genius.7 But at the same time, the artist emphasised that this is not its identity. Whereas a genius is either bare-chested and wearing a hip-mantle, or wrapped in a toga, this figure wears a Greek chiton and himation. Also the solar crown is a feature not seen on any genius. Some elements of the radiate figure were thus meant to call to mind genii that would have been familiar from coin images and created a visual link to Roman imperial power, while other traits emphasised that its cultic significance lay elsewhere.

  • 8 Ronzevalle1937, 29-36 fig. 7 pl. 6-8; Seyrig1938, 364-65; id. 1971, 348-49 fig. 4; LIMCIII “Dion (...)
  • 9 Southern Beqa‘ near Lake Qar‘ūn, Seyrig 1951, 121 fig. 12; id. 1971, 349; LIMC V “Helios (in per. o (...)
  • 10 Thus Seyrig 1971, 349; Nordiguian 2005, 49.

27In Heliopolis no radiate figure in full length is attested. Even in Lebanon at large, there are only two such examples, a peculiar radiate horseman in a rock relief in the quarry of Ferzol, 30 km southwest of Baalbek (fig. 3),8 and a torso of a cuirassed statue from ‘Aytanīt,9 now lost; both gods are sometimes thought to be Ituraean imports.10

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Rock relief in the ancient quarry of Ferzol depicting two figures separated by a palm tree. Radiate horseman in long chiton holding globe; beardless god wearing chlamys and holding nebris, lamb, bouquet of foliage and bunch of grapes or dates

From Seyrig1971, fig.4

28Neither of them matches the solar god on the altar for dress or attributes. Though the Ferzol rider wears a chiton too (the arms are too badly destroyed to determine the length of the sleeves), it is worn in the manner of a Greek or Roman charioteer, belted high up on the chest.

  • 11 Drijvers 1976, passim for quick illustration.

29Elsewhere in Roman Syria there are solar gods who may help explain the Adıyaman figure. In Palmyra, radiate gods are attested in great numbers in votive reliefs (fig.4).11

Figure 4.

Figure  4.

Votive relief from Palmyra, Temple of Bel. 1stc. bc. H 22.5 cm. Damascus NM 4242/10050. Herakles, Astarte (?), Yarhibol, Aglibol. One of the most ancient reliefs of Palmyra. At the time, radiate gods were depicted wearing chiton

From Mesnil du Buisson1964, fig.3

  • 12 Magisterial analysis of Palmyrene dresses in Seyrig 1937, and esp. p. 4-5 on the desert tunic.

30Whether it is the supreme gods Bel and Baalshamin, or their acolytes Yarhibol, Aglibol and Malakbel – solar crowns are a ubiquitous attribute of male gods in Palmyra. But in terms of costume, the combination of chiton and radiate crown of the solar god on the Adıyaman altar only appears on early Palmyrene reliefs, i.e. those dating to the first and early second centuries ad (fig.4). The large majority of radiate gods is instead depicted wearing a muscle cuirass and Parthian baggy pants. There is yet a third Palmyrene dress, which Seyrig correctly identifies as the likely day-to-day wardrobe of the population: this is the simple short-sleeved tunic often seen on reliefs depicting gods on horseback. In contrast to the Greek standard as shown by the solar figure on the Adıyaman altar, they use the “himation” in a peculiar way, wrapping it around the hips like a belt (or as coils on the shoulders) and covering the legs down to the ankles.12

  • 13 See e.g. relief from al-Maqateh, Drijvers 1976, pl. 10.1 = LIMC I “Aglibol” no. 14 = II “Astarte” n (...)

31The choice of costume mattered. Votive reliefs show a deliberate juxtaposition of e.g. Baalshamin in chiton and himation, without radiate crown standing alongside Bel radiate, in cuirass and baggy pants.13 Each good thus wore his individual costume as a distinctive trademark. Since the combination worn by the Adıyaman god (chiton and himation plus radiate crown) is but a rare and early phenomenon at Palmyra, the relationship to Palmyrene gods is not obvious.

  • 14 Goell 1996, passim.

32In Kommagene, close to the presumed origin of the altar, a number of radiate gods are depicted centuries earlier, in the later first cent. bc (fig.5): The colossal building projects (temene and hierothesia) of king AntiochosI (69 to 36bc), such as the tumulus on Nemrud Dağı, are decorated with relief stelae showing various deities with multiple names such as Zeus Oromasdes, Apollo Mithras Helios Hermes and Artagnes Herakles Ares shaking hands with the king.14

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Relief stele from Nemrud Dağı with over-lifesized images of king Antiochos I of Kommagene and Apollo Mithras Helios Hermes, radiate in Persian dress and tiara

From Reinach1912, 195

  • 15 Facella 2006, 294-97.
  • 16 The only known dedication to Antiochos is a purely honorific one, Facella 2006, 312 n. 43.
  • 17 Crowther & Facella 2003, 65-67; Facella 2006, 279-80.

33“Apollo” is indeed depicted radiate, expressing his solar qualities in the same manner as Mithras does on Sassanian rock reliefs. But there is no need to connect this figure with the Adıyaman altar. Not only does the iconography differ (the Kommagenian god wears Iranian dress and tiara; the god on the Adıyaman altar a purely Greek dress), but these peculiar syncretistic gods were long extinct by the time the altar was made. Their hybrid iconographies, newly created for the occasion, propagated the self-image of king Antiochos about his own Seleucid-Iranian pedigree. But this idiosyncratic dynastic cult was apparently received with little enthusiasm and hardly survived his reign. The epigraphic record demonstrates the short duration of this peculiar creation.15 There is no evidence for a dedication to either Antiochos the god16 or any of the three main syncretistic gods chosen (and created) as his patrons. None of these gods is attested beyond the reign of AntiochosI. Instead, they reverted to their ‘original’ form and were worshipped in Kommagene as Helios Mithras, Apollo Epekoos and Zeus Soter.17 In other words, for a monument from the later Roman period such as the Adıyaman altar to resuscitate the divine iconographies of this peculiar dynastic cult is an extremely unlikely scenario.

  • 18 LIMC IV “Helioseiros” has in fact only the following three entries. Cf. Seyrig 1970, 94-95; Butcher(...)

34Another north Syrian solar god with a radiate crown is the enigmatic god Helioseiros (fig.6):18 only some rare coin issues of Chalkis ad Belum and perhaps an altar found in Homs depict him.

Figure6.

Figure 6.

Bronze coin of Chalkis ad Belum under Trajan ad98-117. d 25mm, 12 g. Helioseiros in chiton and himation standing facing with head left, holding long palm, spear, and shield. Paris, Cabinet de Médailles

From Seyrig1970, fig. 14

35The etymology of the second part of his name is uncertain (derived from Semitic Š‘YR = flame?), but there can be no doubt about the first element, Helios. The god is depicted standing, radiate, wearing a short-sleeved chiton and himation and holding three attributes, a large palm branch in the right and spear and shield in the left hand. Dress and composition are thus in accordance with the solar god on the altar (in particular the short sleeves, in contrast to most Palmyrene gods), but the difference in attributes, with Helioseiros equipped in the manner of nomads from the Syrian steppe, militates against wholesale identification of the two.

  • 19 Seyrig 1971. Followed by Hajjar 1985, 205-17 and 1990, 2480-82.
  • 20 Fick 1999; Haider 1999; id. 2002; Freyberger 2000. One of the instigators of this interpretation is (...)
  • 21 Kropp 2010. 237-40.
  • 22 Five (out of 26) gems and cameos do show “Jupiter” radiate, but their value as evidence is uncertai (...)

36What can the inclusion of this peculiar radiate figure on this altar contribute to our understanding of the alleged solar qualities of the gods of Heliopolis? Despite the magisterial refutation by Seyrig,19 the interpretation of Jupiter as a sun god has been resuscitated, principally in German academic literature.20 It is based on the toponym Heliopolis and the account of the fifth-century author Macrobius (Sat. 1.23-10-13). However, neither of these sources lends itself to a compelling case, as argued elsewhere.21 If Jupiter was worshipped as a sun god, one should expect his solar traits to manifest themselves in his iconography with such typical features such as a radiate crown. But this is precisely where the solarisation theory flounders. Among the main body of evidence, i.e. bronze statuettes and stone reliefs, there is not a single example that depicts a radiate crown as the universal trademark of a sun god.22 Jupiter’s attributes, whip, kalathos and grain ears, coupled with the thunderbolts on his flanks and his bull acolytes, are unequivocally those of an agrarian god of fertility.

  • 23 Kropp 2010, 239-40, 244-45.
  • 24 Some 40 examples: Seyrig 1971, 353-55, 362-63. LIMC V “Helios (in per. or.)” is a convenient adapta (...)

37There are depictions of a solar deity with a radiate crown from Heliopolis,23 but they should not be confused with Jupiter or Mercury; nor do they necessarily attest the existence of solar cults. Instead, they are conventional Helios busts (as opposed to full figures), often coupled with busts of Selene, one finds in cultic contexts such as temple pediments across the Roman Near East.24 When integrated in divine iconography, as on the ependytes of Jupiter, the Helios bust is no more indicative of Jupiter as a sun god than the Selene bust as a moon god. Rather than implying a solar cult, Helios busts are there to underline the supreme and universal character of the god.

  • 25 Seyrig 1971, 368 no. 1; Hajjar 1977, no. 158; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 112, two specimens.
  • 26 Seyrig 1971, 368, no. 2; Hajjar 1977, no. 159; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 112.
  • 27 IGLS 6.2910; Hajjar 1977, no. 131; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 72; Fick 1999, fig. 7. An improv (...)

38No such busts are depicted on the Adıyaman altar. But the imagery makes a similar point. By representing Helios as a separate figure, it spells out his separate identity from the three other gods. The same separation is shown on two bronze medallions, which depict Jupiter, Venus and Helios,25 viz. Jupiter, Venus, Eros and Helios.26 Similarly, an altar found at Bted‘ai27 15km northwest of Baalbek depicts three busts, at the front Heliopolitan Mercury, with a caduceus and at the sides radiate Helios and Selene with a crescent behind her shoulders. Just like Heliopolitan Jupiter on the Adıyaman altar, Mercury, as the main addressee of the votive offering and the sun as one of his acolytes, is thus set aside with no hint at conflation with his companions.

39The Adıyaman altar assigns a secondary role to the solar divinity with regard to its companions: It occupies the fourth (i.e. back) side, opposite Jupiter. Other examples confirm this kind of hierarchy whereby the fourth side bears the least prominent figure, such as the kalathos on the Antioch altar. Consequently, the Adıyaman altar mirrors the setup of other Heliopolitan altars in that it relegates the solar god to a subordinate role. But it departs from standard iconography by depicting him in full length.

40In sum, the solar god on the Adıyaman altar fits by and large in the religious landscape of Roman Syria, but his particular costume and attributes remain an isolated occurrence for now. Robbed of its archaeological context, the altar does not allow grasping the role and significance of this god, or his relationship to the gods of Heliopolis. It is, however, a splendid example of a little-studied aspect of the Roman Near East, “plebeian” craftsmanship catering for the market of local worshippers. The lopsided, asymmetrical architectural framework is matched by the sketchy rendering of the gods with just the minimum of features to make them recognisable. In this process too, creativity was involved. From the need for simplification, the artist e.g. found a new way to depict a solar crown as a nimbus with incisions on a flat surface rather than rays in relief. Future discoveries in Roman Syria or on the antiquities market may yet provide further clues about artistic production at the grass roots, as it were, and help understand its original context, be it in physical, artistic or even religious terms.

My thanks to M.Blömer, Münster, for alerting me to this monument and providing pictures and information; to the Department of Antiquities in Adıyaman for their permission for publication, as well as to this journal’s referees for important advice.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

IGLS, Inscriptions grecques et latines de Syrie VI: Baalbeck et Bekaa, (no2711-3017), J.-P.Rey-Coquais, Beyrouth, 1967.

Aliquot (J.) 2009, “Mercure au Liban,” Topoi16: 241-64.

Butcher (K.) 2004, Coinage in Roman Syria. Northern Syria, 64 BC – AD 253. London.

Crowther (C.) & M.Facella 2003, “New Evidence for the Ruler Cult of Antiochos of Commagene from Zeugma”, Neue Forschungen zur Religionsgeschichte Kleinasiens (Asia Minor Studien49): 41-80.

Drijvers (H.J.W.) 1976, The religion of Palmyra. Leiden.

Facella (M.) 2006, La Dinastia degli Orontidi nella Commagene ellenistico-romana. Pisa.

Fick (S.) 1999, “Gesichter aus Gold, die den Glanz der Sonne widerspiegeln,” Ruprechtsberger1999: 77-99.

Fleischer (R.) 1973, Artemis von Ephesos und verwandte Kultstatuen aus Anatolien und Syrien. Leiden.

Freyberger (K.S.) 2000, “Im Licht des Sonnengottes. Deutung und Funktion des sogenannten ‘Bacchus-Tempels’ im Heiligtum des Jupiter Heliopolitanus in Baalbek,” DamMitt12: 95-133.

Goell (T.) (ed.) 1996, Nemrud Dağı. The hierothesion of Antiochos I of Commagene. Winona Lake.

Haider (P.W.) 1999, “Götter und Glaubensvorstellungen in Heliopolis – Baalbek,” Ruprechtsberger1999: 101-43.

Hajjar (Y.) 1977, La triade d’Héliopolis-Baalbek: son culte et sa diffusion à travers les textes littéraires et les documents iconographiques et épigraphiques. Leiden.

Hajjar (Y.) 1985, La triade d’Héliopolis-Baalbek: Iconographie, théologie, culte et sanctuaires. Montreal.

Hajjar (Y.) 1988, “Heliopolitani Dei,” LIMCIV: 573-92.

Hajjar (Y.) 1990, “Baalbek, grand centre religieux sous l’Empire,” ANRWII.18.4: 2458-2508.

Jidejian (N.) 1975, Baalbek. Heliopolis “City of the Sun”. Beirut.

Kropp (A.) 2009, “The gods of Heliopolis (Baalbek) at the National Museum of Beirut. Revisiting some questions of iconography,” BAAL13: 229-53

Kropp (A.) 2010, “Jupiter, Venus and Mercury of Heliopolis (Baalbek). The images of the “triad” and its alleged syncretisms,” Syria87: 229-64.

Kunckel (H.) 1974, Der Römische Genius. Heidelberg.

Mesnil du Buisson (R. du) 1964, “Les origines du panthéon palmyrénien,” MUSJ39: 169-95.

Nordiguian (L.) 2005, Temples de l’époque romaine au Liban. Beirut.

Ronzevalle (S.) 1937, “Jupiter héliopolitain, nova et veteran,” MUSJ21: 1-181.

Ruprechtsberger (E.M.) ed. 1999, Vom Steinbruch zum Jupitertempel von Heliopolis/Baalbek (Libanon). Linz.

Seyrig (H.) 1937, “Armes et costumes iraniens de Palmyre,” Syria8: 4-31.

Seyrig (H.) 1938, “S.Ronzevalle, Jupiter Héliopolitain nova et vetera (review article),” Syria19: 362-5

Seyrig (H.) 1951, “Antiquités de Beth-Maré (Antiquités syriennes47),” Syria28: 101-23.

Seyrig (H.) 1970, “Les dieux armés et les Arabes en Syrie (Antiquités syriennes 89)” Syria47: 77-113.

Seyrig (H.) 1971, “Le culte du soleil en Syrie à l’époque romaine (Antiquités syriennes95),” Syria48: 337-73.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Hajjar 1977 and 1985, as well as 1988 = LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei”; id. 1990; Kropp 2010.

2 Overview in Kropp 2010.

3 See Fleischer 1973, passim.

4 Hajjar 1977, no. 130; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 103; Jidejian1975, fig. 162-65; Kropp 2009, 240-41.

5 Hajjar 1977, no. 170; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei”, no. 106; Jidejian 1975, fig. 169-72.

6 See also Hajjar 1977, nos. 33, 108, 110, 153, 221 and 235.

7 Cf. Kunckel1974, passim. My thanks to an anonymous referee for this suggestion.

8 Ronzevalle1937, 29-36 fig. 7 pl. 6-8; Seyrig1938, 364-65; id. 1971, 348-49 fig. 4; LIMCIII “Dionysos (in per. or.)” no. 15; LIMC V “Helios (in per. or.)” no. 50; Nordiguian 2005, back cover and 48-49.

9 Southern Beqa‘ near Lake Qar‘ūn, Seyrig 1951, 121 fig. 12; id. 1971, 349; LIMC V “Helios (in per. or.)” no. 51.

10 Thus Seyrig 1971, 349; Nordiguian 2005, 49.

11 Drijvers 1976, passim for quick illustration.

12 Magisterial analysis of Palmyrene dresses in Seyrig 1937, and esp. p. 4-5 on the desert tunic.

13 See e.g. relief from al-Maqateh, Drijvers 1976, pl. 10.1 = LIMC I “Aglibol” no. 14 = II “Astarte” no. 23 = III “Baalshamin” no. 23 = III “Bel” no. 5 = V “Iarhibol” no. 15.

14 Goell 1996, passim.

15 Facella 2006, 294-97.

16 The only known dedication to Antiochos is a purely honorific one, Facella 2006, 312 n. 43.

17 Crowther & Facella 2003, 65-67; Facella 2006, 279-80.

18 LIMC IV “Helioseiros” has in fact only the following three entries. Cf. Seyrig 1970, 94-95; Butcher 2004, 435-36.

19 Seyrig 1971. Followed by Hajjar 1985, 205-17 and 1990, 2480-82.

20 Fick 1999; Haider 1999; id. 2002; Freyberger 2000. One of the instigators of this interpretation is Dussaud with a series of articles in the early 1900s – see bibliography in Seyrig 1971.

21 Kropp 2010. 237-40.

22 Five (out of 26) gems and cameos do show “Jupiter” radiate, but their value as evidence is uncertain, see Kropp2010, 231-32.

23 Kropp 2010, 239-40, 244-45.

24 Some 40 examples: Seyrig 1971, 353-55, 362-63. LIMC V “Helios (in per. or.)” is a convenient adaptation of Seyrig’s article to LIMC format, both in structure and content.

25 Seyrig 1971, 368 no. 1; Hajjar 1977, no. 158; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 112, two specimens.

26 Seyrig 1971, 368, no. 2; Hajjar 1977, no. 159; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 112.

27 IGLS 6.2910; Hajjar 1977, no. 131; LIMC IV “Heliopolitani Dei” no. 72; Fick 1999, fig. 7. An improved reading of the inscription is provided by Aliquot 2009, 244-45.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Légende Adıyaman altar. H 34 cm
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,5M
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,8M
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,0M
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 3,2M
Crédits M. Blömer, courtesy of the Directorate General of Antiquities, Adıyaman
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,9M
Titre Figure 2.
Légende Antioch altar, front side depicting Jupiter Heliopolitanus. H 32 cm. Louvre AO 10230
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,1M
Titre Figure 3.
Légende Rock relief in the ancient quarry of Ferzol depicting two figures separated by a palm tree. Radiate horseman in long chiton holding globe; beardless god wearing chlamys and holding nebris, lamb, bouquet of foliage and bunch of grapes or dates
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 328k
Titre Figure  4.
Légende Votive relief from Palmyra, Temple of Bel. 1st c. bc. H 22.5 cm. Damascus NM 4242/10050. Herakles, Astarte (?), Yarhibol, Aglibol. One of the most ancient reliefs of Palmyra. At the time, radiate gods were depicted wearing chiton
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 448k
Titre Figure 5.
Légende Relief stele from Nemrud Dağı with over-lifesized images of king Antiochos I of Kommagene and Apollo Mithras Helios Hermes, radiate in Persian dress and tiara
Crédits From Reinach 1912, 195
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 268k
Titre Figure 6.
Légende Bronze coin of Chalkis ad Belum under Trajan ad 98-117. d 25 mm, 12 g. Helioseiros in chiton and himation standing facing with head left, holding long palm, spear, and shield. Paris, Cabinet de Médailles
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/1416/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 61k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Andreas J. M. Kropp, « A new altar of the “triad” of Heliopolis (Baalbek) at the Museum of Adıyaman », Syria, 89 | 2012, 141-150.

Référence électronique

Andreas J. M. Kropp, « A new altar of the “triad” of Heliopolis (Baalbek) at the Museum of Adıyaman », Syria [En ligne], 89 | 2012, mis en ligne le 01 juillet 2016, consulté le 04 avril 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/syria/1416 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/syria.1416

Haut de page

Auteur

Andreas J. M. Kropp

University of Nottingham, NG7 2RD

Andreas.kropp@nottingham.ac.uk

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© Presses IFPO

Haut de page
  • Logo IFPO
  • Logo CNRS - Institut des sciences humaines et sociales
  • Logo Maison Archéologie & Ethnologie
  • Logo ERIH PLUS | NSD
  • OpenEdition Journals