Dionysus’ statue base from Attideum at Ostia (Rome) by the former praet. prefect C. Ceionius Rufius Volusianus signo Lampadius
source date: 365-377 AD
edition published: 2020-03-27
availability: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

Volusianus vir clarissimus ex praefectis tauroboliatus donum dedit.

Edition based on Van Haeperen 2019a, p. 71.

“Volusianus, of clarissimus rank, a former prefect, who having performed the taurobolium, gave this as a gift.”

(from Van Haeperen 2019a, p. 71)

“Volusianus, clarissime, ancien préfet, taurobolié, a offert ce don.”

“Volusianus, chiarissimo, ex prefetto, tauroboliato, offrì questo dono.”

The statue and its plinth were discovered at Ostia on May 1940 in the Attideum, the little sacellum of Attis near the Porta Laurentina (Reg. IV, I, 3), among other 19 sculptures (see LSA 2539; cf. Calza 1946, p. 207; on this collection of statues see also Boin 2013, in part. pp. 260-261, 266-267). Near the Attideum lay the temple of Magna Mater, which, immediately after the Phrygianum Vaticanum, was the most important sanctuary for this cult in Latium (see PPRET 36; on the campus of the Magna Mater at Ostia cf. Dubosson-Sbriglione 2018, pp. 383-386; Van Haeperen 2019b, chap. 4).

The life-size statue (130 cm) appears rather damaged, indeed «the head, neck, right arm, left forearm, and left shin are missing», moreover « it wears a nebris diagonally across the upper body from the left shoulder to right waist; a chlamys is wrapped around the hip, thighs, and lower left arm and it wears soft decorated boots» (see J. Lenaghan in LSA 2539; cf. Rieger 2004, p. 287, MMA 24). The statue can be identified as a youthful Dionysus, a deity associated to the worship of Magna Mater.

The plinth supporting the reused 1st Century AD statue, bears an abbreviated two-line inscription that was only added later. The inscription qualifies the statue as a gift of the former prefect Volusianus, who partook in a taurobolium, a renowned pagan ritual.

The ritual of the taurobolium originated in Asia Minor and first appears in the West in 134 AD, where it was associated with the cult of Venus Caelestis (CIL 10, 01596, dedication from Pozzuoli). Only later was the ceremony incorporated into the worship of Cybele, approximately under the Antonini, since the earliest known altar dedicated to the Magna Mater commemorating a taurobolium, carried out pro salute imperatoris, dates to 160 AD (CIL 13, 01751). Unfortunately, few literary sources mention the taurobolium; most are Christians and they describe it unanimously as a barbarous, bloody ritual. The Christian poet Prudentius in his Peristephanon (Prud., Peristeph., 10, 1011-1050) furnishes us with the most detailed description, but there is also the anonymous author of the Carmen contra Paganos (vv. 57-61) and Firmicus Maternus (Firm., Err., 27, 08). These interpretations need, however, much attention. Indeed, the numerous taurobolic inscriptions that have survived offer little evidence about the precise nature of the ceremony, that was so variously interpreted.

Rutter (1968, pp. 226-249), Duthoy (1969, pp. 101-105) and Vermaseren (1977, p. 11, 102, 180) argued that the taurobolium underwent an evolution that could be divided into several phases. Although they differ slightly on the kind of ceremony carried out in the first stages, they do agree on the fact that the ritual evolved from a bull chase into something promoting the prosperity of its dedicator, generally the emperor (pro salute imperatoris), becoming in its late antique phase, a veritable “baptism of blood,” in accordance with Prudentius’ account, that is to say that the bull would be sacrificed on a plank above a pit, where the dedicator was, sprinkling him with blood.

More recently, scholars have questioned the reliability of these bloody descriptions, Prudentius in particular, considering them a caricature aimed at promoting their own ideological standpoint (McLynn 1996, pp. 319-320; furthermore Borgeaud 1998; Alvar 2008, pp. 261-275; Cameron 2011, p. 160; Van Haeperen 2014; Dubosson-Sbriglione 2018, pp. 298-402; Van Haeperen 2019b, chap. 3). As McLynn (1996, p. 323) states, the main evolution that the taurobolium experienced was that it evolved from a public to a private rite and that it had remained «essentially the same ritual but had differed in their intended beneficiaries and the degree of publicity». Indeed, from the second half of the 2nd Century to the end of the 3rd Century (CIL 08, 23401, the last recorded taurobolium pro salute imperatoris at Mactar in Africa during the Tetrarchy) the taurobolium had had the character of a public cult, performed on behalf of the emperor. Later, during the 4th Century, the rite developed into a private cult becoming a perquisite of the aristocracy alone. As a sign of social cohesiveness and distinction, the clarissimi performed the taurobolia collectively in the presence of the religious community and their family. The extant epigraphic data reveals that more than one person could perform the taurobolium on any given day: on May 13th 376 AD Ulpius Egnatius Faventinus (CIL 06, 00504), Sextilius Agesilaus Aedesius (CIL 06, 00510) and an anonymous dedicant performed it (CIL 06, 03118). On May 23th 390 AD Lucius Ragonius Venustus (CIL 06, 00503) and Lampadius’ son Ceionius Rufius Volusianus did the same (CIL 06, 00512, see PPRET 36) and on July 19th 374 AD Alfenius Ceionius Julianus Kamenius (CIL 06, 01675) and Clodius Hermogenianus Caesarius did it as well (CIL 06, 00499). From what we can see this ‘elite cult’ appears to experience a rebirth, becoming the religious emblem of the pagan aristocracy, some of whom attained the highest positions of the imperial administration, as Lampadius and his family did (PPRET 36). Among these powerful clarissimi there was our dedicant, whose identity has long been conjectured.

First R. Calza (1946, p. 219) suggested that Volusianus tauroboliatus, who dedicated the statue of Dionysus, might actually be Caius Ceionius Rufius Volusianus (PLRE I, Volusianus 4, pp. 976-978), the praetorian prefect and urban prefect of the early 4th Century under the usurper Maxentius and then Constantine. Instead, Fuhrmann (1941, pp. 103-109) and others after him (PLRE I, Volusianus 5, pp. 978-980; McLynn 1996, pp. 326-328; Lizzi Testa 2004, p. 73; Rieger 2004, p. 287; Boin 2013, pp. 260-261), identified the tauroboliatus as Caeionius Rufius Volusianus signo Lampadius, praetorian prefect in 355 AD and urban prefect in 365 AD (about his complete career, see PPRET 36). This identification is highly plausible given that at least three of his children performed the taurobolium, following what was the family religious belief. Indeed, multiple dedications from the Vatican Phrygianum demonstrate this (Rufia Volusiana, CIL 06, 00509; Sabina, CIL 06, 30966 = IG 14, 01019; Rufius Ceionius Volusianus, CIL 06, 00512, see PPRET 36). The theory is also supported by the involvement of Volusianus signo Lampadius in several pagan cults, as an inscription found on the Aventine hill suggests recording him as pater, hierophant, prophet of Isis and pontifex Solis (CIL 06, 00846, see PPRET 36). Concerning the identification of our dedicator with Lampadius, the use of the plural “ex praefe(c)tis” is important. In the second half of the 4th Century, no other Volusianus could boast two completed prefectures and Lampadius underlines his title of former prefect in five other inscriptions (PPRET 36, PPRET 3737, PPRET 38, PPRET 39, PPRET 41). In our inscription from the Attideum of Ostia the senator refers to the two prefectures he had already held, the praetorian one and urban one, in 355 and 365 AD respectively. This gives us quite a good terminus post quem for the monument, which can now be fixed at 365 AD. Volusianus underwent the taurobolium approximately in the same period of the other members of his family (370-377 AD, see above) or also together with one of them, as we have already said, even if we do not know which one.

However, another discovery further attests his presence at Ostia and his connection with the port. In the courtyard of the Ostian temple of Fabri Navales, later re-used as a marble depository after it ceased functioning in the 4th Century AD, several semi-worked architectural elements destined to be employed in local constructions were found. All are virtually contemporary with the aforementioned inscription. Among them five columns preserve the carved name of a Rufius Volusianus, that appears complete in some cases, Volusiani v(iri) c(larissimi), or only the initials in others, Ru(fii) Bo(lusiani) (see Bloch 1953, nr. 34 a-d; Cébeillac-Gervasoni, Caldelli, Zevi 2010, p. 203, nr. 57. 1- 57.3). Suspecting that one of these inscribed columns was used in a so called Christian basilica nearby, Pensabene (1973, pp. 51-52; 2007, p. 408), and more recently Cébeillac-Gervasoni, Caldelli, Zevi (2010, p. 203) and also Romeo (2019, p. 20) argue that this particular Volusianus corresponds to a later member of the same renowned family of the Ceionii, Rufius Antonius Agrypnius Volusianus (urban prefect in 417/418 AD and praetorian prefect in 428-429 AD; PLRE II, Volusianus 6, pp. 1184-1185; Chastagnol 1956; Sbriglione 2010, pp. 179-182), who lived between the end of the 4th Century and the first half of the 5th Century and who himself converted to Christianity shortly before his death (437 AD).

Of course, the fact that his name had been inscribed on a column does not necessarily imply that he had been a Christian. A more recent and extensive study of the Late-Antique phases of the so-called Christian Basilica has also revealed that during the 4th Century this structure was probably an aristocratic domus. Only in the early 5th Century did it become a Christian building, albeit with a plan that diverges from that of a basilica (Guidobaldi 1995, pp. 525-535; Lizzi Testa 2004, pp. 72-73). Given the intense building activity carried out during his urban prefecture, this figure could also be identified with C. Ceionius Rufius Volusianus signo Lampadius.

However, it is still not clear what connection this man had with the marble depository. Pensabene (2007, p. 408) thought that this carved name was an abbreviation of the buyer of the shafts, but Lizzi Testa (2004, pp. 73-74), on the other hand, assumes that Volusianus could have been the owner of the depository, as his name in the genitive case suggests. If so, it would explain the particular interest that the urban prefect displayed in restoring the monuments of his city.

Fuhrmann 1941, p. 106 = AE 1945, 0055 Calza 1943, p. 219, nr. 12 = AE 1948, 0034 Bloch 1953, p. 272, nr. 34 = AE 1955, 0180 Duthoy 1969, p. 27, nr. 44 Meiggs 1973, p. 212 Vermaseren 1977, pp. 112-113, nr. 366 Rieger 2004, p. 287, MMA 24 Cébeillac-Gervasoni, Caldelli, Zevi 2010, p. 203, nr. 57.1 Dubosson-Sbriglione 2018, p. 514, nr. 122 Van Haeperen 2019a, p. 71

Calza 1943, p. 219, nr. 12 (fig. 21) Bloch 1953, p. 272, nr. 34 (fig. 25) Rieger 2004, p. 287, MMA 24 (fig. 126) Boin 2013, p. 262, fig. 6 Boin 2013, p. 187, fig. 48 Van Haeperen 2019a, p. 71 (fig. 21 a, b)

EDCS 15200077 EDR 073502 EDH 019848 LSA 2539 TM 250115

Alvar J., Romanising Oriental Gods. Myth, Salvation, and Ethics in the Cults of Cybele, Isis and Mithras, Leiden-Boston 2008 Bloch H., Ostia. Iscrizioni rinvenute tra il 1930 e il 1939, NSA, 7, 1953, 239-306 Boin D.R., A Late Antique Statuary Collection at Ostia's Sanctuary of Magna Mater: a Case-Study in Late Roman Religion and Tradition, PBSR, 81, 2013, 247-277 Boin D.R., Ostia in Late Antiquity, Cambridge 2013 Borgeaud P., Taurobolion, in Graf F. (hrsg.), Ansichten griechischer Rituale. Geburtstags-Symposium für W. Burkert, Castelen bei Basel, 15. bis 18. März 1996, Stuttgart 1998, 183-198 Calza R., Sculture rinvenute nel santuario, RPAA, 2, 1943, 207-227 Cameron A., The Last Pagans of Rome, Oxford-New York 2011 Cébeillac-Gervasoni M., Caldelli M.L., Zevi F., Epigrafia Latina Ostia. Cento iscrizioni in contesto, Roma 2010 Chastagnol A., Le sénateur Volusien et la conversion d’une famille de l’aristocratie romaine au Bas-Empire, REA, 58, 1956, 241-253 Dubosson-Sbriglione L., Le culte de la Mère des dieux dans l'Empire romain, Stuttgart 2018 Duthoy R., The taurobolium. Its Evolution and Terminology, Leiden 1969 Fuhrmann H., C. Caeionius Rufus Volusianus Lampadius, Epigraphica, 3, 1941, 103-109 Guidobaldi F., Una domus tardoantica inedita ad Ostia ed i suoi pavimenti, in Bragantini I., Guidobaldi F. (a cura di), Atti del II Colloquio dell’Associazione Italiana per lo Studio e la Conservazione del Mosaico (Roma 5-7 dic. 1994), Bordighera 1995, 525-535 Lizzi Testa R., Senatori, popolo, papi. Il governo di Roma al tempo dei Valentiniani, Bari 2004 Martinez-Maza C., Devotas mistéricas en la Roma bajoimperial, Aevum, 77, 2003, 53-68 McLynn N., The Fourth-Century “taurobolium”, Phoenix, 50, 1996, 312-330 Meiggs R., Roman Ostia, Oxford 1973 Pensabene P. (a cura di), Scavi di Ostia, VII: I capitelli, Roma 1973 Pensabene P., Ostiensum marmorum decus et decor: Studi architettonici, decorativi e archeometrici, Roma 2007 Rieger A.K., Heiligtümer in Ostia, München 2004 Romeo I., Scavi di Ostia, XVII: I ritratti, parte III. I ritratti romani dal 250 circa al VI secolo d.C., Firenze 2019 Rutter J., The Three Phases of the Taurobolium, Phoenix, 22, 1968, 226-249 Sbriglione L., La “gens” Caeionia: étude prosopographique et réflexions sur la conversion d’une famille aristocratique, AncSoc, 40, 2010, 153-196 Van Haeperen F., Prêtre(sses)s, tauroboles et mystères phrygiens, in Estienne S., Huet V., Lissarrague F., Prost F. (éd.), Figures de dieux. Construire le divin en images, Rennes 2014, 99-118 Van Haeperen F., Fana, templa, delubra: corpus dei luoghi di culto dell'Italia antica, 6. Regio I: Ostie, Porto, Roma 2019 (a) Van Haeperen F., Étrangère et ancestrale. La mère des dieux dans le monde romain, Paris 2019 (b) Vermaseren M.J., Corpus cultus Cybelae Attidisque, Vol. III, Leiden 1977

v(ir) c(larissimus)

ex praefe(c)tis