Frescoes from the tomb of Aelius Magnus and Aelia Arisuth in Oea

TNMM 575 ↔ CIMRM 113, 114 & 115

Two sepulchral vaults hewn out in the rock side by side at Guigariche, 7 k.m. west of Tripoli.

In one of the walls there is a niche in which the tomb. The niche is completely painted over as well as the adjoining walls. On its back-wall a dead person is represented. Dressed in an expensive tunic, he lies down amongst flowers and trees. On the sidewalls of the niche, on either side, a painted naked genius, putting their hands up to their faces in mourning. On the front-side of the tomb a scene, of which only a standing person with outstretched arm has been preserved. Next to the niche on the left sidewall, a walking person in long garment with a raised candle-stick in his r.h. Above the niche, between two peacocks and in a tabula ansata an inscription (No. 114), which is continued on the cover of the tomb, on which moreover a leaping lion is represented.

In the other room, also with niche and tomb, the frescoes are better preserved. On the backwall of the niche, the bust of the deceased woman is depicted in a medallion supported on either side by a woman. In her l.h. she holds a scroll, the other hand she presses against her breast. The whole in a yellow frame. On the sidewalls of the niche, two naked mourning persons are lying stretched out on a red cloth. On the walls next to the niche on either side a walking person with short head-dress and dressed in a richly adorned tunic. They hold a candle-stick in their hands. Above the niche in a wreath carried by two genii with blue wings and in red, flying garments, an inscription (No. 115) which is continued in red characters on the body of a lioness, which has been represented on the cover of the tomb. On the tomb itself a race between several quadrigae in the circus is shown.

CIMRM II 113

This rock tomb of the late III or IV century is situated at Gargaresch, W. of Tripoli, immediately S. of the main coastal road.

CIMRM 114

Aelius Ma[gn]us Iuratani (filius) / bixit annus..... / plus mi(nus). On the cover of the tomb: [qu]i leo iacet.

CIMRM II 114

L.H. 0.03.

D(is) [m(anibus)] s(acrum) / Aelius Ma[. . . . .] Iurathani / bix[i]t an[n]o[s . . . . .] agin[ta] quin[que] / plus m[i]nus.

On the lid of the cinerary urn: Qui leo iacet.

CIMRM 115

D(is) M(anibus) s(acrum) / Aelia Arisuth / vixit annus / sexaginta plus minus. On the cover of the tomb: quae lea iacet.

This might be the grave of a mithraist with the hierarchic grade of a Lion; ct. a representation of a Lion with candle-stick in the Mithraeum of S. Prisca’s at Rome (No. 482,6). But then it is very strange, that this sect should have accepted women as well. ct. a similar find from Artanada (Lycaonia) in Sterrett, Am. Papers III, No 153; MMM II No 550.

CIMRM II 115

L.H. 0.06.

D(is) m(anibus) s(acrum) / Aelia Arisuth / vixit annos / sexaginta / plus minus.

On the lid of the cinerary urn: Quae lea iacet.

This inscription [CIMRM 115], which was found on the top of a sarcophagus belonging to the woman named Aelia Arisuth, ends with the words qae lea iacet. It was discovered shortly after the publication of Cumont’s corpus of Mithraic evidence. Cumont himself was later concerned with its interpretation. In his opinion the tomb, where two sarcophagi were found, was the burial site of the holder of Mithraic grade leo and his wife, who could even be the bearer of the otherwise unattested title lea, “lioness”.

His conclusion was subsequently endorsed by Maarten J. Vermaseren. Vermaseren also made a reference to the iconographic resemblance between the person with the candlestick found in one of the tomb’s frescos and the figure painted on the wall of the Santa Prisca mithraeum in Rome. Even though he was willing to concede that the title lea was authentic and Oea tomb was really the burial ground of Mithraic husband and wife, he considered this case to be an isolated one and probably concerning only this African community. Jonathan David has recently used the same kind of argument. Nevertheless, other authors remained rather sceptical and in their opinions this tomb has apparently no connection with Mithraism. Under these circumstances it is presumably prudent to regard this inscription as non-Mithraic: the iconographic resemblance is in itself insufficient proof and the tomb, which is dedicated to Dis Manibus, is not a mithraeum – its Mithraic origins could not thus be surely demonstrated.