Editing Mithraism (section)

===Modern debate on origin===

====Cumont's hypothesis: from Persian state religion====
[[File:Greek - Intaglio of a Mithraic Sacrifice - Walters 421342.jpg|thumb|[[Augustus|Augustan]]-era [[engraved gem|intaglio]] depicting a tauroctony ([[Walters Art Museum]])]]
[[File:Taq-e Bostan - High-relief of Ardeshir II investiture.jpg|thumb|4th-century relief of the investiture of the [[Sasanian Empire|Sasanian]] king [[Ardashir II]]. [[Mithra]] stands on a [[lotus flower]] on the left holding a [[barsom]].<ref name=iranica>Franz Grenet, 2016. [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/mithra-2-iconography-in-iran-and-central-asia "Mithra ii. Iconography in Iran and Central Asia"], ''[[Encyclopædia Iranica]]'', online edition (accessed 19 May 2016).</ref>]]
Scholarship on Mithras begins with [[Franz Cumont]], who published a two volume collection of source texts and images of monuments in French in 1894–1900, ''Textes et monuments figurés relatifs aux mystères de Mithra'' [French: ''Texts and Illustrated Monuments Relating to the Mysteries of Mithra''].<ref>Cumont, Franz (1894&ndash;1900). ''Textes et monuments figurés relatifs aux mystères de Mithra''. Brussels: H. Lamertin.</ref> An English translation of part of this work was published in 1903, with the title ''The Mysteries of Mithra''.<ref>Cumont, Franz (1903). ''The Mysteries of Mithra''. Translated by Thomas J. McCormack. Chicago: Open Court. Accessible online at [http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/index.htm Internet Sacred Text Archive: The Mysteries of Mithra Index] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171006100448/http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/index.htm |date=6 October 2017 }} (accessed 13&nbsp;February 2011)</ref> Cumont's hypothesis, as the author summarizes it in the first 32&nbsp;pages of his book, was that the Roman religion was "the Roman form of [[Mazdaism]]",<ref name=Beck-1987/>{{rp|style=ama|p= 298}} the Persian state religion, disseminated from the East. He identified the ancient [[Aryan]] deity who appears in Persian literature as Mithras with the Hindu god [[Mitra (Vedic)|Mitra]] of the Vedic hymns.<ref name="RichardsonHopfe1994-3">{{cite book
 |last1=Hopfe      |first1=Lewis M.
 |last2=Richardson |first2=Henry Neil
 |date=September 1994
 |editor-first=Lewis M. |editor-last=Hopfe
 |chapter=Archaeological indications on the origins of Roman Mithraism
 |title=Uncovering ancient stones: Essays in memory of H. Neil Richardson
 |publisher=Eisenbrauns
 |isbn=978-0-931464-73-7
 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/uncoveringancien0000unse/page/148 148ff]
 |quote=Franz Cumont, one of the greatest students of Mithraism, theorized that the roots of the Roman mystery religion were in ancient Iran. He identified the ancient Aryan deity who appears in Persian literature as Mithras with the Hindu god Mitra of the Vedic hymns.
 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QRfhSBLmAK8C&pg=PA148 |via=Google Books
 |access-date=19 March 2011
 |url=https://archive.org/details/uncoveringancien0000unse/page/148
}}</ref> According to Cumont, the god [[Mithra]] came to Rome "accompanied by a large representation of the Mazdean Pantheon."<ref>[http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/mom07.htm Cumont, Franz (1903). ''The Mysteries of Mithra''. p.&nbsp;107.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170702092009/http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/mom07.htm |date=2 July 2017 }} (accessed 13&nbsp;February 2011)</ref> Cumont considers that while the tradition "underwent some modification in the Occident ... the alterations that it suffered were largely superficial."<ref>[http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/mom07.htm Cumont, Franz (1903). ''The Mysteries of Mithra''. p.&nbsp;104.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170702092009/http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/mom07.htm |date=2 July 2017 }} (accessed 13&nbsp;February 2011)</ref>

====Criticisms and reassessments of Cumont====
Cumont's theories came in for severe criticism from John R. Hinnells and R.L. Gordon at the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies held in 1971.{{efn|
In the course of the First International Congress, two scholars in particular presented devastating critiques of Cumont's Iranian hypothesis ... One, John Hinnells, was the organizer of the conference ... Of more importance in the long run, however, was the even more radical paper presented by {{nowrap|R.L. Gordon ... — Ulansey (1991)<ref name=Ulansey-1991-Origins/>{{rp|style=ama|p= 10}} }}
}} John Hinnells was unwilling to reject entirely the idea of Iranian origin,<ref>John R. Hinnells, "Reflections on the bull-slaying scene" in ''Mithraic studies'', vol.&nbsp;2, [https://books.google.com/books?id=eBy8AAAAIAAJ&q=Since+Cumont%27s+reconstruction+&pg=PA303 pp.&nbsp;303&ndash;304]: "Nevertheless we would not be justified in swinging to the opposite extreme from Cumont and Campbell and denying all connection between Mithraism and Iran."</ref> but wrote: "we must now conclude that his reconstruction simply will not stand. It receives no support from the Iranian material and is in fact in conflict with the ideas of that tradition as they are represented in the extant texts. Above all, it is a theoretical reconstruction which does not accord with the actual Roman iconography."{{efn|"Since Cumont's reconstruction of the theology underlying the reliefs in terms of the Zoroastrian myth of creation depends upon the symbolic expression of the conflict of good and evil, we must now conclude that his reconstruction simply will not stand. It receives no support from the Iranian material and is in fact in conflict with the ideas of that tradition as they are represented in the extant texts. Above all, it is a theoretical reconstruction which does not accord with the actual Roman iconography. What, then, do the reliefs depict? And how can we proceed in any study of Mithraism? I would accept with R.&nbsp;Gordon that Mithraic scholars must in future start with the Roman evidence, not by outlining Zoroastrian myths and then making the Roman iconography fit that scheme. ... Unless we discover Euboulus' history of Mithraism we are never likely to have conclusive proof for any theory. Perhaps all that can be hoped for is a theory which is in accordance with the evidence and commends itself by (mere) plausibility."<ref name=HinnellsReflections>{{cite book |first=John R. |last=Hinnells |chapter=Reflections on the bull-slaying scene |title=Mithraic Studies |year=1975 |volume=2 |publisher=Manchester University Press |isbn=9780719005367 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eBy8AAAAIAAJ&q=Since+Cumont%27s+reconstruction+&pg=PA303}}</ref>{{rp|style=ama|pp= 303–304}} }} He discussed Cumont's reconstruction of the bull-slaying scene and stated "that the portrayal of Mithras given by Cumont is not merely unsupported by Iranian texts but is actually in serious conflict with known Iranian theology."{{efn|
"Indeed, one can go further and say that the portrayal of Mithras given by Cumont is not merely unsupported by Iranian texts but is actually in serious conflict with known Iranian theology. Cumont reconstructs a primordial life of the god on earth, but such a concept is unthinkable in terms of known, specifically Zoroastrian, Iranian thought where the gods never, and apparently never could, live on earth. To interpret Roman Mithraism in terms of Zoroastrian thought and to argue for an earthly life of the god is to combine irreconcilables. If it is believed that Mithras had a primordial life on earth, then the concept of the god has changed so fundamentally that the Iranian background has become virtually irrelevant."<ref name=HinnellsReflections/>{{rp|style=ama|p= 292}}
}} Another paper by R.L.&nbsp;Gordon argued that Cumont severely distorted the available evidence by forcing the material to conform to his predetermined model of Zoroastrian origins. Gordon suggested that the theory of Persian origins was completely invalid and that the Mithraic mysteries in the West were an entirely new creation.<ref>{{cite book |first=R.L. |last=Gordon |year= |section=Franz Cumont and the doctrines of Mithraism |editor-first=John R. |editor-last=Hinnells |title=Mithraic Studies |volume=1 |pages=215 ff}}</ref>

A similar view has been expressed by Luther H. Martin: "Apart from the name of the god himself, in other words, Mithraism seems to have developed largely in and is, therefore, best understood from the context of Roman culture."<ref>{{cite book |last=Martin |first=Luther H. |year=2004 |section=Foreword |title=Beck on Mithraism: Collected works with new essays |location=Aldershot |publisher=Ashgate |isbn=0-7546-4081-7}}</ref>{{rp|style=ama|p= xiv}}

According to Hopfe, "All theories of the origin of Mithraism acknowledge a connection, however vague, to the Mithra/Mitra figure of ancient [[Aryan]] religion."<ref name="RichardsonHopfe1994-4"/> Reporting on the Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies, 1975, Ugo Bianchi says that although he welcomes "the tendency to question in historical terms the relations between Eastern and Western Mithraism", it "should not mean obliterating what was clear to the Romans themselves, that Mithras was a 'Persian' (in wider perspective: an Indo-Iranian) god."<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.hums.canterbury.ac.nz/clas/ejms/out_of_print/JMSv1n1/JMSv1n1Bianchi.pdf | title = The Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies, Tehran, September&nbsp;1975 | access-date = 2011-03-20 | last = Bianchi | first = Ugo | quote = I welcome the present tendency to question in historical terms the relations between Eastern and Western Mithraism, which should not mean obliterating what was clear to the Romans themselves, that Mithras was a 'Persian' (in wider perspective: an Indo-Iranian) god. | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110724230041/http://www.hums.canterbury.ac.nz/clas/ejms/out_of_print/JMSv1n1/JMSv1n1Bianchi.pdf | archive-date = 2011-07-24 | url-status = dead }}</ref>

[[Mary Boyce|Boyce]] wrote, "no satisfactory evidence has yet been adduced to show that, before Zoroaster, the concept of a supreme god existed among the Iranians, or that among them [[Mithra]] &ndash; or any other divinity &ndash; ever enjoyed a separate cult of his or her own outside either their ancient or their Zoroastrian pantheons."<ref>{{cite journal|last=Boyce|first=Mary|year=2001|title=Mithra the King and Varuna the Master|journal=Festschrift für Helmut Humbach zum 80|location=Trier|publisher=WWT}} pp. 243, n.18<!--(239–257)--></ref> She also said that although recent studies have minimized the Iranizing aspects of the self-consciously Persian religion "at least in the form which it attained under the Roman Empire", the name ''Mithras'' is enough to show "that this aspect is of some importance." She also says that "the Persian affiliation of the Mysteries is acknowledged in the earliest literary references to them."<ref name=Boyce-Grenet-1975/>

Beck tells us that since the 1970s scholars have generally rejected Cumont, but adds that recent theories about how Zoroastrianism was during the period BCE now make some new form of Cumont's east–west transfer possible.{{efn|
"Since the 1970s scholars of western Mithraism have generally agreed that Cumont's master narrative of east-west transfer is unsustainable"; although he adds that "recent trends in the scholarship on Iranian religion, by modifying the picture of that religion prior to the birth of the western mysteries, now render a revised Cumontian scenario of east-west transfer and continuities now viable."<ref name=Beck-2004-Zoroastrianism>{{cite book |last=Beck |first=Roger B. |year=2004 |section=Cumont's master narrative |title=Beck on Mithraism: Collected works with new essays |location=Aldershot |publisher=Ashgate |isbn=0-7546-4081-7 |page=28 |section-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SIYTfTYrs1UC&q=generally+agreed+that+Cumont%27s+master+narrative+of+east-west+transfer+is+unsustainable&pg=PA28 |access-date=23 February 2023 |archive-date=4 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230504001153/https://books.google.com/books?id=SIYTfTYrs1UC&q=generally+agreed+that+Cumont%27s+master+narrative+of+east-west+transfer+is+unsustainable&pg=PA28 |url-status=live }}</ref>
}} He says that

<blockquote>... an indubitable residuum of things Persian in the Mysteries and a better knowledge of what constituted actual Mazdaism have allowed modern scholars to postulate for Roman Mithraism a continuing Iranian theology. This indeed is the main line of Mithraic scholarship, the Cumontian model which subsequent scholars accept, modify, or reject. For the transmission of Iranian doctrine from East to West, Cumont postulated a plausible, if hypothetical, intermediary: the Magusaeans of the Iranian diaspora in Anatolia. More problematic &ndash; and never properly addressed by Cumont or his successors &ndash; is how real-life Roman Mithraists subsequently maintained a quite complex and sophisticated Iranian theology behind an occidental facade. Other than the images at Dura of the two 'magi' with scrolls, there is no direct and explicit evidence for the carriers of such doctrines. ... Up to a point, Cumont's Iranian paradigm, especially in Turcan's modified form, is certainly plausible.<ref>{{cite book | last1 = Beck | first1 = Roger | title = The Religion of the Mithras cult in the Roman empire | url = https://archive.org/details/oxfordworldheroi00libg | url-access = limited | publisher = Oxford University Press | year = 2006 | location = Great Britain | pages = [https://archive.org/details/oxfordworldheroi00libg/page/n62 48]–50| isbn = 978-0-19-814089-4 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url = http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2006/2006-12-08.html | title = Roger Beck, The Religion of the Mithras Cult in the Roman Empire: Mysteries of the Unconquered Sun. Reviewed by Peter Edwell, Macquarie University, Sydney | access-date = 2011-06-14 | last = Edwell | first = Peter | quote = The study of the ancient mystery cult of Mithraism has been heavily influenced over the last century by the pioneering work of Franz Cumont followed by that of M.&nbsp;J.&nbsp;Vermaseren. Ever since Cumont's volumes first appeared in the 1890s, his ideas on Mithraism have been influential, particularly with regard to the quest for Mithraic doctrine. His emphasis on the Iranian features of the cult is now less influential with the Iranising influences generally played down in scholarship over the last thirty years. While the long shadow cast by Cumont is sometimes susceptible to exaggeration, recent research such as that of Robert Turcan demonstrates that Cumont's influence is still strong. | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110810203356/http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2006/2006-12-08.html | archive-date = 2011-08-10 | url-status = dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | last1 = Belayche | first1 = Nicole | title = A Companion to Roman Religion | chapter = Religious Actors in Daily Life: Practices and Related Beliefs |editor = Jörg Rüpke |editor-link = Jörg Rüpke | page = 291| quote = Cumont, who still stands as an authoritative scholar for historians of religions, analyzed the diffusion of "oriental religions" as filling a psychological gap and satisfying new spiritualistic needs (1929:&nbsp;24&ndash;40).}}</ref></blockquote>

He also says that "the old Cumontian model of formation in, and diffusion from, Anatolia ... is by no means dead &ndash; nor should it be."<ref>{{cite book | last1 = Beck | first1 = Roger | title = Religious Rivalries in the Early Roman Empire and the Rise of Christianity | chapter = On Becoming a Mithraist New Evidence for the Propagation of the Mysteries |editor = Leif E. Vaage |display-editors=etal | page = 182 | quote = The old Cumontian model of formation in, and diffusion from, Anatolia (see Cumont 1956a, 11&ndash;32; cf. pp.&nbsp;33&ndash;84 on propagation in the West) is by no means dead &ndash; nor should it be. On the role of the army in the spread of Mithraism, see Daniels 1975.}}</ref>

====Modern theories====
[[File:Musei Vaticani - Mithra - Sol invictus 01136.JPG|thumb|upright=1.25|Bas-relief depicting the tauroctony. Mithras is depicted looking to Sol Invictus as he slays the bull. Sol and Luna appear at the top of the relief.]]

Beck theorizes that the cult was created in Rome, by a single founder who had some knowledge of both Greek and Oriental religion, but suggests that some of the ideas used may have passed through the Hellenistic kingdoms. He observes that "Mithras &ndash; moreover, a Mithras who was identified with the Greek Sun god [[Helios]]" was among the gods of the syncretic Greco-Armenian-Iranian royal cult at [[Mount Nemrut|Nemrut]], founded by [[Antiochus I Theos of Commagene|Antiochus&nbsp;I]] of [[Commagene]] in the mid 1st&nbsp;century&nbsp;BCE.<ref name="Beck_2002">{{cite encyclopedia|last=Beck|first=Roger|year=2002|title=Mithraism|url=http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/mithraism|access-date=2007-10-28|encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Iranica]]|location=Costa Mesa|publisher=Mazda Pub|quote=Mithras &ndash; moreover, a Mithras who was identified with the Greek Sun god Helios &ndash; was one of the deities of the syncretic Graeco-Iranian royal cult founded by Antiochus&nbsp;I ([[Antiochus I|q.v.]]), king of the small but prosperous buffer state of Commagene ([[Commagene|q.v.]]) in the mid 1st&nbsp;century&nbsp;BCE.|archive-date=20 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200520055846/http://iranicaonline.org/articles/mithraism|url-status=live}}</ref> While proposing the theory, Beck says that his scenario may be regarded as Cumontian in two ways. Firstly, because it looks again at Anatolia and Anatolians, and more importantly, because it hews back to the methodology first used by Cumont.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://azargoshnasp.net/Din/mysteriesofmithra.pdf | title = The mysteries of Mithras: A new account of their genesis | access-date = 2011-03-23 | last = Beck | first = Roger  | quote = ...&nbsp;It may properly be called a 'Cumontian scenario' for two reasons: First, because it looks again to Anatolia and Anatolians; Secondly, and more importantly, because it hews to the methodological line first set by Cumont.}}</ref>

Merkelbach suggests that its mysteries were essentially created by a particular person or persons<ref>Beck, R., 2002: "Discontinuity's weaker form of argument postulates re-invention among and for the denizens of the Roman empire (or certain sections thereof), but re-invention by a person or persons of some familiarity with Iranian religion in a form current on its western margins in the first century CE. Merkelbach (1984: pp.&nbsp;75&ndash;77), expanding on a suggestion of M. P. Nilsson, proposes such a founder from eastern [[Anatolia]], working in court circles in Rome. So does Beck (1998), with special focus on the dynasty of Commagene (see above). Jakobs 1999 proposes a similar scenario."</ref> and created in a specific place, the city of Rome, by someone from an eastern province or border state who knew the [[Persian mythology|Iranian myths]] in detail, which he wove into his new grades of initiation; but that he must have been Greek and Greek-speaking because he incorporated elements of Greek [[Platonism]] into it. The myths, he suggests, were probably created in the milieu of the imperial bureaucracy, and for its members.<ref>Reinhold Merkelbach, ''Mithras'', Konigstein, 1984, ch.&nbsp;75–77</ref> Clauss tends to agree. Beck calls this "the most likely scenario" and states "Until now, Mithraism has generally been treated as if it somehow evolved [[Uncle Tom's Cabin#Other characters|Topsy]]-like from its Iranian precursor – a most implausible scenario once it is stated explicitly."<ref name=Beck-1987/>{{rp|style=ama|pp= 304, 306}}
[[File:Rituale Mitraico nel mitraeo di Sutri - Pietas Comunità Gentile.jpg|thumb|Mitraic ritual in the Mithraeum of Sutri, officiated by Giuseppe Barbera, [[Pontifex maximus|Pontefix Maximus]] of the [[Reconstructionist Roman religion|Roman religious]] organisation [[Pietas Comunità Gentile]]]]
Archaeologist Lewis M. Hopfe notes that there are only three mithraea in [[Roman Syria]], in contrast to further west. He writes: "Archaeology indicates that Roman Mithraism had its epicenter in Rome ... the fully developed religion known as Mithraism seems to have begun in Rome and been carried to Syria by soldiers and merchants."{{efn|"Beyond these three Mithraea [in Syria and Palestine], there are only a handful of objects from Syria that may be identified with Mithraism. Archaeological evidence of Mithraism in Syria is therefore in marked contrast to the abundance of Mithraea and materials that have been located in the rest of the Roman Empire. Both the frequency and the quality of Mithraic materials is greater in the rest of the empire. Even on the western frontier in [[Great Britain|Britain]], archaeology has produced rich Mithraic materials, such as those found at Walbrook.<small><br/></small>
<big> &nbsp; &nbsp; </big>If one accepts Cumont's theory that Mithraism began in Iran, moved west through [[Babylon]] to [[Asia Minor]], and then to Rome, one would expect that the cult left its traces in those locations. Instead, archaeology indicates that Roman Mithraism had its epicenter in Rome. Wherever its ultimate place of origin may have been, the fully developed religion known as Mithraism seems to have begun in Rome and been carried to Syria by soldiers and merchants. None of the Mithraic materials or temples in Roman Syria except the Commagene sculpture bears any date earlier than the late first or early second century. [''footnote in cited text:''&nbsp;30. Mithras, identified with a Phrygian cap and the nimbus about his head, is depicted in colossal statuary erected by King Antiochus&nbsp;I of Commagene, 69&ndash;34&nbsp;BCE. (see Vermaseren, [[Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae|CIMRM]]<ref name=CIMRM-1960/> 1.53–56). There are no other literary or archaeological evidences to indicate that the religion of Mithras as it was known among the Romans in the second to fourth centuries&nbsp;AD was practiced in Commagene]. While little can be proved from silence, it seems that the relative lack of archaeological evidence from Roman Syria would argue against the traditional theories for the origins of Mithraism."<ref name="hopfe-5">{{cite book |first=Lewis M. |last=Hopfe |year=1994 |chapter=Archaeological indications on the origins of Roman Mithraism |editor-first=Lewis M. |editor-last=Hopfe |title=Uncovering Ancient Stones: Essays in memory of H. Neil Richardson |pages=147–158, 156 |publisher=Eisenbrauns}}</ref>}}

Taking a different view from other modern scholars, Ulansey argues that the Mithraic mysteries began in the Greco-Roman world as a religious response to the discovery by the Greek astronomer [[Hipparchus]] of the astronomical phenomenon of the [[precession of the equinoxes]] &ndash; a discovery that amounted to discovering that the entire cosmos was moving in a hitherto unknown way. This new cosmic motion, he suggests, was seen by the founders of Mithraism as indicating the existence of a powerful new god capable of shifting the cosmic spheres and thereby controlling the universe.<ref name=Ulansey-1991-Origins/>{{rp|style=ama|pp= 77 ff}}

[[Adrian David Hugh Bivar|A. D. H. Bivar]], L. A. Campbell, and G. Widengren have variously argued that Roman Mithraism represents a continuation of some form of Iranian Mithra worship.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/mithraism | title = Mithraism | access-date = 2011-05-16 | last = Beck | first = Roger | date = 2002-07-20 | publisher = Encyclopaedia Iranica, Online Edition | quote = The time has come to review the principal scholarship which has argued for transmission and continuity based on the postulated similarities ... three argue for continuity in the strongest terms. A.D.H.&nbsp;Bivar (1998, and earlier studies mentioned there) argues that western Mithraism was but one of several manifestations of Mithra-worship current in antiquity across a wide swathe of Asia and Europe. L.A.&nbsp;Campbell (1968) argues in the Cumontian tradition ... extraordinarily detailed and learned form of Zoroastrian Mazdaism. A continuity as thoroughgoing, though not quite so systematic ideologically, was proposed in several studies by G. Widengren (1965: pp.&nbsp;222&ndash;232; 1966; 1980). | archive-date = 20 May 2020 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200520055846/http://iranicaonline.org/articles/mithraism | url-status = live }}</ref> More recently, [[Parvaneh Pourshariati]] has made similar claims.<ref>{{cite conference |last=Pourshariati |first=Parvaneh |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lI67iiAds4 |title=The Literary Holy Grail of Mithraic Studies, East and West: The Parthian Epic of Samak-e ʿAyyar |type=video |conference=9th European Conference of Iranian Studies |location=Berlin |date=September 2019 |access-date=5 February 2021 |archive-date=31 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210131181050/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lI67iiAds4 |url-status=live }}</ref>

According to Antonia Tripolitis, Roman Mithraism originated in [[Vedic India]] and picked up many features of the cultures which it encountered in its westward journey.{{efn|
It originated in Vedic, India, migrated to Persia by way of Babylon, and then westward through the Hellenized East, and finally across the length and breadth of the Hellenistic-Roman world. On its westward journey, it incorporated many of the features of the cultures in which it found itself.<ref>{{cite book |first=Antonía |last=Tripolitis |year=2002 |title=Religions of the Hellenistic-Roman Age |publisher=Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing|isbn=978-0-8028-4913-7 |url=https://archive.org/details/religionshelleni00trip |url-access=limited |page=[https://archive.org/details/religionshelleni00trip/page/n13 3] }}</ref>
}}

[[File:Sol Invictus staue in Milan Archeology Museum IMG 4874 1.JPG|thumb|upright|Sol Invictus from the [[Archaeological Museum of Milan]] (Museo archeologico)]]