Tertium genus? Representations of religious practitioners in the cult of Magna Mater*

The representations of practitioners in the cult of Magna Mater/Cybele hold a special position in Roman imperial imagery. The male images in particular ex-hibit characteristic somatic features and types of clothing as well as striking attributes, connected to certain rituals, religious duties or to the expertise of divination. The images oscillate indeterminately between genders. The effect is to contruct a tertium genus by visual means . It seems that this marked otherness was chosen deliberately as a pictorial scheme to the specific religious status of the cult of Magna Mater and its practitioners.

their individuality and their social status. They are effete, perfumed creatures wearingf lamboyant garments;³ they make am ockery of themselves, follow deviant sexual practicesa nd thus exist on the margins of normals ociety.⁴ These stereotypical claims wereo ften applied to other functionariesi nt he cult of Magna Mater,i rrespective of their specific office.
Even today, one can still find such factoids more or less unquestioningly repeated. Yetm ost of the 'sources' in question are highlyp olemicalo ri ronic perceptions by others, not by the subjects themselves. Yett here are some personal testimonies by functionaries in the cult that do give us some idea of their selfimageo rs elf-perception, namelyi mages commissioned by themselveso rb y their relatives.⁵ Their distributioni ss triking:w ith one exception,a ll are from Italy, indeedm ainlyf rom Rome and Ostia.⁶ Yett his evidence,which derivesm ostlyf rom funerary contexts, has for the most part been interpreted exclusively in the light of the literarys ources.⁷ As a result, they are generallyr ead quite staightforwardlya s' illustrations' of the stereotype: they are supposed to show the protagonists as feminised,t aking Attis as theirr ole-model.⁸ Such interpretations, which ignore an umber of typological and iconographic elements of these images, makethe mistake of attributing meaning to them rather than deducing information from them. Even the criteria for distinguishingb etween different religious offices are often very vague. Hence, most of the images in question have been considered indiscriminately as representations of 'priests' (sacerdotes), of galli,a nd/or of archigalli. An informeda nalysis of these visual media is still ad esideratum.
In this paper,the relevant images are interpreted against the background of contemporaryimagery:what is emphasised?What deviations from the norm are present?W hat are their semantic connotations?W hat iconographic modes and markers are usedt od epict these individuals and their religious and social roles?H ow do they communicatet heirs tanding in the public realm( at any rate, insofarasfunerary representations count as such)? My starting assumption is that the pictorial languageofthe imperial period wasnot limited to simple dichotomies such as Roman/exotic or male/female, but was capable of expressing an elaborate set of different meanings.⁹

Images with an inscription that explicitly links the monument to thec ult of Magna Mater
There are in all just four such monuments thatcan definitelybeassigned to the cult-personnel of Magna Mater.All derive from afunerary context,and all bear a portrait or likeness of the deceased.¹⁰ The inscriptions carefullyr ecordt he religious offices or cult functionsheld. To take the twowomen first: Laberia Felicla was sacerdos maxima matris deum m(agnae) I(daeae),highpriestess of the Great Mother of the Gods of Mt.I da (cat.n o. 11 in the Appendix below).¹¹ This is the  Beard( 1996); Varner (2008); Birk (2010).  Fors ome gravem onuments on behalf of cultp ersonnel of Magna Mater fromR ome and its environs without an imageofthe deceased, see e. g. the funerary of C  (1977a, 67 no. 258). Beside her is an altar showinga n eagle. On priestesses of Magna Materi ng eneral, see vanH aeperen (2011,(471)(472)(473).
onlycertain portrait of ap riestess of Magna Mater.¹² Whereas this relief is quite well-known, the ash-urn of the tympanistria Culcia Metropolis (no. 5) is often ignored, due to its conventional decoration.¹³ Drumswereanimportant part of the musicaloffering in the cult of the Great Mother of the Gods. As for the men, L. Valerius Fyrmus (no. 12)was sacerdos Isidis Ostensis (sic) et Matris deum transtiberinae,priest of Isis in Ostia and of the Mother of the Gods in her sanctuary 'across the Tiber',i.e.inwhat is todayknown as Trastevere.¹⁴ The fourth item, the funerary relief of C. Iulius Bassus( no. 13), has not hitherto been mentioned in this context.F riederike Sinn ingeniously complemented the missing lower left edge of the altar with af ragment,which, although lost,i sp reserved in ad rawing.¹⁵ Now the inscriptioni sf ullyr estored¹⁶ and we know not onlyt he names of the deceased and the commissioner,n amelyB assusa nd M. Aquilius Primigenius, but also the religious office of Bassus: he was archigallus Tusculanorum.¹⁷ All four of these objects werefound in Rome (nos. 11 and 13) or Ostia/Portus (nos. 5and 12); onlyintwo cases do we know at least something about theirorig- The seated statue in Malibu, J. Paul Getty Museum 57 AA 19 (Wrede 1981,220 -221cat.no. 78 pl. 9,3), which portrays aR oman matron dressed as Magna Mater/Cybele, is surelyt obeu nderstood as a consecratio in formam deorum,b ut not necessarilya sapriestess.  AE 1940:131 = IPOstie A92=V ermaseren (1977a, no. 444) =S inn (1987 van Haeperen (2011, 471-473). On the sanctuary of Magna Mater transtiberinum, so far known onlythrough epigraphy,see Meiggs (1973,3 66); Rieger (2004,2 99 *MM 84);Steuernagel( 2004,7 8;237). Against recent arguments that it is to be identified with the Vatican shrine, Erpetti (2009,2 01-202) argues that it must have been situated near Ostia. On cult-officials both of Isis and Magna Mater: Vidman (1970, 140); and for the cult of Isis in Ostia, Steuernagel( 2004,2 12-227).  Sinn (1991,4 3-45 inal setting in an ecropolis (nos. 5a nd 13).¹⁸ The altar of Fyrmus (no. 12)i st he earliest example in our group (second half of the first century CE), followed by the ash-urn of Culcia(no. 5), dating from the reign of Hadrian. The reliefs of Laberia Felicla and Bassus were made around 150 CE (no. 11) or slightlyl ater (no. 13).
Turning now to the ways in which these religious officials are represented or, in one case (no. 12: fecit sibi), had himself represented. In the caseofthe tympanistria Culcia Metropolis (no. 5), the inscription alone refers to her role within the cult of Magna Mater.¹⁹ The decoration of the ash-urn includes no iconographic elements connected to the cult.T he samei st rue of her rather inconspicuous image, am odest bust in front of as ea shell, supported by two cupids. The cupids, the shell, and the doves in the pediment connect the deceased rather to the sphere of Venus, following the conventional codes of praising femalev irtues.²⁰ The relief of Laberia Felicla (no. 11), on the otherh and,s hows her as ar espected matron, as beautiful as Venus, dutifullyp erforming pious service. Images liket his were familiar for the Roman viewer: offering and praying women belong to the standard repertoireofcontemporary imagery,often used in arather generic wayasaformula of pietas.²¹ In her case, however,the iconographydoes evoke Laberia Felicla'srole as areligious professional. Like Culcia, she is shown in front of alarge sea shell, but in her casethe trunk is depicted, at anyrate from the hips. She pours wine onto as mall altar from apaterah eld in her right,a nd with her left hand she holds up al aurelg arland. She wears as leeved garment under a tunica.²² Am antle is drapeda round her waist in ab ulge and falls down over her left forearm. The back of her head is covered, though the published photographs do not allow adecision between amantle or aveil. Vittae (woollen head-bands) hang down to her breasts.She wears anecklace with apendant apparentlyi nt he form of the bust of ab earded god, probablyJ upiter.S uch images, worn as ornament on the breast,are oftenmentioned in literary sources as typicalfor religious functionaries in the cult of Magna Mater.²³ Like Galatea, the  See the relevant catalogue-entries in the Appendix below.  See n. 12 above.  Forfemaleportraits framed by asea-shell see e. g. the relief of Felicla (no. 12) or,without any connection to the cultofMagna Mater, afunerary relief in Rome, Villa Albani inv. no. 179: Wrede (1990,19f ig.5 ).  Alexandridis (2004,7 4-81).  Contrast Vermaseren (1977a, 68): "She is wearingasleeved chitona nd ah imation".  Hdt. 4.76;P olyb.2 1.6 -7. On the pectoral/prosthetidion see Graillot (1912, 237;298); Sanders (1972Sanders ( ,1021Sanders ( -1022M üller (2006).
Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater priestess of Isis on an early-contemporary funerary relief,²⁴ Felicla is depicted with specific garments and attributes,w hich are associated with the cult she serves (long sleeved tunica,p endant shaped like ab ust) and with the sacral sphere in general (vittae, patera,a ltar).
The images of Laberia Felicla( no. 11) and Culcia (no. 5) refer to their religious offices by means of inscriptions and attributes.Overall, however,they conform to the standard representations of women. By contrast,the representations of the twom ale functionaries differ quite markedlyf rom standard representations of males.
Lucius Valerius Fyrmus (no. 12)iswearingagirded tunica with along kolpos, for which thereare some parallels in sepulchral imagery.²⁵ Hislong mantle is secured by abrooch on the right shoulder,for which thereare likewise parallels in funerary contexts.²⁶ However,h is anaxyrides and his headdress²⁷ -at all hat whose crown is bent forward, and with side-flaps hitched up abovet he earsare quite unfamiliar in such contexts: Roman citizens are never depicted in this wayo nt heir tomb-altars.I nc ontemporary imagery the combination of these motifs is used to assert an origin from, or to evoke the idea of, Asia Minor.
Fyrmus acted as sacerdos of Isis as well as of Magna Mater.A ttributes such as the lotus flowers and the ritual vessels mayrefer to the cult of the first,while the flagellum (whip) in his right hand clearlyalludes to the rituals performedfor the latter.The bird on the right border maybeacock, but we should not take this as aplayonthe word gallus,since Fyrmus explicitlycalls himself a sacerdos.²⁸ It is to be read rather as ar eference to the cult in general, whered epictions of cocks are common enough: figurines of cocks,f or example, wereu sed as votives.²⁹ However,whereas the attributesare related both to Isis and to Magna Mater, the imageofFyrmus emphasises his relation to the latter.Heisnot depicted with ashavenhead, which would be typicalfor Isis priests, but wears an eye-catching  Musei Vaticani, Museo Pio Clementino, Loggia Scoperta, inv. no. 840 (ca. 150 CE): Spinola (1999,1 74 no. 2).  Cf. e. g. the tomb-altar of Q. Flavius Criton and his son Q. Fl. Proculus, miles cohortis XIIurbanae (CIL VI 2911), now in the Museo Gregoriano Profano( Vatican): Sinn (1991,72-73 no. 39 figs. 116 -117).  See below.  It is agreat pity that Fyrmus'sf ace( no. 10) is damaged, sinceh ew as probably depicted as clean shaven. In the second half of the first century CE, however,this fashion was standardi n male portraiturea nd the absenceo fabeardh as no special connotation.  Contrast Vermaseren (1977a, 133): Fyrmus is "unquestionablyagallus".  See e. g. the terracotta figurine of ac ock from the temple of Magna Matero nt he Palatine: Vermaseren (1977a, 27 no. 126w ith pl. 126). pointed hat,which no doubt alludes to the Phrygian mitra,which was worn by some Metroac cult officials.³⁰ If the imageo fF yrmus can be said to be unusual thanks to its combination of clothing,cult-utensils and attributes,the relief of the archigallus C. Iulius Bassus (no. 13) must have struck ac ontemporary viewer as bizarre. Like L. Valerius Fyrmus, Bassusb ears the tria nomina -that is, likeo ther archigalli,h ew as a Roman citizen.³¹ However,h is imagei ss trikingly different from the standard male portrait,n ot onlyo fR oman citizens, but of anys ocial stratum.
The imageisframed by two flamingtorches. The mask of alion, the animalcompanion of Magna Mater,i sd epicted aboveB assus' left shoulder.T he right hand is raised in ag esture of adoration, while the left is lowered and holds a patera. His garments cannot be identifiedc ompletely, since the relief shows onlyt he uppert runk from the waist.B ut he clearly wears some kind of mantle aboveh is tunica, which falls looselyf orward over both shoulders. Such drapery is not usual in the case of male subjects.
In contrast to Fyrmus (no. 12), Bassus is not wearingahat but ah air-veil, which covers the backofhis head and falls down behind his shoulders,secured by ahead-band with an ornament at the front.S uchitems are highlyunusual in male portraits. Equallystriking is the fact that the hair is covered completely, for even priestesses such as the Vestals are depicted with the hairline visible, despite their elaborate headdresses and lavish infulae.³² Another remarkable feature of this relief is the fact thatB assus' face is beardless,f or since the time of Hadrian aw ell-groomed beard belongst ot he typicalf eatures of male representation in visual art.Ireturn to this point later.

Images assignedt ot he cult of MagnaM ater solely through iconography
There are eight such monuments in all. Seven of these come from Rome or its immediate environs:t he city itself (nos. 8 -9), Ostia( nos. 2-4a nd 6) and near Lanuvium (no. 10). Onlyo ne example, that from Caesarea (Iol) in Mauretania Caesariensis (no. 1), derivesf rom outside Latium. The earliest of this group, the famous relief in the Centrale Montemartini (no. 10), is Hadrianic. The statue in the Musei Capitolini (no. 9) dates from the Late Antonine period, while the bust in the Musei Capitolini (no. 8), the sarcophagus lid (no. 2) and two reliefs (nos. 3 -4) from Ostia are all of third century date (the latter indeed from the second half). The latest in date, from Caesarea, has been datedt oc .400 CE (no. 1).
Itake first the figure of arecumbent man on asarcophagus lid from the necropolis of Isola Sacra(no. 2).His garment shows manyfeatures we have already discussed. He lies supine on a kline,which is covered with acushion and asheet, with his head supported by his left hand and his left leg bent.Byhis feetstands ar ound cista 'mystica' of the kind found on no. 10 (see below).L ikeF yrmus (no. 12), he is fullyd ressed in shoes, anaxyrides (trousers) and al ong sleeved tunica like that of Laberia Felicla (no. 11), but in this casewith af ringed bottom hem and as ash. As in the caseo fBassus (no. 13), he has am antle drapedo ver both shoulders.His headwear is onlypartially preserved; the lower edge is clearly separated from the hair by deep drilling.This, together with its erect appearance, suggestsacrown.³³ The pine branch in his right hand alludes to the myth and the cult of Attis.
There is at least one ring on each finger of his left hand (supporting the head), but not the thumb.³⁴ The right wrist bears alarge bracelet with arepresentation of the goddess seated on at hrone. Twor ather late inscriptions mention such bracelets (Lat. occabus)asaregular part of the insignia of sacerdotes Matris Magnae.³⁵ On that basis, we can assume the deceased to have been a sacerdos.³⁶  CompareV ermaseren (1977a, 141); Rumscheid (2ß000,5 6-57).  Thereare several literary references to heavy use of jewellery by functionaries in the cult of Magna Mater, e. g. Anth. Pal.7 .709.3; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 36.13; Rhet. Her.4.49.62.Ringsdecoratedwith Metroac imageshavebeen found in the Eastern Mediterranean, cf. Naumann (1983,276 cat.n os.662 -664). We can taket hem to have been typical ornaments in the cult.  The onlyi nscriptions that refer to the occabus plusc rown as the typical insignia of sacerdotes MatrisM agnae are CIL X3 698( Cumae) and CIL XIII 1751 = ILS 4131 (Lugdunum), both Vermaseren argued that this monument intentionallyalludes to figures of recumbent Attis, such as the famous statue donated by C. Cartilius Euplus to the Campus Matris by the Porta Laurentiana in Ostia,³⁷ or another well-known relief from the town.³⁸ They belong to as mall group of images of the recliningg od.³⁹ On the otherhand,this recumbent position is very common in funerary contexts, so that one wuld have expected an allusion to Attis to be clearly signalled, which they are not.I mages of recliningA ttis and our figure have hardlya nything in common apart from the outstretched legs:p osture,p ositioning of the arms and the upper body, as well as the clothing,are all significantlydifferent.Moreover the deceased is portrayeda sm aturei fn ot actuallye lderly, which seems hardlyr econcilable with the youthful god.
Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater Guido Calza'ss uggestion that the figures on the reliefs represent the same person as the sarcophagus lid has now assumed the status of af actoid.⁴³ It is, however,f ar from certain. The facial features are quites imilar,b ut this is due to the so-called 'Zeitgesicht',that is, the current workshop-conventions for representingf aces.A nd an occabus on the right wristi sa ni nsufficient basis for claiming identity.Wes hould instead stress the differences, notablyi nt he clothing:the priest in the sacrificial reliefs is depicted as togatus,quiteunlike the man on the lid, whose mantle is draped around both shoulders with af ringea nd a sash.⁴⁴ In other words, these monuments are in some ways similar but do not necessarilyr epresent the same person.
The clothing connects the reliefs from Ostia with as tatue of a togatus from CaesareaM auretaniae (no. 1), which is our onlye xample that does not derive from Rome and its environs. Since it was found not in an ecropolis but within the city area, it mayh aveb een ad edication or as tatue erected in public space, but this is far from certain. The statuer epresents abeardless man standing close to an altar. Adrawing of the year 1856 indicatesthat the left hand, now missing,h eld ar ound container,p ossiblya nacerra usedf or holding incense.⁴⁵ Like the sacrificant on no. 4, the statue is clad in ag arment looped over the left arm.⁴⁶ The lacinia (tip clearlyindicatest hat the garment is the short togacontabulata thatb ecomes usual in late antiquity.⁴⁷ However,while the drapingoft he garment is not unusual,abelt aboveatoga is, so far as Iknow,unparalleled for men -beltsare onlytypicalonfemale sculptures.⁴⁸ The statue alsofeatures calcei and alaurel wreath. Since the right arm is missing from the biceps down, we cannot decide if the figure once worea noccabus.⁴⁹ The surviving evidence suggests the figurei sw earingatunica manicata beneath the toga. The long knotted infulae reachingd own from the back of his head over his shoulders and right down to below his knees remind us of Felicla (no. 11). The renderingo ft he hair is unusual: short strandsa re shown under the wreath,  Calza (1932). Afactoid is an idea or claim or that,through frequent repetition by those who know no better, has assumed the status of truth.  Goette( 1990,5 9-60.1 46 no. 22); contra Helbig (1972,1 2-14 no. 3003), Steuernagel (2004, 238).  Cf. the relief from Ostia (no. 4): the togatus is offeringo nathymiaterion.  Fort his motif see also the relief of Felicla (no. 11).  Müller (2008, 665) however thinks he is wearing a tunica manicata and a pallium.  Ik now of onlyo ne other example of am ale figure wearings uch ag irdle, namelyagrave relief from Ostia showingaboy with an 'Isis curl' wearingabelt aboveh is toga,s ee Goette (1990,7 3n .3 61a); Landwehr (2008, 71 Beilage 3d).  On both of the reliefs fromI sola Sacra, the longs leeved tunica moreo rl ess touches the upper rim of the occabus. not unfamiliar in male portraits of this time,⁵⁰ but the hair on top of the head is shown in as o-called 'Melonenfrisur',atypicals tyle for women. ⁵¹ We turn now to three examples which are linked togetherbythe flamboyant dress-code of the individuals depicted (nos. 8 -10).
Ab ust of the third century CE, found in Rome, shows ab eardless male (no. 8). Itso riginal function is unclear,b ut it mayh aveb een the upper part of at omb-altar.⁵² Both the right hand raised in ag esture of adoration and the (upper) garment recall the relief of Bassus (no. 13). The figure wears al ong sleeved tunica,⁵³ amantle draped looselyoverboth shoulders, ahair-veil and infulae. Unliket he case with Bassus, the hair is not covered completely, for there are two thin strands of hair showing beneath the headwear and reachingdown to the cheeks, which is highlyu nusual for male portraits. The most significant differencef rom Bassus, however,i st he rich jewellery adorning the headwear, the neck, the chest,t he finger and the forearms. The pendant on the torques shows ab ust of Magna Mater,⁵⁴ so both ornament and its decoration evoke her.The fingers of both handsa re covered in rings. The decoration on the lost object in his left,p erhaps a flagellum,w hich shows an altar flanked by two lions, likewise evokes Magna Mater.T here can thus be no doubt that the bust represents af unctionary in this specific cult,e veni fh is religious office can not be specified precisely.⁵⁵ The same is trueo ft he following sculptures.
Aslightlyover-life-sized statue, found without the head in Rome in the 17th century and restored then as an Attis, dates from the late Antonine period (no. 9). In fact,asthe flagellum on his left arm makes clear,itrepresents acult-function- As Landwehr (2008, 99 n. 2) points out,i ti sd ifficultt ot ell whether the strands aref alling down or arec ombed upwards. In her opinion,t he image shows short strands fallingo vert he forehead.  ForA ttis makinghis long hair filthy as he goes mad, see Ov. Fast.4.238: longaque in immundo pulvere tracta coma est,c f. iactatis … comis (244), explicitlyr eferring to the galli.  Cf. e. g. the funerary altar of P. Albius Memor:B oschung (1987, 87 no. 317p l. 8).  Although the available photos makeitimpossible to be sure, it looks as though he is wearing two garments, one over the other.  The goddess is wearingtypical attributes: amural crown and acircular pectoral. The winged Eros, whoisflyingt owards her,israther unusual in the iconographyofMagna Mater.The same is true for Atargatis -Dea Syria. ContraP ietrangeli (1951,1 9-20); Fittschen and Zanker( 2014, 80).  Pietrangeli (1951, 19 -20 no. 28  Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater ary of Magna Mater.⁵⁶ Liken os. 2, 8a nd 13,h ew ears an over-mantle loosely drapedo verb oth shoulders. The hemline of the garment beneath his left elbow suggests we are dealingw ith ad istinct piece of clothing which was worn in addition to the garment draped around the hips. The over-mantle was not drawnoverthe head, but ended at the neck. It is not possible to saywhether there was ahair-veil. Around his neck, the man wears anecklace made of astragals and a torques. Below it,t here hang two circular medallions and al arge metal pedimented plaque decoratedw ith images of Magna Mater and Attis. The next case, awell-known Hadrianic relief showing the upper trunk of an unbearded man (no. 10), is rather similar.⁵⁷ The breast ornament,however,which is decorated with an imageo fA ttis, is considerablys maller than thosew eh ave alreadynoted. Like the recliningfigure on the sarcophagus lid (no. 2) and Laberia Felicla (no. 11), this man wears al ong sleeved tunica and ag arment hung around his waist.A si nt he case of nos. 8 -9a bove, he wears a torques,i n this case with lion-head finials, and, finally,akind of jewellery we have not seen before, namelyl arge ear-rings.
Longknotted infulae,asinthe case of nos. 1and 11, descend from the hair to the chest.H ew ears ah ead-veil with ab road band to which threel arge circular medallions are attached, the central one figuring abust of Jupiter,while the two lateralones show abust of Attis, in three-quarter view,looking towards the spectator.I nc ontrast to the relief of Bassus (no. 13) and the bust (no. 8), wheret he veil and the headband covered the hair,h is hair can be seen falling in waves from the centrep arting,j ust as we find in contemporaryf emaleh air-styles.⁵⁸ In his right hand the figure holds up apoppyseed-capsule from which three laurel twigsemerge (perhaps aform of aspergillum). In his left,hehas abowl of fruits, includingapine cone.Ahorrid-looking flagellum with ahandle ornamented top and bottomw ith ah eado fJ upiter hangso verh is left shoulder,with numerous astragals knotted into all three leather straps.I nt he panel to the spectator'sr ight,v arious cult objects and attributeso fM agna Mater are depicted, from top to bottomatympanum,c rossed auloi,o ne curved the other straight, and a cista with pyramidal lid represented as hangingf rom ap eg. On the other side, in the upper left corner of the relief,asmall pairofcymbala is shownabove the laurel twigs.
Our lastexample in this group, astatue found in afunerary context in Ostia (no. 6), is unpublished and Ican onlyr efer to the one brief description that has been published.⁵⁹ The head is lost,but the wrinkled neck indicates that the person depicted was elderly. Aband of astragals in the left hand and afragmentary flagellum on the left shoulder make the connection to the cult of Magna Mater obvious. The clothing is described as a 'peplos',t hough in the absenceo fa photo its identification has to remaino pen.N evertheless the very choice of the termi ndicates thatt he statue is not wearingatoga or anyt ypicalm ale garment,b ut af orm of dress characteristic of women.

Contexts
It is most unfortunate thatweknow virtuallynothing about the original context either of these or the other gravemonuments of these cult-functionaries.⁶⁰ There are hints, however,that at least some tombsweresituated side by side or at least close to each other.The sarcophagus lid (no. 2) and the two reliefsfrom the necropolis of Isola Sacra( nos.

Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater
greo (now part of Naples), conceivablyf or the religiosi of the Metroac cult.⁶² These hints allow the inferencethat,atany rate in some cases, the gravemonuments bear ar elationship to one another,thus creatingaform of in-group communication, even if they were alsov isible to all visitors to the necropolis.
If we now review all this imagery,t he most obvious conclusion is that the cult-functionaries are not represented uniformly. As the ash-urn of the tympanistria Culcia Metropolis shows (no. 5), functionaries in the cult could name their religious office in the inscription, but at the sametime prefer aconventional portrait.T he alternative,a so ur other examples show,w as to draw upon ar ecognised set of characteristic features,w hich appear repeatedlyt hough none of them is invariablyp resent.
Despite the iconographic and typological variations between these images, the male functionaries have one feature in common, at least wherethe head survives: they are all beardless.AsIhave alreadym entioned, this can be classified as a 'strong' iconographic marker of difference. Since the time of Hadrian, the standard representation of aRoman male shows him bearded, so that depicting am ale without ab eard had as pecific semantics. Theh airlessness of Isiac priests, for example, evokes the ritual shaving of the cranium and face. As for  CIL X1 894 =V ermaseren (1978,9no. 16). However,t he funeraries of this section of the Campo flegreo, which were collected by Camodeca (1980:8 7-99), reveal no other possiblyr elevant cases. Forareligiosus of Magna MateratLarinum (Reg. II), whoerectedafunerary for himself and a sacerdos of MaterMagna, his patronus (though the gentilicia aredifferent), see CIL IX 734=ILS 4170( Dessaut houghtt he twoi nscriptions might be related)=Vermaseren (1978,4 2 no. 105). See also Steuernagel( ,2 39 with n.1229). the male functionaries in the cult of Magna Mater,b eardlessness maya llude to the hormonalc onsequences of the eviration.⁶³ It makesn om aterial difference whether the subjects in reality had no beard, i. e. werei ndeed eunuchs, or employed the feature to make as ymbolic statement about their 'true' status.

Religious offices
In the case of four of our images, an inscriptionexplicitlystatesthe religious office of the deceased. This is of little help to me here, since threeofthem show no iconographical overlap with the more interesting cases in my §2 :t he imageo f the tympanistria Culcia Metropolis is completelyc onventional, and the images of Laberia Felicla( sacerdos maxima)a nd L. Valerius Fyrmus (sacerdos)a re share some attributes with those in §2 .O nlyt he archigallus C. Iulius Bassus (no. 13) shares distinctive features (hair-veil and headwear)w ith two other images in that group (nos. 8a nd 10).
However the iconographic elements allow us to specify the religious office of the subjects onlyt oacertain degree. Thepectoralistypical of the Metroac cult, but the literarysources do not state explicitlythatitwas specific to acertain religious office. On the other hand, the epigraphic evidence does seem to confirm that occabus and corona were, or came to be, the insignia of sacerdotes in the cult.⁶⁴ This would mean that we could identify three individuals who are wearing occabus and corona as priests (nos. 2 -4). Although this is indeed plausible, we should bear in mind that the onlyc ertain imageo fasacerdos (L.Valerius Fyrmus, no. 12)d isplays neither the occabus nor the corona. The obvious inference is that the iconographyo fM etroac sacerdotes was not fixed but varied bothi n time and space.⁶⁵ There is however one specific ritual expertise that seems to be visualised in the monuments. The archigallus Bassus (no. 13) is depicted with huge eyes. The same is true, to al esser degree, of the togatus from Caesarea (no. 1) and the individual on the relief from Lanuvium (no. 10). Since divination playedanimpor- In this context the imageo fL .L artius Anthus (see n.61), which is in manyw ayss imilar,i s quiter evealing, since he sports ab eard: Fittschen and Zanker (2014, 108 -110 no. 111 pls. 115 -116). Though fanatici thrashed themselvestill the blood came, they werenot requiredtobecastrated.  See n.35a bove.  No. 12, which dates to Neronian-Flavian times, is fromR ome, whereas nos.2-4a re from Isola Sacra. All three however seem to datef romt he third century CE.
Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater tant role in the cult of Magna Mater,⁶⁶ these wide-open eyes mayperhaps be read as ar eference to prophetic power.But Ithink it rather unlikelythatsuch monuments weremade for ordinary galli,ashas oftenbeen suggested. Not onlyisthis group of functionaries almost completelya bsent from the religious epigraphy, not one funerary inscription identifies the deceased as a gallus.⁶⁷ Givent heir life-style, we should not expect that galli werei naposition to order expensive gravem onuments or thats uch monuments weres et up on their behalf -they simplyd id not have the money required for such outlays.
In sum, while it is clear we cannot classify the subject'sc ult-role in every case, there are af ew characteristics thata llow us to differentiateb etween them. Awell-known wall painting from Pompeii (no. 7) mayh elp us to understand the modes of differentiation better.I tdoes not belong to our group of representations commissioned by the functionaries themselvesortheir relatives. We do not know if the person who commissioned the painting had aspecific relation to the Magna Mater cult.What makes the imager elevant for us is the fact thatit shows manyM etroac cult-functionaries in an arrativec ontext.
The painting was produced shortlyb efore 79 CE. It depicts ap rocession in honour of Magna Mater.The cult-statue of the goddess is being carried through the streets,followed by her entourage. Slightlytothe right of centre of the image, we see am ale in ar epresentative toga who is clearlyf oregrounded as the main officiant.Two persons in short whitetunicasare standing to his right,one playing the 'double-flute'.Behind these three, thereare several men, crowded together,a ll dressed in long,l oose, colourful garments, whom we mayi dentify as galli.⁶⁸. To the right of the painting,f our men are standing by the statue on its ferculum,a bout to lift it up. Each one holds al ong,t hin carrying strap. Their clothes recall thoseo fF yrmus (no. 12). Although it seems unlikelyt hat they are wearing anaxyrides,t heir belted tunics with wide kolpos and the draping of the mantle are quites imilar.
This wall-painting shows clearlythat specific functions and roles in the cult of Magna Mater could be differentiated by visual means: musicians are depicted with shortt unics and galli probablyw ith coloured garments. In the context of our funerary representations, it is also relevant that togati could playa ni mpor- VanH aeperen (2011, 483 -484). Galli and archigalli practised divination as well.  VanH aeperen (2011,476). Quite apart from their absencef romf unerary inscriptions, galli hardly appear as benefactors or as dedicators of votives.  On the literary evidencef or the garments worn by galli,s ee n.3 above. tant part in processions, and that the menwhose duty it was to carry the divine imagec ould be rendered in as imilar fashion to the sacerdos Fyrmus.⁶⁹

Male/females emantics
If we cannot establish aclear cut typology, it is nevertheless truethat the images displayanabundant iconography, which evokes specific semantic fields. Striking attributes such as the pectoral, the anaxyrides or the torques,and objects such as the flagellum,are items clearlyconnoted as foreign, un-Roman. We also find details highlyu nusual for male images in ar epresentative context,n amelyt he beardless faces,t he hairstyles, and the exceptional garments,veils, infulae and jewellery.
Some images, such as thoseofthe sacerdos Fyrmus or the three togati from 12), which seem also to represent priests, do not emphasise feminine characteristics even though the subjects are unbearded. On the other hand, in othercases almost every iconographic element seems to be out of place for the representation of aman. Thisistrue of the funerary relief of Bassus(no. 13), the relief from Lanuvium (no. 10), the bust (no. 8) and the statue from the Capitol (no. 9). The clothing of the unpublished statue from Ostia (no. 6) seems also to be characteristicallyf emale. The statue from Caesarea( no. 1) also belongs to this group, since the subject is clad in the togac ontabulata,b ut also wears infulae⁷⁰ and ab elt around the waist,w hich is quite unparalleled for adult male togati. Moreover,i tc ombines male and femalee lements in the coiffure by combininga' Melonenfrisur' with short hair abovet he forehead. At least one of these cases is explicitlys tatedt or epresent an archigallus (C.I ulius Bassus, no. 13), whose large eyes, as we have seen, probablyi ndicate his ritual expertisei nd ivination.T he samei st rue of two other items in the group (nos. 1 and 10). On the basis of these iconographic similarities, Iw ould urge that these other examples (1, 6 ,9 ,8-10) are to be understood as archigalli too.
The crucial question now concerns the relation between the social discourse about these functionariesa nd the images we possess. As everyone knows, the literaryd iscourse of imperial Rome mocked the 'feminine' behaviour and attire of Metroac cult-functionaries. The images are thereforeo ftenr ead as depictions of effete eunuchs dressed in women'sg arments,a sr epresentations of cross- VanHaeperen notesthat in the literary tradition both galli and sacerdotes maycarry the divine image ( 2011, 471-472; 484).  Landwehr (2008, 97)p oints out that infulae were used in various cults,but that it is mainly priestesses whoa re depicted with this attribute.
Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater dressers.B ut in my view the sheer variety of detail showst hat it is simplistict o read these monumentsa sm ere visualisations of prejudices known from literary sources. These subjects, or their friends, are making their ownspecific choices of how to represent themselvesi nt he publicr ealm.
One striking example is the well-known relief from Lanuvium (no. 10). We can usefullyc ontrast this imageo fam ale cult-official with that of af emale one, Laberia Felicla (no. 11), since they are comparable in terms of date, origin, size and quality. The two individuals are shownwearing similar clothing and attributes,for example, long sleeves, hair-veil and infulae. All of these features, together with the beardless face⁷¹ and the striking hairstyle, are highlyunusual for contemporaryd epictions of men. Nevertheless, it would be toos imple to conclude that the person is represented 'as awoman'.Neither the facial nor the bodilyf eaturesn or the garment are really 'feminine'.Take the physiognomy, which has often been described as effeminate:the hairless cheeks mayappear soft,but other elements of the face are not to be found in contemporary femaleportraits. Women'sn oses are usually thinner,⁷² the eyes smaller,the foreheads smoother. Jug-ears are completelyout of place for female portraits, whereas the ears of this subjectp rotrude in an extreme fashion. As for the clothing,there are no analogies in either femaleormale clothing to the waythe mantle is drapedinseveral layers tightlya round the waist.The bagginess of the tunica folds mays uggest a certain fullnessofthe upper trunk, but there is no indication of bulging breasts, as it would be the case with female figures.⁷³ Women are not typicallyrepresented wearingalong-sleeved tunica;the man'ssleeves are longer than those of Felicla, and the seam at the wristi sf olded back to form as ort of ruff. And while Felicla's tunica has ar olling,slightlyoverlappingn eckline, that from Lanuvium has as traight V-neck.
In contrast to Felicla, the subject on the relief from Lanuvium is wearingseveral different kinds of body-ornament in addition to the pendant on his breast. Besides the torques round the neck and the headwear with the three medallions,  Soft facial features and venus ringsare also citedasevidencefor the alleged female characterisation. This is methodologicallyp roblematic:beforewearing abeardbecame fashionable in the earlys econd century CE, unbearded men with no connection to the culto fM agna Mater whatsoever wered epicted with very similar features, e. g. the funerary relief of L. Licinius Peregrinus (BCAR 1985, 434;now Rome, Musei Capitolini, Museo NuovoC apitolino: Arachne no. 16257;.  The bust of ayoung woman with athickened nose in Rome,Museo Capitolino inv. no. 201is ar aree xception: Fittschen and Zanker (1983, 76 -77 no. 100 pl. 125 -127).  This absenceisindicated by the fact that the fold runs straight down from the shoulderwithout indicatingabulge.
it is especiallythe earringswhich have prompted modern scholars to think he is represented 'as awoman'.The point of representing the subject with protruding ears was to evidentlytoemphasise the earringstothe viewer.Onthe other hand, jewellery is not at all ac haracteristic female attribute on funerary and votive monuments in the imperial period, nor is it common in actual burials.⁷⁴ At anyr ate as far as Italyi sc oncerned, women are rarelyd epicted wearing rings, earringso rn ecklaces.⁷⁵ Fort he contemporary viewer,i mages showing jewellery had rather ag eographical connotation than ag ender-specific one: they were seen as characteristic of the eastern part of the Empire.⁷⁶ To sum up: the relief from Lanuvium would have been potentiallyunsettling for ac ontemporary viewer because the subject jars against expectations bothof male and of femalerepresentation. The subjects represented in this and my other examples (nos. 1, 6, 8 -10,13) can be said to 'oscillate' between genders, being represented deliberatelyi na ccordancen either with conventional male nor female iconographyb ut so as to displayacertain ambiguity of gender characteristics. They are represented in amanner waystrikingly different from conventional iconography, amanner that is appropriateonlyfor them,members of a tertium genus. Such ambivalencei sp aralleled in some imperial literature, wheree unuchs are viewed not as men but not as women either.⁷⁷ Although the elusive status of eunuchs usually evokes moralising disgust in literature,⁷⁸ the imagery,f or obviousr easons,r efers to it affirmatively.F or they had been commissioned by the depicted themselveso rb yp eople sympathetic  In the case of ab urial of the fourth century CE at Cataractonium (Catterick, Britannia),the male skeleton was wearingarich jet necklace, ajet bead bracelet,ashale armlet and acopperalloy anklet: Wilson (2002, 1:176 -178f ig.9 5, on grave 951w ith skeleton 952).T wo stones had been placed in the mouth of the deceased. It has been suggested that the burial might be that of adevotee of Magna Mater: Wilson (2002, 2:41-42). Other male burials with single pieces of jewellery areknown from Roman Britain, but none with such avariety of objects:Wilson ibid.  Alexandridis (2004,7 1-74 Representations of religious practitionersi nt he cult of MagnaM ater to them. They werem eant as representative images with apositive connotation. The alterity of these representations is related to the religious offices of the protagonists and to their sociocultural standing,reflecting the specific personal circumstances of the functionaries in the cult of Magna Mater.There werem arried men among the sacerdotes,⁷⁹ but galli and archigalli,c astratedo rn ot,werea lways unmarried.⁸⁰ They livedi ng roups togetherw ith other cult members; some, however,lived alone or as amale couple. The conventional Roman family was not an optionf or them.⁸¹ The case of the archigallus Bassus( no. 13) shows clearlyhow anonconformist life-style found its expression in funerary representation. His relief wasc ommissioned by his contubernalis M. Aquilius Primigenius. As the two inscriptions tell us, they had livedt ogether for 31 years. Such an open reference to an on-conjugal, probablyh omosexual,⁸² relationship, is rare on Romanfunerary monuments. Both imageand text thus refer to aspecial wayo fl ife closelyc onnected to the religious role of the subject.⁸³ This role, as well as the life-style, of Bassus and other such functionaries was highlyd istinctive.Carefullyc hosen 'deviant' images achieve as pecific aim in this context,r eflecting as they do the specific religious statuso ft he Metroac cult-functionaries, especiallyt hat of archigalli,a nd their ambiguous gender-status.

Conclusion
The monuments discussed here show the readiness and ability of the protagonists and theirr elativest ot akea ccount of their unusual representational  See e. g. the funerary inscription of C. Iulius Spiclus, sacerdos of Magna Matera nd Aesculapius,m arried to Ulpia Metropolis, tympanistria publica:I POstie 142=Helttula (2007( , no. 178) = Vermaseren (1977a. The inscription also mentions their children and grandchildren.  It is unknowable whether every gallus was actuallycastrated.A ll that is certain is that they wereb elieved to be castrated and that the communis opinio was that they were eunuchs.S ome scholars,e.g. van Haeperen (2011, 474), believethat archigalli were not castrated.However Sinn (1991,44-45 with n.18) has shown convincinglythat akey iteminthis debate, the inscription on the Bassus relief( no. 13), has always been misunderstood. Castrated archigalli aree xplicitly mentioned in literary sources, see e. g. Firm. Mat. Math. 3.6.22;S erv. ad. Aen.9 .115.A ll this inclines me to doubt whether this is reallyj ust ac ase of confusion, as vanH aeperen suggests.  Sanders (1972 Sanders ( , 10201030).  Sinn (1991,44).  Ad ifferent choicew as made by the person whoc ommissioned an earlyi mperial gravemonumenti nt he northern necropolis of Anazarbus (Cilicia) for ae unuch whoh ad served as a tropheus at the court of Trakondimotos Ia nd is shown wearingc ivic dress:K elp (2008). needs by creatinge xtraordinary images. Moreover they show that such innovations in iconographya re bound to historical and socio-culturald ynamics. The imagery is documented mainlyi nR ome and its environs.I ti ss urelyn ot by chance that almostall of our images are Hadrianicorl ater, when broader strata of Roman society engaged themselvesinthe cult of Magna Mater⁸⁴ and the fashion for growingb eards opened up an ew means of visualising not onlyt he religious role but also the alternative self-fashioning of the subjects.