Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 15. 1974 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1976)
Tanulmányok – Abhandlungen - Tóth I.: Two Misinterpreted Jupiter Dolidunus Relics from Pannonia Inferior. XV, 1974. p. 89–98.
the triangle found at Kömlőd (Lussonium)( 15 ). These small Victoria figures were probably attached to the top vertex of the triangle by a strong strip of bronze running vertically from the globe under the feet of the statue directly to the horizontal strip of the signum-holder( 16 ) , which also served to brase of the triangle. In this way, the thin, embossed plates did not carry the weight of the statue; rather it was transferred directly to the -sw/rmm-holder made of strong bronze. This brase element was covered on both sides by the two triangular plates overlapping each other( 17 ). Since a verticle fragment of a 1 cm,wide bronze strip can be seen on the globe underneath the Victoria figure of the Brigetio Dolichenum (Fig. 4.) it would seem reasonable to conclude that the statue stood on the top vertex of the triangle, as is the case for the above mentioned and as P. Merlat has already suggested( 18 ). Thus the Victoria figure crovning the top vertex of the triangle has to be included for the full reconstruction of the object. In the group of finds at the Brigetio Dolichenum there are two completely identical Victoria statues from the very same casting matrix( 19 ). This would seem to suppose there was not only one cultic triangle in the sanctuary but at least two. Other groups of finds (Mauer a.d. Url, Heddernheim, Traismauer) reinforce this supposition( 20 ). On the basis of the aesthetic value of the execution of the two small Victoria statues, no conclusion can be drawn as to the artistic level of the decoration of these triangles. This is so because, for example, in the well-known Kömlőd finds there exists a sharp contrast between the excellenty executed triangles (15) Merlat Répertoire 65—66. — The Victoria statue p. 67 in the same place had originally been placed on the top vertex of the triangle. This is how it is represented on its first published drawing; see I. HORVÁTH, A Szlavinokról az az kérkedőkről, etc. (On the Slavins namely on the boasting), etc. Pest 1844. 202 ff. This drawing, which was made shortly after the statue was found (1815) and which is still in the collection of the original owner, has had a decisive role in determining to what extent the Victoria statue and the triangle are related. Thus the reasoning of I. Paulovics, who claims that the two pieces are separate, is incorrect from the aesthetical point of view; o. c, AÉrt XLVII, (1934), 47. — cf. F. ROMER — E. DES JARDINS, The Epigraphed Finds о/ the Hungarian National Museum. Budapest, 1873, 13.; Merlat Répertoire, 67.; Z. KÁDÁR О. е., 33. (16) An illustrative example of this is the Mauer a.d. Url triangle: Merlat Répertoire, 152, 153, mainly p. 140. (17) Cf. with a good photograph of the quoted triangle from Mauer a.d. Url on which this can be well seen. For this, see Die Römer an der Donau. Petronell, 1973, p. 18. (18) Merlat Repertoire, 67.; Merlat Essai, 171. (19) Merlat Répertoire, 89.; cf. I. PAULOVICS, О. C, Pannónia, I, 1935, 23. — Here he mentions the Victoria statues as parts of a supposed sculptural group and not as parts of the triangle. (20) Merlat Essai, 171. and the very primitively executed Victoria statue which crowns them. However, the relatedness of the two is beyond a doubt ( 21 ). Most likely, then, in the case of the Brigetio Victoria statues( 22 ), the plates represent a high level of artistic achievement, as do other similar objects. * As for the missing figurai representation of the plate, or the pair of plates it certainly encompassed the same iconographical programme as the cultic triangles that are preserved intact( 23 ). It therefore probably presented on the one side the god standing on the back of the bull accompanied by Victoria( 24 ) placing a crown on his head, and the meeting of the divine pair on the other side( 25 ). The other usual accompaining figures were probably not missing either: the Castores Dolicheni( 26 ), Sol, Luna and the eagle( 27 ), the figure of Victoria( 28 ), and the representation of the aedicula or sacrifice^ 9 ). The iconographical programme could have also depicted other gods occasionally involved with the cult( 30 ). Naturally the present state of the fragment does not allow further, more detailed conclusions as to the original figurai representations of the plate other than the general motifs mentioned above. On the other hand the representation preserved on the plate must be dealth with. This is the figure of a Capricorn, which is not characteristic of the iconography of the Dolichenus cult. Its presence on the cultic triangle, therefore may well be regarded as exceptional. The figure of a Capricorn became well known in the whole of the Hellenistic world under the influence of Near Eastern astronomy as one of the configurational symbols for the stars( 31 ). It is used in this same way in the Roman symbolic system( 32 ). As one of the hypsomata( xi ) (i.e. one of the parts of the system of zodiacal „houses" for the planets created by the Hellenistic astronomers) Capricorn was directly connected with the planet Mars(^). Among the fixed (21) cf. Note 15. (22) I. PAULOVICS, O. C, Pannónia, 1, 1935, 21; In,, EPhK, LVI, 1932, 183. (23) Cf. Note 5. (24) Merlat Essai 1 75. (25) Ibid. (26) Merlat Répertoire, 50, 66, 147, 152, 153?, 168 322, 346. (27) Ibid. 23, 65, 66, 152, 153, 166? (28) Ibid., 65, 153, 322, 346. (29) Ibid. (30) Mars: Ibid., 65, 168, 148.; Minerva: Ibid., 168. Hercules: Ibid, 65. (31) A. JEREMIÁS, Sterne. Roscher's Lexikon, IV, 1909— 1915, 1481. (32) G. GUNDEL, De Stellarum apellatione et religione Romana (ROW III. 2.), GieSsen, 1907, s. v. (33) A. JEREMIÁS, О. С, 1481. (34) Firm, mat., astr. 2., 3—4 — quoted by A. J e r em i a S, l. c. cf. Plin., n.h. II, 13. 92
