Frankincense and Incense Burners in Ancient Rome

Etymology of the English Word "Frankincense"

The English word “frankincense” was borrowed from Old French “franc encense” (meaning “noble incense” or “high quality incense”) in the 14^th century ❶.

Frankincense in the Middle East & North Africa

According to Pliny the Elder, the cultivation of this precious kind of resin was originally limited to the Arabian Peninsula. Locally, one tenth of the harvest was offered to the God Sabis before being exported to other areas where it was also valued as a religious offering ❷. These areas included the Levant (hence its mention in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles), North Africa and Southern Europe.

Frankincense in Greece

Its religious use in ancient Greece is well attested. The vegetarian mathematician Pythagoras for example is described as someone who only burned frankincense as an offering to the Gods, never the flesh of animals ❸.   

Alexander the Great apparently was also fond of it, burning it in lavish quantities on the altar ❷. 

Frankincense in Rome

In Rome, tus, as frankincense was called there, was such a prized commodity that fraudulent merchants would try to mix in resins of inferior quality to increase their profit ❷. Apart from being a popular offering to the Gods, it was also commonly used during cremation were it could simultaneously serve as an offering to the deceased and a means to cover up the stench of the burning corps. Famously, Nero is said to have spent a year’s harvest worth of frankincense on the funeral of his wife Poppaea Sabina ❹ (whom he had kicked to death himself ❺). 

The North of the Roman Empire

Remains of frankincense dating to Roman times have been found as high north as Weston Turville (Buckinghamshire, UK) ❻.

Roman incense burners: Tazza / Räucherkelch / turibulum (thuribulum)? 

Bowls with frilled decorations similar to the ones in fig. 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been found in various regions of the Roman Empire. Nowadays, the Italian word “tazza” is often used to refer to these bowls in English. In German, the term “Räucherkelch” is commonly used.

It is believed that they were used as censers based on burnt remnants that are often still visible on the inside. The fact that they are commonly found among grave goods confirms this ❼.

It is hard to determine whether the Latin word “turibulum (thuribulum)” (“censer”, mentioned by Cicero, among others)❽ would have been used to denote this kind of receptacle, but it seems possible.

Fig. 1: Roman incense burner, Rheinisches Landesmuseum, Trier (Germany)

Fig. 2: Roman incense burners, Museum Het Valkhof, Nijmegen (the Netherlands)

Fig. 3: Roman incense burners, Römisch-Germanisches Museum, Köln (Germany)

Fig. 4: Roman incense burners, Gallo-Romeins Museum, Tongeren (Belgium)

Sources:

❶　Harper, Douglas. "frankincense (n.)". Online Etymology Dictionary. <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=frankincense>  (accessed August 27, 2016).

❷　Pliny the Elder. Natural History. 12.32

❸　Diogenes Laertius. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. book VIII.1.20.

❹　Pliny the Elder. Natural History. 12.41.

❺　Suetonius. The Lives of Caesars: Life of Nero 35.3.

❻ 　Henig, Martin (2003) Religion in Roman Britain. London: Routledge: p185.

❼　(Martens, Marleen & Guy De Boe (2004) Roman Mithraism: The Evidence of the Small Finds. Brussel: Museum Het Toreke: p192).

❽　Cicero. Against Verres. 2, 4.

Pan, Satyrs and Fauns: the Difference between the Types of Mythical Woodland Creatures

Fauns and satyrs were among the most popularly depicted mythological creatures in ancient Greece and Rome. From the Renaissance and Baroque period onwards, they managed to recaptivate the minds of many European artists and they still are very popular in Western fantasy culture today. However, during one millennium of relative unpopularity, people had gradually forgotten the distinction between these two creatures and the terms were used interchangeably to describe a species of men with the horns and hind legs of a goat. Artists like Peter Paul Rubens, Filippo Lauri and later William-Adolphe Bouguereau painted woodland creatures that were likely intended to portray satyrs, but most individuals who lived in Antiquity would no doubt interpret them as depictions of the God Faunus (Pan). This confusion has continued to this day as simple image searches on Google for the terms "satyr" and "faun" will show. A notable example of this confusion in modern times can be seen in Disney’s Hercules (1997), where “Phil” describes himself as a satyr, even though he has all the physical characteristics of Faunus/Pan. Even museums that have ancient Greek and Roman artefacts are not always aware of this problem and sometimes use incorrect description cards.

In this post, I will attempt to show the difference between a satyr and Faunus as seen in Roman art, so Greco-Roman art enthusiasts, modern artists and cosplayers alike can henceforth be aware of the distinction. The comparison below uses ancient Roman art as a starting point, but I will briefly mention pre-Roman examples where relevant.

Background

Faunus was the grandchild of Saturn and the son of Picus according to Roman tradition ❶. Sources in the Greek tradition described his equivalent Pan as the child of Hermes among others ❷. The depiction of Faunus in Rome was heavily influenced by that of the Greek Pan.

The satyrs on the other hand were the children of Silenus ❸ (although other sources describe them as the children of Hermes ❹ or of the Naiads ❺) and have great physical resemblance to him in art. The appearance of Silenus can be described as an old, obese satyr (Fig1).

Fig.1: Silenus, the father of the satyrs, Apulia, 4th century BCE, Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam (the Netherlands)

Ears

Both Faunus and satyrs are usually depicted with the ears of a donkey or a horse, not unlike the “elf ears” as depicted in the Lord of the Rings movie series or the American Christmas elves.

Fig.2: Pan/Faunus mask, Sicily, 3rd – 2nd century BCE, Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam (the Netherlands)

Fig.3: Roman jug with decoration shaped like a mask of Faunus, Valkhof, Nijmegen (the Netherlands)

Horns

The God Faunus has always been depicted with the horns of a goat, like his Greek equivalent Pan (Fig.2 and 3).

Satyrs never had horns on Greek figure vases (Fig.4). In later depictions they are sometimes shown with very small hornlike protrusions on their head (Fig.5), but plenty of Roman artistic renderings show them without horns (Fig.6 and 8).

Fig.4: Early Greek depiction of a satyr, Oudheidkundig museum, Leiden (the Netherlands)

 

Fig.5: Roman bust of a satyr with very small horns, head: 1st century, rest: reconstructed in 18th century, Chicago National Museum of Art (USA)

 

Fig.6: Roman bust of a satyr without horns, Rheinisches Landesmuseum, Trier (Germany)

Modern depictions often show both of them with large ram’s horns, but this is likely a misinterpretation of depictions of Zeus Ammon / Iuppiter Ammon (Fig.7). A famous example of this confusion can be seen in Pan’s Labyrinth (2006).

Fig.7: Roman oil lamp with Iuppiter Ammon (ram's horns), not Faunus or a satyr, Rheinisches Landesmuseum, Trier (Germany)

Tail

Fig.8: Side of a Gallo-Roman Bacchic funerary stele showing a satyr eating grapes and carrying a grape harvesting sickle, Musée Archéologique, Arlon (Belgium)

Satyrs are described ❻ and depicted as having a tail resembling that of a horse. On Greek figure vases, they tend to be rather long (Fig.4), but they seem to have decreased somewhat in length over time. Nevertheless, Roman artists still depicted them with horsetails, rather than short goat tails. Some Roman depictions seem to omit the tail completely (Fig.8).

Faunus / Pan had a goat tail matching the rest of his lower body.

Legs and feet

Faunus / Pan is usually depicted with goat legs (Fig.9), but depictions of him with human legs exist.

Fig.9: Faunus on a Roman funerary relief, Römisch-Germanisches Museum Cologne (Germany

Satyrs are never depicted with goat legs, and this is possibly the most important distinction between fauns and satyrs. Early Greek depictions sometimes show satyr-like creatures with the legs of a horse, but this may actually be Silenus. Either way, the author has never seen a satyr with goat legs in Roman art.

The literary sources leave somewhat more room for discussion. Both Lucretius ❼and Horace ❽ speak of “goat-footed satyrs”. On the other hand, Propertius ❾, Nonnus❿ and Ausonius⓫ make the same claim about panes.

Fur and hair   

Faunus is generally shown as very hairy. He usually has a beard and fur all over his lower body (Fig.9). 

Fig.10: Roman statue of group of satyrs, 1st century CE, Chicago National Museum of Art (USA)

Satyrs may have been hairier in early Greek depictions, but as Bacchus/Dionysus traded his mature, bearded look for a more youthful appearance, so did the satyrs. Satyrs in Roman art therefore rarely have beards, exept if a specific, named satyr in involved. Their bodies generally appear quite smooth and youthful and they often wear animal skins over their shoulders to keep their hairless bodies warm (Fig.10). The only thing remaining from their original beast-like appearance is their distinct shaggy hairstyle (Fig.5, 6, 8 and 10).

Members of the entourage of the Wine God Bacchus

It seems likely that the confusion between satyrs and fauns arose as a result of their association with the Wine God Bacchus. Even though Silenus, satyrs and maenads typically belonged to the retinue of Bacchus, other Gods also temporarily joined the Wine God’s thiasus. Hercules is one of them ⓬ and Faunus another, as described in several myths, which explains why both creatures can appear in Bacchic art. What certainly made the situation more complicated is the fact that there is mention of a third kind of creature: the fauns (fauni or panes)⓭. Literature names these creatures, who are more or less to Faunus what satyrs are to Silenus, but in Bacchic art, they are rather rare. One remarkable sarcophagus that does shows several fauni in a Bacchic context, nevertheless proves that they are still quite distinct beings in the 2^nd century CE: On this sarcophagus, two satyrs support their intoxicated Father Silenus while several others hold torches aloft. Meanwhile, a female faun to the left of the scene tries to copulate with a herm of Faunus (who himself is seen leaving a building in the background) and a couple of fauns to the right is about to mate in front of a herm depicting a young faun. Trying to explain this scene by identifying what I argue to be the fauns (the goat-footed ones) as satyrs and vice versa would be problematic. It is far more plausible that satyrs would help their Father rather than fauns.

How can we know who is who in art?

Certain statue groups unmistakeably depict myths that feature Pan/Faunus, like this statue of Faunus teaching Daphnis how to play the syrinx. An attempt to explain the goat-like creature in the statue group as a satyr, would also be problematic.

If the dancers in the thiasus of Bacchus are called maenads or nymphs when they are female and satyrs when they are male, it should be no surprise that depictions of maenads dancing with what I have argued to be satyrs (the ones with human legs) are far more abundant than depictions of Faunus with a maenad. It seems that the latter pair only became popular in modern times.

Conclusion 
There are enough examples of vague or misinformed descriptions in late Roman literature to explain the confusion in modern times, but the depiction of satyrs and Faunus/fauns in ancient Greek and Roman art does not allow for any confusion. The popular myths provide enough information and description to identify them with great certainty.  

Fig.11: Roman statue of Bacchus, surrounded by two satyrs and Faunus, 2nd-3rd century CE, Chicago National Museum of Art (USA)

Sources:

❶ Vergil. Aeneid. VII, 47-51.

❷ For more details, check out this link: http://www.theoi.com/Georgikos/Pan.html

❸ Euripides. Cyclops. 13, 82, 269.)
❹ Nonnus. Dionysiaca. XIV. 113.
❺ Xenophon. Symposium. v. 7.
❻ Philostratus the Elder. Imagines 1. 22. ; Pausanias, Description of Greece. 1. 23. 6. ;      Nonnus, Dionysiaca 14. 105 ff.)
❼ Lucretius. De Rerum Natura. 4.572.: “capripedes Satyros”
❽ Horace. Odes. II, 19.: “capripedum Satyrorum”
❾ Propertius III. 15. 34 “capripedes agitat cum laeta protervia Panas”
❿ Nonnus. Dionysiaca. 21. 178 ff
⓫ Ausonius. Mosella. Praef 170. “capripedes agitat cum laeta protervia Panas”
⓬ Reineking, Brian (2016) The Esoteric Codex: Demigods of Classical Mythology. Lulu.com: p127.
⓭ Nonnus. Dionysiaca 14. 67 ff