top of page

Jet Bears and Magical Stars

May 17, 2018
6 min read

As part of my PhD research I have been travelling around the UK to check out museum collections; part of this involves coming across objects I had read about but not seen in the real world. Perhaps the example of this category which brings me most pleasure is the disparate group of tiny jet figurines which depict a bear. Seven such bears are known to modern archaeology from Britain: Four from Colchester, two from York, and one from Malton. A further two are known from Cologne and Trier in Germany. The individual finds are well published in Nine Crummy’s 2010 Britannia paper ‘Bears and Coins: The Iconography of Protection in Late Roman Infant Burials’. As the title suggests, there is a strong correlation between these scant finds and infant burials in the late Roman period. In addition to the bears there are two functionally and morphologically similar Jet ‘big cats’ – from Chew Park Villa and Chelmsford.

IMG_20171207_113125
IMG_20180419_133919

FIGURE 1: Jet bears from Malton (left) and Bootham, York (right). Respectively in the collections of Malton Museum and Weston Park Museum, Sheffield. Low-res images by the author. 

The distribution of these finds in York, Colchester (and Eastern Britain generally), and also Cologne is paralleled by the 22 known jet gorgoneia pendants (12 from Britain); these have a strong association with inhumation burials of young-adult females in the 3rd and 4th centuries AD (Eckardt 2014, 112-116; Parker 2016). We know that there is a considerable industry in jet manufacture in York (see Allason Jones 1996), but there are also considerable collections of jet and jet-like materials in Colchester and London.

distribution map

FIGURE 2: Distribution of jet object, from Roman Britain, depicting either bears, big cats, or Medusas. Note the strong correlation between these objects and places. 

Upon visiting the museums which have the bears, I was struck by the prevalence on the objects of something I’d overlooked on the figures and drawings of the published references and something which is not addressed in the literature: the presence of incised decoration on the back of the bear. By ‘back’ I mean anatomically – visually this is the upper surface of the object.

img_20180419_133939.jpg

FIGURE 3: Jet bear from Bootham, York. Incised decoration on shoulder hump and rump. In the Weston Park Museum, Sheffield.

Two of those from Colchester exhibit this feature: The bear from Abbey field burial CF166 and the bear from the Joselin Collection 87/14 (Crummy 2010, figs. 4 and 5; both currently on display in the Colchester Castle Museum). In the former, the bear generally exhibits more incised markings than the other examples, but at the neck and behind the head are a series of transverse grooves some of which intersect diagonally. The latter is much clearer and has five intersecting incisions.The Bootham bear, now in the Sheffield Museum, is the more prominent of all and depicts four intersecting incisions at both the back/shoulder and the rump.

On the presumption that the bears depicted were modelled on the Eurasian Brown Bear (Ursa arctos arctos), we can see that they are generally good depictions of these creatures and, as far as this particular thought goes, they do depict the strong muscle hump behind the head which is incised on the three examples above. Perhaps the obvious interpretation of these intersecting incised lines is that they depict fur tufts? If I had to wholly oppose this argument it may go down the lines of ‘then why only this space? why not everywhere?’. The bear from CF166, crouching down is generally more incised that the others but most prominently so on the apex of the back. Others are completely smooth and all appear to have been at least partially polished. I don’t think it’s useful to entirely discount this option, as it is one possible interpretation, but an alternative certainly sprung to my mind.

Thus I think it is worth at least suggesting that the depiction of these eight or ten pointed line groups bear strong resemblances to the depiction of stars on other Roman small finds.

YORYM_1972_22_6168 (2)

FIGURE 4: Intaglio depicting stars and crescent moon from the Church Street sewer assemblage, York. In the Yorkshire Museum (YORYM : 1972.22.6168) [CC BY SA 4.0].

Indeed stars are particularly prevalent on specific class of gemstone used for magical purposes and are a a prominent feature of the supernatural iconography on these objects. To see the variety of this feature on magical gems follow this link to the catalogue of the Campbell Bonner Magical Gems Database results for ‘Stars’. They are used as decorative elements on other items of jewellery, such as this metal finger ring (PAS: FAKL-030593). Most prominently they feature in several coin issues, particularly from the 4th Century (e.g. PAS: DOR-B97E44)

The implications of a bear with a star on its back is particularly relevant if we consider the ancient myth in which one of Artemis’ handmaidens, Callisto is transformed into a bear (by Artemis or Hera) after a fling with Zeus which bore her a son – Arcas. Later in the myth the adult Arcas nearly shoots his mother (still a bear) whilst out hunting but both are then changed into stars by Zeus to prevent a family tragedy (Stapleton 1978, 50). Callisto is then the constellation Ursa major and Arcas Ursa minor.

A consideration of this myth opens the speculative door both for thematic links between stars and bears explicitly, but also for parent-child relationships and particularly for the protection of parents and children. Crummy considered the bears as one object type in a broad toolkit used for the protection of infants in the graves in later Roman Britain – they were chthonic objects, placed in the graves of deceased children. Clearly these situations were highly emotively charged, but Crummy’s evidence points to the careful consideration of the most suitable object or (more likely) objects for these situations. Thus the bears may represent part of an explicit link to the loss of a parent-child relationship.

The Greek Magical Papyri (Betz 1992) do not disappoint in continuing the links between magic, ritual practices, and bears: both bears and stars, and the constellation Ursamajor were praised and invoked in numerous magical rituals:

  • PGM 1275-1322. “Bear charm which accomplishes everything: Forumula: I call upon you, the greatest power in heaven appointed by the lord gos to turn with a strong hand the holy pole, NIKAROPLEX.”…[continues]

  • PGM 1331-89. “Powerful spell of the bear which accomplishes everything: Take the fat of a black ass, the fat of a dappled she-goat, the fat of a black bull, and Ethipoian cumin, mix all together / and make an offering to the Bear, having as a phylactercy hairs from the same animals which you have plaited into a cord and are wearing in a diadem around you head”…[continues]

  • PGM 686-702 “Bear charm: Bear, Bear, you who rule the heaven, the stars, and the whole world; you who make the axis turn and control the whole cosmic system by force and compulsion;”… [continues]

  • PGM XII. 190-92 “Request for a dream oracle spoken to the Bear: Take olive oil [from] a clean… onto the left hand and say the [names. Then] smear yourself and go to sleep having your head towards thc east. IESOUS ANOUI…”

  • PGM 1-36 “[Rite concerning the Bear: Prepare] an earthen [censer, and] during the 6th hour of the night [offer to the Bear] moss of a savin [in it. Do it before] three days / [after you called on] the Bear nine times from a high roof.”…[continues].

The PGM are clearly referencing the constellation directly, but we may assume at least a passing awareness of the animal to given relevance to the name of the groups of stars in the night sky. These ritualistic elements of the PGM may have direct relevance to the use of Jet in Roman Britain. I have previously argued that certain Jet objects are explicitly and deliberately rubbed in order to produce an electrostatic effect and that this action is evidence of discreet magical practice (see Parker 2016). Several of the bears have certainly been rubbed extensively, perhaps as part of the same effect. It should be pointed out that extensive use-wear of a Jet object in this manner would take an extensive amount of time – rather more than the short lives of the infant burials in which they turn up. Perhaps this is indicative of an object buried with children but used by adults over many more years? Or something curated or used as an heirloom?

Whilst there are only these few scant examples of incised lines upon the backs of bears (3 of the 9 known) is certainly seems plausible that these forms of decorations owe as much to a knowledge and understanding of myth, ritual, and/or magic as they did to the anatomically correct depiction of a bear.

Bibliography:

Allason-Jones, L. 1996. Roman Jet in the Yorkshire Museum. York, Yorkshire Museum.

Betz, H. D. 1992. The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation (2nd Edition). Chicago and London, Chicago University Press.

Crummy, N. 2010. ‘Bears and Coins: The Iconography of Protection in late Roman Infant Burial’, Britannia 41. 37-93.

Eckardt, H. 2014. Objects and Identities: Roman Britain and the North-western Provinces. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Parker, A. 2016. ‘Staring at Death: the Jet Gorgoneia of Roman Britain’, in Hoss, S. and Whitmore, A. (eds) Small Finds and Ancient Social Practices in the North Western Provinces of the Roman Empire. Oxford, Oxbow.

Stapleton, M. 1978. A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Mythology. London, Book Club Associates.

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page