Rating: 
Summary: Good, but a little too speculative
Review: Ulansey's book is an excellent discussion of Mithraism. His suggestion that the cult arose in Cicilia, as a product of new astrological discoveries grafted onto the existing cult of Perseus, is most interesting, and very well argued. The book is quite readable, and as a statement of a position works well. Like most modern scholars, he discards Cumont's theory that the Persian deity Mitra is the same as Mithras. The cult must have been devised, in his view, some time around 70 BC, based on the statement in Plutarch, "Pompey", that the Cicilian pirates were devoted to Mithras.However I came away feeling that he had started with a theory, around which the evidence was moulded. In one or two places, I felt that the narrative adopted the tricks of the Von Daniken school, whereby a problem is raised purely in order to introduce a pre-determined solution, giving the reader a quite fallacious feeling of 'investigation.' Surely the story should arise naturally from the data, not be imposed on it? The book presumes a general familiarity with the evidence for Mithraism, and so would not be the best book to start with. A better starting point would be Manfred Clauss, "The Roman Cult of Mithras." This suggests that the cult originated in Rome in the first century AD. Cumont's book -- the conclusions from his magisterial survey of all the data translated into English -- is now out of date. After reading Clauss, then one might read both Ulansey and Cumont.
Rating:
Summary: Good, but a little too speculative
Review: Ulansey's book is an excellent discussion of Mithraism. His suggestion that the cult arose in Cicilia, as a product of new astrological discoveries grafted onto the existing cult of Perseus, is most interesting, and very well argued. The book is quite readable, and as a statement of a position works well. Like most modern scholars, he discards Cumont's theory that the Persian deity Mitra is the same as Mithras. The cult must have been devised, in his view, some time around 70 BC, based on the statement in Plutarch, "Pompey", that the Cicilian pirates were devoted to Mithras. However I came away feeling that he had started with a theory, around which the evidence was moulded. In one or two places, I felt that the narrative adopted the tricks of the Von Daniken school, whereby a problem is raised purely in order to introduce a pre-determined solution, giving the reader a quite fallacious feeling of 'investigation.' Surely the story should arise naturally from the data, not be imposed on it? The book presumes a general familiarity with the evidence for Mithraism, and so would not be the best book to start with. A better starting point would be Manfred Clauss, "The Roman Cult of Mithras." This suggests that the cult originated in Rome in the first century AD. Cumont's book -- the conclusions from his magisterial survey of all the data translated into English -- is now out of date. After reading Clauss, then one might read both Ulansey and Cumont.
Rating: 
Summary: Amazing!
Review: What an amazing book! Ulansey's explanation of the Mithraic Mysteries is one of those ideas that seems so obvious after you encounter it that you can't understand how no one thought of it before. Every piece of this ancient jigsaw puzzle ends up fitting together perfectly, and as other reviewers have said it is written so well that it is as much fun to read as a great detective novel. The last reviewer claimed that the book didn't reveal the "mystery" of Mithraism, but he must not have read the same book that I did, since the book certainly DOES reveal-- and in a mind-boggling and utterly convincing way-- the central secret of the Mithraic cult . The fact that this secret was an idea and not a ritual means only that the Mithraic cult was more like Gnosticism than it was like earlier mystery cults, but given its time period that makes perfect sense to me. I have rarely encountered an academic book (the book is from Oxford Press) that provides as much pure intellectual excitement as this one. If you have any interest in ancient religion you owe it to yourself to read this book-- especially since it's only 125 pages (without the footnotes), which means you can easily read it in a few hours. Once again-- amazing!
| 
