| Tom E. de Rijk |
Discussion The Channel of Corbulo itself, while directly flowing into the Rhine next to Matilo, may not have been a Roman world border, but it can be argued that it was a liminal border in-between cosmological worlds. The mask was taken out of use by depositing it in a place where it could not be retrieved or seen anymore( cf. Cousins 2014, 61; cf. Kamash 2009, 232). On top of that the Corbulo channel was a converted natural waterway, meaning that the fuzziness whether it was seen as natural or artificial was connected to the deposition as well( cf. Cousins 2014; 6061). Therefore, an explanation for a ritual deposition of the Matilo mask and the associated finds in terms of liminality seems plausible. The channel, being a liminal space, would have functioned as an extraordinary place between( cosmological) worlds, where objects could be offered or‘ move through the in-between and leave it behind with a difference’( cf. Derks 1998, 132; cf. Fokkens and Fontijn 2013, 564; cf. Kamash 2009, 230-232; cf. Nicolay 2007, 124; cf. Thomassen 2015, 40).
The mask was found at the bottom of the channel( fig. 2). A couple of meters away from the mask, heavily chopped articulated horse bones were found that belonged to two horses( Lauwerier and Robeerst 1998, 22). In addition, the skull of a horse was found. Research on this skull revealed that the horse was decapitated and that the chopping of the other bones was not done for functional butchering reasons( Lauwerier and Robeerst 1998, 13; 22). The bones of a leg were found together, while normally these bones would disperse after butchery( Lauwerier and Robeerst 1998, 21). Thus, Lauwerier and Robeerst( 1998, 23) propose that a ritual following the pars pro toto principle had taken place: the parts of the horses representing entire animals. Especially when it comes to the horse skull, the ritual resembles the find of the mask: both horseman and horse are represented by the facial area. The mask was broken off its helmet and the horseman had armour which was not found either: both are arguments for a pars pro toto explanation of the ritual. However, the incomplete state of the mask might as well have been a reason for its discard. Still, the mask and horse bones differ in another respect: the individual parts of the horse skeleton were destroyed on purpose, whereas the mask was not( cf. Lauwerier and Robeerst 1998, 23; fig. 2). The act of damaging an object has long been perceived to signal the end of its use or meaning( i. e. ritual killing). Nevertheless, recent work on broken objects shows that is possible that fragmented finds served new purposes and embodied the whole( Croxford 2003, 82-83; 93). The same might apply to these fragmented finds which had now become part of a ritual, possibly serving a new purpose.
Considering the horse bones were classified as ritual and that many finds from the mask layer like the weapons, horse gear, and coins have often been found in ritual deposits it can be argued that it is possible that( at least a part) of the find assemblage was deposited in the channel in a ritual( cf. Martens 2004, 142-144; cf. Nicolay 2007, 85; cf. Roymans 1990, 77-80).
Furthermore, the rarity of mask finds and the mask’ s value also point to a ritual deposition( cf. Hazenberg 1997, 38-39). Since, the context date matches the mask date the Matilo mask was removed from the world in a period in which it was still in common use, indicating the mask( with a repaired hinge) could have still served its original purpose. And, because the find context of the mask is likely to be unimpaired based on the articulated horse bones, suggesting the finds did not end up in the channel by chance, it is possible to interpret these finds as having been ritually deposited in a liminal place( cf. Lauwerier and Robeerst 1998, 21).
Conclusion The coincidence of the dating range of the Matilo mask and associated finds, the rarity of the mask, the ritual deposition of the horse bones, the other potentially ritual finds, and the undisturbed context of the Matilo mask all make it plausible that the mask was deposited in the Corbulo channel as a ritual action.
The finds from the mask layer and the mask itself appear to have been deliberately deposited. As liminality can be attributed to the Corbulo channel this may have been sufficient reason to render the channel suitable as an extraordinary place for depositions. Although this explanation in terms of liminality and the current model, in which soldiers offered equipment in rites of passage to Gods in return for their safety, are not mutually exclusive, it can be seen as an alternative or complementary interpretation.
In future archaeological research on Roman wet contexts it is important to be more cautious when interpreting the find categories, which were discussed in this article, as normal waste. And, it seems liminality might be needed as an additional dimension to explain why depositions of Roman helmets took place in wet contexts along the Limes.
Acknowledgement and copyright First of all I would like to thank Drs. J. de Bruin for all his tips and suggestions for writing and structuring this article. Additionally, the INTER-SECTION board deserves recognition for both the effort they put in getting articles up to standard and for their personal help. I also want to thank Dr. Carol van Driel-Murray for checking the English. Lastly, The National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden who provided detailed images of the mask,‘ Erfgoed Leiden en Omstreken’ who let me use the excava- p. 20 | VOL II | INTER-SECTION | 2016