Chapter 25. Sol Invictus, the Emperors and 25 December: Mithras in Imperial Politics and His Fall

In the third and fourth centuries the worship of the sun moved from the private cave-sanctuaries of Mithras to the centre of the Roman state. Emperors gave the sun a temple, a priesthood, coins and a birthday. The Tetrarchs dedicated an altar to Mithras as protector of their rule, and the last pagan emperor, Julian, was himself an initiate. The Christian emperors then broke this solar state religion by law, by confiscation and in the end by battle. Vermaseren, quoting Bayet, puts it this way: Roman religion “always developed within the framework of their politics” [Vermaseren, Mithras the Secret God, #38300, ch. 21 “The Fall of Mithras”, p. 187]. This chapter follows that political arc. It then sets out the competing accounts of how 25 December, the “birthday of the Unconquered”, became the date of Christmas, and closes with Mehran Keshe’s teaching on the same date.

From the Emesene stone to the Illyrian emperors

Before Aurelian, a foreign solar cult imposed from the throne had already been tried and had failed. Nock says that Elagabalus “glorified the fetich of Emesa and sought to mate it to Vesta and to make it the chief deity of the Roman world”, and that he “seems to have provoked even the champions of other non-Roman cults” [Nock, The Development of Paganism in the Roman Empire (CAH XII ch. 12), #60218, “New cults at Rome”, p. 413]. Vermaseren uses the same episode to measure how strong sun-worship already was. In his account the Romans resisted the attempt to bring the god of Emesa to Rome because they were “still too much attracted to the traditional conception of the sun to be able to accept Baal in the shape of a black stone” (his text dates the attempt “a.d. 210”) [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 186]. Vermaseren places this inside a wider philosophical trend: “The search for a monotheistic cult stimulated by the philosophical doctrines of the time led inevitably to the all-embracing cult of the unvanquished Sun-god” [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 186].

The reaction came from the soldier-emperors of the Danube. “The Illyrian emperors stood for Rome,” Nock writes. Their Roman dedications show “a peculiar devotion to Vesta” [Nock, #60218, p. 413]. Nock adds that solar theology “did very possibly make a contribution to the complex of ideas and emotions tending to exalt the princeps”. He also stresses that it “had its roots in philosophy” and did not depend only on the Oriental cults [Nock, #60218, p. 435].

Aurelian: the Sun as lord of the Empire

Nock treats Aurelian’s reform as “one innovation of the greatest importance”. Rome had once had a Republican cult of Sol, “but it had faded, and the importance of Sol in the City is due to Aurelian, who on his return from Syria built the great temple of Sol Invictus, introduced the celebration of his birthday (natalis Invicti) on December 25” and gave the cult its own establishment [Nock, #60218, p. 413]. Vermaseren gives more detail. The temple stood in the Campus Martius, “part of which is now the Piazza San Silvestro”. There Aurelian “worshipped the Sun-god as the only heavenly, almighty and divine power”. Games were decreed every four years and the cult received “a priestly college of its own”. Vermaseren also records that “the anniversary of the Sun-god’s birth was on December 25th” [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 187]. The Greek historian Zosimus, in Geden’s translation, says that after destroying Palmyra Aurelian “built the temple of the Sun also on a magnificent scale, adorning it with the votive offerings from Palmyra, and set up statues of the Sun and Bel”. Geden notes that any reference to Mithra here “is doubtful” [Geden, Select Passages Illustrating Mithraism, #38272, “Zosimus”].

Chulev gives the most precise and most political version of the decree: “On the Dies Natalis Invicti, AD 25 December 274, Roman Emperor Aurelian decreed Sol Invictus as the Sol Dominus Imperii Romani (the ‘Lord of Roman Empire’), and ordered imperial coins honoring Mitras-Sol Invictus to be minted and the Templum Solis Aureliani … to be built in Rome” [Chulev, The Continuity Paradigm within the Mysteries of Mitra, #38297]. Chulev gives the exact day. Nock and Vermaseren give only the festival date. Chulev also identifies the imperial Sol with “Mitras” outright. Vermaseren instead separates “the more general sun-cult of Aurelian” from the cult of Mithras proper [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 188]. Vermaseren also records a political legend: the Sun-god “appeared to Aurelian to pledge his support for the Emperor against Zenobia”. He concludes that “it was due to Aurelian that the sun-cult was proclaimed the official state religion of Rome” [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 188].

The Tetrarchs, Carnuntum and the road to the Milvian Bridge

Under Diocletian the state’s gods narrowed further. Nock observes that “the coinage of Diocletian and his associates is primarily interested in Juppiter, Hercules, Mars and Sol”, and that their medallions show “a notable narrowing of the range of gods represented” [Nock, #60218, coin evidence, p. 417]. The sharpest expression of the alliance between the Tetrarchy and Mithras came on the Danube. Carnuntum (modern Deutsch-Altenburg, east of Vienna) had three Mithraic temples. The largest was excavated in 1894. Of the other two, “one was situated next to a temple of the Syrian Jupiter Dolichenus, the other on the north bank of the Danube” [Vermaseren, #38300, ch. 7, Carnuntum section]. There, “when in a.d. 308 the aged Diocletian met Galerius and Licinius at Carnuntum … and made a general agreement, they dedicated a great altar to Mithras, on which the god is described in fine monumental lettering as the benefactor of imperial might (fautori imperii sui)”. For Vermaseren, “the dedication shows how the worship of Sol invictus in connection with the emperor-cult had become the focal point of the state religion in the years following the rule of Aurelian” [Vermaseren, #38300, ch. 5 “The Means of Propaganda”]. He adds that “the fact that Mithras is mentioned by name distinguishes this dedication from the more general sun-cult of Aurelian” [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 188].

Galerius, the persecutor, is named as a Mithraist through an indirect argument. The Byzantine chronicler Theophanes writes that Galerius “was persuaded by a sorcerer Theoteknos to sacrifice to the demons”, and that Theoteknos “entered a cave and delivered to him an oracle against the Christians in order to arouse persecution”. Geden reports that “Cumont argues that inasmuch as Galerius was an adherent of Mithraism the priest referred to must have been a priest of that religion” [Geden, #38272, “Theophanes”]. On the other side of the civil wars, Nock notes that “the litany of Licinius’ army before the defeat of Maximin shows how near solar henotheism could come to Christian monotheism” [Nock, #60218, p. 446].

According to Vermaseren, the battle of the Milvian Bridge (312) “was decisive not only for Constantine but also for the Mithraic cult”. The vision of Christ’s symbol played the part that the Sun-god’s apparition had played for Aurelian: “now, similarly convinced, Constantine firmly planted the Cross on Roman soil”. He cites Constantine’s biographer H. Doerries: “politics were for him determined by religion, and religion was the consequence of politics” [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 188].

Julian the Apostate: the last Mithraist on the throne

Geden’s introduction marks the turning point: “Until with the accession of the Emperor Julian (360 A.D.) there came a brief era of reaction, and for a time Mithra was triumphant” [Geden, #38272, Introduction, p. 3]. Vermaseren stresses the word “convinced”. Julian, “strongly under the influence of the neo-platonic school”, “declared himself a convinced Mithraist”, whereas “the fourth century produced many sympathisers, but few true followers of Mithras”. Julian was initiated in a Mithraeum at Constantinople, entered the highest grade, and in his Hymn to the Sun made Mithras one with Apollo, Phaethon, Hyperion and Prometheus. He “saw himself in the role of a good shepherd, whose moral code was laid down by Mithras” [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 189]. Julian’s own words, in Geden’s translation, have Hermes say to him: “to thee … have I granted the knowledge of Mithra the father. Do thou therefore observe his commands, providing for thyself in this life a sure cable and anchorage” [Geden, #38272, “Julian”, Caesares 336 C]. In another passage Julian describes “the renowned festival in honour of the Sun, celebrating the feast to the invincible Sun”, which immediately follows “the last month of Kronos”. Geden judges that its relation “to the Mithraic ritual is uncertain” [Geden, #38272, “Julian” (d)]. The rhetor Himerius, summoned by Julian, was “initiated into the Mithraic mysteries” before speaking “before the city and the Emperor who had established the rite” [Geden, #38272, “Himerius”].

Nock limits how far Julian’s program was Mithraic. Julian was “himself devoted to Mithras, to solar worship in general, to Cybele, and to theurgy”, but “his religious policy was directed to the restoration of Greek traditional practice”. For Julian, “neo-paganism was … hellenismos” [Nock, #60218, “The last phase”, p. 446].

The reign also produced the most violent episode linked to a mithraeum. Socrates Scholasticus reports that in Alexandria, on a waste site Constantine had granted to the Church, bishop Georgius ordered clearing for an oratory. A shrine “of Mithra” was found containing “many human skulls, both ancient and new”. The Christians “formed a procession and exhibited the naked skulls to the populace”. The pagans attacked, “and others again they crucified, employing this manner of death in mockery of the cross”. Georgius was dragged from the church, bound to a camel and torn apart. Julian then “wrote a letter and upbraided the people of Alexandria”. Sozomen’s parallel account says that “the Greeks with the connivance of the queen of Julian killed Georgius” [Geden, #38272, “Socrates”, “Sozomen”].

The fall: from Gratian to the Frigidus

After Julian’s death in 363 against the Persians, “a period of comparative tolerance set in”. It ended with Gratian’s edict of 382, which removed the altar of Victory from the Senate and withdrew state support. Gratian was also “the first emperor to refuse the high dignity and title of pontifex maximus” [Vermaseren, #38300, pp. 189-190]. In 377 the city prefect Gracchus had already “overturned, broken and destroyed” a Mithraic cave. Jerome reports it as a deed by which Gracchus “gained Christian baptism” [Geden, #38272, “Jerome” (a)], and Vermaseren sees “the traces of such an iconoclastic act” at Santa Prisca [Vermaseren, #38300, p. 190]. The pagan resistance was aristocratic. Vettius Agorius Praetextatus was “Father of Fathers in the cult of Mithras”. He was joined by Symmachus, Nicomachus Flavianus and the circle of Macrobius. Their opponent was Ambrose of Milan, who threatened Gratian with excommunication and made Theodosius, in Herbert Bloch’s phrase, the “spiritual subject of Ambrose” [Vermaseren, #38300, pp. 190-191].

Theodosius’ edict of 24 February 391 forbade all pagan worship in Rome. The edict of 8 November 392 punished “all practice of pagan religions, private devotions included” (Cod. Theod. xvi, 10, 10 and 12). Flavianus then declared for the usurper Eugenius, and the contest became “a question of ‘to be or not to be’ for the old religion”. In Vermaseren’s account of the battle of the Frigidus (394): “At first it looked as though the battle by the Frigidus would bring victory to Jupiter. Then the next morning Theodosius knelt down and prayed. A storm swept up from the Adriatic and the arrows of the pagan enemy were turned back upon them. Yet again a miracle determined the outcome. Eugenius was murdered and Flavianus committed suicide.” The struggle continued in literature, “causing Augustine to write his City of God in order to refute the imputation that the scorn shown to the Roman gods was to blame for the sack of Rome by the Goths” [Vermaseren, #38300, pp. 191-192]. Nock notes that the aristocratic group “showed enthusiasm for Mithraism and the taurobolium, reviving them not only under Julian but also under Eugenius”. Yet the Christian edicts themselves name divination, nocturnal sacrifice, magic and “finally all temple cultus”, not Mithraism specifically [Nock, #60218, p. 446]. Chulev sums up the outcome as “centuries of incessant and merciless Christian persecution toward all the pagan religions and mystery cults”, with the last Mithraic communities disappearing “in the first half of the 5th century” [Chulev, #38297, “The fading of Mitra’s cult and its legacy”].

How 25 December became Christmas: the competing accounts

Foley, writing from a Catholic perspective, sets out “three main theories”. The first, the “history of religion” theory, holds that “Christians in Rome chose December 25 to supplant a Roman pagan festival called the Birth of the Unconquered Sun and that Christians in Egypt chose January 6 to supplant an Egyptian festival of the god Aion, who was born of a virgin”. He grants that “this theory has enjoyed the most scholarly support over the years”. He then objects that Christians were “talking about December 25 as the date of Jesus’ birthday as early as 240”, while the feast of the Unconquered Sun “was not instituted until 274”. He adds that Aurelian “was more concerned about the winter solstice (which at the time fell on December 25) than about stealing thunder from a small religious minority”. The second, the “calculation” theory, derives 25 December from a 25 March conception date. Foley notes that “there is no evidence that the early Church knew about the rabbinical belief in an integral age”. The third theory, a real birth near 25 December computed from the priestly course of Abijah, “has yet to gain widespread acceptance” [Foley, Why We Kiss Under the Mistletoe, #72208, Introduction]. Foley records the earliest Roman evidence for a 25 December Christmas as AD 336.

Jung collects early Christian sun-language for Christ: the Ambrosian “O sol salutis”, Melito’s title for Christ as “sun of the East”, and a Pseudo-Cyprian text marvelling that “on the day on which the sun was made … Christ should be born” (the Latin gives “v. Kal. Apr.”, a late-March date). Jung adds that “the heathen, as Tertullian avows, considered the sun as the Christian God” [Jung, Psychology of the Unconscious, #44615, Part I].

Polemical and popular authors state the solar origin as settled. Koster, writing from a Hebrew-roots position, says: “The fact of the pagan origin of the festival of Christmas on the 25th December, namely, as birthday of the Sun-deity, is admitted by all scholars”. He also claims that “the Sun-worshipping Mithraists, the Sun-worshipping Manicheans and the Christians were all syncretized and reconciled when Constantine led the takeover by Christianity” [Koster, Come Out of Her My People, #86909, “Christmas – 25th December”, nn. 80-83]. Murdock and Barker point to other solstice births. They place the Egyptian “baby sun god Sokar” on 26 Khoiak, “corresponding at the turn of the common era to December 22nd”, and compare his procession in an “ark” with a passage of Epiphanius [Murdock & Barker, The Astrotheology Calendar Guide, #71969, “December”]. Weishaupt suggests that Sol Invictus, celebrated at the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, “could be yet another retelling of Nimrod and Semiramis” and claims that the depictions of Sol Invictus “appear to mirror that of the Statue of Liberty” [Weishaupt, A Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory, #79747]. Vaknin states that Mitra was born on 25 December and that “Pope Liberius” placed the birth of Jesus on the same date [Vaknin, Zeul Mitra si virusul, #60323, “2. Nașterea”].

Keshe: the birthday of Mitra and the date of Christmas

Mehran Tavakoli Keshe gave his own account on Christmas Eve 2020. The transcript reads: “the true birthday of Christ until some 200 and odd years ago was celebrated on 21st, and about 200 years ago Vatican decided to shift it to 24th due to one reason, and that was to make more separation, that Christianity is not replication of Mithraism”. The 21st of December, “the longest night”, is “considered to be the birthday of Mitra, some 8,000 years ago”. The transcript continues: “As Christianity we know today was adaptation of the old Mithraism, so the birth of Christ was put on the same day as the birth of Mitra, as his son, or I should say as her son”. Keshe extends the thesis to Judaism, which he calls “a 2,000 years copy of what Mitra brought”, with Hanukkah as the same light festival under another name [Keshe, Knowledge Seekers Workshop 360, #378072, “Origins of Christmas and the Soul of Man”]. In the same session he identifies 21 December as “the birth of Mitra (Eve)” [Keshe, KSW 360, #378072, “Cosmic Paths … 21st March Cycle”].

Three years later, on the night he called Yalda, Keshe gave the arithmetic of the shift: “The birth of Mitra is on the 22nd, and you add the 3 attributes of the Creation – Think, Speak, and Act Good. And that makes it 25.” Another passage of the transcript gives the formula as “Do good, act good and live good, which makes it 25”. He explains that “in Persia they celebrate the eve of the 21st for the day of the 22nd” as Christians keep the 24th for the 25th, and calls Christmas the “maturity of the Christians to the enlightenment of Mitra” [Keshe, Knowledge Seekers Workshop 517, #378229, “Symbolic Enlightenment and Historical Revision of Religious Dates”]. In late 2025 the workshops also announced a separate celebration, “December 6th at 2 PM Central European Time. Mitra’s daughter’s birthday celebration” [Keshe, Knowledge Seekers Workshop 619, #378331].

Key points

• Nock and Vermaseren credit Aurelian with making Sol Invictus a state god, with a temple, a priestly college and a birthday (natalis Invicti) on 25 December. Chulev dates the decree to 25 December 274 and names the god “Sol Dominus Imperii Romani”.
• Elagabalus’s attempt to impose the Emesene stone, “mated” to Vesta, failed. The Illyrian emperors “stood for Rome”, and Diocletian’s coins centre on Jupiter, Hercules, Mars and Sol (Nock).
• At Carnuntum in 308 the Tetrarchs dedicated an altar to Mithras “fautori imperii sui”. Vermaseren reads it as proof that the sun cult, joined to the emperor-cult, had become the focus of state religion.
• Cumont, via Geden, counts Galerius a Mithraist. Nock sees in Licinius’ army litany how close solar henotheism came to Christian monotheism.
• Julian was, in Vermaseren’s words, a “convinced Mithraist” initiated at Constantinople. Under him “for a time Mithra was triumphant” (Geden), and the Alexandrian mithraeum riot ended in bishop Georgius’s death.
• The fall was legal and military: Gratian’s edict of 382, the Theodosian edicts of 391-392, and the Frigidus (394), decided in Vermaseren’s account by a storm “miracle”. Augustine’s City of God answered the pagan charge that followed.
• On the origin of 25 December, Foley reports that the “history of religion” theory has had most scholarly support but faces chronological objections. Koster, Murdock, Weishaupt and Vaknin treat the solar origin as given.
• Keshe teaches that Christmas is the birth of Mitra (21/22 December, the night of Yalda), moved by the Vatican to the 25th, with the extra days explained by the triad “think, speak, act good”.