The Religious Experience of the Roman People Part 15

[349] _R.F._ p. 95 foll. Cp. Robertson Smith, _Rel. of Semites_, Lect. VIII.

[350] _R.F._ p. 217 foll.

[351] _R.F._ p. 302 foll. Meals in connection with sacrifice are also found at the Parilia (_R.F._ p. 81, and Ovid, _Fasti_, iv. 743 foll.) and Terminalia (Ovid, _Fasti_, ii. 657); but in both cases Ovid seems to be describing rustic rites; nor is it certain that the meal was really sacramental. What does seem proved is that the old Latins and other Italians believed the deities of the house to be present at their meals--

ante focos olim scamnis considere longis mos erat et mensae credere adesse deos (_Fasti_, vi. 307),

and thus the idea was maintained that in some sense all meals had a sacred character, _i.e._ all in which the members of a _familia_ (see above, p. 78), or of _gens_ or _curia_, met together. Cp. R. Smith, _op. cit._ p.

261 foll. We may remember that the Penates were the spirits of the food itself, not merely of the place in which it was stored; it had therefore a sacred character, which is also shown by the sanctification of the firstfruits (_R.F._ pp. 151, 195). (The _cenae collegiorum_, dinners of collegia of priests, were in no sense sacrificial meals; see Marquardt, p. 231, note 7; Henzen, _Acta Fratr. Arv._ pp. 13, 39, 40.)

[352] Cic. _de Legibus_, ii. 8. 19.

[353] Livy i. 18. For const.i.tutional difficulties in this pa.s.sage, see, _e.g._, Greenidge, _Roman Public Life_, p. 50.

[354] For this and the augurs generally, see Lecture XII.

[355] The pa.s.sages are collected by Wissowa, _R.K._ p.

420, note 3. There is no doubt about the inauguratio of the three great flamines and the rex sacrorum, who were all specially concerned with sacrifice, and of the augurs, who would obviously need it in order to perform the same ceremony for others--as a bishop needs consecration for the same reason. As regards the pontifices, Dionysius (ii. 73. 3) clearly thought it was needed for them, and we might a priori a.s.sume that one who might become a pontifex maximus would need it; but Wissowa discounts Dionysius' opinion, and I am unwilling to differ from him on a point of the _ius divinum_, of which he is our best exponent. If he is right, it may be that the three _flamines maiores_, who were reckoned in strict religious sense as above the pontifices, including their head (Festus, p. 185), needed "holiness"

more than any pontifex, and so with the augurs. The insignia of the pontifices, as well as many historical facts, show that the pontifices were competent to perform sacrifice in a general sense (Marq. p. 248 foll.); but it is possible that they never had the right, like the flamines, actually to slay the victim. I do not feel sure that the _securis_ was really one of their symbols, though Horace seems to say so in _Ode_ iii. 23. 12. The whole question needs further investigation. It may be found that the essential distinction between the pontifices and magistrates _c.u.m imperio_ on the one hand, and the flamines on the other, is to be sought in the ideas of holiness connected with the shedding of blood in sacrifice. The flamen is permanently holy, having charge of constant sacrifices; _e.g._ the Dialis had duties every day. He is the duly sanctified guide for all rites within his own religious range.

[356] Wissowa, _R.K._ pp. 339, 410 foll.

[357] The whole subject of the preparation of the sacrificer for his work, and of the steps by which he becomes separated from the profane, is well treated by Hubert et Mauss, _Melanges d'histoire des religions_, p.

23 foll. The reference to Dr. Jevons is _Introduction_, ch. xx. p. 270 foll.

[358] Serv. _Aen._ xii. 173; Virgil wrote "dant fruges manibus salsas, et tempora ferro Summa notant pecudum"; to which Servius adds that the symbolic movement was a (pretended) cut from head to tail of the victim.

Wissowa, _R.K._ p. 352.

[359] Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl., s.v._ "cinctus Gabinus."

[360] Marquardt, p. 340. The Vestals were never, so far as we know, directly concerned in animal sacrifice.

[361] See below, p. 190. For the colour of the garments, and the explanation referred to, see Samter, _Familienfeste_, p. 40 foll.; Diels, _Sibyllinische Blatter_, p. 70; and cp. von Duhn's paper, "Rot und Tot"

in _Archiv_, 1906, p. 1 foll. That red colouring was used in various ways in sacred and quasi-sacred rites there is no doubt (see above, p. 89, note 46); but whether it can be always connected with bloodshed is by no means so certain (Rohde, _Psyche_, i. 226). In the case of women it is at least hard to understand. The idea of consecration through blood, which is very rare in Roman literature, comes out curiously in the words which Livy puts into the mouth of Virginius after the slaughter of his daughter (iii. 48): "Te Appi tuumque caput sanguine hoc consecro" (_i.e._ to a deity not mentioned). The sentence to which this note refers was written before the appearance of Messrs. Hubert et Mauss' essay on sacrifice (_Melanges d'histoire des religions_, pp. 1-122). The theory there developed, that the victim is the intermediary in all cases between the sacrificer and the deity, and that the _force religieuse_ pa.s.ses from one to the other in one direction or another, does not essentially differ from the words in the text; but the French savants would, I imagine, prefer to look on the insignia in a general sense as bringing the person wearing them within the region of the _sacrum_, the force of which would react on him still more strongly after the destruction of the victim (see p. 28 foll.).

[362] See, _e.g._, _Roman Sculpture_ by Mrs. Strong, Plates xi. and xv.

[363] For this and other insignia see Marquardt, p. 222 foll. The question is under discussion whether some of these insignia are not old Italian forms of dress (see Gruppe, _Mythologische Literatur_, 1898-1905, p. 343).

For the wearing of the skin of a victim, which meets us also at the Lupercalia (_R.F._ p. 311), see Robertson Smith, _Semites_, p. 416 foll.; Jevons, _Introduction_, p. 252 foll.; Frazer, _G.B._ iii. 136 foll.

[364] They, of course, wore the _praetexta_ when performing religious acts. Cp. the Fratres Arvales, who laid aside the _praetexta_ after sacrificing. Henzen, _Acta Fr. Arv._ pp. 11, 21, and 28.

[365] Serv. _Aen._ xi. 543. The _camillae_ a.s.sisted the _flaminicae_, Marquardt, p. 227. This is one of the most beautiful features of the stately Roman ritual, and has been handed on to the Roman Church. It was, of course, derived from the worship of the household (see above, p.

74).

[366] _Adonis, Attis, Osiris_, p. 413 foll. Dr. Frazer is criticising Dr. Farnell, who had touched on the subject in the _Hibbert Journal_ for 1907, p. 689, and had taken the more obvious view that death in a family disqualified for actions requiring extreme holiness.

[367] The pa.s.sages are collected in Marquardt, p. 174 foll.; we may notice in particular Livy xlv. 5. 4, where, though only the washing of hands is referred to, we have the important statement that "omnis praefatio sacrorum," _i.e._ the preliminary exhortation of the priest, enjoined _purae ma.n.u.s_. Livy must be using the language of Roman ritual, though he is not speaking here of a Roman rite. For the material of sacred utensils see Henzen, _Acta Fratr. Arv._ p. 30.

[368] Tibullus ii. 1. 11.

[369] Cic. _de Legibus_, ii. 10. 24.

[370] Westermarck, _Origin and Development of Moral Ideas_, ii. 352 foll.; consult the index for further allusions to the subject. Cp. Farnell, _Evolution of Religion_, Lecture III. [Fehrle, _Die kultische Keuschheit im Altertum_ (Giessen, 1910), has reached me too late for use in this chapter.]

[371] Full details, with the most important references quoted in full, are in Marquardt, p. 172 foll.; but some of the latter are applicable only to the Graeco-Roman period.

[372] So we may gather from the Lex Furfensis of 58 B.C.

(_C.I.L._ ix. 3513), and that of the Ara Augusti at Narbo of A.D. 12 (_C.I.L._ xii. 4333).

[373] The real origin of the pontifices and their name is unknown to us. If they took their name from the bridging of the Tiber, as Varro held (_L.L._ v. 83) and as the majority of scholars believe (see O. Gilbert, _Rom. Topographie_, ii. 220, note), the difficulty remains that they are found in such a city as Praeneste, where there was no river to be bridged, and where they could not well have been merely an offshoot from the Roman college; see Wissowa, _R.K._ p. 432, note. Nor can we explain how they came to be set in charge of the _ius divinum_; and where there are no data conjecture is useless.

[374] The covering of the head (_operto capite_, as opposed to _aperto capite_ of the _Graecus ritus_) is usually explained as meant to shut out all sounds belonging to the world of the _profanum_; and the playing of the tibicines is interpreted in the same way.

Hubert et Mauss explain the covered head differently: "le rituel romain prescrivit generalement l'usage du voile, signe de separation et partant de consecration"

(p. 28). Miss Harrison, _Prolegomena to_ _the Study of Greek Religion_, p. 522, also holds that it is the outward sign of consecration; cp. S. Reinach, _Cultes, mythes, et religions_, i. 300 foll. The fact, noted by Miss Harrison, that in Festus's account of the _ver sacrum_ (p. 379, ed. Muller) the children expelled were veiled, seems to point to the idea of dedication--unless, indeed, _velabant_ here means that they blindfolded them.

[375] The wine was poured over the altar as well as on the victim, which suggests a subst.i.tution for blood; Arn.o.bius vii. 29 and 30; Dion. Hal. vii. 72. I cannot find that any one of the many utensils used in sacrifice were for pouring out blood. Blood was, however, poured on the stone at the Terminalia (_R.F._ pp. 325-326); but the rite here described by Ovid seems to be a rural one, outside the _ius divinum_. In the sacrifice of victims to Hecate in Virg. _Aen._ vi. 243 foll., which cannot be _ritus Roma.n.u.s_, the warm blood is collected in _paterae_; but nothing is said of what was done with it, nor does Servius help. Cp. _Aen._ viii. 106. In Lucretius v. 1202, "aras sanguine multo spargere quadrupedum," the context shows that the ritual alluded to is not old Roman. In Livy's description of the "occulti paratus sacri" of the Samnites (ix. 41), we find "_respersae fando nefandoque sanguine arae_, et dira exsecratio ac furiale carmen." Livy seems to think of this blood-sprinkling, whether the blood be human or animal, as unusual and horrible. Ancient, no doubt, is the practice, recorded in the _Acta Fratr. Arv._ (see Henzen, pp. 21 and 23), of using the blood in a religious feast, in the process of cooking: "porcilias piaculares epulati sunt et sanguem." (There is a mention of the pouring of blood in an inscription from Lusitania in _C.I.L._ ii. 2395.) For the use of wine as a subst.i.tute for blood, see the recently published work of Karl Kircher, "Die sakrale Bedeuting des Weines," in _Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche, etc._, p. 82 foll., where, however, the subject is not worked out.

[376] According to Lubbert (_Commentarii pontificales_, p. 121 foll.) _magmentum_ is the same as _augmentum_, which word is also found (Varro, _L.L._ v. 112). Festus, p. 126, "magmentum magis augmentum"; Serv. _Aen._ iv.

57, to which pa.s.sage I shall return. For the equivalent in the Vedic ritual of the cooking and offering of the exta, see Hubert et Mauss, _op. cit._ p. 60 foll.

[377] _R.F._ p. 89.

[378] _ib._ p. 10.

[379] Buecheler, _Umbrica_, pp. 60, 69, etc. Of course the prayer might be said while other operations were going on. For the constant connection of prayer and sacrifice, see Pliny, _N.H._ xxviii. 10, "quippe victimam caedi sine precatione non videtur referre aut deos rite consuli." If Macrobius is right (iii. 2. 7 foll.) in a.s.serting that the prayer must be said while the priest's hand touches the altar, one may guess that this was done at the same time that the exta were laid on it. Ovid saw the priest at the Robigalia offer the exta and say the prayer at the same time (_Fasti_, iv.

905 foll.), but does not mention the hand touching the altar. For this see Serv. _Aen._ vi. 124; Horace, _Ode_ iii. 23. 17, and Dr. Postgate on this pa.s.sage in _Cla.s.sical Review_ for March 1910.

[380] Cato, _R.R._ 132, 134, 139, and 141. That these formulae were taken from the books of the pontifices is almost certain, not only from the internal evidence of the prayers themselves, but because Servius (Interpol.) on _Aen._ ix. 641 quotes the words: "macte hoc vino inferio esto," which occur in 132, introducing them thus: "et in pontificalibus sacrificantes dicebant deo...."

[381] The verb is omitted here for some ritualistic reason, as in the Iguvian prayers (_Umbrica_, p. 55).

[382] Virg. _Aen._ ix. 641, "macte nova virtute puer, sic itur ad astra," etc., and many other pa.s.sages. The verb _mactare_ acquired a general sense of sacrificial slaying, as did also _immolare_, though neither had originally any direct reference to slaughter. The best account I find of the word is in H. Nettleship's _Contributions to Latin Lexicography_, p. 520. He takes _mactus_ as the participle of a lost verb _maco_ or _mago_, to make great, increase, equivalent to _augeo_, which is also a word of semi-religious meaning, as Augustus knew. Nettleship quotes Cicero _in Vatinium_, 14, "puerorum extis deos manes mactare."

[383] Baehrens, _Fragm. Poet. Lat._ 180; Lusilius fragm.

143; Nonius, 341, 28 has "versibus."

[384] It may possibly be objected that some of the deities were powerful for evil as well as good, _e.g._ Robigus, the spirit of the red mildew, and that the power of such a deity was not to be encouraged or increased. But all such deities (and I cannot mention another besides Robigus) were of course conceived as able to restrain their own harmful function; they were not invoked to go away and leave the ager Roma.n.u.s in peace, but to limit their activity in the land where they had been settled for worship. We have no prayer to Robigus (or Robigo, feminine, as Ovid has it) except that which Ovid somewhat fancifully versified after hearing the Flamen Quirinalis say it (_Fasti_, iv. 911 foll.), in which of course the word _macte_ does not occur. As the victim was a dog, an uneatable one, it is possible that the ritual was not quite the usual one.

But the language of the prayer is interesting and brings out my point:

aspera Robigo, parcas Cerialibus herbis.

vis tua non levis est;...

parce precor, scabrasque ma.n.u.s a messibus aufer neve noce cultis: posse nocere sat est.

It concludes by praying Robigo to direct her strength and attention to other objects, _gladios et tela nocentia_; but this is the poet's fancy.

[385] _Evolution of Religion_, p. 212, quoting _Vedic Hymns_, pt. ii. pp. 259 and 391.