of the Divalia; but the etymology of the latter is useless, and the
statement of Pliny as to the statue with the mouth gagged and sealed
fails to give us any clue to the nature or function of the
goddess[1213]. Angerona is, in fact, the North Pole of our exploration:
no one has ever reached her, and probably no one ever will. The mention
of Volupia by Macrobius gives no help; she is only elsewhere mentioned
as one of the numina of the Indigitamenta by Augustine[1214]. The only
possible clue is that of which Mommsen has taken advantage in the very
clever completion of Verrius’ last words, viz. the fact that this day
(21st) is the centre one of the winter solstice. He here even allows
himself an etymology, and derives Angeronalia ‘ab angerendo, id est ἀπὸ
τοῦ ἀναφέρεσθαι τὸν ἥλιον’: quoting Plutarch (_de Iside_, ch. 52) for
similar Egyptian ideas of the sun’s birth at this time. Though the
etymology may be doubtful, the inference from the date of the festival
is certainly acceptable, in the absence of anything more definite: and
the ‘Praenestine fragments’ clearly suggest the word ‘annus.’
X (ANTE CAES. VIII) KAL. IAN. (DEC. 23). NP.
LAR[ENTALIA]. (MAFF. PRAEN.)
Here again Praen. has a valuable note, which, in this case, is fairly
well preserved: FERIAE IOVI. ACCAE LARENTIAE. ... HANC ALII REMI ET
ROM[ULI NUTRICEM ALII] MERETRICEM, HERCULIS SCORTUM [FUISSE DIC]UNT:
PARENTARI EI PUBLICE, QUOD P[OPULUM] R[OMANUM] HE[REDEM FECE]RIT MAGNAE
PECUNIAE, QUAM ACCEPE[RAT TESTAME]NTO TARUTILI AMATORIS SUI[1215].
As regards the feriae Iovi we are utterly in the dark. Macrobius
explains it thus: ‘Iovique feriae consecratae, quod aestimaverunt
antiqui animas a Iove dari et rursus post mortem eidem reddi,’ which is
obviously a late invention. I can see no possible connexion of Jupiter
with the Larentalia, and believe the conjunction to be accidental.
Mommsen writes: ‘De origine Larentalium ipsiusque Larentinae indole ac
natura parum constat.’ He himself has investigated the myth of Acca
Larentia in a memorable essay[1216], and we may take his opinion on the
Larentalia as at present conclusive. It is to be noted, however, that
the view he formerly held as to the impossibility of connecting Lārentia
and Lāres[1217] is not re-asserted in the new edition of the _Corpus_
(vol i); the connexion, he says, may be right, but does not help us to
explain the ‘feriae Iovi’ or the parentatio (performance of funeral
rites) at the grave of Larentina (or Larentia).
This parentatio seems to me the one thing known to us about the
Larentalia which can possibly aid us. We are told by Varro that it took
place in the Velabrum, ‘qua in Novam viam exitur, ut aiunt quidam, ad
sepulcrum Accae[1218].’ The Flamen Quirinalis took part in it, and the
Pontifices[1219]. Now the Parentalia took place in February. Is it
possible that this is a survival from a time when it was in December—a
survival, because it was at the tomb of a semi-deity, and was a public
function[1220]? It is very curious that we have a record of a private
parentatio wilfully transferred from February to December, and probably
to this day. Cicero, in a mutilated passage from which Plutarch has
apparently drawn one of his ‘Roman Questions,’ seems to have stated that
Dec. Brutus (consul 138 B.C.) used to do his parentatio in
December[1221]. Whether Cicero was here alluding to the Larentalia we do
not know; but Plutarch notes the fact of the parentatio of Larentia in
December, and is led thereby to write the quaestio next in order on the
story of Larentia[1222]. Was the learned Brutus simply a pedant,
changing his parentatio to a date which he believed to be the real
original one, or had he some special reason for connecting his family
with December and Larentia?
However we may answer this question, there is, perhaps, a bare
possibility that the Larentalia was originally a feast of the dead of
the old Rome on the Palatine, preserved in the calendar of the completed
city only through the reputed survival of the tomb of Larentia in the
Velabrum at the foot of the rock.
Footnote 1110:
_R. R._ 1. 35. 2; Colum. 2. 8. 2.
Footnote 1111:
xi. 2.
Footnote 1112:
Cp. Hor. _Od._ 3. 18, 9-12. Ovid (_Fasti_, 3. 57) says of
December—Vester (i. e. Faustuli et Larentiae) honos veniet, cum
Larentalia dicam; _Acceptus Geniis_ illa December habet.
Is this only an allusion to Larentia and Faustulus, or also to the
general character of the month and its festivals?
Footnote 1113:
Plut. _Cic._ 19; Dio Cass. 37. 35.
Footnote 1114:
Cic. _ad Att._ 1. 12, and 15. 25.
Footnote 1115:
Cic. _de Harusp. resp._ 17. 37 ‘fit per Virgines Vestales, fit pro
populo Romano, fit in ea domo quae est in imperio.’ In 62 B.C. it was
in Caesar’s house, and apparently in the Regia, if as pontifix maximus
he resided there. See Marq. 346, note 1; 250, note 2.
Footnote 1116:
Fest. 245 _publica sacra_ are ‘quae _publico sumptu_ pro populo
fiunt.’ See my article ‘Sacra’ in _Dict. of Antiquities_.
Footnote 1117:
Juvenal, 2. 86.
Footnote 1118:
2. 83 foll.; 6. 314 foll.
Footnote 1119:
Probus on Virg. _Georg._ 1. 10 ‘In Italia quidam annuum sacrum, quidam
menstruum celebrant.’
Footnote 1120:
The word is ‘odore,’ i.e. sweet herbs of the garden (Marq. 169 and
note).
Footnote 1121:
See on Lupercalia, p. 312.
Footnote 1122:
Lev. 33. 42.
Footnote 1123:
The earliest hint of the connexion of Faunus with Evander and the
Palatine legend is found in a fragment of Cincius Alimentus, who wrote
at this time (H. Peter, _Fragm. Hist. Lat._ 41, from Servius, _Georg._
1. 10).
Footnote 1124:
Dion. Hal. 1. 31; Suet. _Vitell._ 1. Cp. for a more truly Italian
view, Virgil, _Aen._ 8. 314 foll.
Footnote 1125:
_Aen._ 7. 45 foll. The order was Saturnus, Picus, Faunus, Latinus.
Footnote 1126:
Wissowa in _Lex._ s. v. Faunus, 1458: who, however, does not
sufficiently explain the contrast. Silvanus became _tutor finium_, and
_cusios hortuli_ (cp. _Gromatici Veteres._ p. 302). It was probably
this turn given to his cult which saved him from the fate of Faunus.
He takes over definite duties to the cultivator, while Faunus is still
roaming the country in a wild state.
Footnote 1127:
Bouché-Leclercq, _Hist. de la Divination_, iv. 122.
Footnote 1128:
Ad _Georg._ 1. 10.
Footnote 1129:
Schwegler, _Röm. Gesch._ i. 351.
Footnote 1130:
Varro, _L. L._ 7. 36 ‘Faunos in silvestribus locis traditum est
solitos fari futura.’ Servius identifies Faunus and Fatuus; ad _Aen._
6. 775.
Footnote 1131:
‘Versibus quos olim Fauni vatesque canebant.’ Ennius in Varro, _L. L._
7. 36. See Nettleship, _Essays in Latin Literature_, p. 50 foll.
Footnote 1132:
Mannhardt, _A. W. F._ 113 foll.
Footnote 1133:
_L. L._ 7. 36.
Footnote 1134:
_Georg._ 1. 10. The introduction of the Greek Dryads may be thought to
throw suspicion upon the Latinity of these Fauni of Virgil. But in
_Aen._ 8. 314, the similar conjunction of Fauni and Nymphae is
followed by words which seem to mark a true Italian conception.
Footnote 1135:
_Lex._ s. v. Faunus, 1454.
Footnote 1136:
_Aen._ 8. 314.
Footnote 1137:
Cp. Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 315 ‘Di sumus agrestes et qui dominemur in altis
Montibus,’ &c. Cp. Preller, i. 386.
Footnote 1138:
_Monumenti Antichi_, vol. v. (Barnabei). Von Duhn, translated in
_Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 1896, p. 120 foll.
Footnote 1139:
_Röm. Myth._ i. 104 foll.
Footnote 1140:
Virg. _Aen._ 8. 601, and Serv.’s note: ‘Prudentiores dicunt eum esse
ὑλικὸν θέον, hoc est deum ὕλης.’ Silvanus may have been a true
tree-spirit; Mannhardt, _A. W. F._ 118 foll.; Preller, i. 392.
Footnote 1141:
Vol. i. 335, ed. Hauthal.
Footnote 1142:
See above, p. 126. It may be noticed that the Bona Dea, whose solemn
rite occurs also at the beginning of this month, was identified with
Fauna, the female form of Faunus (R. Peter, in _Lex._ s. v. Fauna); i.
e. their powers for good and evil were thought to be much alike.
Footnote 1143:
Preller, i. 381 and reff.
Footnote 1144:
See under Lupercalia, p. 320.
Footnote 1145:
Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 291 foll. I am glad to see that Wissowa accepts this
story as genuine Italian (_Lex._ s. v. 1456).
Footnote 1146:
Cic. _de Div._ 1. 101; Livy, 2. 7 (Silvanus), and Dion. Hal. 5. 16
(Faunus) of the battle by the wood of Arsia.
Footnote 1147:
_Fasti_, 4. 649 foll.
Footnote 1148:
_Aen._ 7. 81 foll.
Footnote 1149:
Calpurnius, _Ecl._ 1. 8 foll.
Footnote 1150:
Cp. Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 341 foll.; Sir A. Lyall, _Asiatic
Studies_, ch. 2.
Footnote 1151:
_Antike Wald- und Feldkulte_, p. 152.
Footnote 1152:
See the cuts of two bronze statuettes which Wissowa, following
Reifferscheid, believed to represent the un-Graecized Italian Faunus,
at the end of the article ‘Faunus’ in _Lex._ 1460. But it is at least
very doubtful whether Reifferscheid was right in his opinion.
Footnote 1153:
By an error Silvius has entered it on the 12th.
Footnote 1154:
For Inuus see on Lupercalia, and Livy, i. 5.
Footnote 1155:
_de Feriis_, xii. His other argument, that Inuus is not a nomen, but a
cognomen, is less satisfactory. Can we always be sure which is which?
(e. g. Saturnus, Janus).
Footnote 1156:
Festus, p. 340.
Footnote 1157:
_de Mensibus_, p. 118, ed. Bekk.; quoted by Mommsen, _C. I. L._ i 2,.
336.
Footnote 1158:
_L. L._ v. 41.
Footnote 1159:
Ibid. vi. 24.
Footnote 1160:
Antistius Labeo, ap. Festum, 348: ‘Septimontio, ut ait Antistius
Labeo, hisce montibus feriae. Palatio, cui sacrificium quod fit
Palatuar dicitur. Veliae, cui item sacrificium, Fagutali, Suburae,
Cermalo, Oppio, Cispio monti.’ Before ‘Cispio’ the MS. has ‘Caelio
monti,’ which must be a copyist’s blunder. The Subura is by courtesy a
_mons_; also a _pagus_ (Festus, 309), a _regio_ (ib.), and a _tribus_
(ib.).
Footnote 1161:
_Staatsrecht_, iii. 112. O. Gilbert has made a great to-do about the
development of these communities; _Gesch. u. Topogr._ i. 39 foll. But
where else will he find three distinct settlements in a space as small
as that of the Palatine? The discoveries at Falerii and Narce would
have saved him the labour of much web-spinning. Plutarch, _Q. R._ 69,
has (accidentally perhaps) expressed the matter rightly.
Footnote 1162:
_Monumenti Antichi_, vol. v. p. 15 foll.
Footnote 1163:
_Mon. Ant._ p. 110 foll. (Barnabei).
Footnote 1164:
Cic. _de Domo_, 28. 74.
Footnote 1165:
At Ariminum, and Antioch in Pisidia (Mommsen, _Staatsrecht_, iii. 113,
note).
Footnote 1166:
Festus, 348, cp. 245.
Footnote 1167:
Preller, i. 414.
Footnote 1168:
_Q. R._ 69. Plutarch does not say in what parts of the city the
vehicles were forbidden. The feast existed in his day, and indeed long
afterwards (Tertull. _Idololatr._ 10). It seems to have become a
general feast of the whole people.
Footnote 1169:
Macrob. i. 10. 2.
Footnote 1170:
See below on Saturnalia, p. 271.
Footnote 1171:
Macrob. 1. 10. 2. Macr. tells us that after the change some people in
error held the festival on the 19th, i. e. on the day which was now
xiv K. Ian.
Footnote 1172:
Hartmann, _Der Röm. Kalender_, p. 203 foll., thinks it was originally
one of the _feriae conceptivae_, like the Compitalia, Paganalia, &c.,
and only became fixed (_stativae_) when it was reorganized in 217 B.C.
But if so, why is it marked in the calendars in large letters? And
Hartmann himself points out (p. 208) that Dec. 17 is the first day of
Capricornus, i. e. the coldest season, which in the oldest natural
reckoning would be likely to fix the day (Colum. 11. 2. 94).
Footnote 1173:
Macr. l. c.; Cic. _Att._ 13. 52.
Footnote 1174:
Mommsen, _C. I. L._ i. 337.
Footnote 1175:
Frazer, _Golden Bough_, ii. 172; Brand, _Popular Antiquities_, ch. 13;
Usener, _Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen_, 1. 214 foll. See for
Italy, _Academy_, Jan. 20, 1888.
Footnote 1176:
_C. I. L._ i. 48. But Prof. Gardner tells me that the reading Saet. is
not certain.
Footnote 1177:
Macrob. 1. 10. 19 foll.; 1. 7. 24 and 25; Marq. p. 11 note 3. The
conjunction of Ops with him in this function is rejected (rightly, I
think) by Wissowa, _de Feriis_, iv. But see below on Opalia.
Footnote 1178:
Jordan’s note on Preller, ii. 10.
Footnote 1179:
e. g. Virg. _Aen._ 8. 321.
Footnote 1180:
See, however, Schwegler, _R. G._ i. 223 foll.
Footnote 1181:
Varro, _L. L._ 5. 42; Dion. Hal. i. 34 (cp. 6. 1); Fest. 322; Solinus,
1. 13; Servius, _Aen._ 2. 115; Middleton, _Rome in 1885_, p. 166.
Footnote 1182:
R. Peter, s. v. Dis in _Lex._ 1181; Macr. 1. 11. 48.
Footnote 1183:
Lucan, 3. 153; Middleton, op. cit. 167.
Footnote 1184:
Preller, ii. 13; i. 182.
Footnote 1185:
The temple was traditionally dated B.C. 497 (Livy, 2. 21); cp. Aust,
_de Aedibus sacris_, p. 4: so too the festival, though both had an
older origin (Ambrosch. _Stud._ 149). The latter was reorganized in
Greek fashion in obedience to a Sibylline oracle in B.C. 217 (Livy,
22. 1).
Footnote 1186:
Plut. _Q. R._ 34 notes the cult of such gods when all fruits have been
gathered.
Footnote 1187:
Macr. 1. 8. 3 and 1. 16. 30 (also, but probably in error, attributed
to Jupiter). Plut. _Q. R._ 42, and _Poplic._ 12, states it distinctly;
but there is no indication of the source from which he drew.
Footnote 1188:
Cp. the legendary connexion of both with ship-building and the coining
of money; though it is of course possible that this was simply
suggested by the Janus-head and the ship of early Roman coins.
Footnote 1189:
Seneca, _Ep._ 18. 1. Martial is full of Saturnalian allusions; e. g.
12. 62.
Footnote 1190:
Popularized, of course, by the poets: Virg. _Georg._ ii. 538; Tibull.
i. 3. 35; &c.
Footnote 1191:
Was this one of the reasons why Christmas was fixed at the winter
solstice? Cp. John Chrysostom, tom. iii. 497e: quoted by Usener, op.
cit. p. 217.
Footnote 1192:
Varro, _R. R._ 1. 35. 2 ‘Dum in xv diebus ante et post brumam ut
pleraque ne facias.’ Columella, 2. 8. 2, seems to follow Varro. Virg.
_Georg._ 1. 211 extends the time ‘usque sub extremum brumae
intractabilis imbrem’ (cp. Serv. ad loc.).
Footnote 1193:
_Sat._ i. 10. 19 and 22, and Dion. Hal. 3. 32; Plut. _Q. R._ 34.
Footnote 1194:
See Marquardt’s excellent summary in _Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 357, and
Preller, ii. 15 foll.
Footnote 1195:
Dion. Hal. 6. 1. Fasti Amit. Dec. 17. We do not know who was the
sacrificing priest; perhaps the Rex Sacrorum, or a magistrate.
Footnote 1196:
Macrob. 1. 10. 18.
Footnote 1197:
Martial, 14. 1; at least this seems to be the inference from
‘Synthesibus dum gaudet eques dominusque senator.’ Cp 6. 24.
Footnote 1198:
Livy, 22. 1. 19 ‘lectisternium imperatum et convivium publicum.’
Footnote 1199:
Tertull. _Apol._ 42.
Footnote 1200:
_Odes_, 3. 17. Cp. Martial, 14. 70. The pig-offering indicates an
earth-deity: Henzen, _Acta Fratr. Arv._ p. 22; Marq. 173.
Footnote 1201:
Martial, bk. 14, is the _locus classicus_ for all this.
Footnote 1202:
Brand, _Pop. Ant._ 183.
Footnote 1203:
Macr. i. 10. 24; 11. 49. In the latter passage he says ‘quae homines
pro se atque suis piaculum pro Dite Saturno facerent.’
Footnote 1204:
Brand, 180.
Footnote 1205:
Marq. 192, and the passages there quoted.
Footnote 1206:
_Sat._ 1. 7. 37. For later evidence see Marq. 588.
Footnote 1207:
p. 50, and note 13.
Footnote 1208:
_C. I. L._ i 2. 337.
Footnote 1209:
O. Gilbert (1. 247 note) holds this latter view.
Footnote 1210:
_Ephem. Epigr._ 1. 37. Wissowa (_de Feriis_, v) points out that all
such entries, in which the god’s name in the dative is followed by the
place of sacrifice, apply to consecrated temples only—and the Regia
was not one.
Footnote 1211:
Aust, _de Aedibus sacris Populi Romani_, p. 40. Wissowa, l. c., who
should not, I think, write of an aedes _in foro_.
Footnote 1212:
Varro, _L. L._ 6. 23 ‘Angeronalia ab Angerona, cui sacrificium fit in
curia Acculeia et cuius feriae publicae is dies.’ Pliny, _N. H._ 3. 5.
65 ‘Nomen alterum dicere [nisi] arcanis caerimoniarum nefas habetur;
... non alienum videtur hoc loco exemplum religionis antiquae ob hoc
maxime silentium institutae; namque diva Angerona, cui sacrificatur
a.d. xii Kal. Ian., ore obligato obsignatoque simulacrum habet.’ Macr.
_Sat._ i. 10 ‘xii (Kal. Ian.) feriae sunt divae Angeroniae, cui
pontifices in sacello Volupiae sacrum faciunt; quam Verrius Flaccus
Angeroniam dici ait, quod angores ac sollicitudines animorum
propitiata depellat.’
Footnote 1213:
See Wissowa, s. v. Angerona, _Lex._ 350.
Footnote 1214:
_Civ. Dei_, 4. 8.
Footnote 1215:
Macrob. _Sat._ 1. 10. 11; Fest. 119; and Lact. _Inst._ 1. 20. 4
mention the Larentalia.
Footnote 1216:
_Röm. Forschungen_, vol. ii. p. 1 foll. See also Roscher, s. v. in
_Lex._ 5.
Footnote 1217:
Cp. Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 55.
Footnote 1218:
_L. L._ 6. 23. The passage is in part hopelessly corrupt.
Footnote 1219:
Gellius, _N. A._ 7. 7; for the Flamen Quir. cf. Gilbert, 1. 88. Cic.
_Ep. ad Brut._ 1. 15. 8. Varro, l. c. says vaguely ‘sacerdotes
nostri.’ Plut. _Romulus_, 4, gives ὁ τοῦ Ἄρεος ἱερεύς, wrongly.
Footnote 1220:
‘Sacerdotes nostri publice parentant’ (Varro, l. c.).
Footnote 1221:
Cic. _de Legibus_, 2. 21. 54; Plut. _Q. R._ 34.
Footnote 1222:
Plutarch is often led on in this work from one question to another by
something he finds in the book he is consulting for the first.
MENSIS IANUARIUS.
The period of winter leisure which began for the agriculturist in
December continued into January. From the solstice to Favonius (i. e.
Feb. 7) is Varro’s eighth and last division of the agricultural year, in
which there is no hard work to be done out of doors (_R. R._ i. 36: cf.
Virg. _Georg._ 1. 312; Colum. xi. 2). So too the rustic calendars;
‘palus aquitur, salix harundo caedetur.’ Columella tells us, however,
that if the weather be favourable, it may be possible from the Ides of
January ‘auspicari culturarum officia.’ We have seen that in December
this easy time was occupied with a series of religious rites of such
extreme antiquity that their meaning was almost entirely lost for the
Roman of later ages. After the solstice this series cannot be said to
continue: the calendars have only three festivals in January marked with
large letters, the Agonia on the 9th, and the two Carmentalia on the
11th and 15th. On the other hand, there were two _feriae conceptivae_ in
this month which do not appear in the calendars; the Compitalia (which
might, however, fall before the beginning of the month), and the
Paganalia towards the end of it. Both these were originally festive
meetings in which rural folk took part together, and seem to indicate
that agricultural labours had not yet really begun.
KAL. IAN. (JAN. 1). F.
[AESCU]LAPIO, VEDIOVI IN INSULA. (PRAEN.)
This temple of Vediovis was vowed by the praetor L. Furius Purpureo in
200 B.C., and dedicated six years later[1223]. For this obscure deity
see on May 21. The connexion between him and Aesculapius (if there were
any) is unexplained. The latter was a much older inhabitant of the Tiber
island (291 B.C.), and became in time the special deity of that
spot[1224], which is called by Dionys. (5. 13) νῆσος εὐμεγέθης Ἀσκληπιοῦ
ἱερά. Is it possible that an identification of Vediovis with
Apollo[1225]—so often a god of pestilence—brought the former to the
island seat of the healing deity? The connexion between Apollo and
Aesculapius is well known.
Another invasion of the island took place almost at the same time. In
194 B.C. a temple of Faunus was dedicated there which had been vowed two
years earlier[1226]; and it may be worth noting that Faunus also had
power to avert pestilence and unfruitfulness, as is seen in the story of
Numa and the Faunus-oracle. (Ovid, _Fasti_, 4. 641 foll.)
On Jan. 1, under the later Republic, i. e. after the year 153 B.C., in
and after which the consuls began their year of office on this day, it
was the custom to give New Year presents by way of good omen, called
_strenae_[1227]; a word which survives in the French _étrennes_. It is
likely enough that the custom was much older than 153 B.C.: the word was
said to be derived from a Sabine goddess Strenia, whose sacellum at the
head of the Via Sacra is mentioned by Varro (_L. L._ v. 47[1228]), and
from whose grove certain sacred twigs were carried to the arx (in
procession along the Sacred Way?) at the beginning of each year[1229].
But we are not told whether this latter rite always took place on Jan.
1, or was transferred to that day from some other in 153 B.C.
III NON. IAN.-NON. IAN. (JAN. 3-5). C.
3 LUDI } LUDI }
4 LUDI }(PHILOC.) LUDI COMPITALES } (SILV.)
5 LUDI } (COMITALIS, MS.)
The Compitalia were not _feriae stativae_ until late in the Empire, and
then perhaps only so by tradition[1230]. They took place at some date
between the Saturnalia (Dec. 17) and Jan. 5; and we may infer from
Philocalus and Silvius as quoted above that the tendency was to put them
late in that period. Not being a great state-festival, they could be put
between Kalends and Nones.
The original meaning of _compitum_ is explained by the Scholiast on
Persius, 4. 28[1231] ‘Compita sunt loca in quadriviis, quasi turres, ubi
sacrificia, finita agricultura, rustici celebrabant.... Compita sunt non
solum in urbe loca, sed etiam viae publicae ac diverticulae aliquorum
confinium, ubi aediculae consecrantur patentes. In his fracta iuga ab
agricolis ponuntur, velut emeriti et elaborati operis indicium[1232].’
From this we gather that where country cross-roads met, or where in the
parcelling out of agricultural allotments one semita crossed
another[1233], some kind of altar was erected and the spot held sacred.
This is quite in keeping with the usage of other peoples: the ‘holiness’
of cross-roads is a well-known fact in folk-lore[1234]. It may be
doubted, however, whether the Scholiast is right in his explanation of
the ‘fracta iuga,’ which may rather have been used as a spell of some
kind, than as ‘emeriti operis indicium.’ Thus Crooke[1235] mentions an
Indian practice of fixing up a harrow perpendicularly where four roads
met, apparently with the object of appeasing the rain-god.
In the city of Rome the _compita_ were the meeting-places of _vici_
(streets with houses), where sacella were erected to the Lares
compitales[1236]—two in each case. For the inhabitants of the vici which
thus crossed each other, the compitum was the religious centre; and thus
arose a quasi-religious organization, which, as including the lowest of
the population and even slaves[1237], became of much importance in the
revolutionary period in connexion with the machinery of electioneering.
The ‘collegia compitalicia’ were abolished by the Senate in B.C. 64, and
reconstituted in B.C. 58 by a bill of Clodius _de collegiis_. Caesar
again prohibited them, and the ludi compitalicii with them; but the
latter were once more revived by Augustus and made part of his general
reorganization of the city and its worship[1238].
The Compitalia, which the Romans ascribed to Servius Tullius or
Tarquinius Superbus[1239], was probably first organized as part of the
religious system of the united city in the Etruscan period, though it
doubtless had its origin in the rustic ideas and practice of which we
get a glimpse in the passage quoted from the Scholiast on Persius. Two
features of it seem to fit in conveniently with this conjecture: (1)
that already mentioned, that even the slaves had a part in it, as well
as the plebs; (2) the fact that the _magistri vicorum_, who were
responsible for the festival, wore the _toga praetexta_ on the day of
its celebration[1240]—which looks like a Tarquinian innovation in an
anti-aristocratic sense.
V ID. IAN. (JAN. 9). NP?
AGON. (MAFF. PRAEN.) A mutilated note in Praen. gives the word Agonium.
It may be doubted whether the Roman scholars themselves knew for certain
what was meant by AGON, and whether the explanations they give are
anything better than guesses based on analogy[1241]. Ovid calls the day
‘dies agonalis’:
Ianus agonali luce piandus erit (_Fasti_, 1. 318).
Nomen agonalem credit habere diem (Ibid. 1. 324).
and gives a number of amusing derivations which prove his entire
ignorance. Festus[1242] gives Agonium as the name of the day (which
agrees with Verrius in Fast. Praen.), and says that _agonia_ was an old
word for hostia. Varro calls the day ‘agonalis’[1243]; Ovid in another
place Agonalia[1244]. A god Agonius mentioned by St. Augustine[1245] is
probably only an invention of the pontifices. The fact is that the
Romans knew neither what the real form of the word was, nor what it
meant. The attempt to explain it by the apparitor’s word at a sacrifice,
_agone_? (shall I slay?) is still approved by some, but is quite
uncertain[1246].
The original meaning of the word, if it ever were in common use, must
have vanished long before Latin was a written language. The only traces
of it, besides its appearance in the calendars, are in the traditional
name for the Quirinal hill, Collis Agonus, in its gate, ‘porta
agonensis,’ and its college of Salii agonenses[1247]. It would seem thus
to have had some special connexion with the Colline city.