This last example may suggest a hypothesis which is at least not likely
to do any serious harm. Let it be remembered that each curia was a
constituent part of the whole Roman community. We might naturally expect
to find a common religious meal of the same kind in which the _whole_
state took part through its magistrates and senate. This is just what we
do find in the epulum Jovis, though the character of its ceremonial is
different; and it is certainly possible that this epulum had its origin
in a feast like that which Dionysius saw, but one which afterwards
underwent vital changes at the hands of the Etruscan dynasty of Roman
kings. I am strongly inclined to believe that it was under the influence
of these kings that the meal came to take place on the Capitol, and in
the temple of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, which they intended to be the
new centre of the Roman dominion[951]; and to them also I would ascribe
the presence at the feast of the three deities in iconic form. It may be
that before that critical era in Roman history the epulum took place not
on the Capitol but in the Regia, which with the temple of Vesta hard by
formed the oldest centre of the united Rome; and that the presence of
Jupiter[952] or any other god was there a matter of belief, like that of
Vacuna with the Sabines, and not of the actual evidence of eyesight.
But this conjecture is a somewhat bold one; and it seems worth while to
take this opportunity of examining more closely into the cult of
Jupiter, with the object of determining whether the great god was apt,
in any part of Italy but Etruria, to lend himself easily to
anthropomorphic ideas and practices[953].
The cult of Jupiter is found throughout Italy under several forms of the
same name, with or without the suffix -piter = pater, which, so far as
we can guess, points to a conception of the god as protector, if not
originator, of a stock. This paternal title, which was applied to other
deities also, does not necessarily imply an early advance beyond the
‘daemonistic’ conception of divine beings; it rather suggests that some
one such being had been brought into peculiarly close relations with a
particular stock, and does no more than indicate a possibility of
further individual development in the future[954]. The ‘father’ in this
case has no wife, though we find the word ‘mater’ applied to
goddesses[955]; Juno is undoubtedly the female principle, but she is
not, as has so often been imagined, the wife of Jupiter. The attempt to
prove this by arguing from the Flamen Dialis and his wife the Flaminica
cannot succeed: the former was the priest of Jupiter, but his wife was
not the priestess of Juno[956]. There is indeed a certain mysterious
dualism of male and female among the old Italian divinities, as we know
from the _locus classicus_ in Gellius (_N. A._ 13. 23. 2); but we are
not entitled to say that the relation was a conjugal one[957].
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive