But at Praeneste, that remarkable town perched high upon the hills which
enclose the Latin Campagna to the north, we find a very remarkable form
of the Jupiter-cult, and one which must be mentioned here, puzzling and
even inexplicable as it certainly is. The great goddess of Praeneste was
Fortuna Primigenia—a cult-title which cannot well mean anything but
_first-born_[971]; and that she was, or came to be thought of as, the
first-born daughter of Jupiter is placed beyond a doubt by an
inscription of great antiquity first published in 1882[972]. But this is
not the only anomaly in the Jupiter-worship of Praeneste. There was
another cult of Fortuna, distinct, apparently, from that of Fortuna
Primigenia, in which she took the form not of a daughter but of a
mother, and, strange as it may seem, of the mother both of Jupiter and
Juno. On this point we have the explicit evidence of Cicero (_de
Divinatione_, 2. 85), who says, when speaking of the place where the
famous ‘sortes’ of Praeneste were first found by a certain Numerius
Suffustius: ‘Is est hodie locus saeptus religiose propter Iovis pueri
(sacellum?) qui lactens cum Iunone Fortunae in gremio sedens, castissime
colitur a matribus.’ Thus we have Fortuna worshipped in the same place
as the daughter and as the mother of Jupiter; and nowhere else in Italy
can we find a trace of a similar conception of the relations either of
these or any other deities. We cannot well reject the evidence of
Cicero, utterly unsupported though it be: we must face the difficulty
that we have here to account for the occurrence of a Jupiter who is the
child of Fortuna and also apparently the brother of Juno, as well as of
a Jupiter who is the father of Fortuna.
As regards this last feature, the fatherhood of Jupiter, Jordan says
emphatically[973]—and no scholar was more careful in his judgements—that
in the whole range of Italian religions ‘liberorum procreatio nulla est
unquam’: and he would understand ‘filia’ in the inscription quoted above
in a metaphorical rather than a physical sense. Yet however we choose to
think of it, Mommsen is justified in remarking[974] on the peculiarly
anthropomorphic idea of Fortuna (and we may add of Jupiter) at which the
Latins of Praeneste must have arrived, in comparison with the character
of Italian religion generally.
Even more singular than this is the sonship of Jupiter and the fact that
he appeared together with Juno in the lap of Fortuna ‘mammae appetens.’
Cicero’s language leaves no doubt that there was some work of art at
Praeneste in which the three were so represented, or believed to be
represented. Yet there are considerations which may suggest that we
should hesitate before hastily concluding that all this is a genuine
Italian development of genuine Italian ideas.
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
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account