This, as Preller truly observes, is only a poetical way of expressing
his stubbornness, and his close relation to Jupiter, with whom he
continued to share the great temple. It seems certain that there was in
that temple a stone supposed to be that of Terminus, over which there
was a hole in the roof[1478]: for all sacrifice to Terminus must be made
in the open air.
Nunc quoque, se supra ne quid nisi sidera cernat,
Exiguum templi tecta foramen habent[1479].
Precisely the same feature is found in the cult of Semo Sancus or Dius
Fidius[1480], who was concerned with oaths and treaties; and of Hercules
we are told that the oath taken in his name must be taken out of
doors[1481].
Of the stone itself we know nothing. It is open to us to guess that it
was originally a boundary-stone, perhaps between the ager of the
Palatine city and that of the Quirinal. The mons Capitolinus seems to
have been neutral ground, as we may guess by the tradition of the asylum
there; it was outside the pomoerium, and in the early Republic was the
property of the priestly collegia[1482]. It was, therefore, a very
appropriate place for a terminus between two communities[1483].
From Ovid (679 foll.) we gather that there was a terminus-stone at the
sixth milestone on the via Laurentina, at which public sacrifices were
made, perhaps on the day of the Terminalia: this was probably at one
time the limit of the ager Romanus in that direction.
VI KAL. MART. (FEB. 24). N.
REGIF[UGIUM], (CAER. MAFF. PHILOC.) REGIFUGIUM, CUM TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
FERTUR AB URBE EXPULSUS. (SILV.)
This note of Silvius is based on a very old and natural misapprehension.
Ovid[1484], and probably most Romans, believed that the expulsion of
Tarquin was commemorated on this day. There is, however, strong indirect
evidence to show that the ‘flight of the king’ on Feb. 24 was something
very different.
1. We have already had a ‘flight of the people’ (Poplifugia) on July 5;
and we saw that this was probably a purificatory rite of which the
meaning had been lost—the sacrifice perhaps of a sacred animal followed
by the flight of the crowd as from a murder. It seems impossible, at any
rate unwise, to separate Poplifugia and Regifugium in general meaning,
for there is no other parallel to them in the calendar. Both were
explained historically by the Romans, because in both the obscure (and
perhaps obsolete) religious rite was inexplicable otherwise; and we must
also endeavour to treat both on the same principle.
2. It seems pretty clear that Verrius Flaccus did not believe in the
historical explanation of the Regifugium. In Festus, page 278, we find a
mutilated gloss which evidently refers to this day, and is thus
completed by Mommsen[1485]:—
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