Chapter III: Part 3

[RECTIUS TAMEN ALII PUTARUNT DICTUM AB EO QUOD HIC DIES EST POST DIEM V IDUS. QUO]D IN LATIO POST [IDUS DIES SIMILI FERE RATIONE DECLI]NARENTUR.

FERIAE MARTI (VAT.)

[SALI] FACIUNT IN COMITIO SALTUS [ADSTANTIBUS PO]NTIFICIBUS ET TRIB[UNIS] CELER[UM]. Praen., in which we find yet another note: ARTIFICUM DIES [QUOD MINERVAE] AEDIS IN AVENTINO EO DIE EST [DEDICATA].

The original significance of this day is indicated by the note Feriae Marti in Vat., and also by that in Praen., which has been amplified with tolerable certainty. The Salii were active this day in the worship of Mars, and the scene of their activity was the _Comitium_. With this agrees, as Mommsen has pointed out, the statement of Varro[158] that the _Comitium_ was the scene of some of their performances, though he does not mention which. More light is thrown on the matter by the grammarian Charisius[159], who, in suggesting an explanation of the name Quinquatrus by which this day was generally known, remarks that it was derived from a verb _quinquare_, to purify, ‘quod eo die arma ancilia lustrari sint solita.’ His etymology is undoubtedly wrong, but the reason given for it is valuable[160]. The ancilia were purified on this day (perhaps by the Salii dancing around them), and thus it exactly answers to the Armilustrium on Oct. 19, just as the horse-races on the Ides of March, if that indeed were the original day, correspond to the ceremony of the ‘October horse’[161].

The object and meaning of the lustratio in each case is not, however, quite clear. Since in March the season of war began, and ended, no doubt, originally in October[162], and as the Salii seem to be a kind of link between the religious and military sides of the state’s life, we are tempted to guess that the lustration of the ancilia represented in some way the lustration of the arms of the entire host, or perhaps that the latter were all lustrated so as to be ready for use, on this day, and once again on Oct. 19 before they were put away for the winter. In this latter case the Salii would be the leaders of, as well as sharers in, a general purifying process. And that this is the right view seems to be indicated by Verrius’ note in the Praenestine calendar, from which it is clear that the _tribuni celerum_ were present, and took some part in the ceremony. These tribuni were almost certainly the three leaders of the original cavalry force of the three ancient tribes, and they seem to have united both priestly and military characteristics[163]; and from their presence in the Comitium may perhaps also be inferred that of the leaders of the infantry _tribuni militum_. In the earliest times, therefore, the arms of the whole host may have been lustrated in the presence of its leaders, the Salii, so to speak, performing the service; but in later times the Salii alone were left, and their arms alone lustrated, though possibly individuals representing the ancient _tribuni celerum_ may have appeared as congregation.

But this day was generally known as Quinquatrus, simply because it was the fifth day after the Ides[164]; i.e. there was a space of three days between the Ides and the festival. Such intervals of three days, either between the Ides and the festival or between one festival and another, occur several times in the Roman calendar[165], though in this instance alone the day following the interval appears in the calendars as Quinquatrus. The term was no doubt a pontifical one, and the meaning was unknown to the common people; in any case it came to be misunderstood, and was in later times popularly applied to the four days following the festival as well as the festival itself; its first syllable being taken to indicate a five-day period instead of the fifth day after the Ides. This popular mistake led to still further confusion owing to a curious change in the religious character of these days, about the nature of which there can be no serious doubt.

The 19th came to be considered as sacred to Minerva[166], because a temple to that goddess was consecrated on this day, on the Caelian or the Aventine, or possibly both[167]. There is no obvious connexion between Mars and Minerva; and it is now thought probable that Minerva has here simply taken the place of another goddess, Nerio—one almost lost to sight in historical times, but of whose early connexion with Mars some faint traces are to be found. Thus where we find Minerva brought into close relation with Mars, as in the myth of Anna Perenna, it is thought that we should read Nerio instead of Minerva[168]. This conclusion is strengthened by a note of Porphyrion on Horace _Epist._ ii. 2. 209 ‘Maio mense religio est nubere, et etiam Martio, in quo de nuptiis habito certamine a Minerva Mars victus est: obtenta virginitate Neriene est appellata.’ As Neriene must = Nerio[169], this looks much like an attempt to explain the occurrence of two female names, Minerva and Nerio, in the same story; the original heroine, Nerio, having been supplanted by the later Minerva[170].

Of this Nerio much, perhaps too much, has been made in recent years by ingenious scholars. A complete love-story has been discovered, in which Mars, at first defeated in his wooing, as Porphyrion tells us in the passage just quoted, eventually becomes victorious; for Nerio is called wife of Mars in a fragment of an old comedy by Licinius Imbrex, in a passage of Plautus, and in a prayer put into the mouth of Hersilia by Gellius the annalist, when she asked for peace at the hand of T. Tatius[171]. And this story has been fitted on, without sufficient warrant, to the Mars-festivals of this month. Mars is supposed to have been born on the Kalends, to have grown wondrously between Kalends and Ides, to have fallen then in love with Nerio, to have been fooled as we saw by Anna Perenna, to have been rejected and defeated by his sweetheart, and finally to have won her as his wife on the 19th[172]. Are we to find here a fragment of real Italian mythology, or an elaborate example of the Graecizing anthropomorphic tendencies of the third and second centuries B.C.?

The question is a difficult one, and lies rather outside the scope of this work. Those who have read Usener’s brilliant paper will find it hard to shake themselves free of the conviction that he has unearthed a real myth, unless they carefully study the chapter of Aulus Gellius which is its chief foundation. Such a study has brought me back to the conviction that Plautus and the others were writing in terms of the fashionable modes of thought of their day, and were not appealing to popular ideas of the relations of Italian deities to each other[173]. Aulus Gellius begins by quoting a _comprecatio_ from the book of the _Libri sacerdotum populi Romani_. ‘In his scriptum est: Luam Saturni, Salaciam Neptuni, Horam Quirini, Virites Quirini, Maiam Volcani, Heriem Iunonis, Moles Martis Nerienemque Martis.’ A glance at the names thus coupled together is enough to show that Mars is not here thought of as the husband of Neriene; the names Lua, Salacia, &c., seem rather to express some characteristic of the deity with whose name they are joined or some mode of his operation[174]; and Gellius himself, working on an etymology of Nerio which has generally been accepted as correct, explains the name thus: ‘Nerio igitur Martis vis et potentia et maiestas quaedam esse Martis demonstratur.’ In the latter part of his chapter, after quoting Plautus, he says that he has heard the poet blamed by an eminent critic for the strange and false notion that Nerio was the wife of Mars; but he is inclined to think that there was a real tradition to that effect, and cites his namesake the annalist and Licinius Imbrex in support of his view.

But neither annalist nor play-writer can stand against that passage from the sacred books with which he began his chapter; and if we give the latter its due weight, the value of the others is relatively diminished. It appears to me that the one represents the true primitive Italian idea of divine powers, which with its abundance of names offered excellent opportunities to anthropomorphic tendencies of the Graecizing school, while the others show those tendencies actually producing their results. Any conclusion on the point must be of the nature of a guess; but I am strongly disposed to think (1) that Nerio was not originally an independent deity, but a name attached to Mars expressive of some aspect of his power, (2) that the name gradually became endowed with personality, and (3) that out of the combination of Mars and Nerio the Graecizing school developed a myth of which the fragments have been taken by Usener and his followers as pure Roman.

Having once been displaced by Minerva, Nerio vanished from the calendar, and with her that special aspect of Mars—whatever it may have been—which the name was intended to express. The five days, 18th to 23rd, became permanently associated with Minerva. The 19th was the dedication-day of at least one of her temples, and counted as her birthday[175]: the 23rd was the Tubilustrium, with a sacrifice to ‘dea fortis,’ who seems to have been taken for Minerva, owing to an incorrect idea that the latter was specially the deity of trumpet-players[176]. She was no doubt an old Italian deity of artificers and trade-guilds; but the Tubilustrium was really a Mars-festival, and Minerva had no immediate connexion with it.

X KAL. APR. (MARCH 23). NP.

TUBILUST[RIUM]. (CAER. MAFF. VAT. FARN. MIN. III.) TUBILUSTRIUM. (PHILOC.)

Note in Praen.: [FERIAE] MARTI[177]. HIC DIES APPELLATUR ITA, QUOD IN ATRIO SUTORIO TUBI LUSTRANTUR, QUIBUS IN SACRIS UTUNTUR. LUTATIUS QUIDEM CLAVAM EAM AIT ESSE IN RUINIS PALA[TI I]NCENSI A GALLIS REPERTAM, QUA ROMULUS URBEM INAUGURAVERIT.

IX KAL. APR. (MARCH 24). NP.

Q. R. C. F. (VAT. CAER.)

Q. REX. C. F. (MAFF. PRAEN.)

Note in Praen.: HUNC DIEM PLERIQUE PERPERAM INTERPRETANTES PUTANT APPELLAR[I] QUOD EO DIE EX COMITIO FUGERIT [REX: N]AM NEQUE TARQUINIUS ABIIT EX COMITIO [URBIS], ET ALIO QUOQUE MENSE EADEM SUNT [IDEMQUE S]IGNIFICANT. QU[ARE COMITIIS PERACTIS IUDICI]A FIERI INDICA[RI IIS MAGIS PUTAMUS][178].

These two days must be taken in connexion with the 23rd and 24th of May, which are marked in the calendars in exactly the same way. The explanation suggested by Mommsen is simple and satisfactory[179]; the 24th of March and of May were the two fixed days on which the _comitia curiata_ met for the sanctioning of wills[180] under the presidency of the Rex. The 23rd in each month, called Tubilustrium, would be the day of the lustration of the _tubae_ or _tubi_ used in summoning the assembly. The letters Q. R. C. F. (quando rex comitiavit fas) mean that on the days so marked proceedings in the courts might only begin when the king had dissolved the Comitia.

The _tuba_, as distinguished from the _tibia_, which was the typical Italian instrument, was a long straight tube of brass with a bell mouth[181]. It was used chiefly in military[182] and religious ceremonies; and as the _comitia curiata_ was an assembly both for military and religious objects, this would suit well with Mommsen’s idea of the object of the lustration. The Tubilustrium was the day on which these instruments, which were to be used at the meeting of the comitia on the following day, were purified by the sacrifice of a lamb. Of the Atrium Sutorium, where the rite took place, we know nothing.

There are some words at the end of Verrius’ note in the Praenestine Calendar, which, as Mommsen has pointed out[183], come in abruptly and look as if something had dropped out: ‘Lutatius quidem clavam eam ait esse in ruinis Pala[ti i]ncensi a Gallis repertam, qua Romulus urbem inauguraverit.’ This _clava_ must be the _lituus_ of Romulus, mentioned by Cicero[184], which was found on the Palatine and kept in the Curia Saliorum. We cannot, however, see clearly what Verrius or his excerptor meant to tell us about it; there would seem to have been a confusion between _lituus_ in the sense of _baculum_ and _lituus_ in the sense of a _tuba incurva_. The latter was in use as well as the ordinary straight _tuba_[185]; in shape it closely resembled the _clava_ of the augur, and perhaps the resemblance led to the notion that it was the _clava_ of Romulus and not a _tuba_ which was this day purified with the other _tubae_.

* * * * *

We can learn little or nothing from the calendar of this month about the origin of Mars, and we have no other sufficient evidence on which to base a satisfactory conjecture. But from the cults of the month, and partly also from those of October, we can see pretty clearly what ideas were prominent in his worship even in the early days of the Roman state. They were chiefly two, and the two were closely connected. He was the Power who must be specially invoked to procure the safety of crops and cattle; and secondly, in his keeping were the safety and success of the freshly-enrolled host with its armour and its trumpets. In short, he was that deity to whom the most ancient Romans looked for aid at the season when all living things, man included, broke into fresh activity. He represents the characteristics of the early Roman more exactly than any other god; for there are two things which we may believe with certainty about the Roman people in the earliest times—(1) that their life and habits of thought were those of an agricultural race; and (2) that they continually increased their cultivable land by taking forcible possession in war of that of their neighbours.

Footnote 61:

See Nissen, _Italienische Landeskunde_, i. 404; Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 235—

Quid, quod hiems adoperta gelu tunc denique cedit,
Et pereunt victae sole tepente nives,
Arboribus redeunt detonsae frigore frondes,
Uvidaque in tenero palmite gemma tumet:
Quaeque diu latuit, nunc se qua tollat in auras,
Fertilis occultas invenit herba vias.
Nunc fecundus ager: pecoris nunc hora creandi,
Nunc avis in ramo tecta laremque parat.
Tempora iure colunt Latiae fecunda parentes
Quarum militiam votaque partus habet.

Here we have the fertility of man, beast, and crop, all brought
together: the poet is writing of March 1. The Romans reckoned spring
from Favonius (Feb. 7) to about May 10 (Varro, _R. R._ 1. 38); March 1
would therefore usually be a day on which its first effects would be
obvious to every one.

Footnote 62:

Sat. 1. 12. 6; Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 135 foll.

Footnote 63:

Ovid only mentions one ‘curia’: in Macrobius the word is in the
plural. Ovid must, I think, refer to the curia Saliorum on the
Palatine (Marq. 431), as this was the day on which the Salii began
their rites. Macrobius may be including the curia of the Quirinal
Salii (Preller, i. 357).

Footnote 64:

See below, on the Vestalia in June, p. 147.

Footnote 65:

Julius Obsequens, 19.

Footnote 66:

Roscher, _Myth. Lex._ s. v. Mars, 2427. Roscher regards the use of
laurel in the Mars-cult as parallel with that in the Apollo-cult and
not derived from it. The point is not however certain. The laurel was
used as an ἀποτρόπαιον at the Robigalia, which seems closely connected
with the Mars-cult (Plin. _N. H._ 18, 161); here it could hardly have
been taken over from the worship of Apollo.

Footnote 67:

Mommsen, _C. I. L._ 254.

Footnote 68:

_Fasti_, 5. 253. There is a good parallel in Celtic mythology: the
wife of Llew the Sun-hero was born of flowers (Rhys, _Celt. Myth._
384). The myth is found in many parts of the world (_Lang_, ii. 22,
and note).

Footnote 69:

By Usener, in his remarkable paper in _Rhein. Museum_, xxx. 215 foll.,
on ‘Italische Mythen.’ He unluckily made the mistake of supposing that
Ovid told this story under June 1 (i. e. _nine months_ before the
supposed birthday of Mars). There is indeed a kind of conjunction of
June and Mars on June 1, as both had temples dedicated on that day;
but neither of these can well be earlier than the fourth century B.C.,
and no one would have thought of them as having any bearing on the
birth of Mars but for Usener’s blunder (Aust, _de Aedibus sacris Pop.
Rom._ pp. 8 and 10, and his valuable note in Roscher’s article on
Mars, p. 2390). Usener also adduces the derivation of Gradivus in
Fest. 97 ‘quia gramine sit ortus.’

Footnote 70:

The practical Roman mind applied the myth chiefly to the history of
its _state_, and in such a way that its true mythic character was
lost, or nearly so. What became in Greece mythic literature became
quasi-history at Rome. Thus it is that Romulus is so closely connected
with Mars in legend: the race-hero and the race-god have almost a
mythical identity. The story of the she-wolf may be at least as much a
myth of the birth of Mars as Ovid’s story of Juno, in spite of the
fatherhood of Mars in that legend.

Footnote 71:

Aust, as quoted above. The date was probably 379 B.C. (Plin. _N. H._
16. 235).

Footnote 72:

Roscher in _Lex._ s. v. Juno, p. 576.

Footnote 73:

Marq. 571, where is a list of passages referring to these gifts. Some
are familiar, e. g. Horace, _Od._ 3. 8, and Juvenal, 9. 53 (with the
scholiast in each case).

Footnote 74:

_Schol. Cruq._ on Horace, l. c., and the scholiast on Juvenal, l. c.

Footnote 75:

See e. g. the mysterious scene on a cista from Praeneste given in
Roscher, _Lex._ 2407, to which the clue seems entirely lost.

Footnote 76:

_Lex._ s. v. Mars, 2399; s. v. Juno, 584.

Footnote 77:

Ovid, 3. 351 foll.; Plut. _Numa_, 13.

Footnote 78:

Dion. Hal. 2. 71.

Footnote 79:

Ovid, l. c. 381 foll.

Footnote 80:

Marq. 430, and note.

Footnote 81:

Festus, p. 131; Usener in _Rhein. Mus._ xxx. 209 foll. Wordsworth,
_Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin_, p. 564 foll. Jordan
(Preller, i. 336) had however doubts about the identification of Mars
and Mamurius.

Footnote 82:

The place is not quite certain. Ambrosch (_Studien_, 7), who believed
them to be part of the armour of the god, placed them in his
_sacrarium_ in the king’s house, with Serv. Aen. 7. 603, and this
falls in with Dionysius’ version of the myth, that the shield was
found in Numa’s house. With this view Preller agreed. Marquardt, (431)
however, believed they were part of the armour of the priests, and as
such were kept in the Curia Saliorum, which might also be called
_sacrarium Martis_. The question is not of the first importance.

Footnote 83:

Dionysius (2. 70. 2) says that each was girt with a sword, and carried
in his right hand, λόγχην ἢ ῥάβδον ἤ τι τοιοῦθ ἕτερον. Apparently,
assuming that he had seen the procession, he did not see or remember
clearly what these objects were. A relief from Anagnia (_Annali del
Inst._ 1869, 70 foll.) shows them like a double drumstick, with a knob
at each end.

Footnote 84:

See also _Myth. Lex._ s. v. Mars, p. 2404 and Apollo, p. 425.

Footnote 85:

Virg. _Aen._ 4. 143.

Footnote 86:

Strabo, 639 foll. The same also appear in the cult of Zeus;
Preller-Robert, _Greek Myth._ i. 134.

Footnote 87:

_G. B._ ii. 157-182; Tylor, _Prim. Cult._ i. 298 foll. We have
survivals at Rome, not only in the periodic Salian rites, but on
particular occasions; Martial 12. 57. 15 (of an eclipse); Ovid,
_Fasti_, 5. 441; Tibull. 1. 8. 21; Tac. _Ann._ 1. 28 (this was in
Germany). I have known the church bells rung at Zermatt in order to
stop a continuous downpour of rain in hay-harvest.

Footnote 88:

_G. B._ ii. 210.

Footnote 89:

Jordan, _Krit. Beiträge_, p. 203 foll.

Footnote 90:

Cato, _R. R._ 143.

Footnote 91:

Liv. 1. 20. Cp. 9. 40, where the chosen Samnite warriors wore _tunicae
versicolores_. In each case the dress is a religious one, of the same
character as that of the _triumphator_, and would have its ultimate
origin in the war-paint of savages, which probably also has a
religious signification. The _trabea_ was the old short cavalry coat.

Footnote 92:

See Marq. 432, and _Dict. of Antiq._ s. v. Salii for details.

Footnote 93:

Fest. 131. The fragments may be seen in Wordsworth’s _Fragments and
Specimens of Early Latin_, pp. 564 foll. In the chief fragment the
name of Janus seems almost certainly to occur (cf. Lydus, 4. 2); and
in another Lucetius (= Iupiter?). Juno and Minerva are also mentioned.
See _Dict. of Antiq._ s. v. Salii. It is curious that Mars is more
prominent in the song of the Arval Brothers.

Footnote 94:

Liv. 5. 52. 7.

Footnote 95:

Dionysius, 2. 71.

Footnote 96:

Usener in _Rhein. Mus._ xxx. 218; Roscher, _Lex._ s. v. Mars 2419, can
only quote two very vague and doubtful passages from late writers in
support of the view that the shields were symbols of the months; Lydus
4. 2. who says that the Salii sang in praise of Janus, κατὰ τὸν τῶν
Ἰταλικῶν μηνῶν ἀριθμόν; and Liber glossarum, Cod. Vat. Palat. 1773 f.
40 v.: Ancilia: scuta unius anni.

Footnote 97:

For the evidence on this point, and others connected with the Salii, I
must refer the reader to Mr. G. E. Marindin’s excellent article
‘Salii’ in the new edition of Smith’s _Dict. of Antiquities_, the most
complete and at the same time sensible account that has appeared in
recent years. (The article ‘Ancilia’ in the new edition of Pauly’s
_Real-Encycl._ is disappointing.) Dionysius, Varro, and Plutarch are
all at one about the shape of the shields, and Mr. Marindin is quite
right in insisting that Ovid does not contradict them. (See the
passages quoted in the article.) The coins of Licinius Stolo and of
Antoninus Pius (Cohen, _Méd. Cons._ plate xxiv. 9, 10, and _Méd. Imp._
ii, no. 467) give the same peculiar shape. The bronze of Domitian,
A.D. 88 (Cohen, _Méd. Imp._ i. plate xvii), and the coins of
Sanquinius, B.C. 16 (both issued in connexion with ludi saeculares),
on which are figures supposed to be Salii with round shields, have
certainly been misinterpreted (e. g. in Marq. 431). See note at end of
this work.

Footnote 98:

Jordan, in _Commentationes in hon. Momms._ p. 365. There could not b
_feriae_ on this day, as it was a _dies fastus_.

Footnote 99:

_Fast._ 3. 429 ‘Una nota est Marti Nonis; sacrata quod illis Templa
putant lucos Vediovis ante duos.’

Footnote 100:

Aust, _de Aedibus sacris_, p. 33.

Footnote 101:

Polyb. 21. 10 (13); Liv. 37. 33.

Footnote 102:

See his article in _Dict. Ant._ He further suggests that in
Philocalus’ note _ancilia_ is an adjective, and that _arma ancilia_
means the shields only, as the spears of Mars do not seem to have been
used by the Salii.

Footnote 103:

The day is of course not given in these almanacs; but the position is
between Isidis navigium (March 5) and Liberalia (March 17).

Footnote 104:

_de Feriis_, ix. foll. Cp. _C. I. L._ 311.

Footnote 105:

The usual sacrifice to Jupiter on the Ides is also mentioned by
Wissowa in this connexion; but I should hardly imagine that it would
have had a sufficiently popular character to cause any such alteration
as he is arguing for. But the first full moon of the year may have
become over-crowded with rites; and it was the day on which at one
time the consuls entered on office, B.C. 222 to 154 (Mommsen, _Chron._
102 and notes).

Footnote 106:

Wissowa takes both as lustrations of cavalry. Mommsen, _C. I. L._ 332,
disapproves of Wissowa’s reasoning about this day.

Footnote 107:

_C. I. L._ 311.

Footnote 108:

_C. I. L._ 254.

Footnote 109:

Cf. Usener’s article on Italian Myths in _Rhein. Mus._ vol. xxx—a most
interesting and suggestive piece of work, which, however, needs to be
read with a critical mind, and has been too uncritically used by later
writers, e. g. Roscher in his article on Mars. Frazer (_G. B._ ii.
208) adopts his conclusions about Mamurius, but, with his usual care,
points out some of the difficulties in a footnote.

Footnote 110:

Usener, p. 211.

Footnote 111:

Lydus, 3. 29 and 4. 36. The words are rather obscure, but the meaning
is fairly obvious. See Usener’s paraphrase, p. 210.

Footnote 112:

See above, p. 38.

Footnote 113:

Cp. what he says of the Salii singing of Janus κατὰ τὸν τῶν Ἰταλικῶν
μηνῶν ἀριθμόν (4. 2).

Footnote 114:

e. g. in Numa 13.

Footnote 115:

_Aen._ 7. 188. Thilo and Hagen seem to think that Servius wrote
_peltas_ (shields) on the evidence of one MS, wrongly, I think.

Footnote 116:

_Octavius_, 24. 3.

Footnote 117:

What is the meaning of _vetera_ here?

Footnote 118:

_Golden Bough_, ii. 208.

Footnote 119:

Mr. Frazer is careful to point out in a note that Lydus only mentions
the name Mamurius. But as we know that Mamurius was called Veturius in
the Salian hymn, and as Veturius may perhaps mean _old_, it is
inferred that the skin-clad man was ‘the old Mars.’ The argument is
shaky; its only strength lies in the Slavonic and other parallels.

Footnote 120:

Lydus is thought to have made a mistake in attributing it to the 15th
(Ides); if so, he may have confused other matters in this curious
note. But he is certainly explicit enough here (4. 36), and refers to
the usual sacrifice to Jupiter on the Ides, and to ‘public prayers for
the salubrity of the coming year,’ which we may be sure would be on
the Ides, and not on a day of even number. I do not feel at all sure
that Lydus was wrong as to the date, the more so as the Ides of May
(which month has a certain parallelism with March) is the date of
another curious ceremony of this primitive type, that of the _Argei_.

Footnote 121:

This was first noticed by Grimm (_Teutonic Mythology_, Eng. Trans.,
vol. ii. 764 foll.). Since then Mannhardt (_Baumkultus_, 410 foll.)
and Mr. Frazer (_G. B._ i. 257 foll. and 264 foll.) have worked it out
and explained it (see especially i. 275). It is generally believed
that Death, or whatever be the name applied to the human being or
figure expelled in these rites, signifies the extinct spirit of
vegetation of the past year. I agree with Mr. Frazer, as against
Usener and Roscher (_Lex._ s. v. Mars), that it is not any abstract
conception of the year, or at least was not such originally.

Footnote 122:

This fusion of two apparently different ideas in a single ceremony has
previously been explained by Mr. Frazer, pp. 205 foll. On p. 210 he
notices the curious and well-authenticated rite of driving out hunger
at Chaeronea (Plutarch, _Quaest. Conviv._ 6. 8), which would offer an
interesting parallel to the Roman, if we could but be sure of the
details of the latter. Another from Delphi (Plut. _Quaest. Graec._ 12,
mentioned by Usener, does not seem to me conclusive); but that of the
‘man in cowhide’ from the Highlands (_G. B._. ii. 145) is singularly
like the Roman rite as Lydus describes it, and took place on New
Year’s eve.

Footnote 123:

See above, p. 47.

Footnote 124:

I am the more disposed to suspect Lydus’ account, as in the same
sentence he mentions a sacrifice which is conducted by priests of the
Magna Mater Idaea: ἱεράτευον δὲ καὶ ταῦρον ἑξέτη ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν τοῖς
ὄρεσιν ἀγρῶν ἡγουμένου τοῦ ἀρχιερέως καὶ τῶν κανηφόρων τῆς μητρόχου·
ἤγετο δὲ καὶ ἄνθρωπος κ.τ.λ. For the difficulties of this passage, and
suggested emendations, see Mommsen, _C. I. L_. 312, note on Id. Mart;
Marq. 394, note 5. What confusion of cults may not have taken place,
either in Lydus’ mind or in actual fact?

Footnote 125:

Both these notes are _additamenta_: Anna does not appear in the large
letters of the Numan calendar. We cannot, however, infer from this
that her festival was not an ancient one; for, as Wissowa points out,
the same is the case with the very primitive rite of the ‘October
horse’ (_de Feriis_, xii). The day is only marked EID in _Maff. Vat._,
the two calendars in which this part of the month is preserved; i. e.
the usual sacrifice to Jupiter on the Ides was indicated (cp. Lydus,
4. 36), and the Ides fixed for the 15th. The additional notes,
according to Wissowa, were for the use of the priests; but,
considering the popular character of the festival, I am inclined to
doubt this rule holding good in the present instance.

Footnote 126:

Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 523 foll.

Footnote 127:

‘Via Flaminia ad lapidem primum’ (Vat.): this would be near the
present Porta del Popolo, and close to the river.

Footnote 128:

See Robertson Smith, _Religion of the Semites_, p. 240, for the jovial
character of some primitive forms of religion, and the absence of a
sense of sin.

Footnote 129:

Ov. l. c. 541 ‘Occurri nuper: visa est mihi digna relatu Pompa. Senem
potum pota trahebat anus.

Footnote 130:

_Sat._ 1. 12. 6. Cp. Lydus, _de Mens_. 4. 36.

Footnote 131:

_Annare perennare_ is to complete the circle of the year: cp. Suet.
_Vespas_. 5 ‘puella nata non _perennavit_.’ Anna Perenna herself is
probably a deity manufactured out of these words, and the idea they
conveyed (cf. Janus Patulcius and Clusius, Carmenta Prorsa Postverta);
not exactly a _deity of the year_, but one whom it would be desirable
to propitiate at the beginning of the year.

Footnote 132:

Ov. l. c. 545 foll. Sil. Ital. 8. 50 foll. Ovid also says that some
thought she was the moon, ‘quia mensibus impleat annum’ (3. 657): but
this notion has no value, except as indicating the belief that she
represented the circle of the year.

Footnote 133:

_Aeneas und die Penaten_, ii. 717 foll. The cautious Merkel long ago
repudiated such fancies; preface to Ovid’s _Fasti_, p. 177.

Footnote 134:

Liv. 1. 2. The Punic Anna is now thought to be a deity = Dido =
Elissa: see Rossbach in the new edition of Pauly’s _Encyl._ i. 2223.

Footnote 135:

Her grove was not even on the Tiber-bank, but somewhere between the
Via Flaminia and the Via Salaria, i.e. in the neighbourhood of the
Villa Borghese: as we see from the obscure lines of Martial, 4. 64. 17
(he is looking from the Janiculum):

Et quod virgineo cruore gaudet
Annae pomiferum nemus Perennae.
Illinc Flaminiae Salariaeque
Gestator patet essedo tacente, &c.

There is no explanation of _virgineo cruore_: but I would rather
retain it than adopt even H. A. J. Munro’s _virgine nequiore_. See
Friedländer, ad loc.

Footnote 136:

This seems to be Usener’s suggestion, p. 207.

Footnote 137:

_Fasti_, 3. 675.

Footnote 138:

No doubt this should be Nerio: see below on March 17.

Footnote 139:

There is some ground for believing that the two words implied two
deities on occasion or originally: Varro, _Sat. Menipp._ fr. 506 ‘Te
Anna ac Peranna’ (Riese, p. 219).

Footnote 140:

Wissowa (_de Feriis_ x) thinks Ovid’s tale mere _nugae_: but this
learned scholar never seems to be able to comprehend the significance
of folk-lore.

Footnote 141:

_Fasti_, 3 661 foll.

Footnote 142:

Varro (_L. L._ 6. 14) calls them ‘sacerdotes Liberi,’ by courtesy, we
may presume: and it is noticeable that Ovid describes this old Anna as
wearing a _mitra_, which, in Propert. v. (iv.) 2. 31, is
characteristic of Bacchus: ‘Cinge caput mitra: speciem furabor
Iacchi.’

Footnote 143:

Op. cit. 208.

Footnote 144:

See Pauly, _Encycl._ vol. i. 2223. This is Wissowa’s opinion.

Footnote 145:

See on Jan. 9.

Footnote 146:

Cic. _ad Fam._ 12. 25. 1; _Att._ 9. 9. 4; _Auct. Bell. Hisp._ 31.

Footnote 147:

Varro, _L. L._ 6. 14 ‘In libris Saliorum, quorum cognomen Agonensium,
forsitan his dies ideo appellatur potius Agonia.’ So Masurius Sabinus
(in Macrob. _Sat._ 1. 4. 15), ‘Liberalium dies a pontificibus agonium
Martiale appellatur.’

Footnote 148:

See above, p. 53, where I have expressed a doubt whether this custom
originally belonged to the Liberalia. It is alluded to in Ovid,
_Fasti_, 3. 725 foll., and Varro, _L. L._ 6. 14.

Footnote 149:

This is the view of Wissowa in _Myth. Lex._ s. v. Liber, 2022. Cp.
Aust, _Lex._ s. v. Iuppiter, 662.

Footnote 150:

It is only once attested of Roman worship, viz. in the calendar of the
Fratres Arvales (Sept. 1 ‘Iovi Libero, Iunoni Reginae in Aventino,’
_C. I. L._ i. 214); but is met with several times among the
Osco-Sabellian peoples.

Footnote 151:

So Hehn, _Kulturpflanzen_, &c., p. 70 foll. But Hehn is only thinking
of the later Liber, whom he considers an ‘emanation’ from Jupiter
Liber = Dionysus, introduced with the vine from Greece. See Aust,
_Lex._ s. v. Iuppiter, 662.

Footnote 152:

See on April 23.

Footnote 153:

Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 771 foll.

Footnote 154:

Marq. _Privatleben_, i. 122 note 2.

Footnote 155:

Ovid, l. c., 783 foll.; Marq. l. c. and 123, 124. Military service
began anciently at seventeen (Tubero, ap. Gell. 10. 28): though even
praetextati sometimes served voluntarily (Marq. op. cit. 131). Even if
not called out at once, the boys would begin the practice of arms from
the assumption of the toga virilis.

Footnote 156:

Marq. op. cit. 124. Libero in Ca[pitolio], Farn. For Iuventas, Dion.
Hal. 3. 69, 4. 15.

Footnote 157:

This result is obtained by comparing Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 791

Itur ad Argeos—qui sint, sua pagina dicet—
Hac, si commemini, praeteritaque die.

(where he refers to his description of the rite of May 15, and appears
to identify the _simulacra_ and _sacella_), with Gell. _N. A._ 10. 15,
who says that the Flaminica Dialis, ‘cum it ad Argeos’ was in mourning
dress: also with the fragments of the ‘Sacra Argeorum’ in Varro, _L.
L._ 5. 46-54. These have been shown by Jordan (_Topogr._ ii. 271
foll.) to be fragments of an itinerary, meant for the guidance of a
procession, an idea first suggested by O. Müller. The further
questions of the route taken, and the distribution of the sacella in
the four Servian regiones, are very difficult, and need not be
discussed here. See Mommsen, _Staatsrecht_, iii. 123 foll.

Footnote 158:

_L. L._ 5. 85 ‘Salii a salitando, quod facere in comitio in sacris
quotannis et solent et debent.’

Footnote 159:

i. p. 81 (Keil). Why the _Comitium_ was the scene does not appear.
Preller has suggested a reason (i. 364), which is by no means
convincing.

Footnote 160:

It was adopted by Usener (p. 222, note 6), but has obtained no further
support. For another curious etymology of the latter part of the word
_latrus_, which, however, does not assist us here, see Deecke,
_Falisker_, p. 90 (_Dies ater = dies alter = postridie_).

Footnote 161:

Wissowa, _de Feriis_, ix.

Footnote 162:

Mommsen, in _C. I. L._ 312.

Footnote 163:

Mommsen, _R. H._ i. 78, note 1.

Footnote 164:

Festus, 254 ‘Quinquatrus appellari quidam putant a numero dierum qui
fere his (? feriis iis) celebrantur: qui scilicet errant tam hercule
quam qui triduo Saturnalia, et totidem diebus Compitalia; nam omnibus
his singulis diebus fiunt sacra. Forma autem vocabuli eius exemplo
multorum populorum Italicorum enuntiata est, quod post diem quintum
Iduum est is dies festus, ut apud Tusculanos Triatrus,’ &c.

Footnote 165:

Wissowa, _op. cit._ viii. We find one in April, between the Fordicidia
(April 15) and Cerialia (April 19).

Footnote 166:

Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 809 ‘Una dies media est, et fiunt sacra Minervae,’
&c.

Footnote 167:

Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 835 foll.

Caelius ex alto qua mons descendit in aequum,
Hic ubi non plana est sed prope plana via,
Parva licet videas Captae delubra Minervae
Quae dea natali coepit habere suo.

As from the note in Praen. we learn that March 19 was also the
dedication-day of Minerva on the Aventine, there must either be a
confusion between the two, or both had the same foundation-day. About
the day of Minerva Capta there is no doubt; for that of Minerva on the
Aventine see Aust, _de Aedibus_, p. 42.

Footnote 168:

Preller, i. 342; Usener, _Rh. Mus._, xxx. 221; Roscher, _Myth. Lex._
s. v. Mars, 2410; _Lyd. de Mens._ 4. 42; Gell. 13. 23 (from _Gellii
Annales_) is the _locus classicus_ for Nerio.

Footnote 169:

Nerio gen. Nerienis (Gell. l. c., who compares Anio Anienis).

Footnote 170:

Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 850: ‘_forti_ sacrificare deae,’ though clearly
meant to refer to Minerva, is thought to be a reminiscence of a
characteristic of Nerio (‘the strong one’), attached to her
supplanter.

Footnote 171:

Aul. Gell. l. c.

Footnote 172:

Usener, l. c., _passim_.

Footnote 173:

H. Jordan expressed a somewhat different view in his _Symbolae ad
hist. Ital. religionum alterae_, p. 9. He thinks that ‘volgari
opinione hominum feminini numinis cum masculo coniunctionem non
potuisse non pro coniugali aestimari.’ But this would seem to imply
that the _opinio volgaris_ was a mistaken one: and if so, how should
it have arisen but under Greek influence?

Footnote 174:

Mommsen, in a note on the Feriale Cumanum (Hermes, 17. 637), calls
them _weibliche Hilfsgöttinnen_; and this is not far removed from the
view I have expressed in the text. The other alternative, viz that we
have in these names traces of an old Italian anthropomorphic age, with
a mythology, is in my view inadmissible. I see in them survivals of a
mode of thought about the supernatural which might easily lend itself
to a foreign anthropomorphizing influence.

Footnote 175:

Ovid, _Fasti_, 3. 835 foll.

Footnote 176:

Wissowa in _Lex._ s. v. Minerva 2986: a model article, to which the
reader must be referred for further information about Minerva.

Footnote 177:

Lydus, 4. 42, adds ‘Nerine,’ and further tells us that this was the
last day on which the _ancilia_ were ‘moved’ (κίνησις τῶν ὅπλων). The
Salii were also active on the 24th (Fest. 278).

Footnote 178:

The note is thus completed by Mommsen from Varro, _L. L._ 6. 31 ‘Dies
qui vocatur sic, Quando Rex Comitiavit Fas, is dictus ab eo quod eo
die rex sacrificulus itat [we should probably read _litat_] ad
comitium, ad quod tempus est nefas, ab eo fas’ (see Marq. 323, note
8). The MS. has ‘_dicat_ ad comitium.’ If we adopt _litat_ with
Hirschfeld and Jordan, we are not on that account committed to the
belief corrected in Praen., that it was on this day and May 24 that
the Rex fled after sacrificing in _comitio_ (see Hartmann, _Röm. Kal._
162 foll.). The question will be discussed under Feb. 24.

Footnote 179:

_Röm. Chronol._ p. 241; _Staatsrecht_, iii. 375.

Footnote 180:

Gaius, 2. 101 ‘Comitia calata quae bis in anno testamentis faciendis
destinata erant.’ Cp. Maine, _Ancient Law_, 199.

Footnote 181:

It may have been of Etruscan origin: Müller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, ii.
206. A special kind of _tuba_ seems to have been used at funerals:
Gell. _N. A._ 20. 2; Marq. _Privatleben_, i. 341.

Footnote 182:

For the military use, Liv. ii. 64. They were also used in _sacris
Saliaribus_ Paul. 19, s. v. Armilustrium. Wissowa (_de Feriis_ xv)
mentions a relief in which the Salii are preceded by _tubicines
laureati_ (published in St. Petersburgh by E. Schulze, 1873).

Footnote 183:

_C. I. L._ 313. He is of opinion that the note was among those ‘non
tam a Verrio scriptas quam male ex scriptis eius excerptas.’

Footnote 184:

_de Div._ i. 17. 30.

Footnote 185:

Varro, _L. L._ 5. 91.

MENSIS APRILIS.

There can hardly be a doubt that this month takes its name, not from a deity, but from the verb _aperio_; the etymology is as old as Varro and Verrius, and seems perfectly natural[186]. The year was opening and the young corn and the young cattle were growing. It was therefore a critical time for crops and herds; but there was not much to be done by man to secure their safety. The crops might be hoed and cleaned[187], but must for the most part be left to the protection of the gods. The oldest festivals of the month, the Robigalia and Fordicidia, clearly had this object. So also with the cattle; _oves lustrantur_, say the rustic calendars[188]; and such a _lustratio_ of the cattle of the ancient Romans survived in the ceremonies of the Parilia.

Thus, if we keep clear of fanciful notions, such as those of Huschke[189], about these early months of the year, which he seems to imagine was thought of as growing like an organic creature, we need find no great difficulty in April. We need not conclude too hastily that this was a month of purification preliminary to May, as February was to March. Like February, indeed, it has a large number of _dies nefasti_[190], and its festivals are of a cathartic character, while March and May have some points in common; but beyond this we cannot safely venture. The later Romans would hardly have connected April with Venus[191], had it been a sinister month; it was not in April, but in March and May, that weddings were ill-omened.

We may note the prevalence in this month of female deities, or of those which fluctuate between male and female—a sure sign of antiquity. These are deities of the earth, or vegetation, or generation, such as Tellus, Pales, Ceres, Flora, and perhaps also Fortuna. Hence the month became easily associated in later times with Venus, who was originally, perhaps, a garden deity[192], but was overlaid in course of time with ideas brought from Sicily and Greece, and possibly even from Cyprus and the East. Lastly, we may note that the Magna Mater Idaea found a suitable position for her worship in this month towards the end of the third century B.C.

KAL. APR. (APRIL 1). F.

VENERALIA: LUDI. (PHILOC.)

Note in Praen.: ‘FREQUENTER MULIERES SUPPLICANT FORTUNAE VIRILI, HUMILIORES ETIAM IN BALINEIS, QUOD IN IIS EA PARTE CORPOR[IS] UTIQUE VIRI NUDANTUR, QUA FEMINARUM GRATIA DESIDERATUR.’

Lydus[193] seems to have been acquainted with this note of Verrius in the Fasti of Praeneste; if so, we may guess that some words have been omitted by the man who cut the inscription, and we should insert with Mommsen[194], after ‘supplicant,’ the words ‘honestiores Veneri Verticordiae.’ If we compare the passage of Lydus with the name Veneralia given to this day in the calendar of Philocalus, we may guess that the cult of Venus on April 1 came into fashion in late times among ladies of rank, while an old and gross custom was kept up by the humiliores in honour of Fortuna Virilis[195]. This seems to be the most obvious explanation of the concurrence of the two goddesses on the same day; they were probably identified or amalgamated under the Empire, for example by Lydus, who does not mention Fortuna by name, and seems to confuse her worship on this day with that of Venus. But the two are still distinct in Ovid, though he seems to show some tendency to amalgamation[196].

Fortuna Virilis, thus worshipped by the women when bathing, would seem from Ovid to have been that Fortuna who gave women good luck in their relations with men[197]. The custom of bathing in the men’s baths may probably be taken as some kind of lustration, more especially as the women were adorned with myrtle, which had purifying virtues[198]. How old this curious custom was we cannot guess. Plutarch[199] mentions a temple of this Fortuna dedicated by Servius Tullius; but there was a strong tendency, as we shall see later on, to attribute all Fortuna-cults to this king.

The Venus who eventually supplanted Fortuna is clearly Venus Verticordia[200], whose earliest temple was founded in 114 B.C., in obedience to an injunction of the Sibylline books, after the discovery of incest on the part of three vestal virgins, ‘quo facilius virginum mulierumque mens a libidine ad pudicitiam converteretur[201].’ Macrobius insists that Venus had originally no share in the worship of this day or month[202]; she must therefore have been introduced into it as a foreigner. Robertson Smith[203] has shown some ground for the conjecture that she was the Cyprian Aphrodite (herself identical with the Semitic Astarte), who came to Rome by way of Sicily and Latium. For if Lydus can be trusted, the Roman ceremony of April 1 was found also in Cyprus, on the same day, with variations in detail. If that be so, the addition of the name Verticordia is a curious example of the accretion of a Roman cult-title expressive of domestic morality on a foreign deity of questionable reputation[204].

PRID. NON. APR. (APRIL 4). C.

MATR[I] MAG[NAE]. (MAFF.) LUDI MEGALESIACI. (PHILOC.)

Note in Praen.: LUDI M[ATRI] D[EUM] M[AGNAE] I[DAEAE]. MEGALESIA VOCANTUR QUOD EA DEA MEGALE APPELLATUR. NOBILIUM MUTITATIONES CENARUM SOLITAE SUNT FREQUENTER FIERI, QUOD MATER MAGNA EX LIBRIS SIBULLINIS ARCESSITA LOCUM MUTAVIT EX PHRYGIA ROMAM.

The introduction of the Magna Mater Idaea into Rome can only be briefly mentioned here, as being more important for the history of religion at Rome than for that of the Roman religion. In B.C. 204, in accordance with a Sibylline oracle which had previously prophesied that the presence of this deity alone could drive the enemy out of Italy, the sacred stone representing the goddess arrived at Rome from Pessinus in Phrygia[205]. Attalus, King of Pergamus, had acquired this territory, and now, as a faithful friend to Rome, consented to the transportation of the stone, which was received at Rome with enthusiasm by an excited and now hopeful people[206]. Scipio was about to leave with his army for Africa; a fine harvest followed; Hannibal was forced to evacuate Italy the next year; and the goddess did everything that was expected of her[207].

The stone was deposited in the temple of Victory on the Palatine on April 4[208]. The day was made a festival; though no Roman festival occurs between the Kalends and Nones of any month, the rule apparently did not hold good in the case of a foreign worship[209]. Great care was taken to keep up the foreign character of the cult. The name of the festival was a Greek one (Megalesia), as Cicero remarked[210]; all Romans were forbidden by a senatus consultum to take any part in the service of the goddess[211]. The temple dedicated thirteen years later on April 10[212] seems to have been frequented by the nobilitas only, and the custom of giving dinner-parties on April 4, which is well attested, was confined to the upper classes[213], while the plebs waited for its festivities till the ensuing Cerealia. The later and more extravagant developments of the cult did not come in until the Empire[214].

The story told by Livy of the introduction of the goddess is an interesting episode in Roman history. It illustrates the far-reaching policy of the Senate in enlisting Eastern kings, religions, and oracles in the service of the state at a critical time, and also the curious readiness of the Roman people to believe in the efficacy of cults utterly foreign to their own religious practices. At the same time it shows how careful the government was then, as always, to keep such cults under strict supervision. But the long stress of the Hannibalic War had its natural effect on the Italian peoples; and less than twenty years later the introduction of the Bacchic orgies forced the senate to strain every nerve to counteract a serious danger to the national religion and morality.

XVII KAL. MAI. (APRIL 15). NP.

FORD[ICIDIA][215]. (CAER. MAFF. VAT. PRAEN.)

This is beyond doubt one of the oldest sacrificial rites in the Roman religion. It consisted in the slaughter of pregnant cows (_hordae_ or _fordae_), one in the Capitol and one in each of the thirty _curiae_[216]; i. e. one for the state and the rest for each of its ancient divisions. This was the first festival of the _curiae_; the other, the _Fornacalia_, will be treated of under February 17. The cows were offered, as all authorities agree, to Tellus[217], who, as we shall see, may be an indigitation of the same earth power represented by Ceres, Bona Dea, Dea Dia, and other female deities. The unborn calves were torn by attendants of the virgo vestalis maxima from the womb of the mother and burnt[218], and their ashes were kept by the Vestals for use at the Parilia a few days later[219]. This was the first ceremony in the year in which the Vestals took an active part, and it was the first of a series of acts all of which are connected with the fruits of the earth, their growth, ripening and harvesting. The object of burning the unborn calves seems to have been to procure the fertility of the corn now growing in the womb of mother earth, to whom the sacrifice was offered[220].

Many charms of this sacrificial kind have been noticed by various writers; one may be mentioned here which was described by Sir John Barrow, when British Ambassador in China in 1804. In a spring festival in the temple of Earth, a huge porcelain image of a cow was carried about and then broken in pieces, and a number of small cows taken from inside it and distributed among the people as earnests of a good season[221]. This must be regarded as a survival of a rite which was no doubt originally one of the same kind as the Roman.

III ID. APR. (APRIL 11). N.

On this day[222] the oracle of the great temple of Fortuna Primigenia at Praeneste was open to suppliants, as we learn from a fragment of the Praenestine Fasti. Though not a Roman festival, the day deserves to be noticed here, as this oracle was by far the most renowned in Italy. The cult of Fortuna will be discussed under June 25 and Sept. 13. It does not seem to be known whether the oracle was open on these days only; see R. Peter in _Myth. Lex._ s. v. Fortuna, 1545.

XIII KAL. MAI. (APRIL 19). NP.

CER[IALIA]. (CAER. MAFF. PRAEN. ESQ.)

CERERI LIBERO (LIBERAE) ESQ.

Note: All the days from 12th to 19th are marked ludi, ludi Cer., or ludi Ceriales, in Tusc. Maff. Praen. Vat., taken together: loid. Cereri in Esq., where the 18th only is preserved: loedi C in Caer. Philocalus has Cerealici c. m. (circenses missus) xxiv on 12th and 19th.

The origin of the ludi Cereales, properly so called, cannot be proved to be earlier than the Second Punic War. The games first appear as fully established in B.C. 202[223]. But from the fact that April 19 is marked CER in large letters in the calendars we may infer, with Mommsen[224], that there was a festival in honour of Ceres as far back as the period of the monarchy. The question therefore arises whether this ancient Ceres was a native Italian deity, or the Greek Demeter afterwards known to the Romans as Ceres.

That there was such an Italian deity is placed almost beyond doubt by the name itself, which all authorities agree in connecting with cerus = genius, and with the _cerfus_ and _cerfia_ of the great inscription of Iguvium[225]. The verbal form seems clearly to be _creare_[226]; and thus, strange to say, we actually get some definite aid from etymology, and can safely see in the earliest Ceres, if we recollect her identification with the Greek goddess of the earth and its fruits, a deity presiding over or representing the generative powers of nature. We cannot, however, feel sure whether this deity was originally feminine only, or masculine also, as Arnobius seems to suggest[227]. Judging from the occurrence of forms such as those quoted above, it is quite likely, as in the case of Pales, Liber, and others, that this numen was of both sexes, or of undetermined sex. So anxious were the primitive Italians to catch the ear of their deities by making no mistake in the ritual of addressing them, that there was a distinct tendency to avoid marking their sex too distinctly; and phrases such as ‘sive mas sive femina,’ ‘si deus si dea,’ are familiar to all students of the Roman religion[228].