Public Portents in Republican Rome (Analecta Romana Instituti Danici, Suppl. 34)

PimT.ic PORTENTS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI Supplementum XXXIV

PUBLIC PORTENTS IN REPUBLICAN ROME

BY SUSANNE WILLIAM RASMUSSEN

«L'ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER ROME MMIII

ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI, SUPPL. XXXIV Accademia di Danimarca, 18, Via Omero, 1-00197, Rome © 2003 «L'Erma» di Bretschneider, Rome ISBN 88-8265-240-8

Published with the support of grants from: Statens Humanistiske Forskningsrad

Rasmussen, Susanne William Public portents in republican Rome / by Susanne William Rasmussen. Roma : «L'ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER, 2003. - 296 p. : ill. ; 32 cm. (Analecta Romana Instituti Danici. Supplementum ; 34) ISBN 88-8265-240-8 CDD21.

292.07

1. Religione romana

2. Presagi - Roma antica

Denne afhandling er den 6. november 2001 antaget af det Humanistiske Fakultet ved Kobenhavns Universitet til offentligt forsvar for den filosofiske doktorgrad.

Dekan JOHN KUHLMANN MADSEN

CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

7

INTRODUCTION

9

1. SOURCES AND APPROACHES

15

2. TYPES OF PORTENTS AND PRIESTHOODS 2.1 Prodigia 2.2 Exta 2.3 Auspicia 2.4 Priests, Magistrates, and Senate

35 35 117 149 169

3. CICERO AND PUBLIC DIVINATION

183

4. DIVINATION AS SCIENCE

199

5. PUBLIC PORTENTS AND AGER ROMANUS VERSUS AGER PEREGRINUS

219

6. PUBLIC PORTENTS, RELIGIO-POLITICS, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROMAN IDENTITY

241

CONCLUSION

257

DANISH SUMMERY

263

BIBLIOGRAPHY

267

ILLUSTRATIONS AND MAPS

281

MAPS

287

GENERAL INDEX

293

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This book was written during the years 1997-2000 after a three-year research grant from the Carlsberg Foundation enabled me to continue my studies of Roman public portents. Thus, having earned my PhD in 1997, I was able to pursue the Danish degree of dr. phil, and I sincerely thank both the Carlsberg Foundation and the Danish Research Council for the Humanities for their gen­ erous financing of the translation and publication of this volume. My research has benefited from the involvement of a wide variety of people and institutions, and, not least importantly, from my years as an assistant pro­ fessor at the Department of Ancient History at the University of Copenhagen. In that connection I owe special thanks to professor emeritus, dr. phil. Jens Erik Skydsgaard for his unfailing willingness to discuss all manner of issues, portentous or otherwise. I am also grateful for discussions with dr. Veit Rosenberger and professor, dr. phil., Jorgen Christian Meyer, and for the sup­ port I have received through the years, particularly in the field of philology, from dr. phil. Jens Vanggaard. Likewise, I am grateful to PhD Robin Lorsch Wildfang for her constructive review of the English text. I also owe special thanks to Heidi Flegal, who translated my Danish manuscript into English with great diligence. This was not an easy task, and she should certainly not be held responsible for any remaining obscurities or awkward turns of phrase. I am further indebted to those who have sponsored my studies in Italy: the Danish Research Training Council, the Carlsberg Foundation, Julie von Mullens Fond, Gads Fond, Christian og Otilia Brorsons rejselegat for yngre videnskabsmaend og kvinder, and Dronning Ingrids Romerske Fond. I also thank Bikubenfonden for several stays at Skejten on Lolland, where Nature provided a splendid and suitably mysterious setting for my studies. Additionally, I would like to thank the Danish Academy in Rome, and particu­ larly cand.mag. Karen Ascani for her kind assistance in publishing this book as a supplementum to the series of Analecta Romana Instituti Danici. Last but not least, I thank Thea for her proofreading, and Christian, Vera, and Michael for their support, patience, and enthusiasm throughout this project. Copenhagen, April 2003

Susanne William Rasmussen

INTRODUCTION The dual aim of this work is to provide a comprehensive study of public por­ tents as observed and dealt with in Roman religion and history during the Republic, and to take a sociological approach to the sources in an attempt to deal with a number of unanswered questions and unresolved issues relating to the divination and public portents of Rome. As will become evident, both types of study are absent not only from the modern scholarly treatment of Ancient History, but also from that of the History and Sociology of Religion. Chapter 1 accordingly deals with the sources of information on public por­ tents, including a critical examination of some general characteristics in the modern scholarly works on divination and portents in Roman religion. Based on literary, epigraphical, and archaeological material, chapter 2 goes on to present a critical examination of the sources for the three main groups that make up official public portents: prodigia, exta, and auspicia. This chapter also deals with a number of questions and issues connected with these three different types of portents, reviewing the relevant priesthoods, their recruit­ ment, and their religio-political procedures. It also considers the interaction between the priesthoods, magistrates, and Senate in connection with portents. Since Cicero figures as a central, but in my view frequently misunderstood, source on this topic, chapter 3 deals exclusively with Cicero and public divina­ tion. This chapter presents a critical discussion, from a religio-sociological per­ spective, of a number of dominant views that give rise to certain methodologi­ cal problems and inappropriate value judgments in the research on Cicero. The chapter also offers other angles that can help promote a better understanding of both Cicero and divinatio, since an additional aim of this approach is to establish a more satisfactory coherence between the sources. The approach covers not only public portents as an institution, but Cicero's own perception of divination and its significance to Roman society as well. As for the method­ ological and theoretical implications of this discussion, chapter 3 also contains deliberations on the essential differences between philosophy and religion, the­ ory and practice, individual and society, belief and behaviour, and - most essentially - the question of divination as a public matter and not as a matter of individual concern. The importance of divination as a public affair is explored further in chap­ ter 4, which clarifies the scientific nature of the ancient interpretation of pub­ lic portents. The chapter discusses and confronts the prevailing theories that perceive portents as magic and superstition, defying the application by modern scholarship of the magic-versus-religion dichotomy in relation to Roman reli­ gion. Continuing along these lines, the chapter suggests defining the concepts religio and superstitio from a sociological point of view, focusing on the insti­ tutionalized religio-political actions discernible in the sources concerning div­ ination and portents.

10 Chapter 5 deals with the scope of public portents, with particular emphasis on the religio-political significance of portents and their expiation in relation to ager Romanus and ager peregrinus. Different theories in modern scholarship dealing with this question are discussed on the basis of the empirical material presented. Chapter 5 also uses a sociological point of view to focus on the man­ ner in which public portents came to serve as a common religious frame of ref­ erence transcending legal and territorial boundaries, and regarding the Senate in Rome as the decisive point of religio-political focus. This further leads to a discussion of public portents as an important religio-political institution, and of this institution's role in the Romanization of Italy. The present study's con­ clusions on these issues contradict the theories of a number of earlier scholars as well as some of the most recent research on Ancient History. Based on the analyses and conclusions of the preceding chapters, the final chapter in this work, chapter 6, presents a sociological hypothesis on the sig­ nificance of public portents to Roman religio-politics and the construction of Roman identity. In relation to this hypothesis, the final chapter also specifies important sociological mechanisms that have become visible throughout the study, and which concern the roles and functions of public portents in Roman society. My professional interest and perspectives spring from two academic enter­ prises. The first was the completion of my initial education in the Sociology of Religion at the University of Copenhagen (earning the title of mag. art.), which bears the mark of the late professor, dr. phil. Arild Hvidtfeldt's soberminded and highly valuable research into religion, placing emphasis on soci­ ological, philological, and historical methodology. Two of the many seminal issues explored during this period were the fundamental importance of Robertson Smith's presentation of religion as an integral part of organized social life,1 and of the Robertson Smith-inspired Emile Durkheim's sociolog­ ical methodology and investigations of so-called primitive classification.2 Among the specific contributions of Danish scholarship on religion, the influence of Vilhelm Gronbech should also be mentioned, particularly because of his book on so-called primitive religion and his published paper Soul or Mana, both of which stress the importance of studying a society on its own terms whenever possible.3 Particular insight into the historical context and the relationship between cult and myth were gained from the general introduction in Hvidtfeldt's dis­ sertation Teotl and*Ixiptlatli, and Svend Aage Pallis's dissertation The Akitu Festival* 1

Smith (1889) 1894) pp. 17-23; cf. Warburg (1985) pp. 9-34. Durkheim (1895); Durkheim (1912). 3 Gronbech (1915); cf. Rothstein (1996); Vanggaard (1985); Gronbech (1913). 4 Hvidtfeldt (1958). For more on the question of temporal perception in relation to the cult, see Pallis (1926). As regards the question of historical priority, Hvidtfeldt deviates unmistakably - and in 2

11 After completing my education in the Sociology of Religion, I had the opportunity to further explore the theories and methods of Ancient History during the subsequent writing of my PhD thesis on public prodigies in Roman religion.5 As a PhD student at the Department of History at the University of Copenhagen, I benefited immensely from the exceedingly knowledgeable, inspiring, and always enjoyable guidance of Professor of Ancient History, dr. phil. Jens Erik Skydsgaard. I consequently found myself embarking on into the second academic enterprise decisive to the present study. The combination of these two academic fields is reflected in the methodol­ ogy applied to this study, which features a critical and diachronic examination of the sources and the different aspects of Roman history, combined with a sociological, synchronic perspective in the analysis of the functions and mean­ ings of public portents in order to clarify the significance of this institution to Roman Republican religion and history. As will become evident, public por­ tents involve a whole range of social contexts and processes, and as far as the sociological perspective is concerned, this study takes its cue from the theories formed on investigations and reconstructions of cultural relations as presented by such scholars as E. Durkheim, PL. Berger and T. Luckmann, and J. Assmann.6 This applies, for instance, to the perceptions of the dialectic ele­ ments in the social construction of reality (processes of externalization, objectivation, and internalization), and to theories of the building of identity and the perception of the past as a social construction dependant upon the contempo­ rary norms, values, and frames of reference prevailing at any given time.7 Finally, it is worth noting that in certain respects this study has developed into something of an inter-disciplinary undertaking, in the sense that in addi­ tion to my own professional fields of Sociology of Religion and Ancient History, I have, to varying degrees, ventured boldly into the domains of ager peregrinus - aspiring to manoeuvre through no less than four different disci­ plines I have not studied at university level. There are the fields of Classical Philology (including Etruscology), Classical Archaeology, Philosophy, and Assyriology. Although for most of my years as a student and scholar I have read many sources in Latin and Greek, and although I have consulted long-suffermy opinion justifiably - from Gronbech's strictly synchronic interpretations, so unwilling to allow diachronic points of view. 5 Thus, as concerns the treatment of prodigies, this study contains portions of my PhD thesis (accepted in 1997). The conclusions on Cicero and divination have been partially published in the arti­ cle referred to as Rasmussen (2000). 6 Durkheim (1895); Durkheim (1912); Berger & Luckmann (1966); Berger (1967); Assmann ((1992) 1999). As is well-known, sociological studies and cultural theories involve a large number of historians, historians of religion, sociologists, and ethnologists, ranging from J.G. Herder and Karl Marx to Clifford Geertz and Mary Douglas. However, as emphasized in Assmann (1999) p. 19, only a negligible number of modern scholars of the Ancient World have systematically tried their hand in the field. 7 Cf. Berger (1967); Assmann (1999); Halbwachs (1925).

12 ing experts in the various fields, any errors or omissions occurring in any of the areas dealt with are, of course, mine and mine alone.8 In my view, public portents have not received adequate attention from mod­ ern scholarship on the Ancient World. Accounts of portents are often inserted as quaint little items that can enliven dry, historical subject matter, serving as entertaining examples of concepts such as irrationality or political manipula­ tion, deception, and humbug. Many a discussion has dwelled upon the ques­ tion of how on earth the Romans could put their faith in portents based on entrails, blood raining from the sky, sweating statues of deities, seasick hens that refused to eat, and so on and so forth. As this study will demonstrate, in certain areas the research in this field seems to bear a disquieting resemblance to St Augustine's presentation of the pagan (mal)practices of divination. Since, strictly speaking, Roman portents can only be correctly interpreted by Roman and Etruscan priests, and with the aid of various non-surviving libri, my current intentions do not include attempting to (re)interpret the portents. Nor do I seek to establish either the psychological mechanisms involved or the potential causal relations between natural phenomena. In other words, the object of this study is not to carry out an examination of the mentality of Reatine peasants and Roman citizens, theorizing on their psychological reac­ tions to fertile mules or other omens. I am primarily concerned with examin­ ing social, religious, and political behaviour, as well as the significance and functions of public portents as an institution in a variety of social and religiopolitical contexts. When describing public portents as an institution, I simply mean that the perceptions and the religio-political behaviour that can be deduced from the sources represent a system of ideas and fixed behavioural patterns that are repeated throughout the entire Republic. Furthermore, this study's repetitive use of the term religio-political is meant to underscore the indissoluble connec­ tion existing in the Roman res publica between the two categories of religion and politics, which are, for all intents and purposes, kept segregated in today's Western civilizations. My choice of focusing on the sociological rather than, for instance, the psy­ chological dimension of the institution of public portents is not based on any lack of appreciation for the psychological importance of public divination to Roman religion. My primary motivation lies in the sources, which I unfortu­ nately find inadequate to shed sufficient light on this side of the matter. Although admittedly (religio-)psychology can lead to a certain understanding of the significance of various institutions, I doubt that it would be possible to explain the public portents of Republican Rome based on the existing sources 8

As regards the literary sources, I have used Loeb editions where no alternative is noted. As for Cicero's philosophical works, see also the Danish translation in Ciceros filosofiske skrifter, vols I and III, translated by F. Blatt, T. Hastrup, and P. Krarup (1969/1970). Throughout this study I have only includ­ ed translations for passages of crucial religio-historical significance, and passages for which my transla­ tions may deviate from those referred to above.

13 by applying modern psychological laws and terminology. Indeed, the history of research into the Ancient World contains a variety of such attempts, as dis­ cussed in chapter 1. All in all, I have sought to deal with the public portents of Rome in a man­ ner that will hopefully present a more meaningful picture than the usual ones, in which portents appear as bizarre elements in Roman religion and history. This has led onwards to new perspectives and connections in the sources, which have far-ranging ramifications for various aspects of Roman religio-politics and the construction of Roman identity. Hence, in addition to the actual religious rituals and beliefs, this investigation into Roman public portents and divination as a whole also involves the examination of a series of historical, religio-histor­ ical, and sociological issues. Such issues include the state's internal and external political affairs and relations, and the demonstration, legitimization, and con­ solidation of religio-political power and expansion. They also take into consid­ eration the influence that the various ancient acculturation processes had on the institution of public portents and divination, and on Roman identity.

1. SOURCES AND APPROACHES It is well known that the works of ancient authors have been influenced by a variety of factors ranging from individual authors' special interests to their methods of composition, research, and use of sources. Moreover, a desire to include only interesting stories and details while omitting boring ones has also played a role. And so, of course, has each particular author's focus on natural history, philosophy, religion, or other topics, his desire to glorify earlier tradi­ tions or eras, his feelings of moral superiority or indignation, and so on. To some extent these factors also apply to the fragmentary sources on public por­ tents, and because of this, finding full agreement between the sources, for instance regarding terminology, is rare indeed.9 Even so, our main sources for these portents - that is, Livy, Julius Obsequens, and Cicero - actually exhibit such agreement to quite a startling degree as far as some of the portents are concerned. Naturally, one cannot expect complete accuracy and total concord down to the minutest details in the various descriptions of the portents, but the variations are really surprisingly few, and often of negligible importance. What is more, these sources uniformly speak of the same, firmly established proce­ dures governing the treatment of the various types of public portents. In general, the sources on public portents do not seem to present an embel­ lished picture, with features like conspicuously literary staging, nor do they suf­ fer from such utterly impossible deficiencies as occasionally characterize frag­ mentary sources on the history and religion of Rome. Admittedly, there are undeniably large holes in our knowledge, but overall, the sources on divination and public portents during the Republic are, in all significant respects, good and trustworthy, especially when compared to those dealing with the many other aspects of Roman religion. As explained in the following, the greatest wealth of sources is found in the area of prodigies, which enables us to make a systematic, diachronic analysis of these portents. This stands in contrast to the fields of auspicy and extispicy which must to a greater extent be compiled from small, unrelated fragments found in different works from different periods, and then corroborated with the relevant archeological evidence. My treatment of prodigies contains a schematic review, which I refer to as the "prodigy table". In addition to stating the sources, this table provides chronological and geographical information, specifies the prodigies themselves and lists the priesthoods involved, and the expiations prescribed. As this study progresses, the reader will often come across references to the relevant numbers in this prodigy table (written PT 1, PT 2, and so on). 9

For example, in some of the sources the terms prodigium, omen, portentum, and ostentum are fair­ ly interchangeable, with the same portent being randomly described using one, then another of these terms. Consequently, apart from the categorization of auspicia, exta and prodigia, I have not attempted to make any conceptual distinctions between all the different terms regarding portents, nor have I intended to carry out any etymological investigations.

16 The earliest historical records of the type of portents referred to as prodi­ gia were the tabulae pontificum, originally compiled annually by the pontif­ ex maximus. In the 120s BC, P. Mucius Scaevola edited and published the most important of these pontifical annals under the title of annates maximi. The annales maximi have since been lost, but were said at the time of pub­ lication to have been a collection of eighty books providing the historians with a valuable body of information on matters of state and religion including records of public prodigies. Our knowledge of the annales maxi­ mi is quite limited, which has given rise to a series of speculative and hypo­ thetical reconstructions of these works. This study will refrain from recount­ ing the far-reaching general discussion and the numerous points of con­ tention in the scholarly treatments of the annales maximi.10 Instead, I shall limit my observations to aspects of direct relevance to the public prodigies.11 Additionally, in the following I will have to broach some research-historical elements and problems that will be dealt with in greater depth in the remain­ ing chapters of this work.

10

Cf. RE; Wülker (1903) p. 64ff; Luterbacher (1904) p. 60ff; E.Kornemann (1911); Westrup (1929); Crake (1940); Walsh (1961) pp. 110-137; Peter (1967) pp. III-XXIX; Macbain (1975); Frier (1979). 11 The most important information on these records can be found in: Cic. De or. 2.12.51: Erat enim historia nihil aliud nisi annalium confectio, cujus rei memoriaeque publicae retinendae causa ab initio rerum Romanorum usque ad P. Mucium pontificem maximum res omnes singulorum annorum mandabat litteris pontifex maximus referebatque in album et proponebat tabulam domi, potestas ut esset populo cognoscendi; ei qui nunc annales maximi nominantur. Livy 6.1.2: [...] res cum vetustate nimia obscuras, velut quae magno ex intervallo loci vix cernuntur, turn quod parvae et rarae per eadem tempora litterae fuere, una custodia fidelis memoriae rerum gestarum, et quod, etiam si quae in commentariis pontificum aliisque publicis privatisque erant monumentis, incensa urbe pleraeque interiere. Livy 9.46.5: [...] civile jus, repositum in penetralibus pontificum, evolgavit fastosque circa forum in albo proposuit, ut quando lege agiposset sciretur [...] Serv. Aen. 1.373: Tabulam dealbatam quotannis pontifex maximus habuit, in qua praescriptis consulum nominibus et aliorum magistratuum digna memoratu notare consueverat domi militiaeque terra marique gesta per singulos dies, cuius diligentiae annuos commentarios in octoginta libros veteres rettulerunt eosque a pontificibus maximis, a quibus fiebant, annales maximos appellarunt. Cato Agr. Orig. 4 (in Gell. NA 2.28.6): Non lubet scribere, quod in tabula apudpontificem maximum est, quotiens annona cara, quotiens lunae aut solis lumine caligo aut quid obstiterit. Macrob. Sat. 3.2.17: Pontificibus enim permissa est potestas memoriam rerum gestarum in tabulas conferendi et hos annales appellant equidem maximos quasi a pontificibus maximis factos. Dion. Hal. 1.74.3: ov yap fi^iouv [...] em TO0 napa Tolg apxi€p€i)ai K€in.€vou mvaKoa kvbo TT|V TTICFTIV d|3aaaviaTov KaTaAiTT€iv. Gell. NA 4.5.6: Ea historia de aruspicibus ac de versu isto senario scripta est in Annalibus Maximis, libro undecimo, et in Verri Flacci libro primo Rerum Memoria Dignarum. This last Gellius account concerns a description of a prodigy (PT 24) in which the haruspices attempt to deceive the Romans through an intentionally erroneous interpretation. As is evident from the quote, Gellius attributes the entire story (4.5.1-7) to the annales maximi and Verrius Flaccus. Gellius most likely got the whole account from Verrius Flaccus (and/or elaborated on it himself), and the annales maximi simply contained a brief note regarding the haruspices, cf. Skydsgaard (1968) pp. 103-104.

17 In her discussion of the annales maximi and the prodigies, E. Rawson 12 believes that our principal sources for these prodigies do not rely on the annales maximi, but rather on certain special local collections of prodigies compiled by Varro and others. Rawson further assumes that Varro's and Livy's sources include Coelius Antipater and Sisenna, and that these two used the accounts of portents found in the Hellenistic historiography as their sources. Consequently, we are, according to Rawson, dealing with sources written after the Social War, at which time the distinction between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus no longer existed. In Rawson's view, this is why the prodigies from "ager peregrinus" surface in Livy and Obsequens, proving that the annales maximi are not Livy's source. 13 As chapter 5 will show, however, Rawson's ideas of such local collections of prodigies rely on dubious statistical reasoning - particularly concerning fertile mules in Reate. Although it is a matter of some dispute, both in general terms and specifi­ cally in relation to prodigies, I do not think one can totally reject the idea that Livy may have directly used the annales maximi, though naturally annalists such as Valerius Antias, Calpurnius Piso, and Claudius Quadrigarius may have been intermediate sources.14 Alternatively, Livy may have had both the annales maximi and the works of the annalists at his disposal. We can never know for sure, but the fact that he does not explicitly refer to the annales maximi cannot be used to argue that Livy did not use these books, since generally the ancient historians only named their source explicitly if they were criticizing it or offer­ ing different versions of the same event. One reason that the annales maximi are such an extraordinary source is that, since they represent mos maiorum, the information they contain has been used by later historians and antiquarians such as Livy and Varro not simply as a record, but also as a guideline for the religious norms and prac­ tices of Roman society. This leads one to wonder which sources on prodigies were used after the editing of the annales maximi. As there are no signs of interruptions or notable changes in the prodigy descriptions around the time that this editing took place, one must assume the people responsible for recording these events simply continued to chronicle them. It hardly seems reasonable to suppose the pontifices stopped doing so simply because editing of their works was in progress. Livy's Ab urbe condita and Julius Obsequens' Ab anno-urbis conditae DV prodigiorum liber are among our main sources on public portents, and as a whole they provide quite a good picture of portents during the Republic, thanks not least to the regularity of the accounts of prodigies and the consid-

12

Rawson (1971). Rawson (1971) p. 165. 14 Cf. Luterbacher (1904) pp. 64-65. 13

18 erable time span covered by the two sources in conjunction. Thus, Julius Obsequens to some extent compensates for the fact that no more than rough­ ly one fourth of Livy's Ab urbe condita has survived. The portions directly handed down from Livy are: • Preface and Books 1-10, covering the period from Aeneas up to 293 BC • Books 21-30, on the Second Punic War • Books 31-45, on the continuation of the account of the Roman conquests up to 167 BC • Scattered fragments and the later so-called Periochae All we know of Livy's sources is that he made use of such authors as Valerius Antias, Claudius Quadrigarius, Coelius Antipater, and Polybius. Despite attempts by scholars working on Livy to delve into the smallest details of this problem, the occasional references to individual sources do not provide any real grounds for concluding that they were the main sources in this context. A more significant element in connection with this study, however, is the very composition of the work. Livy's books are organized around both an annalistic principle and a dramatic principle. Their annalistic structure revolves around accounts of recurring events such as the inauguration of new magistrates and priests, elections, Senate meetings, temple foundations, annual celebrations, and, not least, the reporting of prodigies and their subsequent expiations. Yet the annalistic structure does not follow each individual book. On the contrary, each book has drama and the recounting of a good story as its main focus. This is significant for a critical examination of the sources on prodigies, which are actually dealt with primarily according to the annalistic system, whereas in much of his other material, Livy chooses instead to move within a period of several years. In my view, this particular circumstance, seen in conjunction with the almost formulaic language typical of the prodigy reports, indicates that as far as prodigies were concerned, Livy was basically employing an annalistic source such as the annales maximi or some work derived from them.15 This assumption is further supported by the observation that Livy's work contains no references to different versions of the individual prodigies and related ritu­ als, a practice Livy sometimes uses when describing other types of events. It is noteworthy that Livy incorporates these records of prodigies into his work using a stiff, formulaic style, and does not make use of editing or embel­ lishing the information with phrasing that is more striking and elegant, an art he certainly masters in many other connections. Walsh points out that "Livy belonged to the class of those who sought to present the research undertaken by others in a more attractive literary setting", 16 and in this light it is suggestive

"Cf. Skydsgaard (1968) pp. 112-113. 16 Walsh (1961) p. 114; cf. p. 51: "From this cumulative evidence of carelessness in translation, of failure to eliminate factual errors in his sources, and of confusion in reconciling his sources, one must conclude that Livy's standards of concentration and accuracy inspire little confidence. But there is

19 that precisely his reporting on the prodigies appears in an exceptionally "unre­ fined" form. This might be a result of Livy's respect for the tradition, the tabu­ lae pontificum/annates maximi, as a source. It might also be the result of a more conscious intention to retain the naked form and annalistic structure of the records, with the specific aim of reflecting the tabulae pontificum and creating an impression of authenticity. Nonetheless, in a certain sense Livy can even make use of these "unrefined" prodigy lists to obtain a dramatic effect. There are traces of a partial pattern, which has been emphasized repeatedly by scholars, namely the occurrence of large numbers of prodigies in times of crisis (see below). Of course, this pat­ tern could reflect an actual increase in the number of reports, but it could also be a result of Livy's dramatic treatment of the subject matter, in that he rein­ forces an existing sense of crisis by recounting many prodigies, while limiting such references when dealing with more peaceful periods. At the same time there is also the obvious, and at times clearly manifest, possibility that the author abbreviated the prodigy lists to make room for other events.17 The extensive body of research on Livy contains just as many interpretations of his views on religion as there are works on the subject. In my view, one cannot form a clear picture of Livy's perception of portents, and it is not surprising that the scholarship on this subject is far from reaching a consensus. However, it is not necessary to deal with the issue in depth here, nor with the many answers that various scholars offer, bestowing upon Livy views that range from the greatest scepticism to the deepest piety and respect for all things divine.18 The multifarious answers often cling tenaciously to their own collections of scattered comments found in Livy's work - comments which should probably only be analysed in light of their actual contexts, rather than being interpreted as expressions of Livy's general opinions. I, for my part, am convinced that D.S. Levene's formulation of the question is the most realistic: Thus the search for the "belief of Livy" is illusory. It could be that he was a sceptic, that he was a believer, or that he actually did equivocate between the two, but there is nothing in the work itself to provide us with evidence on this score, since all three attitudes are present, but present with a view to the appropriate construction of the narrative rather than as an expres­ sion of conviction.19

something to be said on the other side. His conscientiousness in listing the details which originally appeared in the annales maximi is noteworthy." 17 Cf. D.S. Levene's treatment of this question in Levene (1993) p. 243: "The fact that religion is allotted a greater role in the narratives of the Third and Fifth Decades than it usually is in the Fourth should not be assumed to reflect the relative significance of religion in the political and military events of the respective periods." 18 Cf. Levene (1993) pp. 16-30. ^Levene (1993) p. 30.

20

The point is that, regardless of Livy's opinion on portents, his work bears witness to the social, religious, and political aspects of public divination. Here the portents demonstrate the state of society's collective welfare, indicating to Livy the state of public morals as well - an area of great concern to him, and one about which he habitually worried. In effect, then, Livy's presentation is coloured by the idea that a society's sta­ bility depends upon its relationship to the gods and to the past: if mos maiorum and pax deorum are undermined or ignored, Roman society is weakened. The past - in idealized form - is a religious and moral exemplum, and in Livy's pres­ entation public divination plays a significant role in this past. This is illustrat­ ed in the following passage, which also confirms Livy's application of the annalistic principle in terms of his source,20 referring back to the tabulae pontificum: Livy 43.13.1-3: Non sum nescius ab eadem neglegentia qua nihil deos portendere vulgo nunc credant, neque nuntiari admodum ulla prodigia in pub­ licum neque in annales referri. Ceterum et mihi vetustas res scribenti nescio quo pacto antiquusfit animus et quaedam religio tenet, quae illi prudentissimi viri publice suscipienda censuerint, ea pro indignis habere, quae in meos annales referam. It is a well-known observation that in Livy's works the reader searches in vain for social and economic explanations of history.21 There are, however, two other factors decisive to Livy's perception of history, namely the personal qual­ ifications, thoughts, and actions of the individual statesmen, and the interven­ tion of the gods in societal affairs. In consequence of this second factor, public portents have particular significance as a direct manifestation of divine inter­ vention. Divination and the various religio-political procedures involved in it are used as a means to interpret the (dis)approval of the gods, and any unfavourable omens are expiated, thereby re-establishing the social and histor­ ical equilibrium. The prodigy table will make it clear that in quite a number of cases, even the main sources, Livy and Obsequens, do not stipulate the substance of or the procedure for an expiation. Presumably - as is so often the case in ancient affairs - this simply reflects the fact that the procedures were fully and implic­ itly understood and the substance fairly stereotypical. Therefore, in opposition to other scholars' points of views on this matter (cf. chapters 2.1 and 5), I do not believe one can deduce from this absence of information that the non-spec­ ified expiations did not take place, nor do I think they should be perceived as insignificant. All in all, there seems to be some uncertainty as to which sources Livy used. However, as far as the prodigies are concerned, it is probably not of vital 20 21

Cf. Levene (1993) pp. 22-23. Cf. Walsh (1961) p. 34.

21 importance whether Livy copied the records of the annalists or copied direct­ ly from the annales maxirni. The text in question consists of relatively dry albeit selective - lists, and such material is not easily misunderstood or distort­ ed by annalists, for instance through the integration of details from their con­ temporary life. From a purely critical point of view, the various accounts of the interpretations of exta and auspicia are far more complicated, since such por­ tents are normally only recounted in detail if they are regarded as particularly unfavourable or noteworthy omens, such as vitia in connection with consular elections and similar events. The accounts of the interpretations of exta and auspicia more readily invite exaggeration and distortion of matters relating to certain individuals or to political issues (cf. chapters 2.2 and 2.3), and Livy blends details and accounts of the interpretation of exta and auspicia into both annalistic and dramatic portions of his text. Our second main source, Julius Obsequens' Ab anno urbis conditae DVprodigiorurn liber, hands down reports of prodigies dating from 190-11 BC in chronological order. In other words, the work does not include the prodigies dating as far back as 249 BC, which Obsequens' book ostensibly contained. The general principle for Obsequens' presentation of the prodigies is - like Livy's - annalistic, but not all years are included. His records consist of three elements: 1) a specification of time and place 2) the nature of the prodigy itself and the relevant expiation 3) subsequent brief notes on historical events around the time of the prodi­ gy in question The dating of Obsequens' book is uncertain, and the scholarly attempts to do so variously place the book in the second, third, and fourth centuries AD.22 Scholars have also discussed whether Obsequens directly uses Livy as a source or has one or two intermediate sources. One seminal contribution to this dis­ cussion is P.L. Schmidt's theory that the prodigy lists in Obsequens are direct excerpts from a complete Livy text.23 The most important aspect of this issue of sources, however, is that whatever the case, it is indisputable that Julius Obsequens can ultimately be traced back to Livy. His work exhibits consider­ able compositional and stylistic dependency on Livy. As for content, Obsequens is not overly concerned with accuracy, and in certain places he omits prodigies, in other places expiations. In yet other instances, he radically reduces or abridges his account. Material on expiation in particular is absent from Obsequens' records, and this tendency becomes more pronounced as time goes by. One feature typical of Obsequens is his lack of any rigid distinc­ tion between private and public portents. This could mean two things: either 22 2

Schmidt (1968a) p. 161.

3 Schmidt (1968a); (1968b).

22

Livy had already applied a loose distinction, or based on scattered information from Livy, Obsequens included these "private" portents in his list because he found them interesting. Additionally, the Senate could choose to approve seemingly "private" portents, provided they were of political and societal rele­ vance (cf. chapter 2.1). Another topic of debate is whether Obsequens was a Christian or a pagan author. Since, as mentioned earlier, we do not have Obsequens' account of the first prodigies, an instructive preface on the subject may have been lost as well. Therefore all possibilities remain open, a circumstance that has been exploit­ ed, with varying degrees of success, since the first critical text edition of Obsequens from 1853 (O. Jahn). Suffice it to say that Mommsen portrays Obsequens as a Christian,24 whereas Rossbach dates the work to an earlier peri­ od and refers to Obsequens as a heathen soul.25 Subsequent scholarship has more or less adopted the latter view, and the picture of Obsequens as a pagan author makes this collection of prodigies one of the pagan world's last stands against Christianity in the fourth century AD. Although Obsequens' religious inclinations cannot be established with any certainty, there is nothing in his atti­ tude, choice of words, style, or content that suggests any adherence to Christianity,26 and the contrast to the highly emotional enmity and indignation of such authors as Augustine and Orosius speak against Mommsen's hypothe­ sis on this count. Furthermore, Obsequens' systematic approach to the topic seems to indicate a professional interest in portents rather than any propagandistic Christian intentions, and I find it difficult to imagine that a Christian writing at this time in Late Antiquity would be able to deal with pagan portents at all in any other way than polemically.27 The principal sources on public portents and divination additionally include two of Cicero's philosophical pieces, De divinatione and De natura deorum, passages from his theoretical works on the state, De legibus and De republica, and, not least, two of his speeches, De domo and De haruspicum responso. These sources will be dealt with separately in chapter 3. 24

Mommsen (1853 (1909)) p . 169: et mibi quidem veri simile videtur, Obsequentem

Orosium ratione excerpta sua eum in finem conposuisse, ut christianorum rum inmanibus prodigiis

simili

temporum felicitatem

atque ethnico-

inlustraret.

25 Rossbach (1898 (1910)) Rh.M. LII (p. XXXiii in the text edition from 1910). 26

Obsequens is completely devoid of such elements as pro-Christian additions and comparisons, as

seen in Orosius and others. Oros. 5.18.5: [...] cruor e mediis panibus quasi ex vulneribus corporum

flux-

it (my underlining) (PT 124: in Arretium blood flows from the bread as it is broken). 27

T h e later author Isidorus Hispalensis, bishop of Seville, eminently exemplifies the difference

between the pagan and Christian perceptions of portents {Etymologiarum PORTENTIS.

sive originum

11.3.1: DE

Portenta esse Varro ait quae contra naturam nata videntur: sed non sunt contra

naturam,

quia divina voluntate fiunt, cum voluntas Creatoris cuiusque conditae rei natura sit. Vnde et ipsi gentiles Deum modo Naturam, modo Deum appellant. Portentum

ergo fit non contra naturam, sed contra quam est

nota natura. To Isidorus, the etymologies reflect the pagan misconceptions and delusions, presenting portents as yet another example of pre-Christian misinterpretation. Isidore seems to be considerably more tolerant of non-Christian culture than Augustine and Orosius, probably for the very reason that he is from a later period in which the heated polemicizing against paganism had ceased.

23

Pliny's Naturalis historia also contains numerous details on various types of portents. Pliny's accounts are in places strongly marked by his own views, and when dealing with history and the history of religion he can seem unclear and imprecise in his rendering of detail. The main reason for this is probably that his interests lay in the field of natural science, making him a relatively selective source with an inconsistent eye for historical and religio-historical details. Pliny's account is characterized by a certain scepticism regarding matters of a religious nature, and he is clearly interested in portents as scientific phenome­ na rather than as religious and political matters of public interest. Nevertheless, Pliny's works do occasionally provide valuable information on divination and public portents, particularly thanks to his interpretatio naturae, which gives some interesting details on extispicy. Important aspects of divination, and its Etruscan elements, also belong within the field and genre of antiquarian interest, which had its heyday during the last century of Republican Rome, exemplified by such authors as Aelius Stilo and his student Varro, for whom the annales maximiwere undoubtedly a significant source. Information can additionally be found in Appian, who concentrated on Rome's various wars and on Roman domestic policy (Bella Civilia), in Cassius Dio's history of Rome, and in works by Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Cassius Dio writes with great interest of dreams and portents, and much seems to indicate that in general, he himself had a positive attitude towards such things - which is, of course, no guarantee that he is a good source in the present context. The question is which sources he used, but as in the case of Appian, discussions of this matter can only rely on conjecture. As for the period after the Second Punic War, Livy is probably one of Cassius Dio's main sources, but in the mat­ ter of prodigies Cassius certainly seems to have had one or more sources besides Livy, since occasionally Cassius notes details and prodigies not men­ tioned by Livy or Obsequens (PT 148 and elsewhere). Other sources that contain scattered comments relevant to the subject are Valerius Maximus, Suetonius, Ovid, Seneca, Aulus Gellius, and Macrobius. Additional information can be found in Diodorus and Strabo, as well as in Plutarch's antiquarian pieces (particularly Quaestiones Romanae) and his par­ allel biographies. Finally the Christian sources, such as Augustine's De civitate Dei and Orosius' Historiarum adversum paganos, should be mentioned, although due to their underlying Christian motivation they are not among the most trustworthy or use­ ful sources on pre-Christian divination. One reason for this is that these Christian sources aim to portray the pagan period and culture as sinful. Hence they prefer to preoccupy themselves with what are - according to Christian ideals - the most bizarre portents of all, namely the prodigies. In the eyes of the fathers of the Church, this type of portent is the very proof of the infamy of paganism. By the same token, the occurrence of the most catastrophic prodigies

24 in itself proves the vainness and uselessness of the pagan gods.28 Christian sources therefore include portents based on a criterion of horror, dwelling on that which is terrifying, obscene, or gruesome. They distort and often deal care­ lessly with details and such information as where the prodigies took place which is, of course, totally inconsequential from a Christian point of view (as in PT 26 and elsewhere). At the same time, when it comes to portraying prodigies, their accounts of ghastly or outrageous events abound in dreadful and elaborate detail and exaggeration (as in PT 106), or make use of Christian terminology (PT 124), interpretation, and moralization. And yet these sources should not be writ­ ten off, even though Augustine and Orosius admittedly - and not surprisingly reflect a lack of knowledge of, and a systematic interest in, describing divination and portents. The church fathers perceive pre-Christian divination and portents as a result of, at best, ignorance and stupidity and, at worst, the futility and per­ version of paganism. It is quite intriguing, not least in this perspective, that one encounters a number of the pagan characteristics of prodigies in Christianity's so-called miracles, such as weeping statues or blood flowing from pieces of bread. From a Christian point of view, this is naturally a different matter alto­ gether, but that is another and later story that will not be dealt with here. Archaeological and epigraphical sources that are deemed relevant to the subject matter will also be treated as the study progresses. The various scholarly contributions to this field will be discussed throughout the study as they become relevant. To maintain a general perspective, the remainder of this chapter will therefore focus on just a few significant modern works and theories on the subject of divination and public portents. Surprisingly enough, portents have often been treated superficially, if not virtually ignored, by scholars working with ancient history and the history of religion. The point of view that the procedures concerning public portents consist more or less of empty formalities is asserted by, among others, Kurt Latte in his Romische Religionsgeschichte (cf. chapter 2.1). This sort of postulate is probably one of the reasons why the subject has been more or less overlooked. In Denmark, this ten­ dency becomes obvious, for instance, when the author of a general and often-used introduction to Roman religion omits a discussion of public portents, only to claim that the entire empty and formalistic practice of omens and portents, the back­ ground of which Cicero deals with in his work De divinatione, greatly contributed to the dissolution of the Roman state religion in the later years of the Republic.29 Furthermore, some of the modern scholarship that has dealt with portents, most notably with the prodigies, is marked by a few narrow-minded, rigid views.30 28

August. De civ. D. 3.31. Latte (1960) pp. 266-267. Jensen (1968) p. 199. 30 It should, however, be emphasized that this applies neither to the most excellent general presen­ tation of Roman religion in Beard et al. (1998), nor to the specific treatment of prodigies in Rosenberger 29

25 As will become evident along the way it seems that - generally speaking the treatment accorded to public portents in modern scholarship is based upon one of two rather extreme views, which take: a) an approach - primarily religio-historical - that psychologizes the interpre­ tation of portents, and in particular the prodigies, as phenomena attributa­ ble to collective mass hysteria. (I shall refer to these as "stress hypotheses", as discussed below.) Such scholars often refer to portents as magic to create a sort of contradiction, or subordination to, religion, cf. chapter 4. b) an approach - primarily historical - that focuses on the interpretation of por­ tents solely as a means of political manipulation, that is, solely as a tool used for political manoeuvring, cf. in particular chapters 2.3 and 3. (These I shall refer to as "manipulation hypotheses", as will also be discussed below.) In my estimation, both types of approach are inadequate when viewed in iso­ lation, and misleading if taken to extremes. They lack any real sociological per­ spective - any ability to see things in a social and religious context - and they are unable to examine public divination as an institution. Another trait com­ mon to both types of approach is that they mainly regard portents as a by-prod­ uct of "real" circumstances and events, whereas the investigations in this study treat the portents as "real" in the sense that they played a role as a significant religious and political institution in the perception and construction of reality of the people of Republican Rome. The historians of religion who lean towards stress hypotheses cling to a handful of very specific elements within the total source material, which they can use to reduce public divination to an issue of the fears and ignorance of the mob leading to panic and hysteria. They additionally present psycholo­ gized postulates on cause and effect in a way that seems to say more about modern scholarship in the twentieth century than about public divination in ancient Rome. The stress hypotheses mainly ignore two things. Firstly, barring a few scat­ tered comments, we unfortunately have no sources originating from this pur­ portedly terrified, ignorant, and hysterical mob. Secondly, they ignore the overall picture, which clearly shows that as phenomena, all types of public portents played a far more important role in terms of history/politics and religion/sociology than they did in terms of personal psychological condi­ tions and/or mass hysteria. As subsequent discussion in this study will show, the historians who solely or primarily regard portents as a means of political manipulation in a cynical power game tend to overlook quite a sizeable body of sources to which their explana­ tion is clearly not applicable. This is, not least, relevant to the social and religious (1998). Both of these works were published during the three-year research period in which this study was written, and each in its own uplifting way represents a paradigm shift in relation to previous pre­ sentations of Roman religion in general and public portents in particular.

26 prestige that is per se connected with the priesthoods, and the importance of mos maiorum to the prevailing religious and political institutions, norms, and values of which public divination was an integral part throughout the Republic.31 Rarely in modern scholarship have public prodigies enjoyed the undivided attention of the historians, since this type of portent was seldom rooted in firm­ ly established historical contexts. Conversely, historians often present manipu­ lation hypotheses when dealing with the interpretation of exta and auspicia in connection with specific political and personal matters. Furthermore, as mentioned above, some of the scholarly treatments of por­ tents, both within stress hypotheses and manipulation hypotheses, are based on a dogged insistence on the dichotomy of magic and religion. The present study of public divination and portents nevertheless seeks to demonstrate that it is meaningless to apply such contradictory religio-historical concepts in this con­ text. On the contrary, the sources generally seem to reveal this dichotomy as artificial and distorted when attempts are made to use it as a modern, religiohistorical premise in connection with public portents. The underlying idea in the approaches I refer to as stress hypotheses is that many portents arise as a result of primarily psychological circumstances, as when individuals alone or in groups experience fear, amazement, mental pres­ sure, confusion, ignorance, and so on. Such a view is clearly evident in Franklin B. Krauss's work on portents, which is often quoted in the later literature.32 Krauss's hypothesis relies on the assumption that portents come into existence in connection with phenomena that were not, at the time, readily explainable from a scientific point of view. According to this type of hypothesis, the Romans became alarmed by such things as inexplicable natural phenomena, and according to Krauss, it is a matter of a mental and moral degeneration towards magic/superstition.33 From Krauss's point of view, the interpretation of portents thus represents a preliminary stage of, or a contradiction to, the socalled real religion.34 Krauss is an evolutionistic textbook example of both the stress hypothesis and the categorization of portents as superstition: He [the Roman] remained for the most part the simple child of Nature, either rejoiced or dismayed by, yet always wondering at phenomena which his senses apprehended but which his mind failed to comprehend. Even when in a later day he came to view supernatural forces in anthropomorphic guise, he was only a step in advance of animism. How easy it was for him in times of individual or national stress and anxiety to slip back to his former 31 As will become clear, the two extreme points of view have their roots in ancient explanation mod­ els, according to which authors like Livy and Cicero have a few comments that stress a link between anxiety, fear, and prodigies, whereas Polybius and others emphasize a politically tactical exploitation of Roman religion.

32 Krauss (1930). 33 Krauss (1930) p . 25. 34 Cf. Krauss (1930) p p . 23-24; 25.

27

self and to resort to magical and primitive methods of warding off the dark­ some and evil influences that clouded his mental tranquillity. [...] A consid­ eration of the portents and prodigies occurring in the writings of Livy, Tacitus and Suetonius will demonstrate in striking fashion the amazing prevalence of superstition in the Roman mind over a period of eight hun­ dred and fifty years, namely from the founding of Rome to the close of Domitian's reign. Referring to stress, for instance, Krauss interprets a prodigy (PT 71 from 177 BC), in which an errant bull mounts a bronze cow in Syracuse,35 as follows: "Such unusual behavior of the beast probably signified to excited minds that the assault of Roman arms would be wasted and come to naught."36 From a sociological point of view, one major objection to Krauss's work is that it deals only with the workings of "the Roman mind", omitting any sys­ tematic treatment of the behaviour itself as represented, for example, in the procedures or the expiations linked to the portents.37 His depiction of pub­ lic divination is therefore a lopsided and disjointed one that fails to present divination and portents as an integral part of the official religion. In his work, portents are presented as a type of magic/superstition expressing either a "fear of the unknown" (p. 26) or ignorance, as he claims that "all beliefs in omens and prodigies arose in consequence of the ignorance of natural laws" (p. 186). In Krauss's view, this is unfortunately the point at which the petri­ fied Roman loses his footing and slips down the ladder of evolution. Although one cannot reproach scholars from an earlier era for their evolu­ tionist thinking, this perception of public divination has profoundly influ­ enced later scholarship, as will be demonstrated repeatedly to readers of this study. It gives one food for thought to find that many of the stereotypes of evolutionism are still perpetuated in research into ancient history and reli­ gion, although to some degree, scholars seek to disengage themselves from the principle of the evolutionist hierarchy.38

35

Krauss (1930) p. 122. For more on the bronze cow as topos and on naturalistic representations, see Pliny on the cow of Myron, Plin.HN 34.57-59; 34.10; cf. Ridgway (1970) p. 86; Robertson (1975) pp. 344; 361; Boardman (1985) p. 80. 36 Fowler (1911), a classic work, also touches on the prodigies, and it is worth noting that this author - who is otherwise so well known for his strong interest in the psychological dimension of reli­ gion - acknowledges in connection with a prodigy (p. 317) that "The mental explanation of all this is lost to us." 37 Cf. Bloch (1963) p. 78 for the author's plainly evolutionist and psychological point of view in sub­ sequent research: "Nous tenterons donc pour notre part de retrouver les stades succesifs, de la con­ science religieuse romaine face au prodige. " 38 Krauss begins his work with a quote from Nietzsche: "Es gibt gar keine moralischen Phänomene, sondern nur eine moralische Ausdeutung von Phänomenen." Here one might be tempted to add: und es gibt gar keine evolutionistischen religioesen Phänomene, sondern nur eine evolutionistische Ausdeutung von religioesen Phänomenen.

28

The work of Krauss and later scholars is in part founded on Franz Luterbacher's dissertation on prodigies,39 which also regards the prodigies as pure Aberglaube. Luterbacher does not specify his selection criteria, and he does not make any attempt to systematize the prodigies selected.40 It should nevertheless be underscored that in addition to the question of Aberglaube, he also deals with the expiations of the prodigies, and therefore in some measure includes procedure and cult. Luterbacher's best chapter is, however, the philo­ logical section in which he speaks of a special sermo prodigialis characteristic of Livy.41 In this section, Luterbacher examines some of the words and the cases applied most frequently in connection with the prodigies in Livy and other sources as well. Another very early work on the subject upon which later scholars rely is Ludwig Wülker's treatment of public prodigies.42 In general, Wülker's presentation of public divination and portents is slightly more critical and systematically orient­ ed than those of both Luterbacher and the later Krauss. It is evident that Wülker was a devoted student of Wissowa, and just as in Wissowa's classic and still indispensable work on Roman religion, there is in Wülker's work an absence of far-ranging hypotheses.43 Like Luterbacher, Wülker also includes the expiations of the prodigies and emphasizes their importance during particular­ ly gruesome periods, while portraying them as insignificant during peaceful periods, a perception that is also observable in later treatments of the subject.44 The expiation of portents is, however, prescribed according to a firmly established religio-political procedure in the Senate involving several different priesthoods, and characterizing such procedure as insignificant seems rather untenable. What is more, the table of prodigies (PT) will show examples of comprehensive expiations occurring in peacetime as well. Moreover, certain prodigies appear somewhat stereotypical, a fact that does not make them insignificant. Finally, in certain cases expiations have been omitted in the sources, presumably because the expiations were regarded as understood. Georges Dumézil's influential work on Roman religion45 perpetuates the psy­ chologized point of view and represents a (slightly different) variant of the stress

39 Luterbacher (1904). Cf. Luterbacher (1904) p. 18. Luterbacher concentrates on the period 218-42 BC. 41 Luterbacher (1904) p. 43. 42 Wülker (1903). 43 Wissowa (1912). See chapter 2.1 of this study for more on the positivistic distinction between "genuine" and "false" prodigies in the works of Luterbacher, Wülker, Wissowa, and later scholars. 44 Wülker (1903) p. 72: "In ruhigen Zeiten schenkten die Römer den Schreckzeichen wenig Aufmerksamkeit; in den Nöten des Staates jedoch suchten sie mit allen Mitteln sich die Götter gnädig zu stimmen. Der Umfang der Sühnungen zeigt noch deutlicher die herrschende Stimmung als die Meldung der Prodigien, denn bisweilen lässt sich erkennen, dass man für zahlreiche Prodigien wegen der Friedenszeiten eine geringe Sühnung als ausreichend erachtete." «Dumézil (1970). 40

29 hypothesis as applied to public divination in Rome. My current intention is not to analyse the main hypothesis of Dumezil's work, but simply to touch upon a single issue of direct relevance to the treatment of portents in Roman religion.46 Dumezil seeks to clarify the nature of public divination and portents using modern psychiatric terminology (vol. 1, p. 119): Not only does public credulity dangerously multiply prodigies, during crises and even in periods of calm, but the anxious waiting for the auspicia oblativa, the disposition to hear omina everywhere, reminds us of familiar mental trou­ bles. Does the religious life of individuals and of the state suggest psychiatry? In continuation of this thinking he wishes to explain the prodigies as based on the idea of a collective psychosis during the period around the Second Punic War (vol. 2, p. 513): It was in fact a true psychosis, with outbursts of terror and paroxysms of panic, which possessed the Roman mob during these terrible years. While magistrates and priests calmly administered sacred affairs, this psychosis was generating secret mysteries in a kind of anarchy; the proliferation of prodi­ gies announced in good faith was an almost yearly symptom of this disease, which Livy recognized as such.47 It is true that the period in question was extremely troubled, and Livy actually does describe a certain connection between such times and the increased reporting of prodigies. Nonetheless, if one takes an overall view of the annual reporting of prodigies throughout the Roman Republic (as in the prodigy table), the psychosis from which Roman society was suffering, according to Dumezil's interpretation of Livy, was dubiously, if not indeed preposterously, long. Nor, in my view, can the application of modern psychiatric terminology used for abnormal mental states contribute to an understanding of public div­ ination and portents in ancient Rome.48 Finally, with regard to the stress hypotheses it should be noted that the sources such authors use to support their claims of a hysterical, anxious mob are a very few vague passages from Livy taken from the period around the Second Punic War.49 46 Dumezil does, however, have a useful appendix on the Etruscans (p. 625ff.) - not least in its con­ siderations regarding criticism of the sources. 47 Cf. chapter 4 - including the panic of the Senate, which is an aspect Dumezil does not notice, since here he unreservedly adheres to Livy's version of the situation. 48 It is also indicative of a superior ethnocentric attitude that Dumezil refers to certain prodigies as "child­ ish" (vol. 1, p. 121, and vol. 2, p. 461), which seems to be a rather poor choice of words, particularly in light of the author's stated intention to characterize "Roman religious thought" (vol. 1, p. 134, cf. p. XVII). 49 Livy 1.62.1: Romae aut circa urbem multa ea hiemeprodigia facta aut, quod evenire solet motis semel in religionem animis, multa nuntiata et temere credita sunt.

30

Naturally it is conceivable that, as Livy intimates, in difficult and turbulent times, not least during the Second Punic War, parts of the Roman population could sometimes be characterized as an unstable and gullible group. One might, however, also consider whether this description represents a stereotyp­ ical feature in Livy's presentation. It is common knowledge that Livy has a ten­ dency to idealize the Senate and aristocratic traditions, whereas the masses in his presentation are characterized by terror ac tumultus.50 Be that as it may, the "explanations" of public divination that fall into the stress hypothesis category tend to generalize, based on Livy's description of a set of exceptional historical circumstances. In my view, these explanations are too frail, and apply to too brief a period, to have carried public divination and portents onwards as a religio-political institution for several centuries. Based on this argument and the present study, I would say the decisive factor lies neither in the volatile mind of the individual, nor in waves of mass hysteria. The mainstay of the institution is a collective, social and religio-political aim at keeping an equilibrium and a pax between society and the gods. That is one of the reasons why public divination must be regarded from a sociological (rather than a psychological) perspective as an institution firmly rooted in the religio-political tradition and the quest to maintain the balance between gods and men in order to ensure the continuity and welfare of society. As for the political aspect of public divination, Dumézil refers to Rigobert Günther,51 thus leading on to the second main category of hypotheses relating to public divination and portents. As this study will show, what I refer to as "manipulation hypotheses" occur sporadically and superficially in much of the currently accepted research into ancient history that in different ways involves divination and portents. Günther will therefore only serve here to emphasize a single and more extreme example of the manipulation hypotheses. The foundation on which Günther's thesis relies mainly consists in empha­ sizing the (well-known) fact that a number of members of the senatorial aris­ tocracy also held religious offices (cf. chapter 2.4). Günther's thesis can be fur­ ther subdivided into two principal assertions regarding the prodigies and their expiations. The first is that various social rebellions can be linked to the occur­ rence of prodigies,52 and the second is that public prodigies involve the sena­ torial aristocracy's cynical subjugation and manipulation of suppressed social 24.10.6: Prodigia eo anno multa nuntiata sunt, quae quo magis credebant simplices ac religiosi homines, eo plura nuntiabantur [...] 29.14.2: Impleverat ea res superstitionum animos, pronique et ad nuntianda et ad credenda prodigia erant. *>Walsh(1961)p. 152. 51 Dumézil (1970) vol. 2, p. 600, note 11. Günther (1964). 52 Günther (1964) p. 209: "Aufstände unterdrückter Klassen waren von Prodigien begleitet."; p. 214: "Vor allem Sonnen-, Mond-, Stern- und Feuerprodigien bedeuteten Kämpfe gegen Sklaven, aufständische Provinzen und eindringende fremde Stämme."; p. 215: "Die Prodigien kennzeichneten den Aufstand mit Zeichen, die für soziale und politische Bewegungen typisch waren. Eine brennende Fackel war am Himmel gesehen worden, und Waffenlärm wurde aus der Unterwelt gehört."

31 groups. 53 Establishing such a link between the occurrence of "heavenly prodi­ gies" and social rebellions does, however, seem somewhat arbitrary. As the prodigy table will show, there are numerous examples of "heavenly prodigies" that are not, to our knowledge, linked to rebellions, and vice versa: rebellions take place without any known "heavenly prodigies". 54 Furthermore, Günther makes extensive generalizations without, for instance, distinguishing between Roman history's many different types of rebellions, with their extremely varied historical, social, and political contexts. There are also a number of weaknesses in the idea that the senatorial aris­ tocracy suppressed and manipulated the lower social classes by means of pub­ lic divination. It builds on a Marxist theory of exploitation and class divisions in ancient society and is weakened by, among other things, the fact that prodi­ gies - to the extent that they are used for political purposes at all - appear in the conflicts of Roman political life within the ranks of the senatorial aristocra­ cy itself. Günther 's thesis moreover presumes that in the so-called politico-ide­ ological disputes, the senatorial aristocracy primarily used the public prodigies as a manipulative tool. His interpretation therefore does not involve the other social and religious aspects of the institution, including the fundamental links to mos maiorum and the social and religious prestige related per se to the reli­ gious offices involved (cf. chapter 2.4).55 Chapters 2.2 and 2.3 in this study will involve and criticize other (more bal­ anced) varieties of the manipulation hypothesis regarding auspicia and the interpretation of exta presented by such scholars as Lily Ross Taylor and H.H. Scullard.56 The manipulation hypotheses are, to a certain degree, linked to the scholar­ ly assumption of a religious decline towards the end of the Republic. This is seen for instance in Toynbee's description of public portents and divination:57 53

Günther (1964) p. 210: "Die herrschende Klasse Roms hatte demnach die grosse politische Bedeutung dieser religiösen Einrichtungen erkannt."; p. 209: "Die procuratio erforderte alle Massnahmen, die der schnellen Unterdrückung des Aufstandes dienten. Die Underdrückungspolitik der herrschenden Klasse erhielt damit eine religiöse Weihe. " 54 In connection with the slave uprising in 73-71 BC (PT 132), for instance, none of the prodigy types mentioned by Günther appear, nor is such an event as the political rebellion in Fregellae in 125 BC fore­ shadowed or accompanied by heavenly prodigies (PT 98). It would presumably be more relevant to turn to certain of the reported story's own links, such as foaling mules (PT 142) or tumbled masonry (PT 118) as a sign of impending rebellion. 55 I shall refrain from discussing Günther's third hypothetical section: Rome's politico-ideological battle against social Utopia based on a Sun cult, and social utopia/the Sun as a symbol of freedom (p. 23 6f£). Even though the general theme is a conflagration in the sky, this section of the article seems too airy and speculative to be relevant to our subject matter. 56 Taylor (1949/1975) chapter IV, p p . 7 6 - 9 7 : "Manipulating T h e State Religion"; Scullard (1951). 57 Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, pp. 409-410; cf. Polybius's view (6.56.6-13) stating that the purpose of Roman religion and "deisidaimonia" was to control the passions and violent anger of the multitude in order to maintain the cohesion of the state. Incidentally, Toynbee's classic work also presents several good examples of the effect of religion on politics and military operations (p. 408ff.). Concerning the issue of the decline of religion in the late Republic, see in particular Liebeschuetz (1979).

32 The observation of a meteorological portent, or even the formal announce­ ment, by a public officer, that he was scanning the sky on the chance that a meteorological portent might catch his eye, was enough to place an embar­ go on all political activities. This shameless misuse of the official Roman reli­ gion for political purposes raises, once again, a question that has been touched upon at the beginning of this chapter. During the last two centuries of the republican period of Roman history, did the Hellenically-educated members of the Roman "Establishment" disbelieve completely in the truth and efficacy of their ancestral religion? In continuing to make an outward show of respect for it, were they utterly insincere? In manipulating it for political purposes, did they have their tongues in their cheeks? However, Toynbee seems to be posing his question from a point of view centred on the religious conviction of the individual, not on the collective ideas and actions concerning the welfare of Roman society as a whole. As will be discussed further in chapters 2,3, and 4, Toynbee s sort of question seems much less relevant in rela­ tion to public divination than one might initially think. In addition, Toynbee lets Polybius (6.56) formulate an affirmative answer to the question, although he him­ self suggests the possibility that here Polybius may be drawing a somewhat sim­ plified picture. Perhaps Polybius' opinion and simplification are, after all, too steeped in Greek tradition and philosophy to be able to answer expansive ques­ tions about Roman religio-political affairs. To the extent that Polybius' presenta­ tion and opinion are aimed at public divination in Rome, it is an obvious possi­ bility that such an interpretation could be conditioned by the considerable differ­ ences between public divination in Greece and Rome. Portents in ancient Greek religion were not part of the public domain in the same way Roman public por­ tents were, and apart from a few oracles, such as the Delphic Oracle, divinatio and the consultation of oracles in Greece was a matter far more often left to private specialists. Seen in this light, the linking of public divination and res publica must seem outlandish to Polybius - and therefore a feature for which one explanation might be the aristocracy's control and manipulation of the people. Kurt Latte's classic work on Roman religion also strongly emphasizes both the decline of religion and the political abuse of religion during the later years of the Republic: 58 Für die Oberschicht hatte die römische Religion im letzen Jahrhundert der Republik jede Kraft verloren. Höchstens war sie noch ein Mittel, politische Aktionen zu verhindern, und auch diese Aufgabe erfüllte sie nur solange, als der Gegner sich an die Spielregeln hielt. The sources on public divination and portents do, however, give rise to a num­ ber of considerations regarding Latte's assertion and certain aspects of both reli­ gion and policy, as well as the concept of abuse in an ancient Roman context. 58

Latte (1960) pp.287-288; cf. chapter X, "Der Verfall der altrömischen Religion" pp. 264-294.

33

The work of Bruce Macbain is a balanced, hybrid form of the stress hypoth­ esis and the politico-historical manipulation hypothesis.59 Macbain's main hypothesis is that prodigies as a type of portent are an expression of political communication between Rome and various locations in Italy and the provinces, the objective of which is to promote Roman imperialism.60 As stressed in the following chapters, it can be advantageous to regard pub­ lic divination and portents as a field of interaction. All the same, Macbain's interpretation of the main function of this institution as a finely-tuned sig­ nalling system and part of a premeditated "religious ostracism" within a strate­ gically established imperialism is probably too all-encompassing,61 and at all events, this complex discussion is a far cry from involving imperialism in the modern sense of the word. In connection with the above, this study also examines the correlation between public divination and ager Romanus/peregrinus. With regard to this issue several investigations into ancient history rely on Mommsen's method and results, and chapter 5 therefore deals with Mommsen's thesis on how prodigies were only approved by the Senate as public if they occurred on ager Romanus.62 Finally, the most recent and excellent scholarly work on public portents in Roman religion is Veit Rosenberger's weighty treatment and inspirational inter­ pretation of public prodigies.63 Rosenberger's anthropological approach and liminal thesis, influenced by the likes of Arnold Van Gennep and his ground-break­ ing work on rites of passage,64 explains prodigies as the violation of limits, and the expiations of the prodigies as the symbolic re-establishment of these limits.65 59 Macbain (1975); (1982). 60

Macbain (1975) pp. 6-7. "The thesis which we propose to develop is that the prodigy-expiation complex functioned throughout much of the republican period as a signalling system, a mode of com­ munication, between Rome and her Italian allies, by which Rome acknowledged their anxieties and iden­ tified herself with their religious sensibilities at times of particular stress upon the whole fabric of the con­ federation, occasionally conveyed warnings to them, and, overall, by appropriating to herself the respon­ sibility to expiate their local prodigies, asserted her hegemony over Italy in the religious sphere parallel to her assertion of hegemony in the secular sphere." Cf. Macbain (1982) p. 41: "Romans were alarmed by untoward events in the natural order and found psychic relief in making ritualized responses to them." 61 Macbain (1975) p. 167: "Rome assumes as her right and duty the obligation to maintain the pax deorum on behalf of her allies as well as her own citizens. In this context, then, the non-acceptance of a peregrine prodigy may equally signal that the town in question has, for some reason, been placed beyond the pale. It is a form of religious ostracism and constitutes an assertion of the separateness of the peregrine town when it is politically desirable to emphasize that." (Macbain's italics.) 62 Mommsen(1853). 63 Rosenberger(1998). 64 Van Gennep (1909). 65 Rosenberger (1998) pp. 91-196. Rosenberger's liminal thesis is, however, slightly contradicted by the admittedly very few examples in the sources of phenomena violating limits that are subsequently interpreted as favourable omens (cf. PT 75; 77; 117; 128). What is more, Rosenberger sometimes unfor­ tunately relies on R. Gunther's presentation of the prodigy sources, which is marred by a number of errors. This chiefly influences conclusions that relate to the frequency of prodigies (Rosenberger (1998) pp. 36-37; Giinther (1965) pp. 234f.). For instance, it is incorrect that sweating statues of deities were

34

To give a single example, Rosenberger interprets the above-mentioned prodigy involving the bull and the bronze cow in Syracuse (PT 71) on the basis of no fewer than four liminal violations:66 Hier last sich in vier Stufen liminales Verhalten konstatieren: 1. verliess der Stier die Herde und ging seinen eigenen Weg; 2. da es sich wohl um eine Kultstatue handelte, überschritt der Stier die Grenze eines Temenos, mögli­ cherweise sogar innerhalb der Stadt; 3. ist die Paarung mit einem Wesen, das einer anderen Gattung angehört, als Vermischung anzusehen; 4. besitzt der Samen, vom Inneren des Körpers, nach aussen kommend, liminale Qualität. Although in this case the liminal interpretations may seem even more over­ whelming than the rutting bull gone astray, when applied, Rosenberger's view of prodigies as profane violations of sacred areas in many instances proves to be exceedingly convincing.

not observed until the first century BC, and it is likewise untrue that swarms of bees were only seen from 118 BC onwards. As seen in the prodigy table, in 217 BC the statue of Mars on the via Appia sweated, as did the images of the wolves (PT 35); in 210 BC four statues sweated blood on the ager Capenas (PT 44); and swarms of bees were observed in 214 BC (PT 40), 208 BC (PT 46), and 193 BC (PT 58). 66 Rosenberger (1998) pp. 113-114.

2. TYPES OF PORTENTS AND PRIESTHOODS 2.1

PRODIGIA

Cicero links the discipline of interpreting and expiating prodigia to the Etruscans,67 and as is evident from the prodigy table the haruspices are regularly involved in interpretations and expiations throughout the Republican period. I define as zprodigium any unusual event reported to the Senate and approved by that body as a prodigium publicum, an unfavourable portent that is usually rel­ evant to society as a whole and requires ritual expiation. Thus, a prodigy is a peculiar event described in the sources as a sign that the pax deorum has been dis­ turbed, and this type of portent calls for expiation to be performed in public.68 The prodigy table in the present work contains a scattering of prodigies that would appear at first glance to be "private".69 This occasionally makes the dis­ tinction between public and private prodigies seem unclear. However, when events that appeared to be private prodigies occurred in connection with "pub­ lic" individuals, those prodigies could obviously become a matter of public rel­ evance.70 This custom, combined with religio-political procedure, shows that the rule applied in practice to the recognition of a public prodigy was the Senate's approval of the prodigy rather than a theoretically rigid distinction between private and public affairs. The same applies to the question of the prodigies and the distinction between the ager Romanus and the ager peregrinus, which will be discussed in chapter 5. Cicero's role as an important source on the institution of public prodigies, and as an implicated party in a case regarding this institution, will be dealt with separately in chapter 3. The prodigy table The nature of the literary sources, that is Livy's and Julius Obsequens' contin­ uous listings of prodigies and their expiations, makes it possible to diachronically review the occurrence of this type of portent. The present chapter there­ fore includes a schematic presentation of public prodigies occurring during the Republic pp. 53-116). By structuring the information in a table, I have sought to systematically organize the data on public prodigies according to the fol­ lowing factors: a) literary sources b) chronology 67

Cic. Div. 1.3: Cumque magna vis videretur esse et inpetriendis consulendisque rebus et [in] monstris interpretandis ac procurandis in haruspicum disciplina, omnem banc ex Etruria scientiam adhibebant, ne genus esset ullum divinationis quod neglectum ab Us videretur. 68 Cf. the prodigies listed in Mommsen (1853); Wulker (1903); Luterbacher (1904); Krauss (1930); Bloch (1963); Rawson (1971); Ruoff-Vaananen (1972); Macbain (1975); (1982); Rosenberger (1998). 69 See for instance PT 72; 90; 94; 131; 144; 146; 147. 70 Cf. PT 147, under Comments.

36 c) geographical locations and incidences d) substance of the events reported e) priesthoods involved f) expiations prescribed I have also included comments on relevant historical events, as well as supple­ mentary information, references, et cetera. In the translation, the prodigies are listed in the order indicated by the principal sources. The actual number of prodigies reviewed is 828, but numbers for individual years can only serve as a very rough estimate, since in many cases the sources abbreviate and summarize within a given year.71 Hence I use the designation "{legio)" in the prodigy table, which means that while the sources explicitly state that there were many prodi­ gies during the year, they only mention a few. The prodigy table's information on historical events should only be seen as an "indicative chronology". In other words, only rarely should the events be viewed as having any causal connection with the prodigies. In addition, a graphic presentation of the physical distribution of the prodi­ gies is found in maps A, B, C, and D, which are accompanied by an index of the locations.72 A number of sociological and religio-political implications and relationships con­ cerning public prodigies are exemplified and examined in detail in some of the following chapters and will therefore not be discussed here. Nor will the prodi­ gy table be used as the basis for claiming any specific religious development of public prodigies as an institution during the Republic. Despite the extensive duration of the period with which we are familiar, no development can be proved on the basis of the sources. Finally - apart from certain exceptions - it seems impossible to establish any systematic, thematic connection between the sub­ stance of the prodigies and the substance of their expiations, or any link between certain prodigies and specific deities. The very unclear picture we have here is probably a result of the fragmentary ancient material on the expiations and, not least, a result of our general lack of knowledge of the interpretations applied in each individual case. The expiations of the public prodigies appear as purely rit­ ual actions relating to the prodigial interpretations. I shall begin by raising a methodical, critical issue concerning the treatment and categorization of the prodigy material. This will be followed by a sociolog­ ically based distinction of the material, and supplemented by a review of the 71

Moreover, the number of prodigies naturally depends on how one chooses to define "a prodigy", cf. note 68. Some scholars would, for instance, choose to distinguish between "genuine" and "false" prodigies (see below), and one could likewise discuss whether a report of multiple strokes of lightning within the same area should be perceived as one prodigy or several. 72 The designations on the maps mark the geographical locations linked with the prodigies in the sources. Names of towns, rivers, and lakes appear in small lettering, while geographical areas and regions appear in larger lettering.

37 actual religio-political procedure associated with the prodigies and priesthoods involved. Some of the early prodigies may strike the reader as atypical, and over the years scholars have sought to distinguish between genuine and apocryphal prodigies and prodigial expiations, particularly labelling certain older prodi­ gies as "false".73 This is in part a reflection of a general and quite seminal dis­ cussion within ancient Roman history and history of religion. However, in the present study of the official public prodigies, the issue of whether a prodigy is "genuine" or "false" (constructed) seems to be of minor significance. Consequently the prodigy table in this study, unlike other previous treatments of the subject, includes such events as the unusual rise in the water level of the Lacus Albanus (PT 13, 398 BC). One reason this episode has been included is that according to the sources, the rising water level was treated as a prodigy and the subsequent drainage as a kind of expiation. The second - and decisive reason is that, according to the tradition, the Senate, the libri fatales, and the Delphic Oracle were involved in the matter.74 According to Cicero, the Lacus Albanus account is found in the annales. In keeping with the philosophical structure of Cicero's work De divinatione (see chapter 3), the account of the Lacus Albanus is used in the first book as an example intended to justify div­ ination, whereas the second book raises doubts as to the divinatory aspect, referring instead to the functional explanation of the lake's drainage.75 73 Cf. Wülker (1903) p. 86; Wissowa (1912) p. 541, note 2; Macbain (1975) pp. 19-20. 74 Livy 5.51.6: lam omnium primum Veiens bellum - per quot annos quanto labore gestum! - non ante cepit finem quam monitu deorum aqua ec lacu Albano emissa est. 5.15.3: Quidnam eo di portenderent prodigio missi sciscitatum oratores ad Delphicum. Sedpropior interpres fatis oblatus senior quidam Veiens, qui inter cavillantes in stationibus ac custodiis milites Romanos Etruscosque vaticinantis in modum cecinit priusquam ex lacu Albano aqua emissa foret nunquam potiturum Veiis Romanum. [...] 5.15.8: Qui cum perductus ad imperatorem, inde Romam ad senatum missus esset, sciscitantibus quidnam id esset quod de lacu Albano docuisset [...] 5.15.11: Sic igitur libris fatalibus, sic disciplina traditum esse, quando aqua Albana abundasset, turn si earn Romanus rite emisisset victoriam de Veientium deserturos non esse. Plut. Vit. Cam. 3-4: καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἤν ποιμένων θαῦμα καὶ βοτήρων. ἐπεὶ δέ, τοῦ διείργοντος ἀπὸ τῆς κάτω χώρας οἷον ἰσθμοῦ τὴν λίμνην ὑπεκραγέντος ὑπὸ τοῦ πλήθους καὶ βάρους, μέγα ῥεῦμα κατέβαινε διὰ τῶν ἀρουμένων καὶ φυτευομένων ἐπὶ τὴν θάλατταν, οὐ μόνον αὐτοις παρεἸχε Ῥωμαίοις ἐκπληξιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσιν ἐδόκει τοἸς τὴν Ἰταλίαν καταοικοῦσι μηδενὸς μικροῦ σημεἸον εἶναι. Dion. Hal. 12.12.2: ἐν τοιαύτη δ' άμηχανία της βουλής ύπαρχοΰοης παρήσαν οί προαποσταλέντ€ς €ΐσ Δ€λφούς θ€Οπρποι χρησμούς κομίζοντ€ς τοις ύπο του Τυρρηνου πρότβρον άπηγγ€λμένοις συνάδοντας·. Cf. Dion. Hal. 12.10.2ff. 75 Cic. Div. 1.100: Quid quod in annalibus habemus Veienti bello, cum lacus Albanus praeter modum crevisset, Veientem quendam ad nos hominem nobilem perfugisse, eumque dixisse ex fatis, quae Veientes scripta haberent, Vetos capi non posse, dum lacus is redundaret, et si lacus emissus lapsu et cursu suo ad mare profluxisset, perniciosum populo Romano; sin autem ita esset eductus, ut ad mare pervenire non pos­ set, turn salutare nostris fore. Ex quo ilia mirabilis a maioribus Albanae aquae facta deductio est. Cum autem Veientes bello fessi legatos ad senatum misissent, turn ex Us quidam dixisse dicitur non omnia ilium transfugam ausum esse senatui dicere; in isdem enim fatis scriptum Veientes habere fore ut brevi a Gallis Roma caperetur, quod quidem sexennio post Vetos captos factum esse videmus. 2.69: Nam ilia praedicta Veientium, si lacus Albanus redundasset isque in mare fluxisset, Romam perituram, si repressus esset, Vetos [...] ita aqua Albana deducta ad utilitatem agri suburbani non ad arcem urbemque retinendam.

38 Although Alföldi's rejection - "nor as the Roman Annals pretend, was its pur­ pose to expiate a prodigium" 76 - may seem even more categorical than Cicero's rebuttal in his second book, the presentation in the sources of the unusual rise in water level, and of the measures taken in that connection, are at any rate important in relation to the history of religion, and relevant to the study of prodigies. The various sources inform us of 1) the role of the Senate, 2) the involvement of the libri fatales, 3) the involvement of the haruspices, 4) the con­ sultation of the Delphic Oracle, and 5) the religious motivation for an exten­ sive and ingenious technological project in which the drainage of the Lacus Albanus included the construction of an emissarium. Portions of this emissarium have been preserved, but unfortunately archaeological dating is difficult. Castagnoli dates the emissary to around 400 BC, which is concordant with the prodigy, while Alföldi holds that the channel may well have been constructed around the sixth century BC, and if so, it was probably restored or expanded around 400 BC.77 Regardless of whether the aim of constructing the emissary (or resuming use of an already existing one) was the prevention of floods, and/or the increase of arable land, and/or the expiation of the prodigy in ques­ tion, the sources dealing with the event bear witness to the decisive importance and considerable age attributed to the institution of public portents. Another event included in my prodigy table is the Lacus Curtius prodigy from 362 BC (PT 15). Wissowa and Macbain consider this apocryphal mate­ rial, and Wülker does not list it as a prodigy. 78 It nonetheless fulfils the crite­ ria I use to define a prodigy: an unusual event is reported (the earth opens into a chasm), approved by the Senate, and expiated by a sacrifice of the things most precious to the Roman people, namely weapons and valour personified by Marcus Curtius, who throws himself into the pit, fully armed and on horseback. Three versions of the Curtius legend have been handed down: 1) The earth opens into a pit, and because closing it requires the sacrifice of quo plurimum populus Romanus posset, the valiant Roman equestrian Marcus Curtius, riding his horse, plunges into the chasm, fully armed, after which the earth closes. 2) Mettius Curtius was the name of a Sabine who, during the conflict that followed the rape of the Sabine women, became mired in this marshy place and had to sacrifice his horse to save his life. 3) Lacus Curtius is a place where lightning had struck, and which was there­ fore made sacred by means of a puteal (a well-head) constructed by C. Curtius, consul in 445 BC.

76 Alföldi (1965) p . 244. 77

78

Alföldi (1965) p. 244; on Castagnoli, cf. Alföldi (1965).

Wülker (1903) p. 86; Wissowa (1912) p. 541, note 2; Macbain (1975) pp. 19-20. For the sources, seePTl5.

39

Fig. 1. Lacus Curtius, a puteal bordered by a twelvesided stone kerb.

Fig. 2. Inscription at the middle of the forum, identical to the inscription on the back of the Lacus Curtius relief (see Figure 4).

A key element in all three versions is the emphasis on the importance of the location itself, and versions 1 and 3 in particular directly indicate the cultic aspect, which is still clearly visible today at the Forum Romanum (see Figures 1 and 2). In light of this similarity, and of the existence of the Curtius relief,79 version 1 represents what in a prodigial context would be an obvious religious explanation of the Lacus Curtius and the aura of great religious respect surrounding this location. Scholarship in the fields of archaeology and art history generally attribute the Curtius relief to version 2, but in this connection it is not necessarily a question of choosing one version and rejecting the others. 8o Consequently, I find it of relatively little use to determine whether the story of the prodigy is actually constructed, and whether perhaps originally the Lacus Curtius at the centre of the forum may simply have marked a location where lightning had struck or some -other, similar event had occurred. The crucial point is that one of the versions describes the event as a prodigy that is expiated, and that the sources bear witness to the procedural aspects of the occurrence. The scholarly distinction between "genuine" and "false" prodigies also involves the issue of plausibility, with physically impossible portents (such as speaking cattle) on the one hand and physically possible portents in the form of abnormalities (such as hermaphrodites) on the other. Luterbacher is one of those who insist on making such a distinction:81 "So sind sicherlich samtliche Angaben iiber sprechende Tiere und Sauglinge pure Erfindungen, z. B. dass ein Ochse des Konsuls Domitius 192 ausgerufen habe: 'Rom, sei auf der Hut'." (PT 59) . 79 See Figures 3 and 4. Thus, the Lacus Curtius relief may illustrate the expiation of a prodigy. Datings of the relief range from the second century BC to the end of the first century BC, cf. Nash (1961) pp. 542-544; Propyliien Kunstgeschichte (1967) p . 224; Platner et at. (1929) p. 310. 80Cf. Bremmer (1993) pp. 165-170; cf. Ampolo (1990) p. 212. 81 Luterbacher (1904) chapter 4.

40

Fig. 3. The Lacus Curtius relief.

Scholars count talking cattle among the more peculiar prodigies. Even so, in my view the question of bovine eloquence is of secondary interest and cannot be resolved here. 82 The main point of interest is this: the sources show that such phenomena as speaking cattle were reported as unusual events, approved by the Senate as prodigies, and expiated as such. This counters the desire to distinguish between genuine and false prodigies. The prodigy table shows that speaking cattle made up a type of prodigy that by no means occurred rarely (cf. PT 7; 59; 77; 92; 93; 112; 123). This is incidentally confirmed by Pliny, who also reports that after prodigies involving speaking cattle, the Senate was to assemble outdoors (Naturalis Historia 8.183): est /requens in prodigiis priscorum bovem locutum, quo nuntiato senatum sub diu haberi solitum.

The sources occasionally report that the speaking ox was to be handed over to the state and allowed to graze on public lands, and was diligently fed and cared for.83 This emphasizes the prodigy as a public affair, and in an ancient Roman context, no scientific distinction seems to be reflected in sources concerning the official treatment of the prodigies. Hence, the basic assumptions of this work and its definition of prodigies do not regard such a distinction as necessary. Based on the prodigy table, I do not believe that a modern scientific distinction between genuine and false prodigies would serve any actual purpose in this context, and it is impossible to establish any critical criteria for doing so 82 I have, however, personally come across cows emanating sounds caused by ruminatio that might easily have been mistaken for Latin speech. 83 Livy 35 .21.5: bovem cum cura servari alique haruspices iusserunt . Cf. Obseq. 27: Bos locutus et nutritus publice; Livy 41.13.3 : [. .. J et in Campania bos alenda publice data [, ..1 For details on the ager publicus, cf. Crawford (1989) pp. 93-98; Gargola (1995) .

41

Fig. 4. The back of the Lacus Curtius relief.

in the relevant source examples. Therefore the distinction between genuine and false prodigies in this study of the significance of public portents is only interesting in those few cases where ancient sources themselves indicate that a portent has been manufactured for a certain religio-political occasion. 84 A sociological point of view, however, offers another noteworthy distinction, as a particular group of prodigies sets itself apart from the other unusual events featured in the prodigy table. Examples of this group of prodigies include the incestum of Vestal Virgins (as in PT 38), the impudicitia of Roman matrons (as in PT 30), and a consul's violation of religious practice (as in PT 36). An element common to these prodigies is that their breach of the pax deorum consists in tangible, incorrect and unusual human behaviour. Treating, for instance, the incestum of the Vestal Virgins and the impudicitia of the matrons as prodigies would be an obvious reaction,85 in light of the normal Roman perception that these would constitute serious violations of the salus publica, the welfare of Roman society, and the security of the state. It is therefore no wonder that such violations and the public handling of the women's pudicitia and castitas can appear as prodigies and expiations, respectively. In the cases in question, the expiations involve firstly the dedication of a statute to Venus Verticordia (PT 30), and secondly the prescription of what Livy refers to as extraordinary, un-Roman expiations consisting of the burial alive of a Gallic man and a Gallic woman, as well as a Greek man and woman, at the Forum Boarium (PT 38).86 Incestum and impudicitia 84 Cf. Meyer (2002).

Cf. PT 3 and 4, in which the incestum of the Vestal Virgins is also said to have given rise to other prodigies. See also chapter 6. 86 Such sacrifices are, however, not completely exceptional, cf. PT 32. It would seem that human sacrifices were prohibited in 97 BC. Plin. HN 28.3.12-13; De Sanctis (1953) vol. 4, p . 320; cf. chapter 6. 85

42

also give rise to a prodigy that Orosius feels moved to describe as both obscene and sad (PT 106): the daughter of a Roman equestrian87 was struck dead by lightning while riding on horseback, and she was found with her tongue stick­ ing out and her dress lifted above her sexual organs, as if the lightning had flashed over her lower limb to her mouth.88 Thus the prodigy and its responsum show a nefas of a sexual nature and are linked with an account of three Vestal Virgins and a number of Roman equestrians who were sentenced to pun­ ishment at the same time for committing incestum. To expiate the prodigy a temple was built in honour of Venus Verticordia.89 Likewise, incidents such as scandals involving Roman matrons and poison are treated as prodigies that call for expiation (PT 18). In the same way as the religious and social violations of the Vestal Virgins and the matrons were viewed as prodigies that threatened the welfare of Roman society, an event such as Flaminius' religious violations in a military context (in 217 BC) was also treated as a prodigy and perceived as giving rise to other prodigies (PT 36).90 Finally, the sanctioning effect of public prodigies in relation to correct behaviour in the political sphere is clearly exemplified by a prodigy recorded in 42 BC (PT 148) involving a praetor who deprives a colleague of his appoint­ ment due to a disagreement. Obsequens explicitly states that this was regard­ ed as a prodigy, and that no one who acted in this fashion would live for more than a year afterwards. Obsequens then produces a list of names to substanti­ ate the practice.91 Based on the records of the prodigies, one must therefore conclude that besides peculiar phenomena such as speaking cattle and fertile mules, exam-

87

The Roman equestrian Publius Elvius was returning to Apulia from the Roman Games, cf. Obseq. 37. 88 Obseq. 37; for the other sources, cf. PT 106. 89 1 do not agree with the identification between the cults of Venus Verticordia and Fortuna Virilis that scholars have sometimes deduced. There is obviously some source-related confusion and uncer­ tainty as to the two cults and their mutual relationship, but as far as content is concerned, they seem to differ significantly. The aim of the Venus Verticordia cult is clearly as described in relation to the prodi­ gies, whereas the Fortuna Virilis cult seems to have been a women's cult with a sexually promoting aim involving, among others, the Roman meretrices - which is admittedly a far cry from the aim of the Venus Verticordia cult, cf. Ov. Fast. 4.145ff.; Verrius Flaccus in CIL I2 p. 314. 90 Cf. PT 84 and 139 (54 BC), in which M. Crassus also ignores prodigies in a military context. It is precisely the violations of Flaminius that cause Plutarch to make an assessment that is highly indicative of the politico-military significance of the Roman public prodigies, Plut. Vit. Marc. 4.4: OIJTCJ rrdvTa T& npdy\±aTa 'Pcojiaiois- ei? T6V 0€OV dvrjyeTo, jiavTeiojv 6e KCCI aTpioav urrepo^iav ou§ ' em Tea? \±€yioTais euTTpa^iais- drreSe'xovTO, |i€i£ov f)yo\j|ji€voi TTpo? acoTripiav TToXecog TO GauiidCeiv TO. 6€ia TOIJ? tfpxovTas- TOO KpaTelv TOOV TTOA€|J.I<JJV. 91

Obseq. 70: Notatum estprodigii locofuisse, quod P. Titius praetor propter dissensiones collegae magistratum abrogavit; et ante annum est mortuus. Constat neminem qui magistratum collegae abstulerat annum vixisse. Abrogaverunt autem hi: Lucius Junius Brutus consul Tarquinio Collatino, Tib. Gracchus M. Octavio, Cn. Octavius L. Cinnae, C. Cinna tr. pi. C. Marullo, Tullius ... [lacuna].

43

pies of unusual and inappropriate human behaviour could also be perceived as public prodigies. This applies to actions that were in contradiction to the mos maiorum in various social, religious, political, and military contexts, and which therefore threatened the basic fabric and continued existence of society. Such incorrect behaviour appears both as a type of prodigy in its own right and as the origin of other prodigies. Whether such forms of "deviant" behaviour did or did not constitute prodigies was up to the Senate to decide, as described fur­ ther in the religio-political procedure discussed below. From a theoretical, soci­ ological point of view, this category of public prodigies is a clear-cut example of how Roman public portents served, among other things, to define and (re) construct Roman identity in relation to the mos maiorum and pax deorum by respectively sanctioning and consolidating a variety of values and behav­ ioural norms in Roman society. This sociological aspect of Roman public por­ tents is discussed in greater detail in chapter 6. The prodigy table shows quite a number of prodigies found in a military context» (PT 13; 21; 34; 36; 74; 75; 127; 128; 139; 143; 147; 148), some of which actually caused postponement of military encounters (see PT 34, Comments): Livy 21.46.1: Apud Romanos haudquaquam tanta alacritas erat super cetera recentibus etiam territosprodigiis; [...] QuibusprocuratisScipio cum equitatu iaculatoribusque expeditis profectus ad castra hostium [...] 23.39.5: Et circa Capuam, transgresso Volturnum Fabio post expiata tandem prodigia, ambo consules rem gerebant. Conversely, morale was boosted for prodigies with a favourable interpretation (as in PT 75), and the military significance of the prodigies also becomes evi­ dent for instance in 173 BC (PT 74), when prodigy expiations had to be per­ formed before Rome declared war on Macedonia. Livy also describes how Gaius Gallus (the military tribune and astronomer) calculated that an eclipse of the moon would take place before the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC.93 Gallus therefore assembled the troops and informed them that this event would not be a prodigy, as recounted in Livy 44.37.7: [...] ita ne obscurari quidem, cum condatur umbra terrae, trahere in prodigium debere. According to Plutarch, the consul (and augur from 192 BC) Aemilius Paullus, who was a friend of Gallus and was familiar with eclipses as natural phenome­ na, nevertheless sacrificed eleven heifers before the battle.94 The Macedonians interpreted the lunar eclipse as a distressing phenomenon portending the fall of their kingdom, and Livy speaks of the wailing and shouting in their camp

92

Cf. Rupke(1990). According to modern calculations, it took place on 21 June 168 BC. Gallus was an expert at cal­ culating both solar and lunar eclipses. Even so, the existing knowledge of how to calculate this type of event did not prevent eclipses from also being perceived as prodigies, cf. chapter 4, note 463. 94 Plut. Vit.Aem. 17.7-13. 93

44

that went on until the eclipse had ended. Thus, according to Livy, the lunar eclipse intensified the zeal exhibited by both sides in battle.95 As the prodigy table shows, thunderbolts and lightning also frequently appear as prodigies that require expiation, and their interpretation is often linked with the Etruscan haruspices.96 It seems that fulgural interpretation itself was a decidedly Etruscan special­ ity, and the principles for fulgural divination were laid down in the librifulgurales.97 Even though all that remains from the hands of Livy and Julius Obsequens are brief, concise lists of the buildings and objects struck by light­ ning, it is obvious that the discipline involved was fully as complex and sys­ tematic as the other portent disciplines. This is clearly evident in certain of the surviving source descriptions of various categories of thunderbolts - which do, however, seem difficult to combine into a single system.98 One of the most recent scholars to deal with this issue is Robin Lorsch Wildfang, who takes a philological approach in seeking to compile a comprehensive classification sys­ tem for thunderbolts.99 Lorsch Wildfang's proposed system consists of three main classes with relevant subdivisions:100 The three major classes are (1) thunderbolts which pierce or drill a hole in an object (Seneca's quod terebrat) (2) thunderbolts which shake or shatter an object, but do not leave any sign of damage by fire (Seneca's quod discutit) and (3) thunderbolts which actually set an object on fire (Seneca's quod urit et fuscit). As far as the subdivision of these classes is concerned, (1) can be divided into thunderbolts which leave both an entry and an exit hole (Servius' transfigens) and thunderbolts which leave simply an entry hole (Servius' infigens); while (3) can be partitioned into three, quod afflat, quod comburit and quod accendit. It is not clear how, if at all, (2) was subdivided, but it seems possible that Servius' quodfindit denotes one particular type of damage done by zfulrnen quod discutit. 95 Livy 44.37.9; Polyb. 29.16. 96 As will be mentioned in the section on auspices, thunderbolts and lightning could also be observed by Roman augurs and magistrates. For an exhaustive discussion of fulgural typology and interpretations, as well as a the distinction between the Roman and Etruscan schools of fulgural science, see Thulin (1906b); Pfiffig (1998 - no changes to the 1975 edition) pp. 127-138; Weinstock (1951); Dumezil (1970) vol. II, pp. 637-649; Cf. Cic. Div. 1.16; Plin. HN 2.138; Sen. Q Nat. 2.32.1; 2.33-35; 2.39-50. According to Livy (1.20.7), as prescribed by Numa, the fulgural expiation also involves the pontifices. 97 Cic. Div. 1.72. For details on Nigidius Figulus' brontoscopic calendar, cf. Dumezil (1970) vol. II, pp. 638-642. For details of the Capitolean she-wolf, which had a cracked hind leg said to be the result of a fulgural prodigy in 65 BC (see PT 133), cf. Vacano (1973). 98 Sen. Q Nat. 2.40; Plin. HN 2.53; Servius Aen. 1.43; 2.649. 99 Wildfang (2000) p. 73: "I believe that it is possible to make out through the obscuring fog of incompleteness and varied vocabulary, the basic bones of a major part of the Romans' system of fulgural divination, the division of thunderbolts into three major classes by the type of damage done and the fur­ ther subdivision of these classes by the extent of damage done."

100 Wildfang (2000) pp. 73-74.

45

Fig. 5. Bidental bearing the inscription /ulgur conditum.

This proposal for categorization demonstrates how complex such a system may have been, even though it seems difficult to gather further support for the classification by evaluating all the material on fulgural prodigies found in Livy and Obsequens, due among other things to the paucity of information on expiations. In a cultic context, lightning could also be given a ritual burial (fulmen condere), after which the location struck by lightning was referred to as a bidental. 101 In addition to the interpretation and expiation of fulgural prodigies, a bilingual inscription on a burial urn from Pesaro 102 bears witness to yet another method of handling thunderbolts and lightning. In addition to the designation (Latin) haruspex / (Etruscan) netsvis, the inscription also contains the designation (Latin) /ulguriator / (Etruscan) /rontac, which evidently cover functions that both ward off and provoke thunder and lightning.103 The prodigies listed in the table show a notable rise in the number of prodigies recorded around the Second Punic War (PT 30-52). As mentioned above, the

101

Cf. Pfiffig (1998) pp. 135-137; Latte (1960) taf. 5; see Figure 5.

102 TLE2 697, published by M. Pallotino, Latin: [L. CaJ/atius. L./ haruspe[xl/ulguriator. Etruscan: ca/ates. l(a)r(isal). netsvis.trutnvt./rontac, (Museo Oliveriano); cf. Pfiffig (1998) pp. 128-132. See Figure 6. 103 Cf. Cic. Div. 2.109:/ulguratores. For more on the various deities and types of thunderbolts, see Pfiffig (1998) pp. 127-138; Dumezil (1970) pp. 642-649.

46 "'.;'1 111

,I

,.

_..

Fig. 6. Bilingual inscription on a burial urn from Pesaro.

use of the stress hypothesis seems too fragile as a general underlying explanation for the centuries-long institution of public prodigies. Nevertheless, there can be little doubt that an unusually high level of social and political unrest typified this particular period. During this period, the very existence of Rome was threatened, and that might well be reflected in the increased number of prodigies.104 Apart from the possibility, discussed earlier, that the increase could be a result of Livy's dramatic treatment of the material in order to augment the reader's excitement and anxiety, it is worth noting that here Livy (as he so often does) focuses on the anxiety of the masses. According to Livy's picture of this period the masses - not least the women - panic, while the Senate is busy trying to alleviate the tension in the city.105 As pointed out by Walsh,106 however, the panic in which Livy portrays the masses could be extended by Polybius' description of the confusion and panic that also characterized the Senate. 106 Panic and social unrest might thereby have contributed to an increase in both the reporting and the approval of more prodigies than previously,108 Finally, the examples in the prodigy table of certain very extensive expiations during this particular period might also indicate an actual increase in the number of prodigies occurring.

104 For and in-depth treatment of the period, see Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, p. 379ff. For analyses of the prodigy material see Macbain (1975); (1982) and Rosenberger (1998) . 105 Livy 22.7 .6ff; 22.51.4-5 ; 22.55; 22.57 . 106 Walsh (1961) p. 152. 107 Polyb. 8.5.7. 108 In addition to an increase in the number of prodigies, the unrest and imbalance in Roman society at the time undoubtedly also led to the more intense interest in foreign religious trends that can generally be found in the sources, cf. Hvidtfeldt (1991) p. 21ff.

47 To recapitulate, a prodigy can be regarded as a sign of social and political imbalance, and its expiation as a way of (re)establishing balance. This equilib­ rium seems to be a cornerstone in Roman religion, and it is reflected in a num­ ber of other religious, social, and political values and institutions that serve as the cement in Roman society. Examples include the quasi-contractual phrase do ut des and the phrase si deus, si dea, as well as the concept of fides as a pact built on mutual loyalty, as seen between a patron and a client, for instance. 109 Based on the body of literary sources it is possible to draw a picture of a fixed procedure in the treatment of prodigies. It seems that anyone was able to report an observation of an unusual event. Unfortunately, Livy only rarely mentions those who reported the prodigies, but temple keepers (PT 77) and private Roman citizens (PT 78) are examples. 110 The surviving sources most often simply use the passive form nuntiari or prodigium nuntiatur. Such an event must first and foremost be reported to the Senate. Normally the consuls would present these reports in the Senate, occasionally producing eyewitnesses for corroboration. 111 Reports could also be submitted in writing, as is apparent in Livy's notation that the proconsul of Macedonia sent a writ­ ten report to Rome regarding a prodigy.112 The Senate then had to decide whether the reported event was a public prodigy, prodigium publicum, that required public expiation.113 The Senate apparently had three options at this stage of the process: a) It could refuse to approve the unusual event as a prodigy. Reasons given for such refusals include too few witnesses and mistrust of the credibility of the witnesses in question, as in Livy 5.15.1: Prodigia interim multa nun­ tiari, quorum pleraque, et quia singuli auctores erant, parum credita spretaque, [...]. This means that the Senate could immediately resolve the matter by not approving the authenticity of the event. b) It could also choose to approve the event, but refuse to regard it as a pub­ lic affair pertinent to the interests of the state. In such cases, the Senate would declare the event to be a private portent, as in Livy 43.13.6: Duo non suscepta prodigia sunt, alterum quod in privato loco factum esset, -palmam enatam in impluvio suo T. Marcius Figulus nuntiabat -[...]. We must assume that after this, it was up to the person or people who observed the portent to decide whether they wished to carry out a private expiation (procuratio privata).114 According to the same passage in Livy, a prodigy 109

See for instance the graphic representation in Skydsgaard (1974) p. 46. Livy 43.13.4; 45.16.5. 111 Livy 22.1.14. 112 Livy 32.1.12. H3 Livy 43.13.7. 114 Cf. Dion. Hal. 46.333; Cic. Har. resp. 15; Gell. NA 6.1.3-4; Madvig (1882) vol. 2, p. 486; Wissowa (1912) p. 398. 110

48 could also be rejected because it occurred in the ager peregrinus: alterum quod in loco peregrino [...] This issue is discussed at length in chapter 5. c) Finally, the Senate could approve the event in question as a public prodi­ gy. The Senate would thereby officially assume responsibility for organiz­ ing the necessary ritual actions connected with the expiation of the prodi­ gy (suscipere prodigia). When a prodigy had been approved, the Senate had two options. It could either act itself to ensure the necessary expia­ tion, as in Livy 10.23.1: [...] Supplicationes in biduum senatus decrevit, or it could consult the religious specialists who possessed the extensive reli­ gious knowledge required to interpret the prodigies and the related cult practices, as in 42.20.2: patres et ad haruspices referri et decemviros adire libros iusserunt. The Senate's final decision on/approval of the expiation rites was presented in the form of a senatus consultum, as in 28.11.5: Prodigia [...] ea ex senatus consulto facta. Aulus Gellius quotes such a Senate decision in connection with a prodigy occurring in Regia, where the spears of Mars moved of their own accord (PT 116, 99 BC): Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae 4.6.2: Eius rei causa senatusconsultum factum est M. Antonio A. Postumio consulibus, eiusque exemplum hoc est: Quod C. lulius, L. filius, pontifex nuntiavit in sacrario in regia hastas Martias movisse, de ea re ita censuerunt, uti M. Antonius consul hostiis maioribus lovi et Marti procuraret et ceteris dis, quibus videretur, lactantibus. Ibus uti procurasset satis habendum censuerunt. Si quid succidaneis opus esset, robiis succideret. As the prodigy table shows, the Senate availed itself of three different groups of religious specialists to determine the meaning of a prodigy: the decemviri sacrisfaciundis, the pontij"ices, and the haruspices (cf. chapter 2.4). The replies and interpretations of the priests were given in the form of responsa and decreta, which the Senate could then choose to comply with or not. It was also up to the Senate to decide whether the relevant responses were to be made public.115 Finally, the Senate was to authorize the recommended procuratio, prescribed by one or more of the above-mentioned priesthoods: Livy 38.36.4: [...] supplicatio triduum pro collegio decemvirorum imperata fuit in omnibus compitis, quod luce inter horam tertiamferme et quartam tenebrae obortae fuerant. 40.19.4: His prodigiis cladibusque anxii patres decreverunt ut et consules quibus diis videretur hostiis maioribus sacrificarent, et decemviri libros adirent. Eorum decreto supplicatio circa omnia pulvinaria Romae in diem unum indicta est. Isdem auctoribus et senatus censuit et con­ sules edixerunt ut per totam Italiam triduum supplicatio etferiae essent.116 115

Cf. Cass. Dio 39.15: [...] ou yap €£fjv ovdkv

TCOV ZipuAAeicov, €i \xr\ rj |3ouXf| *JjT)<J>{aaiTO,

kg TO TTAfjGo? €£ayy€\A€a£ai [...] 116

Cf. Livy 39.46.5: Hac religione levatis altera iniecta, quod sanguine per biduum pluvisset in area

Vulcani; et per decemviros supplicatio indicta erat eius prodigii expiandi causa.

49 When the priesthoods involved had interpreted the prodigies and prescribed the appropriate expiations, and the Senate had approved the related expiation rituals, the formal responsibility for ensuring that these rituals were correctly performed lay with the consuls, who also frequently performed expiatory sac­ rifices themselves: Livy 27.23.4: In capita consulum re publica incolumi exitiabilis prodigiorum eventus vertit. 32.9.4: Eorum prodigiorum causa supplicatio unum diem habita, et consules rebus divinis operam dederunt placatisque diis in provincias profecti sunt [...] 31.12.10: Ea uti fierent, C. Aurelius consul ex decemvirorum responso curavit. Livy most often records the prodigy reports at the beginning of the official year, although in a few instances he does not report them until the end of the year. In several places, he explicitly states that the prodigies were reported and had to be expiated after the new consuls had been appointed, and before they departed to their respective provinces, as noted in 27.11.1: Prodigia quoque, priusquam ab urbe consules proficiscerentur, procurari placuit.117 There are several examples of consuls who were detained in Rome because of prodigy reports: Livy 32.9: Consulem T. Quinctium ... properantem in provinciam prodigia nuntiata atque eorum procuratio Romae tenuerunt. [...] Eorum prodigiorum causa supplicatio unum diem habita, et consules rebus divinis operam dederunt pla­ catisque diis in provinciasprofecti sunt [...] 27.23: Praetores in provinciasprofecti; consules religio tenebat, quodprodigiis aliquot nuntiatis non facile litabant. It is worth noting that the delays experienced by consuls due to prodigies and their expiation indicates that public prodigies as an institution cannot simply be viewed as nothing more than a manipulative tool wielded by a powerful political elite, as a number of scholars have previously claimed. On the con­ trary, we are dealing with a dialectic process in which the tradition/institution most certainly exerts an influence on the political establishment. The reported and approved public prodigies could either require swift expi­ ation, carried out as quickly as possible according to the prescriptions, or, if rapid expiations did not seem necessary, the prodigies could be collected and expiated at the beginning of the next year. This timing might ensure a good beginning for the new year and for those appointed to serve as magistrates.

117 The official Roman consular year originally began on 15 March, but began on 1 January from 153 BC onwards. Cf. Livy 33.26.6: Priusquam aut hipraetores ad bellum prope novum, quia turn primum suo nomine sine ullo Punico exercitu aut duce ad arma ierant, proficiscerentur, aut ipsi consules ab urbe moverent, procurare ut adsolet prodigia quae nuntiabantur iussi. 24A4.1'. Consules duabus urbanis legionibus scriptis supplementoque in alias lecto, priusquam ab urbe moverent, prodigia procurarunt quae nuntiata erant. Cf. also 32.9.1+4; 36.37.1; 38.36.4; 41.9.8.

50 Sources clearly testify to the effect that prodigies had an extremely high pri­ ority on the Senate's agenda. This is illustrated in the following passage from Livy. It indicates the order in which issues were dealt with in the Senate, which began by treating the prodigies and their expiations before moving on to other items on the agenda concerning affairs of state and the conduct of war: Livy 24.11.1: Perpetratis quae adpacem deum pertinebant, de re publica belloque gerendo et quantum copiarum et ubi quaeque essent consules ad senatum rettulerunt. This is in accordance with Varro's information, recounted by Gellius, that issues relating to the gods must be treated before issues relating to mortals. 118 The Roman Senate is commonly characterized by its primarily moral power, auctoritas, its advisory function, and its lack of any real powers. Yet in connec­ tion with matters relating to public portents and religio-political disputes involving portents, the sources and the religio-political procedure demonstrate that in practice, the Senate was the decision-making body.119 It is not surprising that the Senate, in addition to controlling domestic and foreign policy, had the authority to make decisions regarding the institution of public prodigies. The Senate was constantly in session and therefore tradition­ ally had a very detailed knowledge of public, religio-political issues. This insured continuity in these vital areas.120 This does not mean, however, that the importance of the interpretations and recommendations of the priesthoods should be underestimated, or that they can be regarded as mere formalities. On the contrary, it is quite remarkable that - at least to my knowledge - we have no examples that indicate the existence of conflicts between the decreta of the officially consulted priests and the deci­ sions handed down by the Senate. Naturally, the Senate could choose not to refer cases to the colleges of priests (see, for instance, chapter 2.3 for details on the Bibulus controversy), but it seems that in practice a consensus was estab­ lished once the Senate had actually consulted a priesthood following the nor­ mal procedure on matters relating to portents. There can be no doubt about the mutual interaction between the prodigies on the one hand and political and military actions on the other. What is more, the possibility of achieving a religious legitimization of political matters is incorporated into the procedure itself. In both historical and religio-historical scholarship this circumstance has more or less been used as proof of political 118

Gell. NA 14.7.9: [...] de rebusque divinis prius quam humanis ad senatum referendum esse [...] Cf. Livy 40.19.5 quoted above, as well as chapters 3,5, and 6 of this work. Portents also played an important role in connection with the Senate meeting itself. Senate decisions were not regarded as valid unless they had been made within a templum area, and during the Republic, Senate meetings were held in the temples, such as the Capitoline temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus and the temples of Fides, Concordia, Castor, Apollo, and Bellona. Prior to each meeting, auspices were taken and sacrifices were made involving the standard ritual interpretation of entrails. 120 Cf. chapter 5 for more on the ager Komanus and ager peregrinus. 119

51 manipulation and exploitation in Roman religion. Latte gives us one example in his chapter "Der Verfall der altromischen Religion", in which he quotes Livy on the Senate's decision to stop the prodigy reports because they were too numerous.121 As Latte concludes in that piece: Damit war eigentlich zugestanden, dass man bei diesen Siihnungen nur noch einer Form geniigte, die man ebensogut auch beiseite setzen konnte, wenn es niitzlich erschien. Das schlimmste an dieser Situation war, dass man trotzdem den ganzen Apparat von Auspizien und Prodigien beibehielt und scheinbar ernst nahm. I do not share Latte's indignation, and my conclusion is actually the opposite: a more detailed examination of the context shows that at the heart of the mat­ ter lies a high incidence of earthquake reporting. There was a continual influx of such reports early in the year (193 BC), which prevented the Senate's con­ vening, the transaction of any public business, and the departure of the consuls to their provinces. It is evident that the Sibylline Books were consulted and the necessary expiation rituals performed. At the same time, however, it is amply clear that such an unusual situation with continuous prodigy reporting, and the resulting obstruction of political life, could not go on. The reason I regard this episode as evidence of the essential role of public prodigies, as opposed to their being an inconsequential formality, is precisely that the Senate decided to put a stop to the reporting itself. This shows that once a prodigy had been reported, the Senate was obliged to diligently follow the fixed procedure. If public portents held no real significance at the time, one would indeed wonder why so many reports were submitted in the first place, and why the Senate did not choose to simply ignore or reject them. Another passage from Livy dealing with roughly the same period (208 BC) also demonstrates the great significance of prodigy matters, both in form and con­ tent. Livy describes how the pontifices objected to the consecration of the tem­ ple for Honos and Virtus, asserting that if the two deities had the same cella, it would be impossible to decide towards whom the expiations should be direct­ ed in the case of lightning striking the temple or other prodigies occurring there. The conclusion was that a second temple had to be built.122 Finally, Livy presents various examples of the political consequences of prodigies, as when a violent whirlwind knocked down a pillar and a statue in front of the temple of Jupiter on the Campus Martius in 152 BC (PT 85). The haruspices interpreted the prodigy and predicted death among the magistrates and priests - resulting in the immediate resignation of every last magistrate. Whether the incident is genuine or fabricated, or whether, for that matter, someone bribed the haruspices, the account bears out the claim that prodigies 121

Latte (1960) pp. 266-267; Livy 34.55.4.

122 Livy 27.25.7-10.

52 were taken seriously to such an extent that the story could be true. Otherwise it would hardly be meaningful. To sum up, one must admit that on the whole the source material regarding public prodigies demonstrates the decisive influence these portents had on social, political, and military life in Republican Rome. It must also be conced­ ed that the sources do not support the idea of any notable political manipula­ tion or the decline of Roman divination in the final years of the Republic. Besides, in this context, I do not believe that a few unrelated instances of polit­ ical manipulation involving prodigies during this period necessarily constitute proof of the decline of Roman religion. Perhaps quite the contrary, in that suc­ cessful religio-political activity - and manipulation if you will - must surely require that the religious ideas and rituals actually exist, and that their signifi­ cance remains firmly established in a responsive society. This aspect will be clarified and further discussed in chapter 3, which deals with Cicero and pub­ lic divination.

PT No.

Sources

Location

Prodigy

Incidence

Priesthood

Expiation

/3C

1

Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6.17.2-3

4%

1

no crops

2

Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 7.68.1-2

490

5

unusual visions; voices are heard without anyone speaking; unnatural offspring of humans and cattle; divinely possessed women wailingly . portend misfortune; plague among cattle and people

3

Livy 2.42.10-11; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 8.89.3-5

483

Rome

1 (legio)

incestum of the Vestal Virgin Oppia

vates, μάντεις

4

Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 9.40

472

Rome

2 Uegio)

incestum of the Vestal Virgin Urbina; plague - particularly among pregnant women

μάντεις ἅπαντες

1

libri Sibyllini

votum by A. Postumius regarding a temple for Ceres, Liber, and Libera

Historical events 493 BC [?] foedus cassianum

Comments

the temple is consecrated three years later by consul Sp. Cassius, cf. Plin. HN 35.154 see Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 7.68.3 and Livy 2.36-37 concerning a private dream as a public matter

καὶ οἱ τῶν ἱερῶν ἐξηγηταὶ

conviction and punishment; the two guilty men are flogged to death in public

Urbina is convicted, flogged, and buried alive; one of the two guilty men commits suicide and the other is flogged to death | in thefoium

social and political unrest: war against the Veii and uprising among the Volsci

Plutarch (Vit. Num. 10; Quaest. Rom. 96) meticulously describes the religious punishment for the incestum of Vestal Virgins: being buried alive; Dion. Hal. refers to the woman as Opimia according to Dion. Hal. the plague ceased immediately after this

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

5

Livy 3.5.14

464

Rome

6

Livy 3.7.6-8; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 9.67; Oros. 2.12.2

463

in and outside Rome

1

plague among animals and humans

only the Senate is mentioned

supplicatio

7

Livy 3.10.5-7; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 10.2.2-6; Plin. HN 2.147; Val. Max. 1.6.5

461

in and outside Rome

4

flames in the sky; earthquake; a cow speaks; shower of flesh

Ilviri, libri Sibylliniy HavTcis*

sacrifices to

Livy 3.29.9

458

Rome (Capitoline)

1

wolves pursued by dogs are seen on the Capitoline

436

in the country

1

earthquake

8

9

Historical events

BC

Livy 4.21.5; | Oros. 2.13.8

1 {legio)

three days of feriae

conflagration in the sky

e^aKGCJTTlplOlS T€ Kai d-noTpOTTaiois-

Comments

the prodigy occurs when the army returns home frcm war against the Aequi and the Volsci

-

Livy also mentions that the year before a speaking cow was not believed - as opposed to this year Dion. Hal. provides details on the shower of flesh, (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 10.2.4)

lustratio on the Capitoline Ilviri

obsecratio

possibly the plague is also a prodigy here | (Livy 4.21.2)

PT No.

Sources

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Ilviri, libri Sibyllini

temple to Apollo

it is evident from Livy that other expiations for the plague take place as well, but no details are given

Livy also mentions private cult and the freeing of prisoners in this context (Livy 5.13.7-8)

BC

10

Livy 4.25.3

433

in and outside Rome

1

plague

11

Cic. Rep. 1.25

401

in and outside Rome

1

solar eclipse

12

Livy 5.13.4-7; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 12.9; August. De civ. D. 3.17

399

Rome

1

plague

Ilviri, libri Sibyllini

lectisternium for Apollo, Latona, Diana, Hercules, Mercury, and Neptune

13

Livy 5.15.2; 5.51.6; Cicero Div. 1.100; 2.69; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 12.10ff; Plut. Vit.Cam. 3-4

398

Lacus Albanus

1

unusual rise in the water level of the lake

haruspex/ vates (an old man from Veii);

draining of the water from the lake; the prodigy is also linked to a ceremonial error in connection with the Latin Festival

libri fatales and the Delphic Oracle; it is predicted that if the water is artificially | drained

Historical events

Veii is captured by Camillus in 396l3C;to express their gratitude at the victory, the Romans send a golden bowl to the Delphic Oracle

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

from the lake, the Romans will be able to take Veii 14

Livy 7.2.1-7.3.8; August. De civ. D. 2.8; 3.17; Oros. 3.4.1-6

365-363

Rome

15

Livy 7.6.1-7; Varro Ling. 5.148; Val. Max. 5.6.2;

362

Rome (Forum Rom an um)

347-

Rome

2

plague; flooding of the Tiber

pontifices (according to Augustine and Orosius)

lectistemium; institution of the Etruscan ludi scaenici; a dictator is appointed by the Senate to drive a nail into the temple of Jupiter on the Capitoline

the Tiber overflows its banks and floods the Circus during the games; an expiation is made according to an old practice that involves driving a nail

1 ilegio)

a bottomless pit opens in the middle of the forum (Lacus Curtius)

libri Sibyllini; vates; haruspices (according to Procilius - in Varro)

a sacrifice of the things most precious to the Roman people: weapons and valour - the equestrian M. Curtius throws himself into the pit, armed and on horseback

for two other versions of the Lacus Curtius account, see Livy 1.12.8-10; 1.13.5; Varro LL 5.149-50; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom.2A2; Plut. Vit. Rom. 18

Plin. HN 25.20.78; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 14.11; Cass. Dio 30.1 in Zonar. 7.25; Oros.3.5 16

Livy 1 7.27.1-2

1 346

1

plague

Ilviri, lihri \ Sibyllini

lectistemium

a treaty of | friendship

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Prodigy

Incidence

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

between Rome and Carthage is renewed/ established [?], cf.Polyb.3.22; Diod. Sic. 16.69 17

Livy 7.28.7-8

344

Rome;

2

shower of stones; solar eclipse

18

Livy 8.18.11

331

Rome

1

a poison scandal in which 170 matrons are found guilty is perceived as a prodigy: Prodigii ea res loco habita captisque magis mentibus quam consceleratis similis visa

19

Livy 8.25.1

326

Rome

1

20

Livy 10.23.1; Cass. Dio 8 in Zon. 8.1

296

Rome (Capitoline; Forum Romanum)

4 (legio)

libri Sibyllini

343 BC sees the outbreak according to tradition - of the first war against the Samnites

Livy refers to the first shower of stones (under Tullus Hostilius) at the Mons Albanus (Livy 131)

a dictator is appointed, and according to ancient tradition he drives a nail into the temple of Jupiter

plague [?]

blood, honey, and milk flow from the altar of Jupiter on the Capitoline; in the forum a bronze statue of Victoria moves of its own accord, facing towards the Gauls

supplicatio both in the city and among the finitimi populi

only the Senate is mentioned in Livy; Cass. Dio: \LOLVT\S

lectisternium

second [?] war against the Samnites begins

two days of supplicatio with wine and incense provided by the state; an Etruscan

298-290 BC: third [?] war against the Samnites

|JLaVT€lS

| interprets the

here Livy seem to abridge his list; the prodigies give way to a more entertaining account of an argument between patrician and 1 plebeian women;

PT No.

Sources

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

21

Livy 10.31.8; August. De civ. D. 3.17

295

in and outside Rome

3

plague; shower of earth; lightning strikes many times among the army of Appius Claudius

libri Sibyllini

22

Livy 10.47.6; Per. 11; Ov. Met. 15. 622; Plut. Qua est. Ran. 94; Val. Max. 1.8.2; August. De civ. D. 3.17; Oros. 3.22.5; Plin. HN 29.72; Strabo 12.567

293/ 292

in and outside Rome

1

plague

libri Sibyllini

23

Expiation

BC

Livy Per.

1 14;

278

Rome | (Capitoline)

1

lightning strikes the statue of | Jupiter Summanus on the roof

haruspices

Historical events

Comments

statue and blood as favourable/ victory, but the honey as disease and the milk as famine

Cass. Dio lists other prodigies, however

one day of supplicatio; in addition, according to the libri Sibyllini, Aesculapius is to be sailed to Rome from Epidaurus

According to Livy, the consuls are so preoccupied with war that year that they cannot have Aesculapius brought to Rome; this is done some years later, however, and the temple of Aesculapius on an island in the Tiber is consecrated on 1 January 291 BC

a temple to

1 Jupiter

280-270 BC war rega rdless of t h e m uc h | against Pyrrhus | debated etymology of

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

Summanus near the Circus Maximus

and the conquest of southern Italy

the name Summanus, in Antiquity he was regarded as the god of thunderstorms by night, whereas Jupiter Fulgur was the god of thunderstorms by day

liC

of the temple on the Capitoline; the head, which has fallen off, is found (in the Tiber) by the haruspices

Cic. Div. 1.16; Ov. Fast. 6.729; CIL I (2) p. 320; Plin. HN 29.57 24

Gell. NA 4.5.1-7

no date, circa 270 [?]

25

Oros. 4.4.1^1

269

26

Oros. 4.5.1

267

Rome (Comitium)

1

lightning strikes the statue of Horatius Codes at the Comitium

Rome; Formiae; ager Calenus

4

lightning strikes the temple of Salus and the city walls; wolves run into the city with a corpse that they tear apart; in Formiae lightning strikes the city walls; a flaming pit appears on the ager Calenus

3

blood wells up out of the ground; milk rains from the 1 sky; springs bubble with blood

haruspices

due to enmity, the haruspices prescribe the wrong expiation: placing the statue in a lower position; they aie exposed and killed; the correct expiation is placing the statue in a higher position

Gell. attributes the story to the annates maximi and to Verrius Flaccus' Rerum Memoria Dignarum

PT No.

Location

Sources

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

/3C

27

Oros. 4.5.7; August. De civ. D. 3.17

266

Rome

1

plague

libri Sibyllini

28

Livy Per. 49; Festus 441.4; Varro in Censorinus DN 17.8.10

249

Rome (Campus Martius)

3

the war; lightning strikes; disease

libri Sibyllini

ludi saeculares are held at the Terentum (an altar on the Campus Martius)

29

Plin. HN 18.286

238

libri Sibyllini

temple to Flora institution of the Floralia

Historical events

Comments

264-241 BC, First Punic War

the prodigy itself is unclear; Pliny simply writes that the Floralia was established because of the Sibylline oracle (cf. Veil. Pat. 1.14.8, who dates the consecration of the temple t o 241 BC)

30

Plin. HN 7.120.35; Val. Max. 8.15.12

during Second Punic War (218201)

1

Rome

1

the impudicitia of Roman matrons

Xviriy libri Sibyllini

dedication of a statue to Venus Verticordia

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

1

lightning strikes the Capitoline near the temple of Apollo

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

31

Cass. Dio 12.50

228

Rome (Capitoline)

32

Cass. Dio 12 in Zon. 8.19; Plut. Vit. Marc. 3; Orosius 4.13.3

225

Rome

33

Cass. Dio 12 in Zon. 8.20; Plut. Vit. Marc. 4; Oros. 4.13.12

223

Rome (Forum Romanum); Picenum; Etruria; Ariminum

5

in Picenum blood flows in the river; in Etruria the sky is on fire; in Ariminum the light of day shines at night; in several places three moons are visible; a vulture settles in the Forum Romanum for days

34

Livy 21.62; Val. Max. 1.6.5; Cass. Dio 13 in Zon. 8.22.5; Livy 21.46.1-3

218

Rome (Forum Olitorium; Forum Boarium); Lanuvium; Amiternum; Picenum; Caere; Gallia

12

at the Forum Olitorium a sixmonth-old freeborn infant shouts "triumphus"; at the Forum Boarium an ox ascends, of its own accord, to the third floor of a building and then hurls itself out because of the tumult among the inhabitants; visions of ships shine in the sky; at the Forum Olitorium the temple of Spes is struck by lightning; at Lanuvium a slain victim | moves and a raven flies into

Historical events

the prodigy is linked to the Gauls

libri Sibyllini Xviriy libri Sibyllini

Xviriy libri Sibyllini

Comments

burial alive of a Gallic man and woman and a Greek man and woman

noveindiale in Picenum; lustratio and bostiae maiores in Rome; forty pounds of gold to Juno in Lavinium; in Rom e th e ma trons dedicate a bronze statue to Juno on the Aventine; lectisternium at Caere and | supplicatio to

the expiation is connected with a responsum indicating that Gauls and Greeks would capture the city

218-201: Second Punic War

Livy explicitly says that in response to the shower of stones in Picenum, a novemdiale was declared, and that in response to the other prodigies, they turned to the libri Sibyllini

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Livy 22.1.8-20; Val. Max. 1.6.5; Plut. Vit.Fab. Max. 2; Oros. 4.15.1; Macrob. Sat. 1.6.13-14

217

Rome (Via Appia); Sicily; Sardinia; Praeneste; Arpi; Capena; Caere; Antium; Falerii; Capua

19

on Sicily the spears of soldiers break into flames; on Sardinia, flames spring from the staff of a night watchman; on the coast many fires occur; two shields sweat blood; soldiers are struck by lightning; the solar disc seems diminished; in Praeneste burning stones fall from the sky; in Arpi shields are seen in the sky and the sun seems to be fighting the moon; in Capena two moons rise in the daytime; in Caere the springs flow with blood, and blood trickles in the very

Historical events

Fortuna on Mount Algidus; lectisternium for Juventas; supplicatio at the temple of Hercules; five hostiae maiores for Genius and a votum for res publica by the praetor Gaius A. Serranus the prodigies in Scipio's camp are expiated by procuratio

the temple of Juno andlands on the pulvinar; a t Amiternum people are seen in shining robes, but only at a distance; at Picenum there is a shower of stones; at Caere the lots shrink; in Gallia a wolf snatches the sword of a guard; later, Livy mentions two prodigies in Scipio's camp: a wolf walks unharmed through the camp; and a swarm of bees settles in a tree over Scipio's tent;

35

Expiation

BC

Xviri, libri Sibyllini

1

a fifty-pound golden thunderbolt to Jupiter; gifts of silver to Juno and Minerva; hostiae maiores to Juno Regna on the Aventineand JunoSospita in Lanuvium; t he ma t rons hold a lectisternium for and give money to JunoReginaon 1 the Aventine; freed

the Battle of Lake Trasimene

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

spring of Hercules; in Antium bloody heads of grain fall into the basket during harvesting; in Falerii the sky seems to split into a rift, from which rays of light shine; lots shrink, and one falls out of its own accord, bearing the inscription "Mavors shakes his spear", and at the same time the statue of Mars and the images of the wolves on the Via Appia sweat; in Capua the sky seems to be on fire and the moon seems to fall to earth during a rain shower

36

Expiation

BC

Cic. Div. 177-78; Plin. HN 2.200; Livy 22.9.7-11; Per. 22 Plut. Vit.Fab. Max. 3

(217)

Rome; all of Italy; several islands; Liguria; Gallia; Lake Trasimene

4 (legio)

Historical events

Comments

According to Pliny, as many as 57 earthquake reports were submitted this year

Qcero states that Coelius is his source, and that the earthquakes began at the same time as the Battle of Lake Trasimene; the temples to Venus Erycina and Mens were built on the | Capitol in e

women give money toFeionia; lectistemium; hostiae maiores in Ardea; sacrifices at the temple of Saturn and Saturnalia

Livy mentions the following lesser prodigies (minorihus prodigiis): wooly-haired goats; a hen that transforms into a cock; a cock that transforms into a hen

the lesser prodigies do not involve the lihri Sibyllini (Livy 22.1.15)

hostiae maiores; hostiae ladentes; three days of supplicatio in all temples

earthquake; Flaminius ignores unfavourable auspices; his horse stumbles and falls in front of the statue of Jupiter Stator; a standard-bearer cannot move the standard

Xviri, libri Sibyllini

regarding Flaminius: votum t o Mars; ludi magniiox Jupiter; building of temples to Venus Erycina and Mens; supplicatio; lectistemium; \ ver sacrum

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

Xviri, libri Sibyllini

it is only said that these prodigies are expiated in accordance with the directions in the Sibylline Books

Roman defeat at Cannae

Livy notes that dripping blood is a frequently occurring prodigy

RC

37

Livy 22.36.6-9; (cf. Cass. Dio 15 in Zon.9.33)

216

Rome (Aventine; road to Campus Martius); Aricia; Sabine territory; Caere

5

shower of stones on the Aventine; shower of stones in Aricia; in the Sabine territory blood drips from statues of deities; in Caere there is blood in the springs; on the way to the Campus Martius, people are killed by lightning

38

Livy 22.57.2-6; Per. 22; Plut. V/V. Fab. Max. 18

(216)

Rome

1

the Vestal Virgins Opimia and Floronia break the vow of chastity (Floronia even does so with a scriba pontificius by the name of L. Cantilius)

39

Livy 23.31.15; 23.39.5; Cass. Dio 15 in Zon. | 9.3.3

215

Sinuessa; Lanuvium

4

the sea is aflame; in Sinuessa a cow gives birth to a foal; in Lanuvium blood drips from statues in the temple of Juno Sospita and there is a shower | of stones around the temple

Xviri, libri fatales; Q.Fab. Pictor is sent to the Delphic Oracle regarding the many prodigies concerning the war and thesituatbn after the defeat at | Cannae

one of the Vestal Virgins commits suicide, the other is buried alive, and Cantilius is flogged to death; Livy explicitly states that the violation of this nefas is turned into a prodigy

a Gallic man and woman and a Greek man and woman are buried alive at the Forum Boarium. (Livy describes this type of sacrifice as extraordinary and un-Roman)

the shower of stones is expiated by a novemdiale (according to Livy "as usual"); of the 1 other prodigies he |

alliance between Hannibal and Philip V of Macedonia; Syracuse joins forces with the

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

merely says that they are duly expiated 40

Livy 24.10.6-24.1 1.1

214

Rome (Forum Romanum; Forum Boarium; Vicus Insteius; Capitoline; Janiculum); Lanuvium; Apulia; Mantua; Cales; Sabine territory; Gabii; Praeneste; Sicily; Marrucini; Spoletium; Hadria

19

in Lanuvium ravens build a haruspices nest in the temple of Juno Sospita; in Apulia a palm tree bursts into flames; in Mantua there is blood in the sea at the mouth of the Mincius river; in Cales there are showers of chalk; in the Forum Boarium there is a rain of blood; in Vicus Insteius a subterranean spring flows with a strong current; lightning strikes the Atrium Publicum on the Capitoline, and the temples of Vulcan and Vacuna; lightning also strikes a public road in the Sabine territory and a wall and a gate in Gabii; in Praeneste the spear of Mars moves; on Sicily an ox speaks; among the Marrucini a child shouts "Io triumph e" from its mother's womb; in Spoletium a man turns into a woman; in Hadria an alter and people in white robes are seen in the skies; in the Forum Romanum a swarm of bees is seen by some, followed by a vision of armed legions on the

Historical events

Comments

Carthaginians

hostiae maiores; supplicatio for all deities with pulvinaria in Rome

ON

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Janiculum, while others present see nothing unusual 41

Livy 24.44.7-9

213

[lacuna Caietae proposed by Luterbacher]; Aricia; Tarracina; Compsa; Amiternum

5

lightning strikes the wall and gates in [lacuna]; in Aricia lightning strikes the temple of Jupiter; on the river near Tarracina visions of war ships are seen; in the temple of Jupiter Vicilinus in Compsa the clamour of weapons is heard; blood flows in the river near Amiternum

42

Livy 257.7-9

212

Rome (Capitoline); Mons Albanus; Suessula; Cumae; Reate

8

showers of stones fall on the Mons Albanus for two days; lightning strikes two temples on the Capitoline; lightning is seen many places on the fortifications over Suessula, where two guardsmen are killed; in Cumae lightning strikes the wall and some towers, which collapse; in Reate an enormous stone seems to fly, and the sun seems bloody and redder than usual

43

Livy 26.23.4-6

211

Rome (Forum Subertanum); Anagnia; Fregellae; Eretum;

6

on the pediment of the temple of Concordia a Victoria is struck by lightning, falls down to the Victorias on the antefix, and remains there without falling to the ground; in | Anagnia and Fregellae

1 Reate

pontifices

one day of supplicatio; novemdiale; certain unspecified rituals

hostiae maiores; one day of obsecratio; novemdiale

the Romans capture Syracuse

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

lightning strikes wall sand gates; in the Forum Sube tt a num streams of blood flow for a whole day, in Eietum there is a shower of stones, and in Reate a mule gives birth 44

Livy 27.4.11-15

210

45

Livy 27.11.1-6

209

Rome (Tusculum); Anagnia; Tarracina; Tarquinii; Capena

Rome (Mons Albanus; Lacus Albanus); Ostia; Capua; Sinuessa; 1 Privernum

1

14

in Tusculum a lamb is born pontifices with a milk-filled udder; lightning strikes the top of the temple of Jupiter and rips off almost the entire roof; around the same time in Anagnia lightning strikes in front of the gate and the fire bums for a day and a night without being fuelled; in the grove of Diana in Anagnia birds abandon their nests; in Tarracina great serpents frolic in the sea like playful fish; in Tarquinii a pig is born with a human head; in the grove of Feronia on the ager Capenas four statues sweat blood for a day and a night on the Mons Albanus lightning strikes a statue of Jupiter and a tree near the temple; lightning strikes a basin in Ostia; the town wall and the temple of Fortuna in Capua; the wall and a gate in Sinuessa; the waters of | Albanus flow with blood; in

hostiae maiores; one day of supplicatio at all pulvinaria in Rome; one day of supplicatio in the grove of Feronia on the ager Capenas

hostiae maiores\ supplicatio at all pulvinaria; one day of ohsecratio

Historical events

Comments

pr

Sources

No.

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

the cella of the temple of Fors Fortuna in Rome a figure falls by itself from the garland on the statue's head into its hand; in Privernum a cow speaks; and in the peopled square a vulture flies down into a shop; in Sinuessa a hermaphrodite is born; it rains milk; a child is born with the head of an elephant 46

Livy 27.23.1^

208

Capua; Cumae; Casinum; Ostia; Caere; Volsinii

9

47

Livy 27.37.1-15

207

Rom (Armilustrum); Veii; Minturnae; Atella; Capua; Frusino

10

in Capua lightning strikes the t em pies of Fortu na a n d of Ma rs as well as some graves; in Cumae mice nibble at the gold in the temple of Jupiter; in Casinum a large swarm of bees settles in the forum; in Ostia lightning strikes the wall and a gate; in Caere a vulture flies into the temple of Jupiter; in Volsinii blood flows in the sea ponti/ices; Shower of stones in Veii; in Xviri; Minturnae ligjitning strikes haruspices the temple of Jupiter and the grove of Marica; in Atella ligjitning strikes the wall and a gate, and a stream of blood is seen at the gate; in Capua a wolf walks through the gate at night and manges a guard; (theprodigies are expiated 1 and new ones are reported:)

one day of supplicatio; hostiae maiores

novemdiale (for expiation of the shower of stones in Veii); hostiae maiores; one day of supplicatio

the Romans defeat Hasdrubal at the river of Metaurus

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year BC

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

a shower of stones in the Armilustrum; in Frusino a hermaphrodite as big as a fouryear-old is born; while the 27 virgines are learning the expiation hymn relating to the hermaphrodite prodigy in the temple of Jupiter Stator, lightning strikes the temple of J u n o Regina on the Aventine

Priesthood

Livy states that t h e haruspices are called in from Etruria in connection with t h e hermaphro­ dite, which was regarded as a bad omen, and the stipulated expiation seems t o become the standard for hermaphro­ dite prodigies; according to the haruspices the lightning prodigy relates t o the matrons; the curule aediles

Expiation

novemdiale; according to the haruspices the hermaphrodite, without touching the ground, must be removed from ager romanus and drowned in the sea, and alive, it is enclosed in a box and lowered into the sea; in addition, 3 x 9 virgines are to walk singing through the city; they pause in the forum where, singing and tapping the rhythm with their feet, they pass a rope from hand to hand; the matrons sacrifice and give J u n o a golden ewer; the Xviri appoint a date on

Historical events

Comments

Livy lists the order of the procession: first the cows, then the statues, then the 27 virgines in long robes, and finally the Xviri in toga praetexta and bearing laurel wreaths; the route runs from the temple of Apollo through the Porta Carmentalis, down Vicus Iugarius to the Forum, and down Vicus Tuscus and Velabrum across the F o r u m Boarium, then finally down Clivus Puhlicius to the temple of J u n o Regina; there the Xviri sacrifice the cows, and the statues are carried into the temple

pr

Sources

No.

48

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

assemble the matrons on the Capitoline - both those living in the city and those living up to ten miles outside the city; Xviri

which are sacrificed two white cows and two cypress-wood statues of Juno; the hymn is written by Livius Andronicus

only the Senate's decree regarding the expiations and the consuls are mentioned

hostiae maiores; one day of supplicatio

BC

Livy 28.11.1-7; Cass. Dio 17.57-40

206

Rome (Circus Flaminius); Tarracina; Satricum; Antium; Caere; Alba; Fregellae; agerKomanus

14

lightning strikes the temple of Jupiter in Tarracina; in Satricum lightning strikes the temple of Mater Matuta; in Satricum two snakes slide into the temple of Jupiter; in Antium bloody heads of grain are seen; in Caere a twoheaded pig and a lamb that was, at the same time, male and female are born; in Alba two suns are seen; in Fregellae light breaks forth during the night; in the ager Romanus an ox speaks; at the Circus Flaminius the alter of Neptune drips with sweat; the temples of Ceres, Salus, and Quirinus are struck by 1 lightning;

Historical events

Philip V of Macedonia makes peace with Rome

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Livy 29.10.4-8; 29.11; 29.14; Ov. Fast. 4. 179ff; Plin. HN 7.120; App. Hann.

205/ 204

Rome; Setia; Tarracina; Anagnia; Lanuvium

8

203

in and outside Rome: Capitoline; Antium; Capua; Reate; Anagnia; Frusino; Arpinum

9

%\ auctor ignotus De vir. ill. 46 50

Livy 30.2.9-13

frequent showers of stones; two suns; light in the middle of the night; in Setia a meteor is seen to move from east to west; in Tarracina lightning strikes a gate; in Anagnia lightning strikes a gate and many places in the wall; in the temple of Juno Sospita in Lanuvium, noise is heard and a dreadful rumble

ravens eat from the gold on the Capitoline; in Antium mice nibble on a golden wreath; the entire region of Capua is full of locusts; in Reate a five-footed foal is born; in Anagnia shooting stars are seen, and then a great meteor; in Frusino the sun is surrounded by two rings; in Arpinum the earth | collapses into a great cavity;

Historical events

Comments

the quenching of the flame at the temple of Vesta is expiated by hostiae maiores and supplicatio

the negligent Vestal Virgin is flogged by the ponti/ex maxmus Publius Licinius

Xviri, libri Sibyllini; the Delphic Oracle

one day of supplicatio; novemdiale'y introduction of Cybele cult in Rome

the answer from the Delphic Oracle states that if an enemy should wage war on Italian soil, he would be defeated, if the Idaean Mother of Pessinus was brought to Rome

pontifices advise on which deities sacrifices must be made to

hostiae maiores

the flame at the temple of Vesta goes out, due to the negligence of a Vestal Virgin

49

Expiation

BC

Hannibal withdraws from southern Italy

Cf. chapter 2.2 for more on hepatoscopy

pr

Sources

No.

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

one of the consuls finds the head of the liver absent in his first victim 51

Livy 30.38.8-10

202

Rome (Palatine); Cumae; Velitrae; Aricia; Frusino

8

in Cumae there is a partial solar eclipse and a shower of stones; in the Velitrae region the earth collapses into deep pits into which trees plummet; in Aricia lightning strikes the forum and the surrounding shops; in Frusino lightning strikes several places on the wall and in a gate; there is a shower of stones on the Palatine

novemdiale (because of the showers of stones); hostiae maiores

52

Livy 31.12.5-10

200

Lucania; Privernum; Lanuvium; Sabini; Frusino; Sinuessa;

8

in Lucania flames are seen in Xviriy libri the sky; in Privernum the sun Sibyllini is red all day; in the temple of Juno Sospita in Lanuvium a great noise is heard at night; in the Sabine territory a hermaphrodite is born, and a sixteen-year-old hermaphrodite is found; in Frusino a lamb with a pig's head is born; in Sinuessa a pig with a human head is born; in Lucania a fivefooted foal

Livy only writes of the expiations in connection with the hermaphrodites and refers to a similar prodigy in 207 BC (cf. PT 47); the Xviri/libri Sibyllini prescribe the same expiatory rites as in207BC; the hermaphrodites | are lowered into

Scipio defeats Hannibal in the Battle of Zama

Livy explicitly states that the consul ensures performance of the rituals in accordance with the responsum of the Xviri

Livy states that the five-footed foal was | found in agro publico

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

the sea and 3 x 9 virgines walk through the city singing; a sacrificial gift is given to Juno Regina; the hymn is written by Publius Licinius Tegula 53

Livy 32.1.10-14 Livy Per. 32

199

Suessa; Formiae; Ostia; Velitrae; Bruttium; Macedonia

11

in Suessa the wall and two gates are struck by lightning; in Formiae the temple of Jupiter is struck; in Ostia the temple of Jupiter is struck; in Velitrae the temples of Apollo and Sangus are struck, and hair grows in the temple of Hercules; in Bruttium a fivefooted foal is born, and three chicks each with three feet are born;

only the consuls are mentioned

hostiae maiores

in Macedonia a laurel grows up from the stern of a longship

haruspices prescribe expiation regarding the Macedonian prodigy

regarding the Macedonian prodigy, one day of supplicatio is prescribed, as well as offerings at all pulvinaria

According to Livy, notification of the first prodigies is reported to the Senate by legati, while the propraetor writes about the prodigy in Bruttium and the Macedonian | prodigy is reported by

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

means of a letter from the proconsul 54

Livy 32.9.2-4

198

Veii; Lanuvium; Ardea; Capua; Arretium; Velitrae; Suessa Aurunca; Sinuessa

55

Livy 32.29.1-2

197

Rome (Capitoline); Fregenae; Frusino; Aefula; Formiae

56

Livy 33.26.7-9

196

Rome; Sabine territory; 1 Capena

10

in Veii li^itning strikes a public toad; in Lanuvium the temple of Jupiter is struck; in Ardea the temple of Hercules; in Capua a wall, towers, and the so-called White Shrine are struck; in Anetium the sky seems to be burning; in Velitrae the earth collapses into a pit three iugera wide; in Suessa Aurunca a twoheadedlambis born; andin Sinuessa a pig with a human head is born

9

in Rome lightning strikes the temples of Vulcan and Summanus and a wolf runs up onto the Capitoline; in Fregenae lightning strikes walls and gates; in Frusino it is light at night; in Aefula a two-headed lamb with five feet is born; in Formiae two wolves run through the city and mangle passers-by

4

a Roman equestrian and his horse are killed by lightning in the Sabine territory; in Capena | lightning strikes the temple of

only the consuls are mentioned

one day of supplicatio

hostiae maiores

slave rebellions in Latin cities

slave rebellion in Etruria

according to Livy the name of the Roman equestrian is P. 1 Vilius; the route of

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Feronia; at the temple of Moneta two lance points burn; a wolf runs through the city

Historical events

Comments

the wolf runs through the Porta Esquilina to the forum, onwards along Vicus Tuscus and Cermalus and out through the Porta Capena |

57

Livy 34.45.6-8

194

Rome (Forum Romanum; Comitium; Capitoline); Nar; Ariminum; Picenum; Adria

9

blood drips in the Forum and pontifices the Comitium, and on the Capitoline; frequent showers of earth; the head of a statue of Vulcan burns; milk flows in the river Nar; in Ariminum freeborn infants are born with no eyes and nose; in Picenum one is born without hands and feet, there is a shower of stones in Adria

58

Livy 34.55.1-5; 35.9.3-5

193

Rome (Tiber; Porta Flumentana; Porta Caelimontana; Aventine); Aricia; Lanuvium; Capua

9

frequent earthquakes; the Tiber overflows its banks; buildings collapse near the Porta Flumentana; lightning strikes the Porta Caelimontana and the wall; showers of stones in Aricia, in Lanuvium and on the Aventine; in Capua a large swarm of bees settles on the temple of Mars at the forum

Xviri, libri Sibyllini

the shower of stones is expiated by novemdiale; of the others it is simply said that they are expiated according to the decree of the pontifices

expiation of the earthquake: three days of supplicatio', expiation of the other prodigies: novemdiale, supplicatio, and lustratio of the city; the bees are carefully collected and | burned

Livy states that the earthquake prodigies were so frequent that it was inconvenient because of the many feriae during which the Senate could not assemble and the consuls were preoccupied with expiations; upon the initiative of the | Senate, the consuls

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

ISC

Historical events

Comments

asserted that if on a given day one earthquake had already been reported, and feriae stipulated, then no more reports were allowed to be submitted 59

Livy 35.21.2-5

192

Rome; Picenum; Arretium; Amiternum; Formiae

6

in Picenum a she-goat gives birth to six kids at once; in Arretium a boy is born with one hand; in Amiternum there is a shower of earth; in Formiae lightning strikes the wall and gate; in Rome an ox belonging to the consul Gnaeus Domitius says: "Roma, cave tib?

haruspices

the first four prodigies are expiated by supplicatio; the prescription of the haruspices regarding the speaking ox is that it must be diligently cared for

60

Livy 36.37.2-6

191

Rome (Carinae); Tarracina; Amiternum; Minturnae; Volturnum

6

near Carinae two oxen ascend the stairs to the roof of a building; in Tarracina and Amitemium there is a shower of stones; in Minturnae lightning strikes the temple of Jupiter and some businesses around the forum; at the mouth of the river in Volturnum two ships are struck by lightning and burn

haruspices; Xviri, libri Sibyllini

the haruspices declare that the two oxen must be burned alive and their ashes thrown into the Tiber; according to a Senate decision, the Xviri consult the libri Sibyllini, which prescribe: | fasting in honour

1

according to Livy the prodigy of the speaking ox kindles the greatest fear

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

of Ceres, to be repeated every fifth year; novemdiale; one day of supplicatio, in which the participants bear wreaths ; a sacrifice is performed by consul P. Cornelius 61

Livy 37.3.1-6; Obseq. 1

190

Rome; Puteoli; Nurcia; Tusculum; Reate

6

in Rome lightning strikes the temple of Juno Lucina; in Puteoli lightning strikes many places and kills two men; in Nurcia a storm-cloud is seen in a clear sky, and two freemen die; in Tusculum there is a shower of earth; in Reate a mule gives birth

pontifices; Xviri

the pontifices prescribe supplicatio with ten freeborn boys and girls, whose parents are still alive, as well as a nightly sacrifice of hostiae lactentes, performed by the Xviri

Q.

Livy 38.36.4; Obseq. 2

188

Rome (Aventine)

2

darkness of night between the third and fourth hour of the day; shower of stones on the Aventine

Xviri

three days of supplicatio at all crossroads; novemdiale due to the shower of stones

Historical events

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

63

Livy 38.447

187

in and outside Rome

1

plague in the city and in the country

Xviri

three days of supplicatio for the health of the people

64

Livy 39.22.3-5; Obseq. 3

186

Rome (Capitoline); Picenum; Umbria

4

in Picenum showers of stones for three days; flames from the sky burn the clothes off of people; lightning strikes the temple of Ops on the Capitoline; in Umbria a twelve-year-old hermaphrodite is discovered

pontifices; haruspices

novemdiale due to the showers of stones; one day of supplicatio; the consuls sacrifice hostiae maiores; lustratio of the city; the hermaphrodte is removed from Roman soil and killed

65

Livy 39.46.5; 39.56.6; Obseq. 4; Oros. 4.20.30;

183

Rome; island near Sicily

2

for two days there are rains of blood in the area around Vulcan and Concordia; a new island emerges near Sicily

Xviri

supplicatio

66

Livy 40.2.1^1; Obseq. 5

182

Rome (Capitoline; Aventine; Circus 1 Maximus);

5

haruspices

twenty hostiae maiores; one day of supplicatio

in Rome a terrible storm knocks down statues on the Capitoline and at the Circus Maximus and destroys 1 temples; in Reate a three-

Historical events

the Bacchanalia affair

Comments

in Obsequens it is the temple of Jupiter that is struck by lightning; Obsequens (but not Livy) mentions the haruspices in connection with the hermaphrodite

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

nc Reate; Caieta

Comments

footed mule is born; in Caieta the temple of Apollo is struck by lightning

67

Livy 40.19.1-5; Obseq. 6

181

Rome; Lanuvium

4

rain of blood in the area around Vulcan and Concordia; lances move; in Lanuvium the statue of Juno Sospita weeps; plague in the city and in the country

Xviri, libri Sibyllini

the consuls sacrifice hostiae maiores and the Xviri prescribe one day of supplicatio at all pulvinaria and three days of supplicatio andferiaeior the whole of Italy

68

Livy 40.37.1-3

180

Rome

1

plague

pontifex maximus, Xviri, libri Sibyllini

the consul bestows gifts and gilded statues on Apollo, Aesculapius, and Salus; the Xviri prescribe two days of supplicatio in the city and in all the rural settlements and communities

69

Livy 40.45.3-5; | 40.59.6-8;

179

Rome (Capitoline); | Tarracina;

Historical events

9

a storm knocks down statues on the Capitoline; in | Tarracina lightning strikes the

Xviri, libri Sibyllini

the Xviri determine to | which deities

there is no information on which lances move it is probably the lances of Mars in Rome (cf. Gell. NA 4.6.1-2)

the Senate sets in motion an investigation of whether there has been an extensive poison scandal, and many people are convicted (Livy 40.43); cf.PT 18

Livy adds that everyone over the age of twelve must participate in the supplicatio, wearing garlands and holding laurel branches

1

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Obseq. 7

Capua; Reate

Livy Per. 41; Obseq. 8

178

Rome

2

the temple of Venus burns to the ground in a fire around the Forum; the flame of Vesta dies out

71

Livy 41.9.4-8; 41.13.1-3

177

Rome, ager Crustuminus; ager Romanus; Capua; Puteoli; Crustumerium; Campania; Syracuse

9

in ager Crustuminus a stone falls from the sky in the grove of Mars; in ager Romanus a boy is born whose body is without limbs, and a four-legged snake is seen; in Capua lightning strikes buildings in the forum; in Puteoli two ships burn because of lightning; a wolf runs through the city from the Porta Collina to the Porta Esquilina;

Comments

sacrifices must be made, and the number of sacrificial animals; one day of supplicatio; repetition of the ludi Romani under leadership of the curule aediles Gnaeus Servilius Caepio and Appius Claudius Cento

temple of Jupiter; in Capua lightning strikes the White Shrine and the Porta Romana; in Reate a three-footed mule is born; the earth trembles; during a lectisternium the gods turn their heads away and the bowl of Jupiter falls down from the table; mice eat of the olives

70

Historical events

■ the negligent Vestal Virgin is flogged by pontifex maximus Marcus Aemilius only the consuls are mentioned

the consuls sacrifice hostiae maiores; one day of supplicatio at all pulvinaria

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

in Crustumerium a bird, referred to as sanqualis, bores its beak into a sacred stone; in Campania an ox speaks; in Syracuse a wild bull mounts a bronze cow and tries to mate with it

haruspices (regarding the bull)

expiation in Crustumerium with one day of supplicatio on the location itself; the ox is placed in the care of the state; the haruspices point out the deities to whom sacrifices must be made in connection with the bull the Senate decrees that expiation must take place according to the instructions of the pontifices

BC

72

Livy 41.16.3-6; 41.15.1^; Obseq. 9

176

Rome; Tusculum; Gabii; Gravisca

8

in Tusculum a torch is seen in the sky; in Gabii lightning strikes the temple of Apollo and several private homes; in Gravisca lightning strikes the wall and gates; as a consequence of unfavourable exta for the consuls in Rome, they die: Q. Petilius is killed in battle, Gn. Cornelius falls, becomes ill and dies in Cumae, which is linked to the other | prodigies for the year

Pontifices

73

Livy 41.21.5-13; 41.28.2; Obseq. 10;

174

Rome (Forum Romanum); Veii; | Sinuessa;

11

plague; in Veii a boy is born with two heads; in Sinuessa a boy is born with one hand; in Auximum a girl is born with 1 teeth; in the Forum

Xviri, lihri Sibyllini

1 Plin. HN

according to the decree of the Xviri the plague must be expiated | by one day of

Historical events

Comments

regarding the lifelike bronze cow as topos, cf. Myron's bronze cow, Plin. HN 34.57-59 and 34.10

Livy states that Q. Marcius Philippus (who was a Xvir, Livy 40.42.12) | formulates the words

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Romanum a rainbow stretches over the temple of Saturn on a clear day; three suns shine at the same time; torches float in the sky; in Caere and Lanuvium are yellow-spotted serpents; in Campania an ox speaks; an earthquake in Sabini

Auximum; Lanuvium; Caere; Campania; Sabini

2.99

74

Livy 42.2.3-7

173

Lanuvium; Privernum; Veii (Remens); Pomptinum; Gallia

5

in Lanuvium a great fleet is seen in the sky; in Privernum dark wool grows up out of the ground; a shower of stones in Remens at Veii; locusts swarm in Pomptinum; fish jump out of a plough furrow in Gaul

15

Livy 42.20

172

Rome (Capitoline); Saturnia; Calatia; Auximum

5

lightning strikes and destroys the columna rostrata on the Capitoline; in Saturnia there are showers of blood lasting three days; in Calatia a donkey is born with three feet; a bull and five cows are killed by a singje thunderbolt, in Auximum | there is a shower of earth |

Xviri, libri fatales

Historical events

Comments

supplicatio and a votum; if plague and disease are removed from the ager romanus there are to be two days oiferiae and supplicatio; the earthquake is expiated by supplicatio to Ceres, Liber, and Libera

and that the people give the votum in the forum

supplicatio; the Xviri point out the deities to whom sacrifices must be made; feriae and yet another supplicatio due to the votum the previous year

the timing of the expiations is justified by their having to be performed before the anticipated war with Macedonia

regarding regarding the the columna rostrata prodigy, the Xviri columna prescribe: rostrata prodigy, the lustratio of the city, supplicatio, Senate ohsecratio, the requests involvement sacrifice of of both the 1 hostiae maiores

pr

Sources

No.

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

haruspices and Xviri/libri Sibyllini

on the Capitoline and the promontory of Minerva in Campania, ten days of ludi for Jupiter O.M.;

BC

Historical events

the basis of the favourable responsum of the haruspices is that since the rostrata in question are those of the enemy (from the First Punic War), the portent foretells expansion of borders and the demise of the enemy

the haruspices interpret the columna rostrata prodigy as a favourable portent in military terms, as the ships' beaks are spoils from enemies; the other prodigies are expiated by sacrifices, feriae, and one day of supplicatio •76

77

Plin. HN 7.36

171

Livy 43.13.3-8; 44.18.6-7; Plin. HN \ 17.244;

169

Casinum

Rome (Capitoline); (Quirinal); Anagnia; 1 Minturnae;

1

in Casinum a girl transforms into a boy before her parents' eyes

11

in Anagnia a torch is seen in the sky and a cow speaks; in Minturnae fire is seen in the sky; in Reate there is a shower 1 of stones; in Cumae Apollo

haruspices

Xviri

she/he is deported to an uninhabited island according to the prescriptions of the Xviri: sacrifices by the 1 consuls of forty

Comments

war with Macedonia

the portents in Rome are announced by two temple attendants;

PT No.

Sources

Year

Festus 285; Sen. Q Nat. 1.1.2

78

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Livy 45.16.5-6; Obseq.ll

Reate; Cumae; Veii

167

in and outside Rome: Velia; | Minervium;

5

weeps on the citadel for three days and three nights; in the temple of Fortuna in Rome a snake with a crest is seen; in the temple of Fortuna Primigenia on the hill a palm tree grows in the courtyard and there is a shower of blood;

hostiae maiores; supplicatio; sacrifices by all magistrates of hostiae maiores at all pulvinaria; the people must bear garlands

a shower of stones in the ager Romanus;a shower of stones in Veii; according to Pliny a palm tree sprouts from the alter of Jupiter on the Capitoline, portending victory in the war against Perseus of Macedonia

expiation by two times novemdiale

on the Velia lightning strikes the temple of Penates; in Minervium the wall and two 1 gates are struck; in Anagnia

(Pliny explicitly refers to this favourable portent using the term prodigium) Xviri, lihri Sibyllini

regarding the bloody hearth, one day of 1 supplicatio is

Historical events

Comments

Livy mentions towards the end of his list that two prodigies were not treated as public matters: one because it took place in a locus privatus (a palm tree growing in the impluvium of T.M. Figulus) and the other because it occurred at a locus peregrinus (at Frege Ua e, i n t he h ou se of L. Atreus, a lance burned without being consumed by the flames); concerning the question of ager Komanus and p ereg rin u s cf. c ha pt er 5; in 168 BC the Romans defeat King Perseus of Macedonia at Pydna

a lunar eclipse on the eve of the Battle of Pydna is calculated and predicted by G. Gallus, cf. Livy 44.37.7; Plut.W/. Aem. 17.7-13

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Anagnia; Lanuvium; Calatia

79

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Obseq. 12

166

Rome (Capitoline; Quirinal); Campania; Praeneste; Veii; Terracina; Lanuvium; Cassinum; Teanum Sidicinum

there is a shower of earth; in Lanuvium a meteor is seen in the sky; on the ager publicus in Calatia a Roman citizen (M. Valerius) reports that for three days and two nights blood has dripped from his hearth

12

a shower of earth in Campania; a rain of blood in Praeneste; in Veii wool grows on the trees; in the temple of Minerva in Terracina three women die after having made sacrifices; in the grove of Libitina water drips from the mouth and foot of a bronze equestrian statue; a kite drops a weasel it had caught inside the temple of Jupiter into the midst of a Senate meeting on the Capitoline; lightning strikes the temple of Salus; on the Quirinal blood wells up out of the earth; in Lanuvium a meteor is seen; in Cassinum there is lightning, and the sun is seen for hours at night; in Teanum S. a boy is born with | four hands and four feet

Historical events

Comments

prescribed, as well as a sacrifice of fifty goats in the forum; the other prodigies are expiated by yet another day of supplicatio at all pulvinaria; hostiae maiores and lustra tio of the city lustratio

the kite-and-weasel prodigy is linked to the Senate having met because of corruption in connection with soliciting votes; a law against corruption was passed in 159 BC, cf. Livy Per. 47

PT No. 80

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

3

plague; in the temple of Penates the doors open of their own accord at night; wolves are seen on the Quirinal at midday and chased away

Obseq. 13

165 1 Rome

18

in Capua the sun is seen at night; on the ager Stellatinus rams are killed by lightning; in Terracina triplet boys are born; in Formiae two suns are seen in the daytime; the sky bursts into flames; in Antium a person burns up in a ray of light from a mirror; in Gabii there are rains of milk; many thunderbolts on the Palatine; a swan flies into the temple of Victoria and evades those trying to catch it; in Privernum a girl is born with no hands; in Cephallenia a trumpet sounds from the sky; there is a shower of earth; a storm devastates fields and houses; and there are many thunderbolts; in Pisaurum a sun shines at night; in Caere a pig is born with human hands and feet; children are born | with four feet and four hands;

(Esquiline; Quirinal)

81

Priesthood

Expiation

bC

Obseq. 14

163

Rome (Palatine); Capua; ager Stellatinus; Terracina; Formiae; Antium; Gabii; Privernum; Cephallenia; Pisaurum; Caere; Forum Aesi

libri Sibyllini

the populus performs rites at the compita and sacella in connection with the plague; lustratio of the city

Historical events

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

in the Forum Aesi an ox breathes fire without being injured 82

Obseq. 15

162

Anagniae; Frusino; Reate

4

in Anagniaethe sky bursts into flames at nigjit; there is much devastation due to ligjitning in Frusino an ox speaks; in Reate a three-footed mule is born

83

Obseq. 16

156

Rome (Capitoline; Regia; Circus Flaminius)

4

on the Capitoline a storm shakes the temple of Jupiter and all that surrounds it; the roof and columns of the pontifex maximus' house are flung into the Tiber; at the Circus Flaminius a colonnade between the temple of Juno Regina and the temple of Fortuna is struck and buildings around it are scattered; a bull being led to the place of sacrifice because of these prodigies collapses

84

Obseq. 17; Plin. HN 17.244

154

Rome; Compsa

4

despite the heads being absent in the livers of several victims , the consul Postumius still travels to his province, and seven days later he returns to Rome and dies; in Compsa weapons seem to soar in the sky; lightning strikes many times; according to Pliny a fig | tree grows up from the altar of

sacrifice of a bull

the new year is moved to 1 January

Comments

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

Jupiter on the Capitoline after a storm has knocked down a palm tree at the same spot (cf. PT 77) 85

Obseq. 18

152

Rome (Campus Martius); Aricia

3

a whirlwind knocks down a column with a statue in front of the temple of Jupiter on the Campus Martius; there is a shower of stones in Aricia; in Rome people in togas are seen, who disappear before the eyes of those approaching

86

Obseq. 20

147

Rome; Amiternum; Caere; Frusino; Lanuvium

7

in Amiternum a boy is born with three feet and one hand; ligjitning strikes several times in Rome and its environs; in Caere blood flows on the earth, and at night the heaven and earth seem to be on fire; in Frusino mice nibble at the saciedgold; in Lanuvium a red and a white circle are seen around the sun; a star burns for thirty-two days

Obseq. 21; Cass. Dio 1 22.74.1

143

Amiternum; Caura

2

in Amiternum a boy is born with three feet; in Caura blood 1 flows from the earth

87

haruspices

regarding the tumbled statue Obsequens says that all the magistrates stepped down because of the responsum of the haruspices that death would reign among the magistrates and pri est s; supp lica tio 149-146 BC: Third Punic War

in connection with the Roman defeat (by | the Salassi) the

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

(cf. Livy Per. 54 (140 BC))

Comments

Xviri/lihri Sibyllini prescribe that every time the Romans go to war against the Gauls, a sacrifice should be made on enemy soil

88

Obseq. 22; Oros. 5.4.8

142

Rome; Luna

3

plague and famine; in Luna a hermaphrodite is born; plague in Luna

89

Obseq. 23

140

Praeneste; Cephallenia; Aetna

3

in Praeneste and in Cephallenia statues seem to have fallen from the sky; Aetna overflows with fire

90

Obseq. 24; Livy Per.

137

Rome (Esquiline; Comitium; Graecostasis); Lavinium; Praeneste; Terracina; Lacus Fucinus; Portus Herculis

11

Oros 5.4.19

Historical events

during the taking of auspices in Lavinium the chickens fly out of their cage into the Laurentine forest and cannot be found; in Praeneste a flaming torch is seen in the sky and there is thunder from a clear sky; in Terracina Marcus Claudius burns up when his ship is struck by lightning; Lacus Fucinus overflows its | banks;

Xviri; haruspices

the Xviri prescribe supplica tio a ga inst the plague, and at the instruction of the haruspices the hermaphrodite is thrown into the sea forty hostiae maiores

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

in the Graecostasis and the Comitium blood flows; on the Esquiline a five-footed foal is born; manythuncbibolts occur; a voice warns Ma nanus against boarding his ship for Numantia and later a snake on the ship escapes from capture 91

Obseq. 25; Oros. 5.6.1

136

Regium; Puteoli

4

the town of Regium burns to the ground without a trace of crime or negligence; a slave woman gives birth to a boy with four feet, hands, eyes and ears, and two sets of sexual organs; the hot springs of Puteoli flow with blood; lightning strikes many places

92

Obseq. 26; Oros. 5.6.2

135

Rome (Capitoline); Aetna; Bononia

5

Aetna spews more fire than usual; in Rome a boy is born without a lower aperture; in Bononia grain grows on the trees; the cry of an owl is heard on the Capitoline and in other locations in the city; an ox speaks

93

Obseq. 27

134

Rome (Capitoline); Amiternum; Anagnia

6

in Amiternum the sun is seen at night; an ox speaks; it rains blood; in Anagnia the tunic of a slave burns leaving no trace | of flames; on the Capitoline a

Historical events

Comments

the Romans suffer defeat at the hands of the rebellious Spaniards

haruspices

the deformed boy is burned according to the instructions of the haruspices and his ashes thrown into the sea after a reward has been promised, the owl is caught and burned and its ashes scattered in the Tiber

135-132 BC: a slave rebellion on Sicily

the speaking ox is given into the care of the state

1

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

the hermaphrodite is drowned in the river and lustratio of the city is performed by 3 x 9 singing virgin es

Tiberius Gracchus, whose proposed laws include one on the distribution of the ager publicus, is murdered

BC

Comments

bird lets out a human-like groan at night; in the temple of Juno Regina a Ligurian shield is struck by lightning 94

Obseq. 27 a; (cf. Cic. Verr. 4.108; Diod. Sic. 34/35 10)

133

Rome (Lacus Romanus); Luna; Ardea; Minturnae; Ferentinum

95

Obseq. 28; Cass. Dio 24.84.2; August. De civ. D. 3.11

130

Rome (Graecostasis); Reate; Ostia; Apulia; Terracina

10

milk in the Lacus Romanus; in Luna a lake appears; showers of earth in Ardea; in Minturnae a night guardsman is mangled by a wolf, which escapes in the tumult; in Rome an owl and an unknown bird are seen; in the temple of Juno Regina a child's voice is heard for two days; shields with stains of blood are seen; a girl is born with four feet; a hermaphrodite in Ferentinum

9

in Reate a five-footed mule is born; there is a rain of milk in the Graecostasis; in Ostia a wolf and a dog are killed by lightning; in Apulia a flock of sheep is killed by a single thunderbolt; a praetor is struck by lightning; in Terracina the sail of a ship is flung into the water by lightning; the statue of Apollo in Cumae weeps for | four days; King Antiochus

vates (in connection with the weeping statue of Apollo)

the vates foretell destruction for Greece, where the statue comes from, and the Romans make sacrifices and place gifts in the temple

the location of the Lacus Romanus is unknown; Obsequens mentions that when Tiberius Gracchus died, he had neglected tristia omina both at home and on the Capitoline; on the day of his death he hit his left foot on the doorstep, spraining his Hgtoe, and ravens let a large piece of roofin g t ile fa 11 dow n in front of him

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

BC

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

ignores swallows building a nest in his tent, commences a battle, and is killed by the Parthians

%

Obseq.28a; Livy Per. 59; Cic. Nat. D. 2.14; Cic. QFr. 3.5.1

129

Rome

3

two black snakes slide into the temple of Minerva; a double sun is seen in the sky; Publius Scipio Africanus dies suddenly

97

Obseq. 29; Plin. HN 2.203; Strabo 6.2.11; Oros. 5.10.11

126

Rome (Capitoline); Aetna; Liparae

6

a storm shakes temples on the Capitoline; lightning strikes many times; Aetna spews fire; there is a storm at Liparae: seamen are poisoned by smoke from ships' fires, and dead fish lead to stomach poisoning/ plague

98

Obseq. 30; Livy Per. 60; August. De civ. D. 3.31; Oros. 5.11.1-7

125

Rome (Capitoline); Veii; Arpi; Cyrene (Africa)

6

grain grows on the trees, in Veii there are rains of oil and milk; an owl is seen on the Capitoline; in Arpi there are showers of stones for three days; in Africa there are enormous swarms of locusts, which are thrown into the sea by the wind, and when they wash ashore again, they cause a deadly miasma and plague in Cyrene and 800,000 people are 1 said to die

according to Obsequens the snakes in the temple of Minerva portend a slaughter of citizens

haruspices

lex lunia de peregrinis (expulsion from Rome of all non-Roman citizens)

an armed rebellion in Fregellae (caused by the issue of Roman citizenship) is quashed by the Romans

according to the responsum from the haruspices the prodigy in Liparae portended civil strife, which occurred at a later time

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

99

Obseq.31

124

Rome (Graecostasis); Croton; Satura

3

rain of milk in the Graecostasis; in Croton a flock of sheep, a dog, and three shepherds die due to a thunderbolt; in Satura a twoheaded calf is born

100

Obseq. 32; Plin. HN 2.99

122

Rome (Capitoline); Forum Vessanum; Gallia; Catina (Aetna)

5

at the Forum Vessanum a hermaphrodite is born; in Gaul three suns and three moons are seen; a calf is born with two heads; an owl is seen on the Capitoline; Catina is destroyed due to an eruption from Aetna

101

Obseq. 33; Plut. Vit. C Gracch. 11; App. B Civ. 1.24

121

1

a flock of wolves scatters the boundary stones that had been set up after the distribution of land by C. Gracchus

102

Obseq. 34

119

1

an eight-year-old hermaphrodite is discovered in | ager Romanus

Ager Roman us

Historical events

Comments

the geographical designation Satura is not found elsewhere

the hermaphrodite is thrown into the sea

the plebeian tribune C. Gracchus, who had implemented wide-ranging legislation, is killed; the southern part of Gaul becomes a Roman province the hermaphrodite is 1 thrown into the

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Comments

Historical events

sea, and 3 x 9 virgines cleanse the city with song 103

Obseq. 35

118

Rome

4

when the consul Cato offers sacrifice, the entrails melt and the animal's liver has no head; it rains milk; the earth trembles; a swarm of bees settles in the forum

104

Obseq. 36; Cic. Div. 1.97

117

Rome (Regia); Praeneste; Privernum; Saturnia; Apulia

6

lightning strikes in Rome; it rains milk in Praeneste; in Regia the spear of Mars moves; in Privernum an enormous cavity in the earth appears; in Saturnia a ten-year-old hermaphrodite is discovered; according to Cicero there are also violent earthquakes in Apulia

105

Plin. HN 2.144

115

Rome

1

the temple of Juno is struck by lightning

106

Obseq. 37; Livy Per. 63; Ov.Fast. 4.157-160; Cass. Dio 26.87.1-4;

114

ager Stellatinus

1

on the ager Stellatinus lightning kills a young girl (the daughter of a Roman equestrian named Publius Elvius): her dress is pulled up to her waist and her tongue protrudes, as if the lightning | has flashed over her lower

libri Sibyllini

Cicero mentions both the h a ru spices and libri Sibyllini, claiming that their answers were identical

t he h erma phrodt e is thrown into the sea and 27 virgines cleanse the city with song

Xviriy libri Sibyllini

according to the responswn this portends dishonour for the virgines and for the equestrian order; a temple to | | Venus

the prodigy is linked to cases of incestum: at the same time the pontifices sentenced three Vestal Virgins (Aemilia,

the dies natalis of the temple was 1 April {fasti Antiates maiores; Ov. Fast. 4.159); we do not know the location of the temple

1

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Verticordia is built; two Gauls and two Greeks are buried alive

Licinia, and Marcia) and a number of Roman equestrians to punishment for incestum

BC

Plut. Quaest. Rom. 83; Oros. 5.15.20-22

limbs to her mouth

107

Obseq. 38; Plin. HN 2.100

113

Mons Albanus; Lucania; Privernum; Gallia

1

the Mons Albanus seems to burn by night; lightning strikes a shrine and a statue; the altar of Salus is broken; in Lucania and Privernum the earth is violently rent; in Gaul the sky appears to be on fire

108

Obseq. 39

111

Rome

2

a large part of the city burns along with the temple of Magna Mater; it rains milk for three days

109

Obseq. 40

108

Rome; Padus; Arretium; Nursia

8

in the city an owl and a firebird are seen; in the quarries one man eats another; the river Po and the lake of Arretium overflow their banks; twice there are rains of milk; in Nursia a free woman gives birth to twins: a girl with all limbs intact and a boy with an open stomach and no anus (the boy dies)

Comments

war against the Cimbri and the Teutoni, who have invaded Gaul

libri Sibyllini

hostiae maiores

the temple of Magna Mater is quickly rebuilt

according to the libri Sibyllini, on the island of Cimolos sacrifices are performed by thirty freeborn boys with (living) parents and just as many girls (the expiation is described after the cannibal | prodigy)

the island of Cimolos: one of the Cyclades, located in the Aegean Sea [?]; the quarries are the prison in Rome

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

106

Rome; Amiternum; Perusia; Atella; Trebula

10

in Amiternum the newborn son of a slave woman says "ave"\ on Perusian soil and in Rome there is a rain of milk; lightning strikes in Atella, among other things slicing four fingers off a man; silver coins are dissolved due to lightning; on Trebulan soil lightning strikes a woman who is married to a Roman citizen; noise is heard and spears seem to fall from the sky; it rains blood; in Rome, in the daytime, a torch is seen flying high up in the air; in the temple of the Lares a flame penetrates from the gable to the highest peak of the roof without any damage

Obseq. 42

105

Trebula Mutusca

2

before the games at Trebula Mutusca the altar is encircled by black snakes when the flute player is performing and the next day they are stoned by the people; when the temple is opened, the statue of Mars is found standing on its head

Obseq. 43; Plin. HN 1 16.132;

104/ 103

PT No.

Sources

110

Obseq. 41

111

112

Year

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Rome (Comitium); 1 Trebula

18

an owl is seen outside the city; a cow speaks; in Trebula 1 Mutusca a bare-headed statue

1

Historical events

104-101 BC: Sicily is 1 devastated by

Comments

PT

Sources

No.

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

2.148; Plut. Wit. Mar. VIA

Mutusca; Nuceria; Lucania; Luna; Ariminum; Picenum; Volsinii; Tarquinii;

is found enveiled; in Nuceria an elm tree falls over because of the wind and rises again of its own accord; in Lucania there is a rain of milk;

Ameria; Tuder

in Luna there is a rain of haruspices blood; in Ariminum a dog speaks; in the sky weapons are seen to fight day and night from east and west, until those from the west are vanquished; the moon and one star are seen in the daytime from the third to the seventh hour; a wolf walks into the city; on a tower vultures are killed by lightning; a solar eclipse occurs in the third hour; a swarm of bees settles in front of the temple of Salus; on the Comitium there is a rain of milk;

after the prodigy of the battle of weapons in the sky, a sacrificial gift from the people to Ceres and Prosepina is mentioned according to the responsum from the haruspices, and 27 singing virgines bringing gifts

in Picenum three suns are seen; on Volsinian soil a flame reaches from the earth to the sky; in Lucania two lambs are born with horse's hoofs, and one with the head of an ape; in Tarquinii milk bubbles up out of the ground

according to the responsum from the haruspices, two armed statues made of olive wood are to be set up, and a supplicatio is to beheld

Historical events

Comments

violent slave uprisings; introduction of the lex Domitia de sacerdotiis

in connection with the "battle of weapons in the sky", Pliny and Plutarch mention the cities of Ameria and Tuder; this information is not given by Obsequens

PT No.

Sources

113

Obseq. 44

102

114

Obseq. 44a; Livy Per. 68

115

Obseq. 45

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

Rome (Regia; Forum Boarium); Etruria; Anio; Gallia; Aricia

7

a shower of stones in Etruria; the spears of Mars in Regia move of their own accord; there is a rain of blood around the river Anio; a swarm of bees settles on a shrine in the Forum Boarium; in Gaul a light shines at night in a camp; in Aricia a freeborn boy is enveloped by a flame without being burned; lightning strikes the temple of Jupiter

haruspices; Xviri; magistratus

novemdiale; lustratio of the city; the ashes of hostiae are spread over the sea by the Xviri and for nine days there are processions, led by magistrates, around all temples

Marius slaughters the Cimbri and the Teutoni, who have invaded Gaul

Obsequens states the name of the haruspex who prescribed the expiation in question: Aemilius Potensis; it is said that he received a reward for this, as the other haruspices had kept the interpretation secret, since it portended their downfall and that of their offspring

101

Rome (Aventine)

3

the sacred shields move of their own accord with a rattle; the slave of Quintus Servilius Caepio castrates himself in devotion to the Idaean Mother; a shower of mud occurs on the Aventine

100

Rome (forum); 1 Tarqvinii;

5

BC

in Tarqvinii a burning torch that suddenly falls is seen; a 1 solar disc that resembles a

lustratio of the city; a she-goat with burning horns is led through the city, sent out through the Porta Naevia and left there; the slave is sent out to sea and forbidden to return home to Rome

according to Livy the rattling shields (of Mars) move just before the end of the war against the Cimbri

in Rome the plebeian 1 tribune

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Picenum;

116

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Obseq. 46; Gell. NA 4.6.1-2

99

Rome (Regia); Lanuvium; Nursia

shield moves from the west towards the east; an earthquake occurs in Picenum; the clanging of weapons is heard from the depths of the earth; gilded four-horse chariots in the forum sweat from their hoofs

7

Comments

Saturninius is lynched during disturbances arising in connection with his attempt to establish laws on citizen's colonies for the discharged soldiers of Marius

an owl is seen in the city; torrents of rain, gusts of wind, and lightning cause great destruction; in Lanuvium drops of blood are seen in the temple of Juno Sospita; in Nursia a shrine is torn asunder by an earthquake; when the plebeian tribune S. Titius proposes a distribution of land to the people, two ravens tear each other apart above the assembly; noise rises from the depths of the earth towards the sky;

Historical events

lustratio of the city because of the owl

haruspices

according to the haruspices expiatory offerings should be made to Apollo and the law that was being proposed must be abandoned; the | people give

according to Obsequens the noise rising from the earth towards the sky portends hunger and hardship

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

money, and the matrones and virgines bring gifts to Ceres and Proserpina; 27 virgines sing; two statues are given to Juno Regina; the spears of Mars in Regia move of their own accord

117

Obseq. 47 (cf. Sen. Q Nat. 1.1.14-15)

98

Rome (Capitoline; Regia; circus)

1

an owl is seen over the statues of the deities on the Capitoline; lightning strikes many times; in Regia the spears of Mars move; in the theatre there is a shower of chalk during the ludi; it thunders from a clear sky; a hermaphrodite is found; in the circus the spears of the soldiers catch fire

according to Gellius the spears-of-Mars prodigy is expiated by hostiae maiores to Jupiter and Mars and hostiae lactentes to the other gods Xviri

during the expiation in connection with the owl, the sacrificial bull drops dead; when the Xviri sacrifice in the temple of Apollo, the head of the liver is absent and a snake is found near the altar; | the

Gellius quotes the Senate decision regarding the spears of Mars

according to Obsequens the shower of chalk portends fair weather and good crops (= a favourable omen)

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

hermaphrodite is thrown into the sea 118

Obseq. 48

97

Rome; Pisaurum; Nursia

4

a hermaphrodite is found; in Pisaurum noise is heard from the earth; masonry tumbles down without an earthquake; in Nursia Jupiter turns towards the left

t he h erma phrodt e is thrown into the sea; lustratio of the city and dedication of cypress-wood statues to Juno Regina by 21 singing virgines

119

Obseq. 49

%

Rome (Capitoline); Faesulae; Arretium;

6

a wolf walks through the city and is killed in a private house; an owl is killed on the Capitoline; lightning strikes many times; gilded statues of Jupiter, capitals and columns are crushed; in Faesulae blood wells up out of the earth; in Arretium heads of spelt grow out of the nose of a woman and she vomits grains of spelt

lustratio of the city

120

Obseq. 50

95

Rome (Regia); Caere; Venafrum; Ateste; Urbinum

8

in Caere it rains milk; many animals are killed by lightning; in Venafrum the earth collapses into a deep chasm; vultures ripping apart a dead dog are killed and eaten by other vultures; in Ateste a two-headed lamb is born, and 1 a boy with three hands and

the hermaphrodite is thrown into the sea

the tumbling of masonry without an earthquake supposedly foreshadows civil | strife

Obsequens also mentions that at Lebadea, Eutychides went down into the shrine of Jupiter Trophonius and brought out a bronze tablet, on which were | inscribed matters

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

11C

three feet; in Regia the spears of Mars move; in Urbinum a hermaphrodite is born 121

Obseq.51

94

Rome; Volsci; Volsinii; Vestini; Faesulae

9

a shower of stones over the Volsci; in Volsinii a new moon goes dark; a girl with two heads, four feet, four hands, and double female sexual organs is stillborn; a firebird is killed; a shower of stones occur within a villa in Vestini; a torch is seen in a burning sky; blood trickles from the earth; dogs gnaw on stones and tiles; in Faesulae a large group clad in mourning garb and with pale faces is seen wandering among the graves

122

Obseq. 52

93

Rome; Fregellae; Arretium; Lucania; Carseoli; Praeneste; Apulia; Volsinii

14

lightning strikes many places in Rome and environs; a slave woman gives birth to a boy with one hand; in Fregellae the temple of Neptune is opened at night; twin calves are found in the stomach of a bull calf; in Arretium a bronze statue of Mercury sweats; in Lucania a flock of rams is encircled by fire without burning; in Carseoli a stream of blood flows; wolves walk 1 into the city; in Praeneste

Historical events

Comments

concerning the state of Rome - but he does not explain the context novemdiale due to the shower of stones over the Volscian people

lustrationes

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

the outbreak of the Social War

Cicero and Pliny mention the mice nibbling at shields and foreshadowing 1 the war against the

wool flies; in Apulia a mule gives birth; in Rome a kite is caught in the temple of Apollo; although consul Herennius offers a second sacrifice, the head of the liver fails to appear; during a novemdiale a dog eats the meal of the goddess; in Volsinii fire leaps across the sky, which seems to split in two 123

Obseq. 53

92

Rome; Faesulae; Volaterrae; Arretium

13

124

Obseq.54; Cic. Div. 1.98-99; Plin. HN \ 8.221;

91

Rome (Circus Flaminius); Arretium; 1 Vestini;

12

an owl is caught in the temple of Fortuna Equestris; in Faesulae noises are heard from the ground; a slave woman gives birth to a boy with no opening in his private parts; a woman has two sets of sexual organs; a torch is seen in the sky; an ox speaks; a swarm of bees settles atop a private house; in Volaterrae a stream of blood flows; in Rome there is a rain of milk; in Arretium two hermaphrodites are found; a cock is born with four feet; lightning strikes many times at dawn a ball of fire springs with great noise from the northern skies;in Arretium blood flows from bread when it | is broken; in Vestini there are

supplicatio] populus brings a sacrificial gift to Ceres and Proserpina; lustratio of the city by 27 singing virgines

according to Cicero, both the haru spices 1 and libri

PT No.

Sources

Year

Incidence

Aenaria; Regium; Spoletium; Asculum; Cumae; Lanuvium

2.199; Oros. 5.18.3-6

125

Location

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Obseq. 55; Cic. Div. 1.99; 1.4;

Plin. 2.238; Diod. Sic. 32.12.2; Strabo 6.2.11

90/89

Rome Hiera; Liparae

Historical events

showers of stones and tiles for Sibyllini seven days; in Aenaria a flame are springs from a chasm; an involved, earthquake in Regium; in and their Spdetium a gdd-cdou led ball of answers are fire flies to the earth; on the identical fortifications in Cumae a statue of Apollo sweats; lightning strikes the temple of Pietas at the Circus Flaminius; in Asculum Romans aie murdered during the games; when Latins lead cattle from the fields to the city, people die at random: the wild rampaging of the cat tie a nd t he ba rkin g of dogs port ends war and misfortune; in Lanuvium war is portended by mice nibbling at silver shields 4

Comments

Marsii (who led the demand for full rights of Roman citizenship/the Social War)

the temple of Juno Sospita is disgraced by a hag and her offspring, who had laid down bedding beneath the effigy of the goddess; (Metella Caecilia dreams that Juno Sospita flees her temple);

the Senate decides to restore the temple of Juno Sospita; supplicatio

the Italian allies that lay down their arms are offered Roman citizenship and rights

Hiera, Liparae and the sea around them burn

expiated according to Pliny by a legatio senatus

89 BC: Mithridates VI of Pontos moves into the province of 1 Asia

Cicero states Sisenna as his source

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

(Diod. Sic.)

during the Social War (91-88)

near Rome

126

Obseq. 56; Plut. Vit. SulL 7; Diod. Sic. 38.5

88

Bovianum

1

Pompeius Silo leads a triumphal procession into the city of Bovianum, and in the next battle loses his army and is killed himself

127

Obseq. 56a; Plin. HN 2.92; Oros. 5.19.18

87

Rome

2

during the civil war in Rome, the sky above the camp of Pompeius seems to collapse, weapons and standards are struck, and soldiers die; Pompeius dies from a starlike gust of wind

128

Obseq. 56b

86

Piraeus;

2

while Sulla is besieging Piraeus, a soldier dies when struck by lightning, while he is carrying earth; when Gaius Fimbria has Ilium burned, the temple of Minerva also burns to the ground, except for one | statue

Ilium

a man who is married to a hermaphrodite reports this to the Senate

haruspices TOIS" OTTO TuppTivias" iepoaKOTTois'

Historical events

Comments

the hermaphrodite is burned alive

88-82 BC: wars against Mithridates; civil wars in Rome; with his army Sulla moves into Rome and then moves on to Greece

this is perceived as an omen of victory to the enemy, because a triumphal procession should be led into the victorious city - not the vanquished city; Obsequens also mentions portents for Mithridates Orosius interprets the death of Pompeius as having been caused by a bolt of lightning

haruspices

Sulla captures Athens and Piraeus

according to the responsum the prodigy means victory to the Romans because the body's head was pointing in the | direction of the city

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

(= a procession into the city), that is, a favourable omen; the undamaged statue portends restoration for the town | 129

App. B Civ. 1.78

84

Rome

2

lightning strikes the temples of Luna and Ceres

|iavT€is"

130

Obseq. 57; Plin. HN 7.34; App. B Civ. 1.78

83

somewhere between Capua and Vulturnum; Clusium

5

between Capua and Vulturnum the clamour of standards, weapons, and shouts are heard; traces of horses and men are seen; in Clusium a mother gives birth to a live snake; a mule gives birth; earthquakes

haruspices

131

Plin. HN 10.50

78

Ariminum

1

in the villa of Galerius a cock speaks

132

Obseq. 59

76

Reate

2

in Reate earthquakes shake shrines in the city and in the country; noises are heard from the earth

Rome (Capitoline)

2

lightning strikes the she-wolf on the Capitoline; the statue of Jupiter is also struck; (bronze tablets melt, see below)

133

Cic. Div. 1.19-20; 2.45^16; Cat. 3.19-20; Obseq. 61; Cass. Dio | 37.9.1-2

65^63

haruspices

according to orders from the haruspices the snake is thrown into a river, where it swims against the current

according to the responsum the statue of Jupiter is rebuilt in the forum; ten days of ludi

1

the Capitoline burns to the ground

according to Obsequens and Appian, the prodigies portend war

73-71 BC: slave rebellion

Obseq. 60 and 60a list portents for Sertorius and Mithridates according to Cicero the responsum states that the prodigies portend uprising, civil war, and destruction of the city

PT No.

Sources

134

Obseq. 61 (cf. Cic. Cat. 3.19-20); Plin. HN 2.52; Cass. Dio 37.25.1-2

135

Obseq. 61a; Livy Per. 103

136

Obseq. 62

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Rome; Pompeii; Spoletum

5

frequent lightning; in Pompeii Vargunteius is killed by lightning from a clear sky; a fiery timber stretches up into the sky from the west; an earthquake shakes all of Spoletum; bronze tablets with laws are struck by lightning and the letters melt

62

Macedonia

1

after the proconsul Gaius Antonius defeats Catiline in Pistoria, he carries the fasces, crowned with laurel wreaths, into his province, where he is defeated by the Dardani

60

Rome (Tiber)

4

although the entire day is clear, night falls around the eleventh hour, after which the light returns; a whirlwind strikes roofs to the ground; when a bridge collapses, people fall into the Tiber; in the country several trees are uprooted

BC

65-63

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

the introduction of lex labiena

the prodigies are linked to the conspiracy of Catiline, against which Cicero leads the fight during his consulship

according to Obsequens this is interpreted as a portent of victory for the enemy, since G. Antonius bears the fasces to the enemy and not to the Capitoline, as he should have

first triumvirate: Caesar, Pompeius, and Crassus

pr

Sources

No.

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

137

Cass. Dio 39.15

%

Rome; Mons Albanus

138

Cass. Dio 39.20.1-2; Cic. Har. Resp.

%

ager Latiniensis

139

Cass. Dio 39/S0.4-61.4; Plin. HN 2.147; Obseq. 64; (cf. Plut. Vit. Crass. 19ff)

54

Rome (Tiber); Lucania; Euphrates

140

Obseq. 63; Cass. Dio

53

Rome

lightning strikes the statue of Jupiter on the Mons Albanus; on the Mons Albanus a small temple of Juno turns towards the north; a wolf walks through the city; earthquake; lightning strikes

libri Sibyllini

on the ager Latiniensis rumbling and noises from the earth are heard

haruspices

6

the waters of the Tiber rise drastically; houses collapse; animals and people drown; in Lucania there are showers of iron that looks like fungi; when setting off to cross the Euphrates, M. Crassus ignores many prodigies, including a dark fog and a storm's ripping the standard from a standardbearer and making it sink in deep water

libri Sibyllini

5

owls and wolves are seen in the city; at night the plaintive howling of dogs is heard; the

6

Historical events

Comments

59 BC: the cult of Isis is forbidden by the Senate

regarding the statue of Jupiter, Cass. Dio quotes the responsum from libri Sibyllini: "If the king of Egypt asks for help, refuse him not friendship, nor yet assist him with any great force; else you shall have both toils and dangers" cf. chapter 3

postiliones to "Jupiter, Saturn Neptun, Tellus, Di caelestes" M. Crassus is surrounded by the Parthians near Carrhae and perishes with his army in 53 BC

lustratio of the city

the Senate decides to | demolish some

Cassius Dio links the prodigies with Gabinus' ignoring of the oracular reply from libri Sibyllini and with his subsequent illegal activities (39.56ff)

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

40.17.1

statue of Mars sweats; lightning races through the city, destroying several statues of deities and killing people

141

Cass. Dio 40.47.1-2

52

Rome

9

an owl is seen in the city; a statue sweats for three days; a torch moves from the south towards the east; lightning strikes in several places; there is a shower of stones; and a rain of blood; lumps of earth, shards of pottery and blood fly through the air

142

Obseq. 65; Plin. HN 2.147; 17.243 (circa 50 BC)

50

Rome; Cumae

3

a mule gives birth; a fire destroys most of the city; in Cumae a tree sinks into the earth and only a few branches protrude

Historical events

Comments

shrines to Isis and Serapis that had been built by private individuals without official approval

libri Sibyllini

libri Sibyllini

49 BC: civil war

according to the libri Sibyllini the tree in Cumae portends the obliteration of people, and the closer to the city the prodigy occurred, the greater the number of people involved; according to Obsequens a foaling mule portends civil strife, the death of citizens, changes of the constitution, and 1 unseemly child-

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

Historical events

Comments

bearing among the matrons 143

Obseq. 65a; Cass. Dio 42.26.1-2; Plin. HN 2.92

48

Rome (Capitoline); Macedonia; Antiochia; Ptolemais; Pergamon; Tralles

9

(Cass. Dio)

144

Cass. Dio 42.26.3-5

lightning flashes against Pompeius and his army when he lines up against Caesar in Macedonia; a swarm of bees settles on the standards; the same day, statues turn of their own accord in several places; in Antiochia and Ptolemais sounds of shouting and the clamour of weapons are heard, in Pergamon the sound of a tympanon is heard; in the temple of Victoria in Tralles a palm tree sprouts to full-grown size from beneath the statue of Caesar; a swarm of bees lands near the statue of Hercules on the Capitoline; when shrines are demolished, a temple of Bellona is destroyed that is found to contain crocks full of human flesh

47

Rome

8

violent earthquake; an owl is seen; lightning strikes the Capitoline; in the temple of Fortuna Publica; and in Caesar's garden; the doors of | the temple of Fortuna open of

the Battle of Pharsalos

\ICLVT€IS

according to the \idvT€ig

all

shrines of Isis and Serapis were to be demolished

\idvT€\.g

according to Obsequens a swarm of bees settling on the standards of Pompeius' army portends ruin; Obsequens links the palm-tree prodigy with the report that on that very day, an augur at Padua announced that the birds indicate Caesar is victorious

Cass. Dio states that the cult of Isis had been performed exactly where the swarm of bees settled

according to Cassius Dio the priests interpret the prodigy of the newborn babies as a 1 forewarning of revolt

|

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

BC

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

their own accord; blood runs from a bakery to the temple of Fortuna Respiciens; some newborn babies hold their left hand to their head 145

Cass. Dio 43.2.1

46

Rome

2

a wolf is seen in the city; a pig is born that resembles an elephant, except for its feet

146

Obseq. 67-68; Cass. Dio 45.17.2-8; Plin. HN 2.96.98-99; Oros. 6.20.5; Suet. Div. Aug. 2.95

44

Rome; Ostia; Po; Italia

22

exta without a heart are found at Caesar's sacrifice; Caesar's wife dreams that the gable top on his house, which had been added by decree of the Senate, had fallen down; the doors to Caesar's bedchamber are flung open of their own accord; on the day he enters Rome, Gaius Octavius is surrounded as if by the end of a rainbow, which reached from the sun in a clear sky; during the games of Venus Genetrix a long-haired star is seen; frequent earthquakes; lightning strikes many times; the day before the final approval of the exile a whirlwind knocks down the statue Cicero had installed before the temple chamber of | Minerva;

Caesar is murdered; Gaius Octavius is accepted into the Julian line

concerning the missing heart at Caesar's sacrifice, cf. chapter 2.2; according to Obsequens the fact that the limbs of the statue were completely shattered and that its shoulders, arms, and head were crushed, portends disaster for Cicero

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Historical events

Expiation

BC

Comments

a storm tears the bronze tablets of the temple of Fides loose; the doors of the temple of Ops are broken open; trees are uprooted and many roofs crash down; a torch is seen in the sky; a special star blazes for seven days; three suns are seen

(Cass. Dio)

(44/ 43)

in the temple of Castor some letters are shaken down;

the fallen letters in the temple of Castor relate to the names of Antonius and Dolabella and portend separation from the fatherland

the howling of dogs is heard in front of the residence of the pontifex maximus and the largest of the dogs is ripped apart by the others; a wave leaves a school of fish behind on the shore in Ostia; the Po overflows its banks leaving vipers behind;

according to Obsequens the fact that the largest of the dogs is ripped apart by the others in front of the house of the pontifex maximus portends disgrace for Lepidus (Caesar's magister equitum and pontifex maximus)

a bull that is sacrificed in the temple of Vesta because of an earthquake jumps up after | being sacrificed; plague afflicts

due to the plague, the Senate orders the 1 rebuilding of the

1

(concerningthe "naval battle" on the Campus Martius, cf. Cass. Dio 1 4050 and 43.23.4)

PT No.

Sources

Year BC

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

all of Italy; during the sacrifice on the first day of the year a lictor drops dead

147

Obseq. 69; App. B Civ. 4.4; Cass. Dio 46.33

43

Rome (Palatine); Mutina

27

double entrails appear in Caesar's sacrifice; a statue of Pansa collapses; a man collapses when Pansa speaks; a b r o n z e statue of him turns; a horse with trappings falls dead; sacrifices cannot be interpreted d u e to blood; a man w h o is to h a n d Pansa a palm frond slips in the blood, sullying the palm frond; a display of weapons seems to be lifted from the earth towards the sky with a great rumble; the standards of Pansa's abandoned legions are seen to be wrapped in cobwebs; several things are struck by lightning; in Caesar's c a m p an eagle lights on the ridge of the headquarters; at the oracle of Apollo a voice is heard: lupis rabies hieme, aestate frumentum non demessum; six vultures appear to Caesar on the C a m p u s Martius, and later again on the Rostra after his appointment as consul six vultures are seen;

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

Octavius, Antonius, and Lepidus are chosen as triumvirs

concerning the duplicia exta as a favourable sign, cf. chapter 2.2

Curia Hostilia, and the filling of the hole after the naval battle

Vibius Pansa dies after the Battle of Mutina

regarding the series of prodigies for V. Pansa O b s e q u e n s says that they were deadly to the consul himself, while Cass. Dio states that they are not private matters, since Pansa is a consul; concerning Augustus and the vultures O b s e q u e n s makes a reference to Romulus and the foundation of the city, cf. Suet. Aug.

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

dogs howl like wolves; wolves walk through the city; an ox speaks; a newborn baby speaks; statues sweat - some sweat blood; a clamour of weapons is heard, and voices and horses without anything being seen ; many signs around the sun; a shower of stones; lightning strikes temples and statues; Magna Mater on the Palatine turns; the Minerva at Mutina discharges blood and milk

148

Priesthood

BC

Obseq. 70; Cass. Dio 47.40.2-8

42

Rome (Duodecim Portae); Mutina; Mons Albanus

14

a mule gives birth near the Twelve Gates in Rome; a dog drags away the carcass of a temple servant's dog; at night so much light shines that people get up to go to work; near Mutina the statue of Marius' victory turns; when a sacrifice is to be made three suns are seen merging into | one; during the Latin Festival

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

are summoned from Etruria the eldest says that the monarchy will be re­ established and all will become slaves, except himself after which he holds his breath until he dies according to Cass. Dio the first dog drags the dead dog's carcass to the temple of Ceres and buries it with its paws

PT No.

Sources

Year BC

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

Historical events

Comments

on the Mons Albanus, blood drips from Jupiter's shoulder and t h u m b when a sacrifice is made; the praetor Publius Titius deprives a colleague of his office because of disagreements and dies within a year

a swarm of bees settles in the camp of Cassius; a flock of vultures and other carrioneating birds fly over to the army; when a boy is to be carried in a procession dressed in the vestments of Victoria he falls off of the litter; during the lustratio the lictor places the laurels on inverted fasces; in addition, Cassius Dio mentions: lightning striking; a child with ten fingers on each

according to Obsequens depriving a colleague of his office because of disagreements is regarded as a prodigy, and no one who does so will live for more than a year afterwards; Obsequens names a number of people who have acted in such a manner ha ru spices

according to the instructions of the haruspices the place is declared off limits and the fortification rampart is built further in; lustratio Cassius Dio notes, quite astutely, that the mule prodigy

PT No.

Sources

Year

Location

Incidence

Prodigy

Priesthood

Expiation

BC

hand; a mule giving birth to a mule, the front part of which is a horse while the rest is a mule 149

Cass. Dio 48.43.4; Oros. 6.18.34; 6.20.6; Cass. Dio 48.43.4-6

38

Rome

2

Casa Romuli burns due to a ritual; a statue of Virtus falls down on its face

150

Cass. Dio 48.50.4

37

Avernus

1

a statue sweats

Historical events

Comments

must certainly be dual in nature

libri Sibyllini

the statue is ritually cleansed in the sea

2.2. EXTA It is generally difficult to distinguish precisely between Etruscan and Roman elements in the sources dealing with Roman religion. The sources, however, present extispicy - the reading of entrails - as an Etruscan science clearly linked to the Etruscan haruspices. According to Cicero, the Romans adopted the Etruscan method of divination because it was compatible with obtaining omens for one's undertakings, and it was incorporated early on into the official Roman cult.123 Extispicy was thus a part of the standard Roman sacrificial procedure: a sacri­ ficial animal was ritually slaughtered and portents taken by examining the exta, or entrails, which were the portion allotted to the gods.124 The sources empha­ size that extispicy was used as a means of obtaining the approval or disapproval of the gods, for instance before making political or military decisions, in con­ nection with consular inaugurations, before a magistrate's departure for the provinces, and before the state committed to decisive military engagements.125 Consequently, there are numerous accounts of military commanders and provincial governors bringing haruspices with them.126 Like the other types of divination, extispicy is associated with the concept of pax deorum, as is evident from Livy 27.23.4: Per dies aliquot hostiae maiores sine litatione caesae, diuque non impetrata pax deum. Scholars have attempted to establish a distinction between Roman and Etruscan extispicy,127 according to which the Roman variety (inspectio) focus123

Cic. Div. 1.3: Cumque magna vis videretur esse et inpetriendis consulendisque rebus et [in] monstris interpretandis ac procurandis in haruspicum disciplina, omnem banc ex Etruria scientiam adhibebant, ne genus esset ullum divinationis quod neglectum ab Us videretur. Cf. 1.35: Non enim me deus ista scire sed his tantum modo uti voluit. Utar igitur nee adducar aut in extis totam Etruriam delirare aut eandem gentem in fulgoribus errare aut fallaciter portenta interpretari, cum terrae saepe fremitus saepe mugitus saepe motus multa nostrae rei p., multa ceteris civitatibus gravia et vera praedixerint. See also Thulin (1906b) vol. II, pp. 3-54. Certain aspects in the author's thorough, detailed analysis do, however, con­ fuse Etruscan, Babylonian and Greek hepatoscopy, cf. below regarding the treatment of the bronze liver from Piacenza; Dumezil (1970) vol. II, p. 625-696; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 115-127; Schilling (1979) pp. 183-190; Beard et al. (1998) vol. I, pp. 35-37. 124 In Roman practice, the general distribution seems to be that after the sacrifice the gods received the entrails {exta) of the victim and the mortals received its meat {viscera - which included both entrails and meat), cf. Schilling (1979) p. 183. However, according to Augustine, Sulla was allotted the exta by order of the haruspex Postumius, who interpreted an observation on the calf's liver of "something resembling a golden crown" as an omen of victory, Cic. Div. 2.24: Deinde cum venisset Tarentum Sulla atque ibi sacrificasset, vidit in capite vitulini iecoris similitudinem coronae aureae. Tunc Postumius haruspex ille respondit praeclaram significare victoriam iussitque ut extis illis solus vesceretur. From a Roman religio-political per­ spective, this could be regarded as an interesting foreshadowing of the deification of certain individuals. !25 Cf. Cic. Dw. 1.95. 126 On haruspices being brought along, cf. Livy 8.9.1 (on Decius in 340 BC); 23.36.10 (on Fabius in 215 BC); 27.16.15 (on Fabius in 209 BC); Cic. Div. 1.72 (on Sulla). M Cf. Schilling (1979) pp. 183-190; Pfiffig (1998) p. 120.

118

Fig. 7. The bronze liver of Piacenza.

es solely on the divine approval/acceptance of the victim,128 whereas the Etruscan variety (consultatio) implies a much higher degree of interpretation and actual prediction of future events. Nevertheless, since in practice the sources mix the individual elements and terminology, and since Etruscan extispicy is an integral part of Roman religion, such a distinction seems diffi­ cult to maintain. What is more, origin is of little concern in this study of extispicy. Therefore in the following I will deal with Etrusco-Roman extispicy as one discipline. The main point here is simply that Etruscan extispicy, linked to the haruspices, was a standard element in Roman divination and public por­ tents during the Republic. This basic assumption also applies to the present chapter s treatment of the most important archaeological evidence concerning extispicy: the bronze liver of Piacenza (Figures 7 and 8). Not surprisingly, extispicy implies a fundamental division into favourable and unfavourable portents, the former referred to as laeta exta and the latter as tristia or turpia exta.129 In a military context, for instance, laeta exta would por­ tend victory, triumph, and the expansion of Roman territory,130 whereas turpia exta would foreshadow death and defeat.131 Festus also distinguishes between muta exta, which do not portend anything, and <mo>nitoria exta, which do.132 128

Corresponding to "accipio". Cf. Livy 27.26.14; 29.10.6; 31.5.7; Plin. HN 11.190. 130 Livy 31.5.7: Cum renuntiassent consules rem divinam riteperactam esse etprecationiannuisse deos haruspices respondere laetaque extafuisse et prolationem finium victoriamque et triumphum portendi, turn litterae Valerii Aureliique lectae et legati Atheniensium auditi. 131 Livy 27.26.13 (see below). 132 Festus 146L; 157M: Muta exta dicuntur, quihus nil divinationis aut deorum responsi inesse animadvertunt. Cf. Weinstock (1951) p. 148; Schilling (1979) p. 188. 129

119 The literary sources give the general impression that the haruspices mainly confirmed the presence of the liver and observed its shape and potential defor­ mities, its colouring, projections, fissures, and fibres.133 Besides the liver (including the gall bladder, cf. the section dealing with the liver of Piacenza), extispicy can also involve the heart, lungs, and spleen.134 Unfortunately the Etruscan libri haruspicini, which laid out the guidelines for extispicy, have not survived. An intriguing detail in Pliny's work, however, tells us that in 275 BC the standard procedure for Roman extispicy came to include the heart as well: Pliny Naturalis historia 11.186: In corde surnmo pinguitudo quaedam est laetis extis. Non semper autem in parte extorum habitum est; L. Postumio L. f. Albino rege sacrorum post CXXVI Olympiadem,135 cum rex Pyrrhus ex Italia decessisset,1^ cor in extis haruspices inspicere coeperunt.lJ>1 This passage is interesting for several reasons. First of all, it shows us that such changes were diligently recorded. Pliny's information clearly seems to have been taken from an older source containing information of a religious nature to which Pliny or his source must have had access. It is simply too improbable to imagine that Pliny fabricated such special­ ized information. Similarly noteworthy is the year indicated by the personal reference to the incumbent rex sacrorum as well as the dating of the Olympiad, which might indicate the additional involvement of a Greek histo­ rian. It may even implicate Q. Fabius Pictor, who is known for using the Greek method of dating. In other words, there is evidence here of a change in the ritual of extispicy, but unfortunately, as is so often the case with the particulars of Roman religion, the context is missing. The use of the heart in extispicy is not often mentioned, but some of the sources confirm it, among them Cicero's narrative concerning Julius Caesar shortly before his assassination. He performed a sacrifice in which the heart was found to be absent from the entrails of the victim (an ox), and at the sacrifice the following day, the so-called head of the liver was absent.138 Cicero notes the interpretation of these signs by the haruspex Spurinna: the missing heart portended the loss of Caesar's sanity and his life since both are seated in the heart. According to Cicero's account, Caesar »3 Cic. Div. 1.16; 1.131; 2.30; Plin. HN 11.204. !34 Cic. Div. 2.29; 1.85; Plin. HN 10.49; 11.204. »5 276-272 BC. !36 275BC. 137 "In favourable entrails there is a certain deposit of fat on the upper part of the heart. But it has not always been counted among the entrails; after the 126th Olympiad, when Lucius Postumius Albinus, son of Lucius, was rex sacrorum, and when King Pyrrhus had withdrawn from Italy, the haruspices began examining the heart among the entrails." 138 Cic. Div. 1.119: Qui cum immolaret Mo die quo primum in sella aurea sedit et cum purpurea veste processit, in extis bovis opimi cor non fuit. [...] Postero die caput in iecore non fuit.

120

Fig. 8. The bronze liver of Piacenza. The pyramidal projection, lobus caudatus, is probably what is referred to as the "head" of the liver, while the drop-shaped projection is the gall bladder, vesica fellea, and the semicircular projection is the processus papillaris.

became quite alarmed at this portent, whereas Suetonius, who also tells the story, says he was not frightened by it. 139 Most often, however, the sources refer to the liver or the head of the liver, caput iocineris (or iecoris), seen in Figure 8, and occasionally the term exta simply seems to be synonymous with the liver, as in Obsequens 69. Here, for once, our source refers to a favourable portent (for the year 43 BC): Caesari cum honores decreti essent et imperium adversus Antonium, immolanti duplicia exta apparuerunt. Secutae sunt eum res prosperae. 140 The caput iocineris clearly seems to be the most crucial item in hepatoscopic observation, and a liver with an absent or deformed head is a terrible portent, as described by Cicero in De divinatione 2.32: caput iecoris ex omni parte dtligentissime considerant; si vero id non est inventum, nihil putant accidere potuisse tristius. According to Pliny, a fissure in the head of the liver is an unfavourable portent, although when it coincides with anxiety or unrest it means that troubles will come to an end.1 41 Livy recounts a number of episodes involving the inspection of entrails that also indicate the related religio-political procedures. One key passage is his account for the year 176 Bc. 142 139 Suet. [uL. 77 : Eoque arrogantiae progressus est, ut haruspice tristia et sine corde exta quondam nuntiante, /utura diceret laetiora, cum vellet; nec pro ostento ducendum, si pecudi cor de/uisset. 140 Cf. Plin. HN 11.189: recur in dextera parte est;in eo quod caput extorum vocant, magnae varietatis; Obseq. 35: Catone consule immolante exta tabuerunt, caput iocineris inventum non est. 141 Plin. HN 11. 190: Caput extorum tristis ostenti caesum quoque est, praeterquam in sollicitudine ac metu; tunc enim perimit curas. 142 Livy 41.14 .7: "On the day the consuls Gnaeus Cornelius and Quintus Petilius took office and each, as was customary, sacrificed an ox to Jupiter, the head of the liver could not be found in the vic-

121 Livy 41.14.7: Cn. Cornelio et Q. Petilio consulibus, quo die magistratum inierunt, immolantibus Iovi singulis bubus uti solet, in ea hostia, qua Q. Petilius sacrificavit, in iocinere caput non inventum.l4J> Id cum ad senatum rettulisset, bove perlitare iussus. [...] (41.15.1) Dum de iis rebus in senatu agitur, Cn. Cornelius evocatus a viatore, cum templo egressus esset, paulo post redit confuso vultu et exposuit patribus conscriptis bovis sescenaris quern immolavisset iocur diffluxisse. Id se victimario nuntanti parum credentem ipsum aquam effundi ex olla ubi exta coquerentur iussisse et vidisse ceteram integram partem extorum, iecur omne inenarrabili tabe absumptum. Territis eo prodigio patribus et alter consul curam adiecit, qui se, quod caput iocineri defuisset, tribus bubus perlitasse negavit. Senatus maioribus hostiis usque ad litationem sacrificari iussit. The usual procedure in extispicy was to continue to sacrifice until a favourable result was obtained (litatio, perlitare),144 and defying unfavourable portents was regarded as a violation of religio, which always had disastrous consequences. While finding the head of the liver absent was a unfavourable portent, an increase or duplication in the liver itself, or a double head (duplicia exta, geminum caput, caput duplex), was usually interpreted as a favourable omen: Livy 27.26.13-14: Immolasse eo die quidam prodidere memoriae consulem Marcellum, et prima hostia caesa iocur sine capite inventum, in secunda omnia tim sacrificed by Quintus Petilius. When he reported this to the Senate, he was told to continue sac­ rificing oxen until he obtained favourable omens. [...] (41.15.1): While these matters were being dis­ cussed in the Senate, Gnaeus Cornelius was summoned by a messenger. He left the temple, soon returning with a troubled expression, and reported to the Senators that the liver from the sescenaris ox he had sacrificed had melted away. Despite the message from the victimarius he could hardly believe it, and having ordered that the water be poured out of the vessel in which the entrails had been boiled, he had himself seen that the rest of the entrails were as they should be, whereas the liver had inexplicably disappeared completely. The senators were alarmed at this portent, and the other consul gave them cause for further anxiety by reporting that he had failed to obtain a favourable omen after sacrificing three oxen because the head of the liver was absent. The Senate commanded the contin­ ued sacrifice of full-grown victims until a favourable omen had been obtained." The meaning of sesce­ naris remains unknown. 143 Beard et al. (1998) vol. 2, pp. 177-178 translates this as "when no lobe was found in the liver". The implied claim that caput iocineris is a lobe of the liver is, however, difficult to reconcile with the circumstance that geminum caput/caput duplex is interpreted as a favourable omen. A liver normally has two lobes, whereas the absence or duplication of the pyramidal projection is seen only occasional­ ly, and is interpreted as unfavourable or favourable, respectively (see below). In addition, the designa­ tion caput in the sense "top", "point", or "head" could more appropriately be applied, anatomically and semantically, to the pyramidal projection than to either of the two liver lobes. Finally, omens such as Sulla's favourable portent, mentioned above, (August. De civ. D. 2.24: [...] vidit in capite vitulini iecoris similitudinem coronae aureae) are more logical when caput is read as the pyramidal projection rather than one of the lobes. 144 Cf. Obseq. 17: In provinciam proficiscens Postumius consul cum immolaret, in plurimis victimis caput in iocinere non invenit; profectusque post diem septimum aeger Romam relatus expiravit.; 55: Rutilius Lupus spretis religionihus, cum in extis caput non invenisset iocineris, amisso exercitu in proelio occisus; Livy 27.23.4 (see above).

122 conparuisse quae adsolent, auctum etiam visum in capite; nee id sane haruspiciplacuisse quod secundum trunca et turpia exta nimis laeta apparuissent.145 In connection with hepatoscopy the sources occasionally mention a twofold division of the liver into pars familiaris and pars hostilis or inimica: Cicero De divinatione 2.28: [...] aut quo modo est conlata inter ipsos: quae pars inimica, quae pars familiaris esset, quod fissum periculum quod commodum aliquod ostenderet? The arrangement of these two parts has long been debated among scholars, but the ancient evidence we have is extremely sparse.146 It seems reasonable to assume, however, that the division into pars familiaris and pars hostilis would follow the anatomical division of the organ, as marked by the ligamentum coronarium. This twofold division is clearly visible on the bronze liver of Piacenza (see Figure 8), yet the diverse interpretations of the model's inscriptions have given rise to several alternative suggestions.147 A passage by Livy possibly indicates that the whole liver, as well as the head itself, can be divided into pars familiaris and pars hostilis, 8.9.1: Decio caput iocineris a familiari parte caesum haruspex dicitur ostendisse: alioqui acceptam dis hostiam esse, Manlium egregie litasse, portending death for Decius, but vic­ tory for his army.148 In his philosophical discussion of extispicy, Cicero reflects on how the signs in the entrails can actually occur. He mentions two alternatives in the first book of his De divinatione: either the selection of the sacrificial animal is subject to an omnipresent force (vis), or changes take place in the entrails before the sac­ rifice is carried out, causing shrinkage or growth in certain places.149 In the second book of De divinatione, however, Cicero polemicizes against the choice of sacrificial animal being motivated by some divine force that per­ vades the whole world (an outlook supported by Chrysippus, Antipater, and Posidonius), and he argues against the possibility that entrails can change instantaneously.150 145

Cf. Plin. HN 11.189: lecur in dextera parte est. In eo quod caput extorum vocant, magnae varietatis: Marcello circa mortem, cum periit ab Hannibale, defuit in extis; sequenti deinde die geminum repertum est. 146 Cf. the section below dealing with the bronze liver of Piacenza. 14 ? Cf. Deecke (1882) pp. 82-83; Thulin (1906) pp. 26-30; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 112-113; Maggiani (1982) pp. 71-72. 148 In the hepatoscopic vocabulary, the word caedere seems to designate splitting, whereas it means killing when used in connection with a person. 149 Cic. Div. 1.118: Nam et ad hostiam deligendam potest dux esse vis quaedam sentiens, quae est toto confusa mundo, et turn ipsum cum immolare velis extorum fieri mutatio potest, ut aut absit aliquid aut supersit. 150 Cic. Div. 2.35-36: An censes, eundem vitulum si alius delegerit, sine capite iecur inventurum; si alius, cum capite? Haec decessio capitis aut accessio subitone fieri potest, ut se exta ad immolatoris fortunam accommodent? For more on the philosophical implications of Cicero's work, cf. chapter 3.

123 He goes on to label the account of Caesar's ill-fated sacrifices as nonsense, since the sacrificial animal could not have been alive if it had no heart. He men­ tions the possibility that the beast's heart may have been sick and shrunken, bearing little resemblance to a heart. 151 The second book also opposes extispicy by emphasizing the lack of consen­ sus among the various forms of interpretation, 152 illustrating its absurdity by quoting from an account of Hannibal's exile with King Prusias. Despite Hannibal's urgings, Prusias does not dare to fight because the entrails forbid it, upon which Hannibal asks the king whether he really has more confidence in a small piece of veal than in an experienced general.153 In the first book, however, Cicero reaches the conclusion (using among other references the arguments of Chrysippus, Diogenes, and Antipater) that the art of divination actually does exist. The only reason to deny its existence would be the difficulty of clarifying the principles and causes underlying the various divination methods. 154 According to the Stoic approach, which he describes in the first book, the deity is not necessarily present in each liver fissure or bird call. Even so, certain signs - those found in entrails, for instance - precede certain events and can therefore be interpreted by means of empirical observation.155 In a sociological context it is worth noting that in Cicero's view, one did not necessarily have to understand or explain these things. According to Cicero, one should simply make use of them, since all of Etruria could hardly be mistaken about the inter­ pretation of extispicy, lightning, and other portents. 156 If all of Etruria could hardly be wrong, it is all the more regrettable that we have no knowledge of the finer technical points used in reading entrails. Nonetheless, we do have portrayals of the ritual liver inspection itself, as illus­ trated on two Etruscan bronze mirrors, 157 one of which additionally links extispicy to Etruscan legendary material.

151 Cic. Div. 2.37: Qui fit, ut alterum intellegas, sine corde non potuisse bovem vivere, alterum non videas, cor subito non potuisse nescio quo avolare? 152 Cic. Div. 2.28: Inspiciamus si placet exta primum. Persuaderi igitur cuiquam potest ea, quae significari dicuntur extis, cognita esse ab haruspicihus ohservatione diuturna? Quam diuturna ista fuit? Aut quam longinquo tempore ohservari potuit, aut quo modo est conlata inter ipsos: quae pars inimica, quae pars familiaris esset, quodfissum periculum quod commodum aliquod ostenderet? An haec inter se haruspices Etrusci EUi Aegyptii Poeni contulerunt? At id, praeterquam quod fieri non potuit, ne fingi quidem potest; alios enim alio more videmus exta interpretari nee esse unam omnium disciplinam. "3 Cic. Div. 2.52. 154 Cic. Div. 1.85: Quid enim hahet haruspex cur pulmo incisus etiam in bonis extis dirimat tempus et proferat diem. 155 Cic. Div. 1.118: Nam non placet Stoicis singulis iecorum fissis aut avium cantibus interesse deum: neque enim decorum est nee dis dignum nee fieri ullo pacto potest; sed ita a principio inchoatum esse mundum ut certis rebus certa signapraecurrerent, alia in extis alia in avibus [...] "6 Cic. Div. 1.35. Cf. Cic. Nat.D. 3.6 157 Also found on a sigillata sherd, cf. Pfiffig (1998) p. 119, abb. 48.

124

Fig. 9. Tuscan bronze mirror depicting Pava Fig. 10. Details from the image on the bronze mirror (cf. Figure 9). Tarchies and other figures.

The first, a bronze mirror from Tuscany158 dating from the mid-fourth to third century BC, shows a group of five people. Four of their names are inscribed around the border and one (Pava Tarchies) is located directly above one of the figures. Unfortunately this mirror is not very well preserved, but old photographs give a relatively clear picture of the inscriptions and the various figures (see Figure 9).159 Pava Tarchies is seen standing at the centre in a characteristic hepatoscopy posture: bending over the liver, which he holds in his left hand while examining it with his right hand. His left leg is elevated, his foot resting on a stone, and he is wearing the characteristic galerus 160 of the haruspex on his head. Next to him stands Aul[e] Tarchunus,161 also wearing a galerus that has been pushed back to the nape of his neck. He has assumed a speculative posture, holding his right hand under his chin and resting his elbow on his left arm. Behind these two stands a woman, Ucernei, also looking at the liver. Next to Aule Tarchunus, stands a young man, Rathlth, with a laurel branch in his hand, while a bearded man, Veltune, stands next to Pava Tarchies. This bronze mirror can be linked to the legendary material on the origin of the Etruscan discipline and its mythical characters,162 for Pava Tarchies may well be identical with Tages, the founder of Etruscan haruspicy.163 In Cicero's version, the legend of the discipline's origin tells of how Tages, appearing as a the Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Firenze, inv. no. 77759. based on the original from the Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Firenze (Figure 9). 160 Cf. Pfiffig (1998) p. 48, abb. 6; 49; p. 119, abb. 49; 50. 161 Aule, son of Tarchon (the eponymous Hero figure of Tarquinii) , cf. Pfiffig (1998) pp. 23; 36-41; 352-355. 162 Cic. Diu. 2.50-51; Ov. Met. 15.552-559; Wood (1980) p. 325-344; van der Meer (1989) pp. 82-84. 163 Cf. Wood (1980) pp. 334-335. Pava is a hapax legomenon. For more on Tages and the Vegoias figures, and on the Etruscan saecula, see Pfiffig (1998) pp. 37-43; 157-162. 158 At

159 Drawing

125 child but possessing the wisdom of a sage, leapt out of a plough furrow on the ager Tarquiniensis. The ploughman's exclamations of surprise soon had the entire population of Etruria gathered round, and Tages addressed them at length. His words were written down, giving rise to the books containing the discipline of haruspicy. Thus, the bronze mirror may embody a reference to legendary material, depicting how Tages, who is holding the liver, initiates a deeply concentrated Tarchon into the art of extispicy.164 This stresses the importance of ritual and legendary didactics as a means of institutionalizing Etruscan haruspicy. According to Cicero, the libri haruspicini were enlarged over the years by the addition of new observations. Cicero notes that we have learned of this story from the haruspices themselves; this is what they keep in their records, and it is regarded as the original source of their dis­ cipline. 165From this perspective, the bronze mirror and other available sources indicate that the Etruscan institution of divination is legitimated in a "histori­ cal" context that comprises a relationship between ritual and myth. Cicero also provides a general classification of the contents and technical details of the Etruscan books, dividing them into: a) libri fulgurates concerning the interpretation of lightning, b) libri haruspicini concerning the interpretation of victims' entrails, and c) libri rituales concerning various ritual instructions.166 In other words, these books supplied religious specialists with detailed knowl­ edge of methods, observations, and interpretations of portents with the pur­ pose of ensuring the destiny of mortals and the welfare of society.167 The second bronze mirror is from Vulci (see Figure ll), 168 and has been dated to the fourth century BC. This mirror bears the inscription "Chalchas" and shows the Greek seer Chalchas inspecting a liver, likewise in the characteristic posture. Scholars have debated whether the object lying on the table in front of Chalchas is a knife or other entrails, for instance lungs with a trachea.169 It looks to me like entrails, but either view would be defensible. The depiction on this mirror of the Homerian Chalchas as an Etruscan haruspex is evidence of a well-known type of ancient iconographic identifica­ tion - in this case between the Etruscans' own divination specialists and those from Greece - yet why he has been equipped with wings remains a mystery. 164

Regarding the consistency with Lydus' version of the Tages myth, see Wood (1980).

165

Cic. Div. 2.50: earn postea crevisse rebus novis cognoscendis et ad eadem ilia principia

referendis.

Haec accepimus ab ipsis haec scripta conservant hunc fontem habent disciplinae. Cf. Cic. Har. resp. 10.20. 166

Cic. Div. 1.72: Quorum alia suntposita

in monumentis

et disciplina, quod Etruscorum declarant et

haruspicini et fulgurales et rituales libri [...] This classification of the Etruscan books corresponds with the thematic threefold division {exta, fulgura, ostenta) that Cicero attributes to the special Etruscan dis­ cipline of haruspicy, Cic. Div. 2.49: Sed quoniam de extis et de fulgoribus

satis est disputatum,

ostenta

restant, ut tota haruspicina sit pertractata. According to Festus (283), the libri rituales contain ritual instructions concerning the religious, social, political, and military organization of society 167

Cf. chapters 4 and 6.

168

At the Museo Gregoriano Etrusco, Rome, inv. no. 12240.

169 Cf. Pfiffig (1998) p p . 117-118.

126

Fig. 11. Bronze mirror from Vulci depicting Chalchas as a

haruspex.

The bronze liver of Piacenza Still, the most famous and significant archaeological evidence relating to extispicy is the Etruscan bronze liver of Piacenza, which is kept in the town's own Museo Civico. In 1877, a farmer ploughing his field in Settima di Gossolengo170 unearthed a unique artefact: an Etruscan bronze model of a sheep's liver (see Figures 7, 8, and 12). Weighing 635 g, the model measures 12.4 cm in length and corresponds in size to a real sheep's liver,171 The convex bottom of the model (margo dorsalis) is divided into two parts that bear markings signifying the ligamentum coronarium. The flat upper side is divided into three parts: 172 a left lobe, a centre, and a right lobe (margo sinister, penetralis, and dexter) . The upper side presents three precisely replicated growths or projections: 1) lobus caudatus,173 a pyramidal projection located on the top portion of

the right lobe (see Figures 7, 8, and 12), which the literary sources presumably refer to as caput iocineris.174 2) vesica fellea - the gall bladder, or lel in the literary sources,175 located on the border of the right liver lobe (see Figures 7,8, and 12). seven km from Piacenza. Cf. Nickel et al. (1979) pp. 114-176; Leiderer (1990) . Concerning informations on real sheep's liver I owe special thanks to prof. Poul Maddox-Hyttel, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University of Copenhagen. 172 Cf. Nickel et al. (1979) p. 178. 173 Also referred to as lobus Spigelii or processus pyramidalis. 174 Cic. Div. 2.32 . 175 Cic. Div. 2.29. 170 Approximately 171

127

Fig. 12 The bronze liver of Piacenza

3) processus papillaris - a small, semicircular projection located to the left of the lobus caudatus in the middle of the liver (see Figures 7,8, and 12). We unfortunately do not know the ancient term for this projection in the hepatoscopic vocabulary. The upper side of the bronze model is subdivided into 40 sections, each bearing one or more Etruscan inscriptions, so that the entire surface of the model (except the lobus caudatus and processus papillaris) is covered with inscriptions. The model's convex bottom bears two inscriptions. The bronze liver also has four apertures. One is located between the two lobes where the principal vein enters the organ, and two more are found on the bottom of the right lobe. These three marks correspond with the blood vessel apertures of a real liver. A fourth opening is visible high up on one side of the lobus caudatus. 176 The bronze model reproduces in detail the various anatomical elements of a sheep's liver, and it shows only such insignificant stylization as would naturally result from the differences between bronze and organic material, for instance glandular tissue. This stylization is sometimes emphasized as a special characteristic of the bronze model. Such opinions must be based either on inadequate experience with real sheep livers, or on images of sheep livers that show the organ from other angles than the one the model presents. Particularly the lobus caudatus is wrongly perceived as stylized, for it is actually a very prominent pyramidal projection - exactly like the projection on the bronze model. The description van der Meer,177 among

176 A 177

real sheep's liver has no vein apertures or other markings here. Van der Meer (1987) p. 9.

128

Fig. 13 Real sheep livers - with and without gall bladder. 16

12

10

7

Fig. 14 The inscriptions on the bronze liver of Piacenza - top .

Fig. 15 The inscriptions on the bronze liver of Piacenza - bottom.

others, gives of the pyramidal projection and gall bladder as "very stylized" must rely on a comparison of the model with a drawing178 of a sheep's liver still lodged within the animal's abdominal cavity - which presents quite a different picture. The bronze model must, of course, be compared with a genuine sheep's liver seen from the same angle as the model itself (see Figure 13).

178 Van

der Meer (1987) p. 8.

129 The Etruscan inscriptions on the bronze liver:179 1 1. tin / cil/ en 4. uni / mae 7. netf 10. selva 13. eels 16. cilensl 19. l a / s i 22. tinsd / ne& 25. tvnft 28. ned 31. selva 34. lvsl / velx 37. left am 40. tlusc

2. tin / ftvf 5. tec / vm 8. caft ll.le&ns 14. cvlalp 17. pul 20. tins / ftvf 23. cafta 26. marisl / laft 29. here 32. lefta 35. satr / es 38. metlvrnft 41. tivs (bottom of model)

3. tins /ftne 6. lvsl 9. fuflu / ns 12. tluscv 15. vetisl 18. leftn 21.ftufl/ftas 24. fuf/lus 27. leta 30. mar 33. tlusc 36. cilen 39. mar 42. usils (bottom of model) |

Considerable uncertainty is associated with the reading of these inscriptions. One reason is that in order for many of the inscriptions to have any meaning whatsoever, Etruscologists have regarded them as abbreviations. Another reason is that some of the words appear only on the bronze liver,180 making scholars unsure whether the inscriptions even denote deities. As will become evident, some of the inscriptions are assumed to have a genitive ending, leading us to believe there are close links between the respective deities and their domains/sec­ tions on the model. Yet if they do denote deities, the question begging an answer is: Why do some of these names appear in the genitive while others do not? Re 1; 2; 3; 20; 22: tin - probably nominative; tins - probably genitive. Etruscan bronze mirrors show only the forms tinia and tina, and the figure is represent­ ed as Zeus (van der Meer (1987) pp. 33-37; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 231-234). 179

Here I am following Maggiani's reading and numbering used in REE Studi Etruschi (1981) pp. 263-267. Cf. Maggiani (1982) pp. 56-57; Pallottino (1956); Pfiffig (1998) pp. 124-126; van der Meer (1987) pp. 10-15. In many instances, the identification of the individual Etruscan inscriptions is very uncertain. A detailed review of the epigraphical, literary, and iconographical sources relating to the var­ ious deities is available in van der Meer (1987) p. 3Off. and Pfiffig (1998). 180 The uncertainty connected with the inscriptions naturally opens the possibilities for a multitude of interpretations. One (extreme) example is found in Kaulins (1980), which claims that the inscriptions are written in an Indo-European language, and that the bronze liver served as an astrological instrument for calculating the Etruscan calendar. The author identifies the inscriptions as stellar constellations and deciphers them by applying a linguistic, etymological method based on linguistic comparisons between Baltic, Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, English, German, and Scandinavian; on identifications with Sumerian and Egyptian astrological texts; and finally on astronomical findings from the Mayan and Aztec cultures and conditions in Polynesia and Micronesia. From a historical and religio-sociological point of view, such a methodology that does not consider the religious and historical context seems to hold little value for the present examination. Another slightly less ambitious example of an etymological, comparative approach is found in Strnad (1982).

130 Re 3; 7; 25; 28: neth - thought to be an abbreviation of nethuns, possibly derived from the Italic word *neptunos (van der Meer (1987) pp. 37-40; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 285-286). He is depicted on a bronze mirror as an aquatic deity. On the bronze liver, the word neth occurs on the gall bladder and in other loca­ tions. Some scholars link this with a passage by Pliny {Naturalis historia 11.195): Taurorum felle aureus ducitur color. Haruspices id Neptuno et umoris potentiae dicavere geminumque fuit divo Augusto, quo die apud Actium vicit. Re 4: uni - nominative; derived from the Oscian-Umbrian *iuni, the oldest form of Iuno (van der Meer (1987) p. 40). She often appears on bronze mirrors in the company of tinia. Inscriptions from the Etrusco-Phoenician sanctuary at Pyrgi181 identify uni with the Phoenician deity Astarte (Pfiffig (1998) pp. 266-268). The collocation of the inscription mae with uni, as seen on the bronze liver, has not been found elsewhere (though see van der Meer (1987) pp. 41-43; Pfiffig (1998) p. 127). Re 5: tec/vm - probably nominative, possibly an Etruscan version of the Umbrian deity Tikamne Iuvie. Little is known of this deity, who may be a Jupiter figure (van der Meer (1987) pp. 43-46). Re 6; 34: lvsl - genitive of lvsa. Possibly a fertility goddess (van der Meer (1987) pp. 46-47; Maggiani (1982) p. 56, note 12; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 295-296). Re 8; 23: cath - thought to be an abbreviation of catha. Possibly a sun goddess, or a deity associated with the underworld/burial rites (Pfiffig (1998) pp. 241-244; van der Meer (1987) pp. 49-53). Re 9; 24: fufluns - fuflus is thought to be an abbreviation. Identified in the iconography with Bacchus (Pfiffig (1998) pp. 288-292; van der Meer (1987) pp. 53-58). Re 10; 31: selva - thought to be an abbreviation of selvans. Identified with the Roman or Italic Silvanus,182 who is, among other things, protector of fields, woods, and city gates/borders (van der Meer (1987) pp. 58-66; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 297-301). Re 11; 18; 27; 32; 37: lethns - genitive of letham; letha thought to be an abbre­ viation. Very little is known of this figure, which may be associated with the underworld (van der Meer (1987) pp. 66-70; Pfiffig (1998) p. 239). Re 12; 33; 40: tluscv - does not occur in any other Etruscan inscriptions than those on the bronze liver (van der Meer (1987) pp. 70-72). 181 182

Pallottino (1968) pp. 873-876. Cf. Skovgaard Jensen (1962) pp. 11-40.

131 Re 13: eels - genitive of eel. Scholars remain divided on whether this deity is a sun god or an equivalent of the Greek goddess Ge (van der Meer (1987) pp. 73-75). Re 14: cvlalp - cvl may be an abbreviation of culsu, who is associated with the underworld, or of culsans, who is a Janus-like figure. The combination with alp, as seen on the bronze liver, has not been found elsewhere. Alp may be an abbreviation of alpan, alpanu, or alpnu, which are depicted on bronze mirrors as female assistants in amorous motifs. May also be associated with the under­ world (van der Meer (1987) pp. 77-87; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 280; 330-331). Re 15: vetisi - genitive of vetis. The inscription is known only from the bronze liver. Vetis may have links to the Roman deity Vedius and to the underworld (van der Meer (1987) pp. 88-90; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 236-238). Re 1; 16; 36: cilen - thought to be an abbreviation of cilens; the genitive is cilensl. Scholars strongly disagree on the identity of this goddess. She may be a goddess of fate (van der Meer (1987) pp. 90-96). Re 17: pul - possibly tul. Scholars are unsure whether this is actually the name of a deity. Maggiani (1982, pp. 80-81) links pul with the Greek polos (sky), whereas van der Meer (1987, pp.107-108) reads tul as a singular form, or as an abbreviation of tular, which he sees as parallel to the Latin fines. Re 19: lasl - genitive of lasa. A goddess seen on bronze mirrors, for instance in amorous motifs - often seen close to Turan (van der Meer (1987) pp. 109-112). Re 21; 20; 2: thuflthas - genitive of thufltha. No consensus at all on this god­ dess. She may be a goddess of revenge associated with the underworld (van der Meer (1987) pp. 96-107). Re 25: tvnth, or tvuth, or tvath - This goddess is a total enigma. According to van der Meer, she shares certain qualities with Demeter and Venus Libitina (van der Meer (1987) pp. 112-114). Re 26; 30; 39: marisl - genitive of maris; mar is thought to be an abbreviation. Scholars strongly disagree on whether there is a connection between Maris and Mars (van der Meer (1987) pp. 114-120; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 249-250; Maggiani (1982) p. 57, note 19; 72-73). He is seen on bronze mirrors as a young god bearing a lance. Re 26: lath - possibly lar. Lath is only found in this inscription. Lar is thought to be an abbreviation of laran. One bronze mirror portrays laran equipped with armour, greaves, a lance, and a helmet (van der Meer (1987) pp. 120-122; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 309-311).

132 Re 29: here - derived from Hercules of Greece and identified with this figure (van der Meer (1987) pp. 122-124; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 340-345). Re 34: velch - thought to be an abbreviation of "velchans or velchanas. Assimilated with the Roman god Vulcan. Vitruvius mentions that the haruspices associate Vulcan with fire183 (van der Meer (1987) pp. 124-126), and Servius asserts that according to the Etruscan books, Vulcan is the god of lightning.184 Re 35: satres - genitive of satre. Identified with the Roman god Saturn and associated with agriculture and the underworld (van der Meer (1987) pp. 126-128; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 312-313). Re 38: metlvmth - -th possibly a locative. Scholars are generally unsure of how to interpret this inscription, including the issue of whether it is the name of a deity. The term may correspond to the Latin populus or ager publicus (van der Meer (1987) pp. 129-132; Maggiani (1982) pp. 80-81). Re 41: tivs - genitive of tiv or tiu-, which, among other things, can mean moon and month (van der Meer (1987) pp. 133-135). Re 42: usils - genitive of usil, who is depicted on bronze mirrors as a sun god (van der Meer (1987) pp. 136-140; Pfiffig (1998) pp. 244-246).

Based on the bronze liver's epigraphical characteristics, scholars currently date it somewhere between the second and first century BC.185 If this is correct, and if the bronze liver originated in the area where it was found, then the region it came from was originally Etruscan and later became home to the Latin colony of Placentia (in 218 BC).186 The literature incidentally offers a wide range of speculative suggestions on how the bronze model ended up in a field in Settima di Gossolengo. One of the regularly cited assumptions is that some absent-minded haruspex must have dropped it, and a few scholars have even ventured to identify him as Julius Caesar's haruspex Spurinna.187 ^Vitv.Dearch. I.7.2. ^Serv.Aen. 1.42. 185 Characteristically, the inscriptions feature a combination of signs originating in graphematic usage in southern Etruria and a graphic innovation particularly common in northern Etruria after the mid-third century BC. This and other, later inscriptions found near Asciano are related to a significant Etruscan presence around the Po basin. Maggiani (1982) pp. 81-84; Colonna (1984). 186 p o r m o r e o n the founding of the two large coloniae latinae Placentia and Cremona, see Livy 21.25.2; Polyb. 3.40.3; cf. Gargola (1990). 187 Heurgon (1965) pp. 183-185; Dumezil (1970) p. 650; van der Meer (1987) p. 18: "Perhaps an Etruscan haruspex serving a Roman general lost it during a military campaign".

133

Fig. 16. Funerary urn from Volterra - a haruspex holding a liver.

Naturally we have no way of knowing. There was admittedly an uprising among Caesar's troops near Piacenza in 49 BC, and theoretically speaking, Spurinna may have inadvertently lost the bronze liver or dropped it in a scuffle. Still, in light of the artefacts unearthed in recent archaeological excavations throughout northern Italy, today there is no reason to resort to such conjecture, nor to marvel at the presence of an Etruscan model liver from such a late period so far north. In an article he wrote in 1880, the famous Etruscologist Wilhelm Deecke failed to recognize the bronze artefact for what it was - a model of a sheep's liver. Deecke interpreted the find as a templum until a fellow Etruscologist, G. Korte, drew his attention to the similarities between the bronze model and the model liver held by a haruspex on an alabaster funerary urn from Volterra (see Figure 16). Deecke promptly wrote a new article, published in 1882,188 in which he identified the artefact as a model of a sheep's liver, and - still regarding it as a templum - interpreted it within a cosmological framework. 189

188 Deecke (1880); (1882). Cf. Korte (1905). The statement in van der Meer (1987) p. 19 that Korte did not identify the bronze model until 1905 is therefore incorrect, cf. Deecke (1882) p. 65. 189 Deecke (1882) p. 80: "Dann ab er muste die Leber von alien Eingeweiden durch ihre Grosse und absonderliche Form auffallen, und man kam, nach der Lehre vom Makrokosmos und Mikrokosmos durch uns im Einzelnen unbekannte Schlussfolgerungen dazu, in ihr ein Bild der Welr zu sehn."

134

Fig. 17. Funerary urn from Volterra - details of the liver.

In his comparative analysis of the bronze liver and the liver on the alabaster urn, Deecke further argued that the latter must be a calf's liver, as the semicircular projection (processus papillaris) is not very clearly defmed. The processus papillaris on a calfs liver is usually less visible, if not completely absent, but the partial erosion of the chiselling makes it all but impossible to resolve this question. Alternatively, as suggested by the Italian Etruscologist Adriano Maggiani,190 the alabaster liver may be a sheep's liver exhibiting the processus papillaris in duplicate, implying a favourable portent after the fashion of caput duplex/geminum caput and geminum jel (see Figure 17). Certainly the thought of the deceased haruspex resting eternally with a favourable omen in his hand is quite appealing. Deecke believed the bronze model could help scholars understand Etruscan haruspicy in general, for as mentioned above, he regarded the artefact as a templum that had markings corresponding to specific sanctified areas located in the heavens, on earth, in the city or encampment, and so on. 191 The right lobe, which in Deecke's view represents the eastern region, supposedly accommodates the gods who are favourably disposed (pars jamiliaris), while the liver's left lobe or western region (pars hostilis) is home to the unfavourably disposed gods of the underworld. 192 Deecke identifies the head of the liver as the abode of the gods, located to the north - meaning the Alps in his cosmology although "eine bestimmte Spitze lasst sich nicht feststellen". Deecke believes this is why blemishes and abnormalities on the pyramidal projection are considered particularly dreadful omens. 193 et al. (1989) p. 26. According to Deecke's interpretation, the liver is cosmologically oriented by lines that divide its surface into four regions. The cardo line runs north to south on the liver, while the decumanus line runs east to west, identified by the demarcation between the left and right lobes. 192 Deecke (1882) p. 82ff. 193 Deecke (1882) pp. 83-84: "Der dreiseitig-pyramidale lobus Spigelii stellte den im Norden (eig. NW.) gelegenen Giitterberg dar, fUr die Etrusker die Alpen (eine bestimmte Spitze Hisst sich nicht fest190 Maggiani 191

135 Despite external similarities, however, the sources do not support the claim that the Etruscans identified the lobus caudatus with the Alps, and on several counts Deecke's interpretation of the bronze liver seems slightly naive, some­ what speculative, and strongly influenced by the contemporary tendency to let Greek religion permeate his field. Even so, his underlying assumption - that the bronze liver is a templum and an instrument used to define the cosmos has influenced some of the later scholarship.194 The actual function of the bronze liver has, of course, been debated, one possibility being that it was used for instructional purposes, serving as a haruspical guide to the signs read in the victim's liver.195 There are two main tendencies in scholarly treatments of the bronze model: one focuses on its origin, the other on its cosmos. Both trends involve critical considerations of the character of the source material in general, and of mod­ ern theories of Roman religion in particular. A. Origin The scholarly preoccupation with the origin of extispicy probably stems from the general interest in, and search for, the origins of religious customs, a promi­ nent feature in early evolutionist scholarship. It rests on the idea that this was the only way to understand the various religious phenomena and their place in a so-called development of religion. This evolutionist approach, combined firstly with the many unresolved issues directly linked to the bronze liver's inscriptions and secondly with the many unanswered questions associated with Etruscology in general, apparently led to a burning desire to establish (if noth­ ing else) an initial point of reference for the bronze liver and its interpretation. The pivotal issue in this discussion is the idea that Assyro-Babylonian extispicy laid the foundation for Etruscan hepatoscopy.196 The most prominent repre­ sentative of this idea is the French orientalist Jean Nougayrol,197 whose theory revolves around two marks observed on a terracotta liver from Falerii Veteres.

stellen) wie fiir die Griechen der Olymp [...] Daher war sein Verstecktsein oder Fehlen das schlimmste Vorzeichen: die Gotter fehlten mit ihrem Sitze, sie waren entwichen; Tod und Vernichtung standen bevor". Another interpretation of the liver's division is that pars familiaris comprehends domestic affairs, while pars hostilis denotes foreign affairs. 19 « Cf. Ducati (1925) p. 118; Pfiffig (1998) p. 120; van der Meer (1987). ^ Cf. van der Meer (1987). 196 The observation of entrails in Mesopotamia is documented from the beginning of the second mil­ lennium BC. Detailed sources on divination in this area survive and have been dated to around the reign of King Assarhaddon and his successor King Assurbanipal (seventh to sixth century BC). These sources consist of archival records of reported omens and portents based on entrails, astrological observations, and so on, cf. Bottero (1974); Starr (1990); Jeyes (1989); Koch-Westenholz (2000). For a Babylonian liver model with inscriptions, see Figure 20. ™ Nougayrol (1955). Cf. Deecke (1882) p. 79; Thulin (1906a) p. 39; Maggiani (1982) pp. 73-75; van der Meer (1987) pp. 153-164.

136

Fig. 18. Terracotta liver from Falerii Veteres.

Fig. 19. Babylonian liver model.

This clay liver bears no inscriptions and dates back to about the third century BC, making it the oldest Etruscan liver model ever unearthed (see Figure 18).198 According to Nougayrol, the two marks correspond to two important elements in Assyro-Babylonian hepatoscopy (see Figure 19):199 the lines manzazu and padanu. 20o From these marks on the Falerii Veteres liver Nougayrol concludes that" ce foie etrusque, sans doute du HIe siecle av. J.-c., est un foie de type caracteristiquement babylonien. "201 Although Nougayrol mainly concentrates on the liver from Falerii Veteres, later scholars also apply his conclusions to the bronze liver of Piacenza. The most notable example of this is presented by the Etruscologist A. Maggiani, whose interpretation relies partly on the theory of Babylonian origin and partlyon astrological readings. Extrapolating on Nougayrol's theory, Maggiani points out two features on the bronze liver - the small, slightly curved slit at the centre of the rounded left lobe, and a slightly longer, linear slit located in section 32 Oetha). These he identifies with the Babylonian hepatoscopy's manzazu and padanu, respectively (see Figure 21).202 198 The

clay liver from Falerii Veteres is now located in Villa Giulia. (1955) pp. 512-517. See also Figure 19. 200 The Accadian manziizu can be translated as "presence" and padiinu as "path". Nougayrol (1955) p. 516: "D' ailleurs, ces 'incisions' perpendiculairement disposees au centre du lobe gauche, tout assyriologue un peu verse dans la barutu les reconnait et les nomme aussit6t: ce sont le manzazu 'presence (divine)', et le padanu 'chemin', elements fondamenteux du 'tableau hepatoscopique'." A detailed review and translation of the comprehensive sources relating to manziizu and padiinu in Babylonian hepatoscopy is found in Koch-Westenholz (2000): on manziizu, see pp. 51-53 and 79-183; on padanu, see pp. 184-266. 201 Nougayrol (1955) p. 517. 202 Maggiani (1982) p. 85: "Il riconoscimento anche suI fegato di Piacenza delle incisioni del manzazu el del padanu, con il conseguente riferimento, che sembra inoppugnabile, all' elaborazione 'caldea', mentre induce a impostare su nuove, solide basi la problematica dei rapporti tra extispicina etrusca e epatoscopia orientale, si inserisce in una serie molto compatta di indizi che rimandano verso 10 stesso ambiente, sopratutto al corpus delle dottrine astrologiche, come dimostrano le tre aree interne del fegato caratterizzate dalla presenza di tin, maris, satre, riflesso probabile della dottrina, elaborata dal 199 Nougayrol

137

Fig. 20. Babylonian liver model with inscriptions.

This study does not aim to discuss the topic of origin in detail. I nevertheless find it appropriate to include certain reservations and remarks on the Babylonian origin hypothesis, and on its relevance to the bronze liver of Piacenza. 203 First, any concordance between the indicated lines is presumably related to the actual anatomical appearance of a sheep's liver: fissures in the locations described often appear on real livers as their surface folds and forms cavities, for instance when pressure is exerted by other organs. What is more, the small curved notch at the centre of the bronze liver's left lobe does not quite resemble the (usually longer) slit that is more visible on the terracotta liver from Falerii Veteres, and which Babylonian hepatoscopy refers to as manzazu. 204 Second, it seems impossible to interpret any of the inscriptions on the bronze liver using our knowledge of the inscriptions on the Babylonian liver models. The inscriptions on the bronze liver indicate Etruscan, Roman, Italic, and Greek elements and deities, but no incontestably Assyro-Babylonian elements are present. caldeo Berossus e contaminata con la dottrina etrusca del fulmine, reltiva ai tre pianeti superiori, 0 I'accostamento dei teonimi di maris e hercle, probabile eco di una identificazione, dalle fonti attribuita anch'essa all'astrologi caldea." Cf. pp. 74-75 and tav. XIV a. Maggiani's argument to support a reading of tin, maris, and satre as planets does not seem convincing, and there is no concrete evidence substantiating an actual identification between the three deities and planets. Maggiani's reference to Psellus' information that the two lobes of the liver are associated with five planets only serves to further confuse the picture. Not only is Psellus an extremely late source (perhaps eleventh century), but this piece of information also clearly relates to Greek hepatoscopy. 203 Cf. van der Meer (1987) pp. 157-124. 204 Cf. Koch-Westenholz (2000) p. 45 A+B; Leiderer (1990) p.181, abb. 53.

138 Third, there are several technical discrepancies between Assyro-Babylonian and Etrusco-Roman extispicy. One is that in the Assyro-Babylonian discipline, questions and prayers were directed towards a specific deity, principally the sun god Shamash. Along with the storm god Adad, Shamash played a promi­ nent role in the teachings of Assyro-Babylonian extispicy. According to the rit­ ual, questions concerning the future had to be whispered into the ear of the Babylonian sacrificial animal, upon which the god was presumed to reply through the overall impression given by the animal's entrails (following inspec­ tion of the liver, lungs, heart, and large intestine, as well as the sternum). This would result in an "aggregate score" including both favourable and unfavourable portents. What is more, diviners often posed more than one question per animal.205 None of these features are supported in the Etrusco-Roman practice. The lit­ erary sources indicate no one or two deities that played a particularly prominent role in this extispicy. On the contrary, in Roman religion the reading of entrails was, above all, part of a standardized sacrificial ritual that concerned the pax deorum, and could be directed to any deity. The key element in this ritual was divine acceptance of the victim, and consequently of the action occasioning the sacrifice and the divination. There are also differences in the respective vocab­ ularies206 of the two varieties of extispicy and their general functions: the Babylonian discipline revolved entirely around specific, detailed predictions of future events.207 Here it should also be noted that the Babylonian liver and the Etruscan liver spring from very different political and social contexts: Babylonian extispicy was intimately linked with the personal situation of the king in terms of his power, accomplishments, and adversities, and the royal court included a large staff of divination experts and astrologists.208 Furthermore, a notable argument against the theory identifying the Babylonian with the Etruscan slits is that the Roman sources actually provide no literary evidence of a hepatoscopic correspondence. In Babylonian extispicy, these two marks held decisive significance. By observing manzazu, for instance, one could distinguish livers that conveyed portents from livers that did not.209 Although the Roman discipline also distin­ guished between entrails that did and did not convey portents, there is no evi­ dence connecting this distinction with the two particular slits described above. All in all, as far as the issue of origin is concerned I would argue that the fea­ tures noted by certain scholars as evidence of an Assyro-Babylonian origin need not necessarily be explained as such. In my view, they can simply be 205

Cf. text 43 in Starr (1990); on the various entrails, cf. Starr (1983) p. 69; on the development of Babylonian extispicy, cf. Koch-Westenholz (2000) pp. 7-37. 206 On the termini technici of the Babylonian discipline, cf. Nougayrol (1955) pp. 514-515 and Koch-Westenholz (2000) pp. 43-45. 207 Cf. the abundant material in Koch-Westenholz (2000). 208 For an example of a Babylonian royal portent, cf. Koch-Westenholz (2000) p. 97: summa manzazu arik umu rube arku, "if manzazu is long, the days of the king will be long". 209 For more on the vocabulary of Babylonian hepatoscopy, cf. Nougayrol (1955) pp. 512-513.

139

Fig. 21. The bronze liver of Piacenza.

regarded as a (not entirely surprising) consequence of the observation of anatomical features that any liver would exhibit, regardless of nationality. Obviously one cannot deny the existence of links between the two types of hepatoscopy, but it is necessary to clarify one's objective before searching for (another) place of origin. There are indications that the academic preoccupation in this case springs from frustration caused by the many uncertainties and incomprehensible aspects of Etruscan hepatoscopy, and that scholars turn to the Babylonian discipline because it is considerably better documented. Yet those preoccupied with the origin issue and the supposed Babylonian connection seem to pay little heed to the differences actually indicated by the sources. This makes it even easier to mix the issue of origin with the issue of meaning, or mistake one for the other - which leads to just as many problems and errors as does the misconception that one can establish the meaning of a word based on nothing but its etymology. Indeed, clarifying the possible Babylonian origin of hepatoscopy would in no way shed light on the religiopolitical significance of the bronze liver in an Etrusco-Roman context around the first century BC. According to Cicero, extispicy was practised using a variety of interpretive methods and meanings, with no consensus on the systems applied. This lack of consensus is precisely what motivates the philosophical, academic doubts voiced against extispicy in Cicero's second book of De divinatione: Inspiciamus si placet exta primum. Persuaderi igitur cuiquam potest ea, quae signi/icari dicuntur extis, cognita esse ab haruspicibus observatione diuturna? Quam diuturna ista /uit? Aut quam longinquo tempore observari potuit, aut quo modo est conlata inter ipsos: quae pars inimica, quae pars /amiliaris esset, quod /issum periculum quod commodum aliquod ostenderet? An haec inter se haruspices Etrusci Elii Aegyptii Poeni contulerunt?

140 At id, praeterquam quod fieri non potuit, nefingi quidem potest; alios enim alio more videmus exta interpretari nee esse unam omnium disciplinam.210 Naturally, this does not justify the conclusion that in practice there were no mutual influences or connections of any kind. Rather, it is an interesting testi­ mony to clear distinctions between different types of interpretation and mean­ ings within the field of hepatoscopy. It is, however, well known that Roman society was in many ways characterized by various syncretistic processes and influenced by, not least, Greek and Oriental, philosophical, religious, and astro­ logical ideas and cults. This is often reflected in the sources and it can be diffi­ cult, and sometimes even impossible, to distinguish between the various layers or elements represented in both the literary and the archaeological material. In this way, the acculturation processes, so to speak, obscur the various religious frames of reference. Particularly during the late Republican period, Roman society was undoubtedly teeming with Etruscan, Roman, Egyptian, Carthaginian, Greek, and Chaldean "specialists" practising numerous forms of divination, including the reading of entrails. It is therefore important to distin­ guish between, on the one hand, the haruspices involved in public portents (that is, those who observed entrails or interpreted prodigies in a public context) and, on the other hand, the religious specialists of the "street-corner" variety (cf. chapter 2.4). The wanderings and dubious predictions of this second group are the main reason for the somewhat shady reputation of divination in gener­ al, and of private divination in particular. However, this reputation - which has become firmly entrenched in modern scholarship - must not be applied to the haruspices serving the respublica, nor should it lead to any hasty or general con­ clusions regarding a diminished role for Late Republican portents. B. Cosmos In addition to the preoccupation with origin, there is a second prominent trend in modern studies of the bronze liver. Scholars following this trend focus on cosmological ideas, particularly including structuralistic interpretations of the bronze liver. This approach is typified by a fairly uncritical use of the sources to achieve "reconstructions" of one cosmological system or another, depending on which system the liver is believed to represent. For instance, ever since Deecke, schol­ ars seeking to identify and explain the individual gods and their locations and 210

Cic. Div. 2.28: Let us first make an inspection of the entrails. Is it possible to convince anyone that the ostensible significance of entrails is an insight the haruspices have won through long-standing observation? How long is this period? For how long have these observations been made, and how have the haruspices informed each other of which part is favourable and which part is unfavourable, and which type of fissure portends danger and which type portends some advantage? Might the Etruscan, the Elian, the Egyptian, and the Punic haruspices have consulted with one another about this? Quite apart from the fact that it would not be possible, one cannot even pretend to believe it; for surely we see some nations interpreting the entrails in one way and some in another, and there is no single, com­ mon discipline.

141

constellations on the bronze liver have mainly relied on the very late literary source Martianus Capella (De nuptiis Philologiae etMercurti, books 1-2), pos­ sibly written around the fifth century AD.211 Among the many subjects mentioned in this source are the Etruscan division of the heavens into sixteen regions, and the association of various deities to these regions. Capella's sources are often thought to include Apuleius and Varro, as well as Cornelius Labeo, Nigidius, and a Latin translation of the libri fulgurates themselves,212 but we still know next to nothing of Capella's sources. The Capella narrative's highly allegorical and imaginative style and its mythological musings and astrological elements reflect a syncretistic, very late Graeco-Roman thinking. Therefore, in my opinion, this work cannot readily be used as a source for interpreting the bronze liver. Scholars have nonetheless employed this liter­ ary source - more or less unreservedly - on an equal footing with older epigraphical and iconographic material dealing with the various Etruscan deities and their constellations, meanings, and functions. This approach has been used by Korte, Deecke, Thulin, Pallottino, Maggiani, and van der Meer.213 Crucial in its efforts to create concord between the deity constellations on the bronze liver and those in the Capella text is Thulin s otherwise diligent, sys­ tematic analysis and treatment, which has come to form the basis of all subse­ quent studies of the Etruscan discipline of haruspicy.214 The reason why scholars in this field have extensively incorporated Capella's text into their works when interpreting the bronze liver lies in this text's allu­ sion to the sixteen regions of the heavens and the various related deities - the motivation being that Cicero, Pliny, and others tell us the Etruscans divided the heavens into sixteen parts. Consequently, since the edge of the bronze liver also has sixteen sections, all manner of unconvincing attempts have been made to justify "reconstructions" of this system or that, based on the peripheral sections of the bronze liver and the Capella text.215 It seems amazing that scholarship in general has shown such uncritical use of the available sources. This probably came about because the hopes of clarifying key aspects of Etruscan religion using the bronze liver proved to be overly optimistic, unless, of course, one chooses to ignore the various critical issues related to the sources. One of the most well-known cosmological structuralistic theories relying heavily on Capella is that of van der Meer, whose archaeological study is fre211

Reproduced in van der Meer (1987) pp. 175-176. Cf. Weinstock (1946); Thulin (1906a).

212 Van der Meer (1987) p. 22; Weinstock (1946) p p . 115-116. 213 Korte (1905); Deecke (1882); Thulin (1906); Pallottino (1956); Maggiani (1982); van der Meer (1987). However, Weinstock (1946), which analyses the Capella text in a platonic-cosmological context, simply states that Capella and the liver have the sixteenfold division and several deities in common (p. 122; 126). Cf. Pfiffig (1998) p. 114; Dumezil (1970) vol. II, pp. 685-696. 21

4 Thulin (1906a); (1906b).

21

^Cic. Div. 2.42.

142 quently referred to in modern scholarship. 216 In keeping with the attempts of earlier scholars, van der Meer's objective is to clarify the cosmological system believed to underlie the inscriptions on the liver: It will appear that the network with the inscribed names of divinities on both sides of the Liver depicts a microcosmos reflecting the macrocosmos, the Etruscan division of heaven. The analysis of the system, the complex of gods, their interrelations, their identity and character, and their possible origin form the scope of this study.217 Besides its use of the problematic Capella text, van der Meer's approach pres­ ents yet another problem, since it ignores such elements as epigraphical evi­ dence of the rituals associated with the deities. Hence, his use of the sources is distorted, not only when it comes to critical consideration of the sources in general, but also in terms of modern theorization on the specific relationship between cult and myth or cosmology. Van der Meer skilfully outlines the body of material dealing with the gods on the bronze liver, dividing the sources according to epigraphical and iconographic context. Yet surprisingly, and rather unfortunately, this division does not lead to any true critical treatment of the material in connection with his actual attempt to reconstruct the bronze liver's cosmology 218 In van der Meer's interpretation, for instance, the gods of the right liver lobe are associated with the sky, light, water, fate, love, and borders. 219 Here he seemingly ignores the positions of the gods letas, thuflthas, and cathas and their possible association with the underworld and funerary cult, although he him­ self presents this information elsewhere in his study.220 Giving no reason, his "reconstruction" chooses to interpret the figure catha using references to the Capella text 221 and other sources rather than using relevant material such as the inscriptions linking the figure with funeral cult rituals.222 216

Van der Meer (1987). Van der Meer (1987) p. 3. Van der Meer's reading of the inscriptions (p. 11) begins with item number 3 in the schematic representation above, and his reading and interpretation of the inscriptions deviate from previous attempts in several respects. 218 One significant point is van der Meer's emphasis on the fact that about half the gods on the bronze liver seem to be of Italic origin. Thus, as van der Meer rightly concludes (p. 166): "The process of Ttalisation' had already started at the end of the sixth century, and continued during the fifth and fourth centuries B.C." He further concludes on the basis of the collective sources that no clear evidence is found for any of the bronze liver's deities in the early phase of Etruscan culture (700-500 BC), although it should be noted that generally speaking, our knowledge of Etruscan religion during this period is very limited. 219 Van der Meer (1987) p. 165. 220 See for instance van der Meer (1987) p. 49; 67; 99; 101. 221 Mart. Cap. 1.50-51; van der Meer (1987) p. 52. 222 Cf. Pallottino (1968) p. 359; 622; van der Meer (1987) pp. 4 8 ^ 9 ; 52; 169-171. The inscriptions mentioned are from the fourth and fifth centuries BC, and the author's failure to emphasize this aspect 217

143 According to van der Meer's interpretation, the gods of the left liver lobe represent connections to the earth and vegetation, but here he disregards the possibility that eel on the left lobe may be associated with the sun, and that cilen, fufluns, leta, lvsa, and tluscv are mentioned on both lobes. His interpre­ tation also asserts that the central part of the liver and the gall bladder repre­ sent the martial deities, in this case disregarding the presence of catha also in the central part. Instead catha's significance as a sun goddess is emphasized in connection with her presence on the right lobe.223 Van der Meer rejects the assumption that a division into pars familiaris and pars hostilis follows the anatomical bipartition of the liver. His argument builds primarily on a passage from Pliny stating that four of the north-western regions of the sky represent maximae dirae and four of the north-eastern regions rep­ resent summa felicitas.224 Van der Meer therefore has pars familiaris stretch across regions 1 to 8 (according to his own numbering system), covering the lower portion of both the left and right liver lobes, while pars hostilis stretches across regions 9 to 16, covering the upper portion of the left and right lobes.225 Consequently, in connection with the bronze liver and hepatoscopy, van der Meer and others often unreservedly employ information that is, admittedly, taken from Etruscan religion, but concerns the interpretation of lightning or some other aspect of divination. Here it is important to recall the various types of carefully maintained boundaries so characteristic of both Roman and Etruscan religion. The, earlier mentioned, factual information, given by Cicero and others concerning the distinction between libri fulgurates and lihri haruspicini indicates that different principles and methods of interpreting the respective phenomena may well have coexisted. Another methodological problem is the seemingly reverse order of the arguments used to support certain points, notably pertaining to deities that confuse or confound the scholars. One example is tluscv, which occurs three times on the bronze liver, but has never been found in any other inscriptions. Van der Meer reaches the following conclusion on this figure, deducing its substance from the position of the name on the liver: "If Tlusc in region 33 is related to Lvsa in region 34 and 4 [van der Meer's own numbering] and if Tellurus in Martianus' region 5 is related to Lynsa in region 4, Tlusc may be compared with Tellurus."226 in his cosmology is rather puzzling - not least in light of his conclusion (p. 167): "The total constella­ tion of gods, however, had its roots in the fourth century B.C. Roman influence does not dominate". 22

3 Van der Meer (1987) p. 165-166.

224

Plin. HN 2 . 1 4 3 ^ 4 : ex Us (sc. sedecim partibus caeli) maximae dirae quae septemtriones

attingunt.

Itaque plurimum

refert unde venerint fulmina

et quo concesserint.

Optimum

est in

ab occasu exortivas

redire partes. Ideo cum a prima caeli parte venerint et in eandem concesserint, summa felicitas

portende-

tur, quale Sullae dictatori ostentum

prospera

aut dira. 225 Van der Meer (1987) p. 151.

226VanderMeer(1987)p. 71.

datom accepimus. Cetera ad ipsius mundi portionem

minus

144 The same sort of reverse argument is evident elsewhere, for instance in con­ nection with the figure selva: It seems probable that his position in the "wheel" indicates his function as an agricultural god.227 [... Later, concerning cvl:] On the evidence available it seems more probable that cvl in region 12 [van der Meer's numbering] is an abbreviated form of cvlsu than of cvlsans. The principal argument is that most gods in regions 9-16 can be shown to belong to the sphere of the underworld. Culsans cannot be associated with death. 228 There are several examples of van der Meer basing an interpretation on argu­ ments that run in circles: from postulated structural and positional meanings to meanings concerning mythical content, which must in turn serve to confirm the reconstructed polytheistic cosmological structure. The reconstruction is there­ by transformed into a basic premise instead of being proved. What is more, the cosmological structures are "reconstructed" using very dissimilar sources, and the author one-sidedly makes use of the mythical material in these sources without taking ritual meanings into account. Consequently, I have strong reservations about the foundation on which van der Meer bases his structuralistic attempt to map the cosmological system of the bronze liver. Similar reservations are necessary for another structuralistic cosmological inter­ pretation, which Dumezil presents in his work on archaic Roman religion. He regards the bronze liver in an (occasionally flickering) Indo-European light, based on the idea that the two liver lobes might represent mythical, cosmolog­ ical structures, and his approach is firmly anchored in a classic structuralistic, theoretical dichotomy: This opposition of the wheel on the left and the grid on the right surely had a meaning, but we cannot fathom it; in its principle, it recalls the IndoEuropean opposition of round and square which has been studied above in connection with the Roman doctrine of the sacred fires and which can be summed up in its Vedic formulation as follows: the round is the present world, the square is the celestial world.229 The sectional division of the left lobe - the "wheel" structure - is a particular­ ly crucial feature in symbolic and structuralistic interpretations, which some­ times see it as the earth and sometimes as the sun or moon.

227 Van der Meer (1987) p . 65. 228 Van der Meer (1987) p . 80. 229 Dumezil (1970) vol. II, p. 652 (the author's italics). Cf. vol. II, p . 690. For a discussion of Dumezil's (re) construction of Indo-European and Roman mythology, cf. Beard (1993); Beard et at. (1998) vol. I, p p . 14-16 and Graf (1993).

145

Fig. 22. A sheep's liver with a single infected bile duct (left lobe).

Opposite these structuralistic, symbolic theories stands the possibility that the wheel-like pattern could be a representation of a pathological deformity. Thulin aired such an anatomical explanation early on,230 but it seems to have drowned in later religio-historical speculations. Some real sheep livers exhibit signs of a common parasite231 most frequently occurring in marshy areas, which is transferred via the lower digestive tract to the animal's liver, causing the organ to become chronically infected. The infection is located in the bile ducts (see Figure 22), and can give rise to a characteristic "wheel-like" pattern. Although in this case parasitism does not necessarily rule out structuralism, it is important to emphasize the obvious anatomical significance and relevance of the parasite theory. In light of the otherwise so realistic appearance of the bronze model, and in light of the close links between the discipline of hepatoscopy and the expression of the individual anatomical elements on the liver, I find it more plausible to regard the "wheel" as an anatomical structure rather than a symbolic one. To my mind, considering the "wheel" primarily as a symbol would bring one dangerously close to Deecke's dubious postulate that the pyramidal projection of the liver corresponds to the Alps. As far as extispicy is concerned, the bronze liver of Piacenza is an important piece of archaeological evidence. At the same time, however, the inevitable conclusion is that the scholarly analyses of the bronze model clearly reflect the highly fragmentary character of the sources on Roman and Etruscan religion. This affects studies of the bronze liver and extispicy in two ways: firstly, scholars essentially fail to examine the sources critically, and secondly there is a tendency to fill the many voids in our knowledge with elements like the origin theory, thereby intermingling the issue of meaning with that of origin. In the case of the 230 Thulin

(1906a) pp. 38-39. Dicrocoelium dendriticum. Cf. Leiderer (1990) p. 165, abb. 15. This parasite can be present in almost all the sheep in flocks grazing in marshy areas and therefore, theoretically speaking, the resulting condition might appear to an Etruscan haruspex to be the normal state of a sheep's liver. 231

146 bronze liver, such purported connections can span up to 2000 years - as when scholars incorporate Babylonian hepatoscopy into their interpretations of the Etruscan bronze liver, paying no heed to the disparity of the two contexts. In other words, the bronze model has been subject to quite a few recon­ structions in which critical method has been replaced by an uncritical mixture of diverse sources. The lack of willingness to conduct a thorough examination of the sources is probably caused by an eagerness to construct a "synthesis", thereby smoothing over the gaps in our knowledge in order to present an even surface. Nevertheless, the investigative zeal of scholars seeking to reveal ars haruspicina should not lead to neglect of another important art - ars nesciendi. By way of conclusion, we remain unable to explain or reconstruct any cosmological system upon which Etruscan extispicy is built. It might therefore be more appropriate to simply speak of the sacral topography of the bronze liver, establishing that: 1) the bronze liver is a realistic model of a sheep's liver used to determine the will of the gods through hepatoscopy, as a part of Etruscan divination 2) interpreting the will of the gods involves systematic observation of the liver's topographical characteristics 3) the bronze liver links the model's topography to a series of inscrip­ tions/deity names that we only partially understand 4) these deity names are placed in sections that may represent a religious classifi­ cation system, but the meaning and interpretational context remain unclear 5) this system may be governed by mythical, ritual, and/or topographical relations between the various sections and deities232 6) the other archaeological and literary sources contain no similar ritual links to the many inscriptions on the bronze liver, which may be a late syncretic feature The question, however, is how loudly we should bemoan our missing knowl­ edge of this cosmological system. Perhaps our own ignorance on the subject is not really that important? Perhaps it reflects, more than anything else, scholar­ ship's preoccupation with belief systems (after the Christian model) or hierar­ chies of gods (after the Greek model)? After all, we have no other solid evi­ dence that a heavy emphasis on individual deities and reconstructions of celes­ tial hierarchies and cosmologies was necessarily the key element dictating the cultic realities of Etruscan hepatoscopy. As it happens, most of the other sources relating to public portents indicate that the principal element consisted in the religious actions - that is, the rituals 232

It is noteworthy that on the bronze model, the pyramidal projection (caput iocineris), which gen­ erally seems to play a prominent role in the literary sources on extispicy, is one of the few surface areas that does not bear the name of any deity.

147 rather than the various underlying mythical/cosmic beliefs. Both Etruscan and Roman religion contain only small amounts of actual mythological material relating to the individual deities,233 which is probably one of the reasons why the Etruscans' identification with and acceptance of the Greek deities seems to have gone very smoothly. Certain beliefs are, of course, evident to some degree in the rituals and interpretations of portents, yet the surviving literary sources provide only a scattering of actual motivations, explanations, and beliefs relat­ ing to the individual deities (cf. chapter 3). This could, of course, be due to a paucity of surviving sources on the subject, but that would still not explain the puzzling general absence of such explanations in some of the material that actually has survived. Thus, on the one hand the sources clearly emphasize the methodical diligence exhibited by the religious experts when determining the appropriate ritual, while on the other hand they rarely explain the underlying notions, such as which deity sent the portents and why 234 Moreover, mythological and cosmological material, such as the constella­ tions of deities, often changes character repeatedly with the passing of time. By contrast, specific ritual actions and techniques are generally more closely attached to certain social situations and patterns of interaction and tend to change much less, although naturally their meanings may change or be reinter­ preted as society undergoes social and historical changes. Therefore, in my view, the analysis of both public portents in general and Etruscan hepatoscopy in particular would benefit from shifting the focus away from flimsy hypothetical, cosmological, and mythological speculations towards the concrete ritual circumstances, procedures, and meanings - in short, to focus on the function of public portents as a religio-political institution and as an ancient scientific discipline. Both the archaeological sources and the very fragmentary literary sources indi­ cate that the key element of extispicy as a discipline is a systematic approach to the actual observation of entrails, primarily the liver and its various anatomical components: two lobes (left and right) and three projections (lobus caudatus, vesica fellea, and processus papillaris). Relying on the literary and archaeolog­ ical documentation of extispicy, and shifting the focus as proposed above, chapter 4 will further examine extispicy and other forms of divination. They will be regarded as a type of scientific discipline forming an important part of Roman religion; a discipline with its own particular theorization and method­ ology for the observation, analysis, and classification of data - that is, an ancient discipline applying critical and systematic criteria, as well as empirical, synchronic and diachronic examinations.

233 Cf. van der Meer (1989) p . 8 1 . 234 On the importance of ritual in Roman religion compared to the significance of myth, one might consider the composition of Varro s Antiquitates rerum divinarum. This work clearly emphasizes Roman religious actions and religious institutions: the first twelve books deal with colleges of priests, temples, and festivals, while the last three books deal with the deities themselves.

148 We know that the empirical analyses and interpretations were carried out by religious experts, and that those practising hepatoscopy might have used liver models as one way of handing down their knowledge. In this light, the bronze liver of Piacenza - despite its many unsolved riddles - is a significant late-Etruscan artefact documenting the existence of hepatoscopy as a religioscientific discipline that was ritually practised during the second and first centuries BC.

149

23.AUSPICIA The term auspicia primarily covers portents from the observation of birds. Like the other forms of divination, this practice is referred to as disciplina, scientia, and ars, and the sources also speak of a ius augurumP5 The practice involves a technique used to perform religious delimitation of a specific area {templum) as well as the expert knowledge used to interpret the signs. The observations include not only the birds providing celestial signs requested by the observer within the delimited area, but also signs occurring spontaneously, such as lightning and thunder. Our knowledge of public auspices is very fragmentary, and Linderski is undoubtedly correct in claiming that these observations and interpretations of bird cries and behaviour were far more complicated than scholars previ­ ously assumed.236 The taking of auspices is generally linked to Jupiter,237 and Cicero refers to it as a Roman form of divination, as opposed to extispicy, which was distinctly Etruscan. Auspices were taken by the Roman magistrates or the Roman priests, augures, and the practice was normally prepared for at night and carried out at dawn.238 According to Cicero, Roman public augury recognized only a few types of aves augurales, as opposed to non-Roman augury, which used almost all bird species and interpreted the signs quite differently.239 Cicero mentions ravens and crows as examples of aves augurales, and the interpretations of the birds' cantus and volatus seem to have been firmly established.240 As evidence of the decisive role of augury in Roman society, Cicero cites Romulus' auspices in connection with the founding of the city, referring to him as optumus augur. The use of augury also appears in connection with Numa's inau­ guration (see below). Numa's successors also employed augurs, and moreover Cicero writes that after the expulsion of the kings, no public actions were per­ formed, during war or peace, without first taking auspices.241 And so it came to pass, according to the tradition, that augury was institutionalized. Cicero also sup­ ports this in his De republica, describing the augural discipline as a cornerstone not only of the founding of Rome itself, but also of the ideal Roman constitution: as part of Scipio's synopsis of Rome's most ancient history, Cicero gives Romulus cred235 Cic. Leg. 2.32-33; Div. 2J5; cf. chapter 4. 236

Linderski (1986) p. 2286; pp. 2168-2173. The institution of public auspices has been subjected to numerous treatments and detailed studies, cf. Linderski's bibliography (pp. 2297-2312). In addition to Linderski's article, those deserving special mention include Valeton (1889); Catalano (1960); (1978); Magdelain (1964); (1969); (1976); (1977); Beard et al (1998) vol. I, pp. 21-24. 23

7 See below, Cic. Div. 2A2-4J>\ Leg. 3.43; Livy 1.18; cf. Catalano (1960); Linderski (1986).

238

Cic. Div. 1.3 Principio huius urbis parens Romulus

non solum auspicato urbem condidisse sed ipse

etiam optumus augur fuisse traditur. Deinde auguribus et reliqui reges usi et exactis regibus nihil sine auspiciis nee domi nee militiae gerebatur. Cf. Livy 1.18; Linderski (1986). 239 Cic. Div. 2.76. 240 Cic. Div. 1.85; cf. Madvig (1882) vol. 2, p p . 241 Cf. note 238 and Livy 1.36.6.

511-525.

publice

150 it for introducing auspices and for establishing the Senate, dividing the people into tribus,'and founding the augural college with one elected augur from each tribus242 The body of ancient sources substantiates how crucial augural science was to all political activity in Rome, since public actions such as passing laws and conducting assemblies, elections, and Senate meetings could only take place after auspicia had been taken.243 Accordingly, the taking of auspicia was a stan­ dard part of public religio-political procedure, and lightning, thunder, and bird omens revealed the approval or disapproval of the gods, thereby indicating whether planned activities would be successful or not: aves eventus significant aut adversos aut secundos244 A number of ancient writers who were augurs themselves, among them Claudius Marcellus (consul 222 BC), Lucius Julius Caesar (consul 64 BC), Appius Claudius Pulcher (consul 54 BC), and Cicero (consul 63 BC), wrote works on augury that have, regrettably, been lost. It is true that Cicero's De legibus also describes public auspices and the activ­ ities of the augurs in considerable detail,245 but various issues still remain unex­ plained, and it seems impossible to create a coherent picture of public augury as a whole. De legibus makes it evident that the objective of public augury as an institution was to observe and interpret the auspices by which the gods expressed their favour or disfavour in relation to state business and public cer­ emonies, including the consecration or inauguration of places, things, and peo­ ple. Taking auspices is likewise linked to the expiation of divine wrath and to maintaining the welfare of Roman society. The contents of the disciplina augurum were laid down in the books of the augural college, the libri augurales, also known as commentarii24G In his De divinatione, for instance, Cicero quotes information from these augural commentarii, asserting that when Jupiter makes lightning and thunder, it is forbidden to hold popular assemblies.247 242 Cic. Rep. 2.16: Turn, id quod retinemus hodie magna cum salute rei publicae, auspiciis plurimum obsecutus est Romulus. Nam et ipse, quod principium rei publicae fuit, urbem condidit auspicato, et omnibus publicis rebus instituendis, qui sibi essent in auspiciis, ex singulis tribubus singulos cooptauit augures [...] Ac Romulus cum septem et triginta regnauisset annos, et haec egregia duo firmamenta rei pub­ licae peperisset, auspicia et senatum [...]; cf. Div. 1.107-109; Enn. Ann. 1.94; Ungern-Sternberg (1993). On the conflict between the augur Attus Navius and King Tarquinius, cf. Livy 1.36.2-6; Cic. Div. 1.32-33; Bremmer (1993); Beard et al. (1998) vol. I, pp. 23-24. 243 For testimony concerning the founding of colonies and military camps following a Roman augur­ al pattern, cf. Polyb. 6.27; Livy 41.18.7-10. 244 Cic. Div. 2.79. 245 Cic. Leg. 2.20-21: Interpretes autem Iovis optumi maxumi, publici augures, signis et auspiciis postera vidento, disciplinam tenento, sacerdotesque vineta virgetaque et salutem populi auguranto, quique agent rem duelli quique popularem, auspicium praemonento ollique obtemperanto. Divorumque has providento Usque apparento, caelique fulgura regionibus ratis temperanto, urbemque et agros [et] templa liberata et effata habento. Quaeque augur iniusta nefasta vitiosa dira deixerit, inrita infectaque sunto quique non paruerit, capital esto. 24 Cic. Nat. D. 2.11; Div. 111. Cf. Bomer (1953); Linderski (1986) pp. 2241-2256. 247 Cic. Div. 2A2-4J>: Itaque in nostris commentariis scrip turn habemus: "love tonantefulgurante comitia populi habere nefas".

151 According to Varro, auspicia were taken by delimiting an area of the sky or the earth and designating its four parts, the left being eastwards, the right west­ wards, the nearest southwards, and the farthest northwards. The meaning of the auspices would then be interpreted based on their location relative to these positions.248 Varro describes the augur as facing south, and the southward-gaz­ ing stance is also confirmed in one of Cicero's narratives on the augur Attus Navius.249 Other sources250 describe the augur as gazing eastwards, and these differences in orientation have led to a variety of scholarly interpretations, and disagreements. The augural principles concerning orientation may, however, have varied depending on the ritual and topographical circumstances.251 According to Varro's reproduction of an augural formula, religious delimi­ tations could be performed on the ground using trees as points of reference.252 Unfortunately, the text presents many uncertainties, and it seems even Varro himself found it difficult to decipher its meaning. Setting out the limits of the templum was of crucial religio-political significance, both in the immediate context of taking the auspices and in a broader context.253 Gellius, repeating Varro, provides an example when he states that a decision passed at a Senate meeting would not be legally valid {iustum) unless it was passed within an area demarcated by an augur, that is, a templum.254 Furthermore, auspices always had to be taken, and sacrifices made, before Senate meetings were held.255 On the subject of delimiting templa, Gellius relates from Varro that not all shrines are templa, a notable example being the shrine of Vesta.256 The round shape of this shrine has since led scholars to speculate on whether a templum could only be rectangular or might just as well be circular.257 Be that as it may, the idea of the rectangular templum is certainly confirmed by the augural templum in Bantia.258 A significant element in the definitions and delimitations applied in augury was the pomerium, Rome's sacred augural boundary within which auspicia 248 Varro Ling. 1.1: Eius templi partes quattuor dicuntur, sinistra ab oriente, dextra ab occasu, antica ad meridiem, postica ad

septemtrionem.

249 Cic. Div. 1.31; cf. Pease (1920) part 1, p p . 144-145 (Div. 1.31). 250

Livy 1.18, see below; Servius Aen. 2.693.

251

For a thorough discussion of the direction issue, see Valeton (1889) p. 285ff.; Linderski (1986)

p p . 2280-2289; cf. Gargola (1995) p p . 44-50. 2 2

^ Varro Ling. 7.8-10, cf. Peruzzi (1976).

253

For a distinction between loca inaugurata and the templa from which the auspices were taken, see

Linderski (1986) p p . 2272-2279. 254

Gell. NA 14.7.7: Turn adscripsit de locis in quibus senatusconsultum

firmavitque,

nisi in loco per augurem constituto,

fieri iure posset, docuitque con-

quod "templum" appellaretur, senatusconsultum

factum

esset, iustum id non fuisse. 255

Gell. NA 14.7.9: [...] immolareque hostiam prius auspicarique debere, qui senatus habiturus esset; [...]

256

Gell. NA 14.7.7: Inter quae id quoque scriptum reliquit, non omnes aedes sacras templa esse ac ne

aedem quidem Vestae templum 257

esse.

Cf. Frothingham (1914); on the significance of the templum

see Beard et al (1998) vol. 1, p. 22. 2

58Cf.Torelli(1966).

and the shrine of Vesta as an aedes,

152 urbana were taken. 259 The pomerium marked an important distinction between the city and the world outside as far as religious, political, and military affairs were concerned. Foreign cults, for instance, were often located outside the pomerium. Certain political assemblies could only take place within the pomerium, whereas all military events (except triumphal processions) had to take place outside the pomerium?-*® Livy describes the inauguratio ritual in connection with the appointment of Numa Pompilius as Romulus' successor to the Roman throne, drawing paral­ lels to the way Romulus took auspices when the city itself was founded. 261 In Livy's account, Numa, accompanied by an augur, went to the arx, where he sat down on a stone and looked southwards. The augur, capite velato, sat at Numa's left, holding the lituus in his right hand. 262 The augur observed the city and the country, invoked the gods, and drew a line running east to west demar­ cating two regions, then defined the southern part as the right and the north­ ern part as the left. Next he fixed a reference point as far as the eye can see, directly ahead of him, and transferring the lituus (see Figure 23) into his left hand and placing his right hand on Numa's head, he prayed: Father Jupiter, if it be the will of the gods [fas] that this man, Numa Pompilius, whose head I am touching, become king of Rome, then let incon­ testable signs appear within the boundaries I have set. He then proceeded to name the auspices he desires,263 and when they had been sent, Numa was declared king. It seems virtually impossible to precisely describe the difference between auspicium and augurium, even though these terms have been the subject of numer­ ous scholarly studies, not to mention a variety of etymologically based analy­ ses.264 There may be an obvious connection between the powers granted to the 259 Gell. NA 13.14.1-7; cf. chapter 5, note 42. 260 Gell. AL4 15.27.5. For the mythical explanation of the establishment of the pomerium, see Plut. Vit. Rom. 11.1-4; cf. Magdelain (1968) pp. 4(M8; 57-67; (1976); (1977); Riipke (1990); Gargola (1995). 261 Livy 1.18 (for the year 716 BC): Accitus, sicut Romulus augurato urbe condenda regnum adeptus est, de se quoque deos consuli iussit. Inde ab augure, cui deinde honoris ergo publicum id perpetuumque sacerdotium fuit, deductus in arcem in lapide ad meridiem versus consedit. Augur ad laevam eius capite velato sedem cepit, dextra manu baculum sine nodo aduncum tenens, quern lituum appellarunt. Inde ubi prospectu in urbem agrumque capto deos precatus regiones ab oriente ad occasum determinavit, dextras ad meridiem partes, laevas ad septentrionem esse dixit; signum contra, quoad longissime conspectum oculi ferebant, animo finivit; turn lituo in laevam manum translato dextra in caput Numae imposita ita precatus est, "luppiter pater, si est fas hunc Numam Pompilium, cuius ego caput teneo, regem Romae esse, uti tu signa nobis certa adclarassis inter eos fines quosfeci". Turn peregit verbis auspicia quae mitti vellet. Quibus missis declaratus rex Numa de templo descendit. 262 For details on the augural lituus and its application in the division of earth and sky, cf. Cic. Div. 1.31. 263 Cf. Plutarch's description in Plut. Vit. Num. 7.11-3. For an in-depth analysis of this ritual, see Linderski (1986). 2 ^ Cf. Catalano (1960); (1978) pp. 467-479; Linderski (1986) pp. 2290-2296; Latte (1960) p. 67.

153

Fig. 23. A silver dinar from 46 BC showing ceremonial equipment, notably the augural staff with its curved head.

magistrates and augurs, respectively, with the magistrates taking auspices (auspiciis rem gerunt), and the augurs taking both auspicium and augurium (augurium agunt) and generally interpreting the signs presented to them by the magistrates. 265 This could tie in with a tendency for the term auspicium to involve mainly divine approval or disapproval of a planned profane activity, while augurium is more often used of the augural science, the ceremonies, and processes by which a person or place gains new significance and a different status, shifting from the profane to the sacred sphere (as indicated in Livy's description of the inauguratio ritual). We know that during the Republic, the augurium salutis ceremony, which could only take place during absolute peace, was performed twice. The earliest example took place around 160 BC266 and the other during the consulate of Cicero in 63 Bc. 267 The object of the augurium salutis was to determine whether supplication could be made to the gods concerning the welfare of the state and the people.

It will have become evident that public augury was an important part of Roman identity in religious, political, historical, geographical, and sociological terms. Nevertheless, scholarship has dwelt on obvious situations in which auspices could serve purposes of religio-political manipulation. One example is Lily Ross Taylor's chapter "Manipulating the state religion" in Party Politics in the age 0/ Caesar - a work often cited by later scholars.268

265 Cf. Cic. Div. 1.28; Leg. 3.43 ; 01/ 3.66. For a detailed treatment of these passages, see Magdelain (1964); Catalano (1960); (1978); Linderski (1986) pp. 2151-2225. When outside Rome or on a military campaign, the magistrates could, to some extent, interpret the signs themselves. 266 Plut. Aem. 39; cf. Liegle (1942). 267 Cic. Div. 1.105; Leg. 2.21; cf. Beard et al. (1998) vol. I, pp. 110-111; 188. 268Taylor (1975) pp. 76-97.

154 In the following I have chosen to focus on some of the incidents involving auspices that have been one-sidedly used to authenticate what I call "manipu­ lation hypotheses". I use this term to cover modern interpretations that assume portents are primarily a politically motivated phenomenon, aimed at cynical, premeditated manipulation. 269 One episode, related by Cicero, shows with ample clarity the considerable religio-political significance of augural (and haruspical) practices. 270 It con­ cerns a consular election in which Tiberius Gracchus (in his capacity as consul in 162 BC) called for the appointment of P. Scipio and C. Figulus. A rogator who had just announced the successful election of the two candidates sudden­ ly died. Gracchus completed the election despite the man's death, but because of the people's religio the matter was brought before the Senate. The Senate decided to refer the matter to the haruspices, whose responsum declared Gracchus to be non iustus comitiorum rogator. Cicero tells how an infuriated Gracchus responded (2.11): "What? Was I not authorized, I who made the proposal both as consul and augur, and who, myself, had first taken the aus­ pices? Should you, Etruscans and barbarians that you are, have the right to interpret the auspices and elections of the Roman people?" Gracchus then bade the haruspices begone. Later, however, Gracchus wrote from his province to the college of augurs that after reading the books, he realized he had made a mistake (vitium): having set up his observation post 271 in Scipio s gardens, he subsequently crossed the pomerium to attend a Senate meeting, but forgot to take the auspices when crossing the pomerium again on his way back.

269

In Taylor (1975) p. 77, the author asserts (referring to Polyb. 6.56): "Thus the aristocratic Greek familiar with the city-states of the Peloponnesus, where restrictions of the state religion had weakened, praises the Roman system, where he sees religion being used as the 'opium of the people'." 270 Cic. Nat. D. 2.10-12: Multa ex SibyHints vaticinationibus, multa ex haruspicum responsis commemorare possum quibus ea confirmentur quae dubia nemini debent esse. Atqui et no strorum augurum et Etruscorum haruspicum disciplinam P. Scipione C. Figulo consulibus res ipsa probavit. Quos cum Ti. Gracchus consul iterum crearet, primus rogator, ut eos rettulit, ibidem est repente mortuus. Gracchus cum comitia nihilo minus peregisset remque Mam in religionem populo venisse sentiret, ad senatum rettulit. Senatus quos ad soleret referendum censuit. Haruspices introducti responderunt non fuisse iustum comi­ tiorum rogatorem. Turn Gracchus, utepatre audiebam, incensus ira: "Itane vero, ego non iustus, quiet con­ sul rogavi et augur et auspicato? An vos Tusci ac barbari auspiciorum populi Romani ius tenetis et interpre tes esse comitiorum potestis?" Itaque turn illos exire iussit. Post autem e provincia litteras ad collegium misit, se cum legeret libros recordatum esse vitio sibi tabernaculum captum fuisse hortos Scipionis, quod, cum pomerium postea intrasset habendi senatus causa, in redeundo cum idem pomerium transiret auspicari esset oblitus; itaque vitio creatos consules esse. Augures rem ad senatum; senatus ut abdicarent consules; abdicaverunt. Quae quaerimus esempla maiora. Vir sapientissimus atque baud sciam an omnium praestantissimus peccatum suum, quod celari posset, confiteri maluit quam haerere in re publica reli­ gionem, consules summus imperium statim deponere quam id tenere punctum temporis contra religionem. Magna augurum auctori tas; quid haruspicum ars nonne divina? Haec [et] innumerabilia ex eodem genere qui videat nonne cogatur confiteri deos esse? 271 Concerning auguraculum and the phrase tabernaculum capere, cf. Linderski (1986) p. 2277; Beard et al (1998) vol. 1, p. 183.

155 An error had thus been committed in the election of the consuls, and the augurs referred the matter to the Senate. The Senate decided the consuls would have to renounce their positions, which they did.272 Ross Taylor's approach to the episode is to view the auspicia as religio-political trickery (p. 84, the italics are mine): Later, from his province, perhaps because he was not satisfied with the poli­ cies of his successors, he wrote back to the college of augurs, to which he belonged, that he remembered he had not taken the auspices when he crossed the pomerium to go to the Campus Martius for the assembly. Still, political disagreements notwithstanding, the account presents the reli­ gious infraction as a reality. It therefore seems natural to shift the focus and pri­ marily regard the episode as a verification of public portents' significance to Rome's religio-political affairs, which were influenced in several ways by these portents. First, of course, there is the crucial importance of ritual qualifications and appropriate ritual actions in matters of auspicia and religio-political proce­ dures, including the importance of the pomerium. Secondly, the account out­ lined above provides an example of a conflict between magistrates and reli­ gious specialists, additionally presenting the terms and procedural descriptions used when dealing with these public portents. Finally, the account bears wit­ ness to the interaction between consuls, Senate, and priesthoods, and also demonstrates the role of the Roman people - which in this case directly con­ tradicts Ross Taylor's claim that religion was used to subjugate the masses.273 The events and procedures can be outlined as follows: 1) Gracchus heads the consular election process 2) the rogator dies suddenly, arousing religious doubts {religio), but the elec­ tion is finalized despite the death 3) under pressure from the people, Gracchus puts the matter before the Senate 4) the Senate refers the matter to the haruspices 5) the haruspices return a responsum indicating that Gracchus is not reli­ giously qualified as a rogator comitiorum, which Gracchus contests 6) Gracchus writes to the augural college about a religious flaw: his failure to take the auspices, which results in the consuls being vitio creati

272

Cf. Degrassi (1947) vol. 13, p. 462, in 162 BC: vitio facti abdicarunt. Taylor (1975) pp. 76-78; p. 76: "Men who as magistrates celebrated the great games for the gods, performed the chief sacrifices, and took auspices - which determined the will of the gods - served also as priests to interpret the gods on earth. In the early republic the patricians, who seem really to have believed that they were the representatives of heaven, used the state religion to keep the plebeians in subjection. Later the plebeian nobles, who as magistrates and priests were entitled to a part in the reli­ gious control of government, shared with the patricians the same attitude towards the masses." 273

156 7) the college of augurs brings the case before the Senate 8) the Senate decrees that the consuls must abdicate 9) the consuls abdicate Particularly noteworthy are the facts that the rogator's sudden death is treated as a prodigy, and that the haruspices' responsum defines Gracchus as non iustus comitiorum rogator because he forgot to take the auspices. Note also that his first error {vitium) gives rise to a second error, rendering the consuls elected under his leadership vitio creati. Gracchus' reaction in this situation further demonstrates that a distinction between Roman augures and Etruscan haruspices was upheld based on their ethnic identities and authority to interpret the different types of public por­ tents. Yet the episode's conclusion demonstrates that religio stood over and above the ethnic identity issue in a Roman context: the effect of the conde­ scending term barbari is totally offset by the correctness of the haruspices' responsum, showing the crucial importance of religio-political procedure and ritual accuracy. Therefore references to the term "barbari" seem misleading when, as is fre­ quently the case, the word is taken out of context and used to demonstrate a gen­ eral lack of respect for these Etruscan priests. An example would be Elizabeth Rawson, who refers to that particular episode, stating:274 "In the second Century B.C. the haruspices were perhaps despised as 'Etruscans and barbarians'." From a religio-political perspective, however, the whole point of this story is that the responsum from the haruspices turns out to be correct. Considering the systematic inclusion of the haruspices and their influential role in official Roman religion - also in the second century BC275 - it is, in my view, difficult to believe that the Romans should have found them generally contemptible. 276 The above narrative serves to illustrate how, based on the augural commentarii and the haruspices responsum to the Senate, the augural auctoritas and scientia functioned as a vital element in controlling political matters and defining Roman religious and political identity. At the end of the narrative, Cicero praises Gracchus' conduct and his deci­ sion to disclose a religious transgression he might otherwise have concealed. He also praises the consuls for relinquishing their positions rather than keep­ ing them contra religionem. Based on Cicero's presentation of the episode, one can conclude that the consular election was not automatically annulled because of the religious infringement itself. The consuls had to step down from office themselves following a request from the Senate. One might readily draw a parallel between, on the one hand, the religiopolitical principle of vitia when individuals obtained offices contra religionem

2/4 Rawson (1985) p. 303. Cf. Goar (1972) p. 39, note 8. 275 See P T 53; 59; 60; 64; 66; 71; 75; 76; 85; 88; 91; 97; 104; 112; 113. 276 Cf. chapter 2.4.

157 and, on the other hand, vitia when laws were passed contra auspicia. If the same principle applied to both situations, it would challenge one of Linton's conclu­ sions on the principles of Roman religio-politics: For if a law was formally at fault, as the laws of Antonius and Manilius were, there would be no need for annulment by the senate.277 Judging from the actual episodes related in the surviving sources, however, the obvious conclusion seems to be that, just as a vitium regarding a consular elec­ tion does not automatically annul that election, a vitium regarding an enacted law does not automatically annul that law. Presumably the Senate would have to annul such a law, just as the consuls in the example examined above were obliged to abdicate at the request of the Senate. The procedural aspect of public auspices is further clarified by an episode from Livy relating to a consular election, an episode scholars have also presented as an example of political manipulation. 278 In 215 BC, Marcus Claudius Marcellus was elected consul, but as he was prepar­ ing to take office, thunder was heard. The augures were summoned and declared that the election seemed to involve a vitium. Some of the senators said the gods dis­ approved of the result: the first simultaneous appointment of two plebeian consuls. Marcellus stepped down and was replaced by Q. Fabius Maximus.279 The events and procedures can be outlined as follows: 1) Marcellus is elected consul 2) thunder is heard 3) the omen is reported to the Senate 4) the augures are summoned 5) the augures present their responsum to the Senate, asserting that Marcellus is vitio creatus 6) the Senate orders him to abdicate 7) Marcellus steps down This particular case also provides rare insights into how the election's vitium was interpreted: the error being that Marcellus was unacceptable as a plebeian, since Rome had not previously had two plebeian consuls at the same time. It

277 Lintott (1968) p. 136; cf. Linderski (1986) p. 2165, note 54. 78Scullard (1951) pp. 57-59. Cf. Munzer (1920) p. 74; Cassola (1962) p. 316-317; Linderski (1986) pp. 2168-2173. 279 Livy 23.31.13-14: Creatur ingenti consensu Marcellus, qui extemplo magistratum occiperet. Cui ineunti consulatum cum tonuisset, vocati augures vitio creatum videri pronuntiaverunt; volgoque patres ita famaferebant, quod turn primum duo plebeii consules facti essent, id deis cordi non esse. In locum Marcelli, ubi is se magistratu abdicavit, suffectus Q. Fabius Maximus tertium. 2

158 seems to follow that augural responsa differ from haruspical responsa in that they only assess an existing situation arising from an actual official action, the action being either imminent or already (erroneously) performed. Augural responsa establish profane and sacred causal connections, for instance in the form of ritual qualifications, as demonstrated here. Haruspical responsa to prodigies, however, can apply to a wide range of non-recognized situations and actions, which the interpretations themselves are expected to specify. Haruspical responsa also dictate expiation rituals and sometimes contain actu­ al predictions as well. The details vary in the scholarly studies that claim this episode was politically motivated, but they basically assume that the thunderclap was fabricated for the occasion by Marcellus' opponents, and that Q. Fabius Maximus may have masterminded the plot himself. Two things undermine the theory of political opposition against Marcellus, however. Not only does Livy tell us that Marcellus was elected ingenti consensu. We also learn that Marcellus was, in fact, appointed consul the following year (114 BC) - alongside the patrician Q. Fabius Maximus.280 The most remarkable notion is Scullard's idea that the whole affair, including the appointment, vitium, and abdication, could be a scam orchestrated by Marcellus and Q. Fabius Maximus in collusion:281 The election and withdrawal of Marcellus may even have been staged by him and Fabius in order to moderate the ambitions of the People, and the unprecedented election of two plebeian consuls have been encouraged merely in order that the patricians could publicly voice disapproval and by augural procedure force a plebeian consul to abdicate in order to make room, with appearance of reluctance for a patrician. Scullard's political analysis is, in my view, rather far-fetched, his conjecture bor­ dering on the unsustainable. The purported staging is based on a concept of cyn­ ical religio-political manipulation on a scale that is completely unsupported else­ where in the sources. Moreover, staging such an event seems to be an extremely difficult and risky undertaking, bearing in mind that its sole purpose is to stake out a purely political territory. Most importantly, however, the staging hypothesis ignores the significant role the entire augural college played in the affair (proce­ dure items 4 and 5) - unless, of course, Scullard imagines that all of the augurs were bribed to obtain an entirely fictional tonitrus, vitium, and responsum. Although refuting the claim of a strictly politically motivated staging in this case, I do not disregard the significance of conflicts between patricians and ple­ beians. I would, however, point out that such conflicts inevitably seem attrib­ utable to the interplay between religion and politics, rather than politics alone. Here it is important to recall the original principles behind public auspices as 280 281

Livy 24.9.3. Scullard (1951) p. 58.

159 an institution. According to the tradition, auspicia were originally a patrician prerogative,282 whereas plebeian magistrates, assemblies, and plebiscita were usually appointed or approved without any prior taking of auspices - or more precisely, no preliminary public auspices were taken of the sort traditionally described for similar patrician matters. 283 The traditional patrician monopoly on auspices naturally raises a number of questions, especially about how ple­ beians accessing patrician offices were handled with respect to the patrician auspices. Linderski proposes what he himself (appropriately) calls "a strange compromise": "A plebeian on his election to the consulate would enter as it were into patrician shoes: he would use patrician auspices, but he would not 'have' them." 284 The whole issue nonetheless remains obscure in the existing sources of which, incidentally, very few deal with plebeian religious matters. The same applies to the discussion of social and religio-political conflicts between plebeians and patricians during early Roman history, although that topic is too complex and wide-ranging to discuss here. Even so, it should be noted that the sources indicate considerable social, political, and religious changes in the relationship between patricians and plebeians from around 500 BC until the passing of the Licinic-Sextic laws in 367 BC (granting plebeians access to the consulate) and the lex Ogulnia in 300 BC (which gave them access to the college of augurs and the college of pontifices). The right to take auspicia was transferred through the election of magis­ trates, and according to Varro, who quotes the augur Messala's book De aus­ piciis, the patrician auspices could be divided into two categories: auspicia max­ ima and auspicia minora. Auspicia maxima related to consuls, praetors, and cen­ sors, whereas auspicia minora related to the other types of magistrates. In other words, there were various auspices depending on magisterial rank,285 and the right to take auspices was relinquished at the end of one's magisterial term. 286 Should the succession of consuls be interrupted {interregnum), the auspices would revert to the Senate {auspicia ad patres redeunt), which would "have them" until a public assembly was called, electing new consuls who would have the right to take auspices.287

282

Livy 4.6.1-2: [...] Curtius respondit, "Quod nemo plebeius auspicia haberet, ideoque decemviros conubium diremisse ne incerta prole auspicia turbarentur" \ cf. 4.2; Cic. Leg. 3.9; Linderski (1986) pp. 2178-2184; Linderski (1990). 283 Cf. Madvig (1882) vol. 1, p. 210; 378; Beard et al (1998) vol. I, pp. 64-68; 134-135. 28 < Linderski (1995) p. 567. 285 Gell. NA 13.15.4: Patriciorum auspicia in duas sunt divisapotestates. Maxima sunt consulum, praetorum, censorum. [...] Reliquorum magistratuum minora sunt auspicia. Cf. Cic. Leg. 3.10; For a discus­ sion of auspicia maiora and minora, see Bouche-Leclercq (1882) vol. IV, p. 218ff; Linderski (1986) pp. 2177-2184. 2 ^ Cic. Nat D. 23. 28 ' Cic. Leg. 3.9; Dom. 14.38; Brut. 1.5.4; Livy 1.17.5-11; 1.32.1; cf. Magdelain (1964). In war, the right of auspicy was transferred to the commander by means of lex curiata, after which he handled the war suis auspiciis. If the command of a combined army periodically shifted between two consuls, the right of auspicy lay with the one commanding on the day in question, cf. Livy 28.9.9-10.

160 Based on the traditional connection between the auspicia and the patricians, as well as on the actual relevant religio-political procedures, there is actually no reason to doubt the occurrence in 215 BC of the above-mentioned thun­ derclap. Nor is there any reason to assume that the augural interpretation of the electoral vitium must necessarily have been fabricated prior to said thun­ derclap, or have arisen from specific personal hostilities or political differ­ ences in the ongoing dispute between plebeians and patricians. Basically, in this particular context, the responsum from the college of augurs could well have refused to accept Marcellus' election on strictly augural grounds. As mentioned earlier, this view is based on two elements. The first is the tradi­ tionally privileged position of the patricians in matters of auspicia. The sec­ ond lies in the way the augures were used in the situation discussed: they were only consulted on the question of whether Marcellus was ritually qualified to hold the office of consul - not asked to consider his personal qualifications as such. From an augural point of view, Marcellus was not ritually qualified to hold the office, since there was no precedent for electing two plebeians as consuls with the right to take auspices. It should be noted that a strong emphasis on this religious aspect of the affair also leads to substantial agreement with the fact that the following year, the aus­ pices readily gave Marcellus divine confirmation, indicating that he was qualified to take up the consulate alongside the patrician Q. Fabius Maximus.288 My overall conclusion thus differs from that of Ross Taylor, Scullard, and others who approach and interpret religio-political matters believing that in practice portents simply cannot provide an adequate explanation for political manoeu­ vres. In my view, these episodes provide substantial support for the claim that both in theory and in practice, public portents formed the basis for political mat­ ters, and that politics and portents were complementary factors in a dialectic relationship. Naturally, in some cases religious elements may have been used pri­ marily to achieve some immediate political aim, or deftly exploited in a person­ al political controversy, as in the Bibulus affair, described below. That is still a far cry, however, from the modern point of view that divination and public portents in general should be explained only as politically premeditated, fabricated stag­ ings. We move too far from Roman religious premises, if we expound portents as inevitably being the result of plotting and antagonistic scheming of the sort a modern point of view would refer to as "rational" (see chapter 4). Additionally, I do not fully agree with the explanation that in Rome the fight for political power was also a fight for control over the gods. Augury was not about gaining control over the gods. On the contrary, one was subject to the will of the gods, and the sources demonstrate a religio-political desire to be in harmony with the gods, while one s political opponents might be (accused of being) in disharmony with the gods. 289 288 289

Livy 24.9.3. Cf. chapter 3 regarding the dispute about Cicero's house, and Linderski (1986).

161 A certain amount of pragmatic negotiation is definitely evident in sources dealing with the portents and the gods, but the wish to exercise control over the gods would have seemed unwise in a Roman context: to defy the deities responsible for guaranteeing the welfare of Roman society could in itself con­ stitute a violation of the pax deorum. This relationship with the gods, and the consequences of violating it, are clearly evidenced in the famous exemplum involving P. Claudius Pulcher (con­ sul in 249 BC) and the sacred chickens. Within the auspicia ex tripudiis, it was considered a favourable omen if the chickens ate so eagerly that some of their feed fell from their beaks onto the ground. If, however, they refused to eat before an encounter, it meant that the troops should not engage in battle. When Claudius Pulcher took auspices prior to a military decision during the first Punic War, and the chickens showed no appetite, he threw them into the water so that they could drink, since obviously they had no intention of eating. Sailing contra auspicia, he suffered a terrible military defeat, and the people of Rome passed judgement on him for his serious religious violation.290 In a similar episode, C. Flaminius ignored a tripudium before the Battle of Lake Trasimene, as well as ignoring the express advice of the pullarius that he should postpone the battle because the chickens would not eat.291 Auspicia ex tripudiis were often used when the army was campaigning,292 and Cicero shows more than a hint of irony when referring to the magistrates' use of this type of divination, as in De divinatione 1.27: Nam nostri quidem mag­ istrates auspiciis utuntur coactis; necesse est enim off a obiecta cadere frustum ex pulli ore cum pascitur293 Nevertheless, neglecting the auspices could be fatal. Military defeat was immi­ nent when C. Flaminius left Rome in 217 BC without first taking the auspices (not having iustum imperiurn and auspicium)294 and many similar examples tes290

Cic. Nat. D. 2.7; Div. 1.29; 2.71; cf. Pease (1920) part 1, pp. 135-136. Cic. Div. 1.77. 292 A military example from the late Republic is the fate of Marcus Crassus, who ignored the aus­ pices and was killed by the Parthians in the Battle of Carrhae in 53 BC, Cic. Div. 1.29; cf. Pease (1920) part 1, p. 137-138. 293 Cf. Cic. Div. 2.73. This work also recounts a formulaic augural exchange regarding a tripudium 2.72: "Q. Fabi, te mihi in auspicio esse volo", respondet "audivi". Hie apud maiores adhibebatur peritus, nunc quilubet. Peritum autem esse necesse est eum, qui silentium quid sit intellegat; id enim silentium dicimus in auspiciis quod omni vitio caret. Hoc intellegere perfecti auguris est. Illi autem qui in auspicium adhibe[n]tur cum ita imperavit is qui auspicatur "dicito, <si> silentium esse videbitur", nee suspicit nee circumspicit; statim respondet silentium esse videri. Turn ille "dicito, si pascentur'. "Pascuntur." Quae aves aut ubi? "Attulit" inquit "in cavea pullos is qui ex eo ipso nominatur pullarius". (Cf. PT 90) I assume that in this context, the peritus mentioned is an augur publicus, cf. Livy 41.18.16. It is evident in this formu­ laic ritual that in connection with auspices, the term silentium means that there is no religious obstruc­ tion (vitium), and that the ritual can be conducted free of other distracting portents. It is also worth not­ ing that in the same passage (2.73), Cicero refers to an old decree from the augural college according to which any bird could provide tripudium. 291

294

Livy 22.1.5, cf.21.63; on the conduct of Flaminius, see also PT 36.

162 tify to the fact that auspices were absolutely crucial, both in relation to the out­ come of various actions affecting the collective welfare of the Roman state and in relation to questions of specific religio-political authority, status, and identity. In sum, the function of auspices and public augury was to examine and con­ firm that Roman society's relationship to the gods was balanced as far as offi­ cially planned political, religious and military undertakings, offices, individuals, and places were concerned, the object being to ensure a favourable outcome for the relevant situations and actions. If such confirmation could not be achieved in the form of favourable auspicia, the reason or error had to be deter­ mined using augural science, which could then re-establish the balance and ful­ fil the will of the gods. Scholars often make a distinction in matters of public augury between signa impetrativa, which are omens given at the express request of the person taking auspices, and signa oblativa, which are omens that can occur spontaneously at any time in any place. It should, however, be noted that the sources do not use the term signa oblativa until around the fourth century AD.295 Unfavourable signa receive the same treatment as procedural errors (vitia), meaning that if a magistrate observed an unfavourable sign during an official activity, he prompt­ ly had to cease that activity. The magistrate also had to cease the activity if an augur reported an unfavourable sign while it was taking place. Failure to do so constituted a vitium. In consequence, omens could break up assemblies and meetings, as Cicero describes in De legibus.296 Here the author lists the powers vested in the augur, allowing him, when observing auspices, to: 1) dissolve assemblies 2) annul decisions made by the highest military and civilian authorities 3) terminate or postpone the treatment of any matter until another day 4) decree that consuls must step down from office 5) revoke leges passed in contravention of ius297

295 Cf. Madvig (1882) vol. 2, p. 521; Beard et al. (1998) vol. 1, p. 22, note 58. 296 Cic. Leg. 2.31: Maximum autem et praestantissimum in re publica ius est augurum cum auctoritate coniunctum. Neque vero hoc quia sum ipse augur ita sentio, sed quia sic existimari nos est necesse. Quid enim maius est, si de iure quaerimus, quam posse a summis imperiis et summis potestatihus comitiatus et concilia vel instituta dimittere vel hahita rescindere? Quid gravius quam rem susceptam dirimi, si unus augur "alio " dixerit? Quid magnificentius quam posse decernere, ut magistratu se ahdicent consules? Quid religiosius quam cum populo, cum plebe agendi ius dare aut non dare? Quid, legem si non iure rogata est tollere, ut Titiam decreto conlegi, ut Livias consilio Philippi consulis et auguris? Nihil domi, nihil militiae per magistratus gestum sine eorum auctoritate posse cuiquam prohari? The controversial land and grain laws of Sex. Titius and L. Appuleius Saturninus (circa 100 BC) were revoked following an augur­ al decree. L. Marcius Phillipus similarly convinced the Senate that M. Livius Drusus' reform laws (91 BC) were contra auspicia latae, cf. Cic. Leg. 2.14; Linderski (1986) pp. 2209-2215. 297 In this context, ius seems to be the augural law set out in the commentarii. This is in turn linked to the auspicia in order to maintain or re-establish the/we deorum, cf. Linderski (1986).

163 It will have become clear from the procedures outlined in the above examples that despite their authority, decrees from the college of augurs could not auto­ matically revoke laws and annul official elections, but had to be processed by the Senate, which would then hand down decisions in each individual case. At the same time it should be emphasized that in practice, the Senate always seems to have followed the decrees issued by the augural college. To my knowledge there is no testimony to the contrary. We do, however, know of an affair (the Bibulus controversy, dealt with below) in which the Senate - probably for political reasons - refrained from consulting the official augural college.298 As indicated in the above passage from Cicero's De legibus, the augural right to declare obnuntiatio is manifested by speaking the words alio . There is some uncertainty in the sources as to the precise content of the technical terms obnuntiatio, nuntiatio, spectio, and servare de caelo, particularly with regard to the respective powers of the augurs and magistrates in this discipline of div­ ination. This is further reflected in modern scholarly interpretations and the disagreements among them. A scholar as early as Madvig299 shrewdly analysed the situation, concluding that the attempted explanations were exceedingly arbitrary, complicated, and extreme - a description that is equally applicable to the scholarship that came after Madvig.300 One major cause of uncertainty is a passage in Cicero.301 It describes the augurs as entitled to nuntiatio (that is, the right to report signa observed before or during the performance of public affairs) in connection with comitia, where­ as it describes the magistrates as entitled to both nuntiatio™2 and spectio (the right to report in advance their intention of observing auspicious signs from the heavens, servare de caelo}0}). The uncertainty as to the procedures and implications relating to obnuntia­ tio also includes the introduction of lex Aelia et Fufia, which regulates the use of auspices, but our information about this is rather unclear. The main ques­ tion in this context, however, is whether different consequences result from reporting unfavourable omens actually observed, and reporting one's inten­ tions of watching the skies for omens.304

298

Likewise, according to Cicero, the previously mentioned Marcus Marcellus (elected five times as augur and consul) was able to avoid observing auspices by having himself transported in a closed litter when entering into warfare, Cic. Div. 2.11. 299 Madvig (1882) vol.1, p. 220: "forsogte forklaringer ere meget vilkaarlige, indviklede og voldsomme"; cf. Linderski (1986) p. 2195ff. 300 For an examination of this issue and a treatment of the augur's role in the inauguratio, see Catalano (1960) pp. 220-246; Linderski (1986) pp. 2215-2225. 301 Cic. Phil. 2.81: Nos enim nuntiationem solum habemus, consules et reliqui magistrates etiam spectionem. 302 The term nuntiatio is used not only to denote augural reports, but it can also denote any report­ ing of omens. 303 Cic. Phil. 2.81: [...] qui servavit, non comitiis habitis, sedpriusquam habeantur, debet nuntiare. 304 Cf. Madvig (1882) vol. 1, p. 203; Linderski (1986); Astin (1964); Beard et al. (1998) vol. 1, pp. 109-110.

164 The very idea that public assemblies, laws, and similar matters could be postponed or obstructed not only by actual observations of unfavourable celes­ tial omens, but also by the mere reporting of plans to observe the sky might seem preposterous. It has certainly given scholars a good argument in their por­ trayal of Roman portents as a political tool used to achieve strategic delays and obstruction. Indeed, the possibilities seem obvious. One testimony to both the function and the possibility of the intentional use of obnuntiatio in prolonging political negotiations is found in a remark attrib­ uted to the plebeian tribune L. Appuleius Saturninus in the work De viris illustribus, whose author remains unknown. Saturninus was known for stirring the masses to tumultuous behaviour and stone throwing. He ostensibly threatened political opponents unwilling to continue negotiations because of thunder by stating that if they would not keep their fears to themselves, they would surely come to feel the hail.305 The textbook example of exploiting portents for political means is the controversy that arose over consul Marcus Calpurnius Bibulus' persistent observation of the sky in 59 BC.306 Various questions remain unanswered, but the reason for Bibulus' marathon vigil seems to have been his opposition to the approval of certain laws, including a controversial land act initiated by his fellow consul Julius Caesar.307 As Suetonius describes the affair, Caesar, having publicly presented his bill, had Bibulus, who wished to protest against the bill, driven from the Forum by force. Bibulus appealed in vain to the Senate, subsequently declaring that he intended to observe the heavens for unfavourable signs. This would, under normal circumstances, prevent further negotiations on passing the bill. This gave rise to political unrest, and Bibulus stated that he intended to observe the sky from his own house, perhaps because he dared not leave home after being threatened by Caesar's friends. According to Suetonius, Bibulus remained at home until he had completed his term in office.308 Even so, the negotiations continued in spite of Bibulus' intentions, and (among many other things) the bill was passed and became law. This in turn raised the question of whether a vitium had been committed by ignoring Bibulus' obnuntia­ tio - the point being that if the controversy did involve a vitium, the relevant nego­ tiations should rightfully have been declared religiously invalid. According to Cicero, Clodius therefore arranged for a contio to be held, dur­ ing which he 309 allowed Bibulus and a number of augurs to step forward. ^^Devir. ill. 73: Huic legi multi nobiles abrogantes, cum tonuisset, clamarunt: "lam", inquit, "nisiquiescitis, grandinabit.i 306 Suet, lul. 20; Cic. Att. 2.16.2; 2.19.2; 2.21.3-5 in Shackleton Bailey (1965); Cf. Lintott (1968) p p . 144_146; 190-193; 213; Taylor (1975) p p . 8 2 - 8 3 ; 133-134; Linderski (1965) p p . 71-90; Linderski (1986) p p . 2165-2168; Meier (1995) p p . 204-223; Beard et al (1998) vol.1, p p . 126-129. 307 Cf. Meier (1995) p p . 207-209. 308 Suet. lul. 20.1. 309

Since the adoption of Clodius into a plebeian family had actually taken place precisely during Bibulus' celestial observations, the adoption, and by extension Clodius' status as a tribune, may have been invalid from a religious point of view, cf. Cic. Dom. 15.40^41.

165 Clodius questioned the augurs, who declared that cum de caelo servatum sit, cum populo agi non posse. He then questioned Bibulus, who se de caelo servasse respondit?10 Thus, according to the consulted augurs, this particular case clear­ ly involved a vitium: Illi vitio lata esse dicebant?11 The Bibulus controversy is frequently presented as an example of politicians exploiting religion during the Late Republic. Such claims are in a way justifi­ able, although our deficient knowledge of significant details in the religio-political procedures governing obnuntiatio makes it difficult to adequately assess this issue. There are, however, (at least) two extreme standpoints from which the controversy can be viewed. The one would contend that Bibulus sat at home, smiling contentedly while gazing at the sky, since his sole objective was to cynically exercise his right of obnuntiatio in order to obstruct political nego­ tiations.312 The other would argue that the controversy must be regarded as a religio-political emergency, since Bibulus was forced into confinement by actu­ al threats of violence, compelled to remain indoors and observe the sky from there. The latter standpoint makes Caesar out to be the greatest cynic: not only does he use violence to cause a law to be passed; he also deliberately disregards portents. 313 Another important aspect here is Caesar's autocratic position fol­ lowing Bibulus' domestic isolation. In fact, one of the contemporary Roman jokes consisted in describing 59 BC as "the consulate of Julius and Caesar".314 Whichever alternative one prefers, it is almost certain to contain, either implicitly or explicitly, the general assumption that such cynical exploitation of public portents had become commonplace in the political scheming and power games of the Late Republic. I believe this general assumption is a simplification and distortion of both the religio-political situation in question and the gener­ al significance of public portents in Republican Rome. The alternative scenarios outlined above bear witness to the fact that the right of obnuntiatio - be it Bibulus or Caesar who cynically caused the vitium - was still an extremely serious matter, and one that gave rise to considerable attention, commotion, and doubt about the religio-political procedure. 315 In my view, the entire affair seems to indicate that public augury still held considerable religio-political importance. It seems that the religious procedures could not readily be abandoned to further political interests. If the type of

310 Cic. Dom. 15.40; cf. Har. resp. 22.48. 3ii Cic. Har. resp. 22.48. 3!2

Cf. Meier (1995) p . 219, where the author speaks of "Bibulus' ludicrous sky-gazing." [...] "The

efficacy of this means of obstruction depended not on religious conviction, but on the senatorial sanc­ tion behind it, the existence of a power that could punish any infraction." 313

For a more moderate stance on Caesar and this affair, cf. 0 r s t e d (1994) p. 197. 0 r s t e d states that

Caesar's relaxed attitude towards "political" portents made Bibulus' action futile. Unfortunately, how­ ever, 0 r s t e d does not discuss an essential point concerning the religious aspect of the Bibulus contro­ versy, namely whether it is actually meaningful to speak of political portents as separate from others. 314 Suet. Jul. 20.2. 315

Cf. Cic. Att. 2.21.5: Bibuli qui sit exitus futurus

nescio.

166 exploitation described had been a commonplace event in the Late Republic, the matter would hardly have developed into an affair of the dimensions indi­ cated. The Bibulus controversy raises the difficult question of how one would choose to define "political exploitation" in connection with divination and public portents during the Republic.316 Surely a magistrate convinced that the gods would not favour a certain undertaking had a right, indeed an obligation, to search the skies for relevant omens? It is noteworthy that the affair was not handled as precedent would dic­ tate, by passing through the Senate to the official augural college. The Senate's low profile in the given situation indicates that a responsum from the official college of augurs would have had to declare the negotiations contra auspicia. This would have invalidated all Senate negotiations and decisions conducted during that period, requiring a Senate decree to annul them. Perhaps the political consequences were too unpredictable, and/or perhaps Caesar controlled a Senate majority? Whatever the case, the situation might well confirm the significance of the augural college, contradicting the general impression of disintegration and reli­ gious deterioration at the time.317 Linderski's analysis of the controversy holds Bibulus' reports of celestial observations to be invalid, since he did not present them in person at the Forum, and Linderski therefore concludes: He [Caesar] once chased Bibulus from the Forum, and he was ready to repeat this action. It was a violation of the other consul's rights, but it was not a violation of augural law.318 The question is, however, whether it is possible to distinguish, as Linderski does, between consular rights and augural law, since such rights are acquired on the basis of public augury, and the right to take auspices is inseparable from consular authority. Yet, if Linderski's analysis is correct, it is surprising that the issue ever gave rise to any controversy in the first place, and equally surprising that the Senate refrained from having the matter settled by the augural college. Assuming Linderski is correct, the augural college would have quickly reject­ ed the case, and the negotiations would have been able to move forward without further ado. Another surprising point is that, as described above, the augurs consulted in this particular case could actually be quoted as having established that a vitium had taken place. Even though the consensus among

316

Cf. Cic. Att. 2.19.2: Bibulus in caelo est, nee qua re scio, sed ita laudatur quasi "unus homo

nobis cunctando restituit rem". Cicero does not question the act of observing the heavens as such, but through Ennius' mention of Fabius Maximus Cunctator he expresses disagreement with those who believe that this step in casu would be effective as a countermeasure against Caesar. 317 Cf. Taylor (1975) p . 95. 318 Linderski (1965), in Linderski (1995) p p . 73-74.

167 these augurs naturally did not equal a formal responsum from the official augural college,319 it still testifies to the fact that a vitium interpretation actu­ ally could have been possible in this situation. Preventing the matter from being treated by the college of augurs might mean that in practice, the Senate would have been obliged to follow responsa from the augural college in such matters, even this late in the Republic. To round off this discussion it is worth mentioning that the augurs' consulta­ tive role, combined with the sources' lack of clarity as to the rights of magis­ trates and augurs in matters concerning auspices, have brought about a ten­ dency to underestimate the augurs' role in Roman religio-politics. The above examples have clearly shown that the magistrates often took the auspicia, for instance before assemblies and military engagements, and they also handled the consecration of temples and the making of vota, as well as leading other public religious and political events. In these and other contexts, the role of the augur was to be present, ensuring that things progressed smoothly, preventing proce­ dural errors, and sometimes providing instruction on the wording of religious formulae and performing various interpretations. Despite the Senate's status as the ultimate decision-making authority in pub­ lic portent matters, there is no doubt that the official augurs did wield consid­ erable power. This is implied in the different religio-political affairs described above, and in the way the institutionalization of the augural discipline features the augures as the only religious specialists authorized to advise on the inter­ pretation of auspices relevant to the welfare of Roman society. Additionally, according to the rules of the ideal state described in De legibus, Cicero empha­ sizes that those leading negotiations must observe the auspices and obey the public augur.320 Furthermore, in the event of a conflict between the magis­ trates' and the official priesthoods' observations and expertise in matters of public portents, the regard for religio is, theoretically speaking, always identi­ cal with the regard for the welfare of the res publica. This places the responsa from the official priesthoods over and above the individual magistrate's actions, opinions, and potential scheming, as indeed demonstrated in the episodes dis­ cussed in this chapter. Finally, as far as false auspices {auspicia ementita) are concerned, it seems that in connection with a lustrum, the censors could insert disapproving notes into

319

One might, of course, speculate on whether the augurs Clodius questioned about the matter may have been bribed. At all events, however, the replies of these augurs undoubtedly contributed to the uneasiness and doubts surrounding the whole affair and played a role in the general disrepute in which these negotiations were held. 320 Cic. Leg. 3.11: Qui agent auspicia servanto, auguri publico parento [...] The importance of the augurs to the res publica is also confirmed by Cicero's statements regarding the augural duties to socie­ ty in times of crisis, cf. Cic. Leg. 3.43: Est autem boni auguris meminisse maximis reipublicae tempori bus praesto esse debere [...]

168 the lists of citizens and senators if false auspices had been reported.321 In rela­ tion to Marcus Crassus' neglect of unfavourable auspices, resulting in the mil­ itary disaster in 53 BC (the Battle of Carrhae) Cicero mentions that one of his colleagues, the augur and censor Appius, had noted down that an honest citi­ zen, C. Ateius, had reported false auspices. Furthermore, in his capacity as augur, Appius had stated this to be the reason why the Roman people had been struck by misfortune. The obnuntiatio of Ateius turned out to be true, howev­ er, which even Appius conceded, for had it been false, it would not have been able to portend misfortune. Cicero criticizes Appius for presenting the reporter of false auspices as the cause of the misfortune: according to Cicero the obnun­ tiatio in question either had no significance, or alternatively, if it did hold sig­ nificance, the fault lay not with the person who reported the omen, but with the person who ignored it.322 This reveals a crucial principle: auspices and other signs do not generally cause accidents or misfortune themselves,323 and false auspices therefore do not present any real danger to the Roman people. This principle further implies that the blame for potential misfortunes falling on society, and for portents pre­ saging such misfortunes, does not fall upon those reporting the auspices, but rather on those who do not listen to the auspices.324 In other words, according to Cicero's presentation, the idea seems to be to refrain from shooting the mes­ senger, regardless of whether the message is true or false. Although it is noteworthy that reporters and suspicions of false auspices were noted down, this kind of falsification nevertheless seems to be somehow less important in an ancient Roman perspective than it is in the eyes of those modern scholars who narrow-mindedly focus on divination and portents as a means of political trickery and manipulation.

321

Cic. Div. 1.29: In quo Appius collega tuus bonus augur, ut ex te audire soleo, non satis scienter virum bonum et civem egregium censor C. Ateium notavit, quod ementitum auspicia subscriberet. 322 Cic. Div. 1.30: Ita aut ilia obnuntiatio nihil valuit, aut si, ut Appius iudicat, valuit, id valuit utpeccatum haereat non in eo qui monuerit, sed in eo qui non obtemperarit. 323 Except for the group of prodigies arising from the inappropriate conduct of mortals, as men­ tioned in chapter 2.1. 324 Cic. Div. 1.29: Si enim ea causa calamitatis fuit, non in eo est culpa qui obnuntiavit, sed in eo qui non paruit.

169

2.4. PRIESTS, MAGISTRATES, AND SENATE The preceding examination of the three portent types has shown that public divination in Rome involved several different priesthoods, and that their func­ tions and the procedures applied were clearly divided among the various types of divination and portents. The four priesthoods significant to official Roman divination were:325 a) the Roman Xviri sacris faciundis (originally Ilviri; from 367 BC Xviri, and from Sulla onwards XVviri), who interpreted prodigia b) the Roman pontifices, who interpreted prodigia c) the Roman augures, who interpreted auspicia d) the Etruscan haruspices, who interpreted exta and prodigia The various religio-political procedures reflecting the functions of, and interac­ tion between, priesthoods, magistrates, and Senate, are analysed in relation to the different types of portents throughout this study and need not be repeated here. What this chapter does examine is the issue of recruitment into the priest­ hoods, including some central elements in the scholarly treatment of the inter­ action and the possible coincidence of identity between priests and magistrates. The prodigy table shows that Senate procedure often directed the Xviri to con­ sult the libri Sibyllini in order to determine the appropriate expiation rituals.326 This Roman priesthood originally consisted of only two members {Ilviri)?21 and sources credit Tarquinius Superbus with acquiring the Sibylline Books and establishing the Ilviri sacrisfaciundis.328In 367 BC, the number of priests in the college was increased to ten {Xviri sacris faciundis). It was also decided that ple­ beians could achieve membership, after which the college came to consist of five patricians and five plebeians (Livy 6.42.2): Refecti decumum iidem tribuni, Sextius et Licinius, de decemviris sacrorum ex parte deplebe creandis legem pertulere. Great quinque patrum, quinque plebis; graduque eo iam via facta ad consulatum videbatur.

325

Notable references to the treatments of these priesthoods include: Madvig (1882); Marquardt (1885); Mommsen (1887); Wissowa (1912); Boyce (1938); Broughton (1951/1952); (1960); Latte (1960); Hahm (1963); Dumezil (1970); Szemler (1972); Beard et al (1990); (1998). 326 Livy 36.37.4: Eorum prodigiorum causa libros Sibyllinos ex senatus consulto decemviri cum adissent. Cf. Livy 5.13.6. The details of how the Xviri used these books to compose oracular replies remain unknown. (Throughout this study the mention of the Xviri = the decemviri sacris faciundis.) 327 The members of the college are occasionally referred to as Ilviri/Xviri sacrorum, Livy 3.10; 40.42; 41.21. 328 For the account of the Sibyl of Cumae, who sells the Sibylline Books to Tarquinius Superbus, see Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 4.62; cf. Wissowa (1912) p. 534ff.

170 Livy speaks of Xviri up to and including 98 BC, whereas both Varro and Cicero speak of XVviri from 51 BC onwards. 329 This further expansion of the college to a total membership of fifteen is normally ascribed to Sulla, who also increased the number of pontifices and augures.330 There is no indication, how­ ever, that the expansion entailed changes in the powers of the college of XVviri. The primary task of the college's members was to guard and consult the Sibylline Books. 331 According to tradition, this collection of Greek oracular pronouncements was only consulted to clarify prodigies that proved difficult to interpret or were particularly terrifying, as mentioned in Livy 22.9.8: [...] nisi cum taetra prodigia nuntiata sunt, decemviri libros Sibyllinos adire iuberentur. Dion. Hal. 4.62.5: χρῶται δ'αὐτοἸς ὅταν ἡ βουλή ψηφίσηται, στὰσεως καταλαβούσης τὴν πόλιν ἢ δυστυχίας τινὸς μεγάλης συμπεσούσης κατὰ πόλεμον ἢ τεράτων τινῶν καὶ φαντασμάτων μεγάλων καὶ δυσευρέτων αὐτοἸς φανέντων, οἷα πολλάκις συνέβη. In other words, the Sibylline Books could only be consulted if the Senate request­ ed it, and the Senate also had to decide whether to publicize the reply from the oracle. The surviving sources include a single, rather baffling text by Phlegon that appears to be an excerpt from such a publicized oracular reply originating from the libriSibyllini.332 The directions from the Sibylline Books, which were kept on the Capitoline,333 were to some extent concerned with introducing Greek cults and rites, such as the lectisternium (PT 12; 16; 35) and the cult of Aesculapius (PT 22), but they also introduced other foreign cults and rites, such as the Phrygian cult of Cybele (PT 49)334 and human sacrifices (PT 38). Finally, the pre­ scribed expiations included various decidedly Roman rituals, such as novemdiale, supplicatio, lustratio, instauratio, and the sacrificing of hostiae maiores. The Roman pontifices various duties and privileges included listing reports of prodigies and consulting the libri pontificii. These books consisted of the annales, fasti, ritualia, indigitamenta, acta, and commentarii, including various responsa and décréta on religious matters. 335 Apparently the original number of

329 Obseq. 47; Varro Ling. 7.88; Cic. Fam. 8.4.1. 330 Cf. Latte (1960) p p . 397-398, note 1; Boyce (1938). 331 For comprehensive treatment of the Sibylline Books, see Diels (1890); Thulin (1906b); Hoffmann (1933); Gagé (1955); Bloch (1962); (1963); Parke (1988). 332phlegon Mir. 10 = Jacoby (1958) 2.B 257, frg. 36.10.A.1-28. Cf. Diels (1890) p p . 70-103; 111-113; Macbain (1982) p p . 129-135; Parke (1988) p p . 136-151; 190-215; Beard et al (1998) vol. 2,

pp. 179-181. 333 T h e Sibylline Books were destroyed when the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline burned in 83 BC, but a new collection was established by order of the Senate, cf. Parker (1988) p p . 206-207. 334 Cf. chapter 6. 335 Peter (1967), pp. IV-VIL Regarding the pontifices listing of prodigies et cetera, cf. the Cato fragment (Cato Agr. Orig. 4) in Gell. NA 2.28.6; Cic. De or. 2.12.51; the passages are quoted in chapter 1, note 11.

171 pontifices was three, but gradually this increased to six, nine, fifteen and (dur­ ing Caesar's rule) sixteen.336 The year 300 BC saw the passing of the Lex Ogulnia, which paved the way for important social and religio-political change by opening the college of pontifices to plebeians.337 In prodigy matters, the deereta of the pontifices (like those of the Xviri and the haruspices) could only be enforced by the Senate, yet Cicero's speech De domo sua indicates the decisive role the pontifices played in treating prodigies. This speech was, in fact, addressed to the pontifical college338 because the expertise of this priesthood was crucial to the Senate's decision in the religious dispute over Cicero's house, which is further discussed in chapter 3. Public auspices and augury were the domain of the Roman augural college. Tradition 339 has it that the augural college was expanded exactly like the pon­ tifical college, from its original three members - one for each tribus}40 - to six, and then by means of the Lex Ogulnia to nine. Sulla later increased the augur­ al college's membership to fifteen, with Caesar adding a final member, bring­ ing the total to sixteen. The special interaction and division of power between augurs and magistrates has already been discussed in section 2.3 on auspicia. As concerns recruitment into the Roman colleges, the priests were selected by cooptatio,341 with certain exceptions. However, the Lex Domitia de sacerdotiis (104 BC) abolished the priesthoods' co-optive election process, which was replaced with elections in seventeen tribus chosen by lot. This law was repealed during the reign of Sulla (in 81 BC), but reintroduced in 63 BC through the Lex Labiena. Unlike magistrates, who were elected annually, members of the colleges of pontifices and Xviri were elected for life. It does seem, however, that unlike augurs, pontifices and Xviri would forfeit their offices if sentenced in court.342 336

Livy Per. 89; Dio Cass. 42.51.4. On the college oi the pontifices, cf. Wissowa (1912) pp. 501-512; Beard et al. (1998) vol. I, pp. 18-19; 24-26; Vanggaard (1988). 337 Livy 10.6.6-10: Rogationem ergo promulgarunt ut, cum quattuor augures, quattuor pontifices ea tempestate essent placeretque augeri sacerdotum numerum, quattuor pontifices, quinque augures, de plebe omnes, adlegerentur. [...] Ceterum, quia de plebe adlegebantur, iuxta earn rem aegre passipatres quam cum consula turn volgari viderent. Simulabant ad deos id magis quam ad se pertinere: ipsos visuros ne sacra sua polluantur; id se optare tantum, ne qua in rem publicam clades veniat. 338 Cic. Dom. 1.1. Cf. the case of Clodius and the Bona Dea festival, which was referred to the pontifices, who declared that it concerned a religious violation, Cic. Att. 1.13.3. Similar cases, like those of the incestum of Vestal Virgins, were also handled by the college of pontifices (PT 106), cf. Plut. Num. 10. 339 Cf. Livy 10.6.6-10 (above); 10.9.2; Livy Per. 89. 340 Cic. Rep. 2.16. 3 4i Wissowa (1912) p. 487ff. 342 Cic. Brut. 33.127, except the pontifex maximus, who could not be deprived of this status. Plut. Quaest. Rom. 99: Aia TI TCOV aXXiov i€p€ujv TOV KaTaSiKacrdevTa KGLI fyvyovja -navovrzs £T€pov aipouvTai, TOU 6' atryoupos\ 'iwg Cx\ K&V em TOIS1 (icyiaTois- aSiKrjjiaai KaTayvcoaiv, OIJK d^aipouyTCU TT|V i€pcoa\Jvr|v; 'aftyovpag 'Se TOII? em Toav oicovcov KaXouai Cf. Wissowa (1912) p. 508ff.

172 The sources mention certain social and physical requirements associated with the recruitment of members to the priesthoods.343 A potential candidate had to be: 1) a Roman citizen 2) freeborn 3) free of physical defects No other social criteria or norms for admission to these priesthoods are explic­ itly mentioned. As is so often the case, circumstances that would be complete­ ly obvious to contemporary society are simply not brought up. It is, however, fairly clear that these religious offices were held by men from the most wealthy, prestigious, and powerful group in the social stratification of Roman society, meaning the noble patrician and eventually plebeian families that made up the city's social and political elite. One obvious, unspoken political-social require­ ment would therefore be that candidates for priesthoods either were or had been consul, or came from a family of consulares. In his speech De domo sua (see chapter 3), Cicero begins his address to thepontifices by defining what could almost be a Weberian Idealtyp of religio-political relationship. What characterizes this relationship is that it has the same group of people combining the roles of handling religious affairs and safeguarding the interests of the state {De domo sua 1.1.): Cum multa divinitus, pontifices, a maioribus nostris inventa atque instituta sunt, turn nihilpraeclarius quam quod eosdem et religionibus deorum immortalium et summae reipublicae praeesse voluerunt, ut amplissimi et clarissimi cives rem publicam bene gerendo religiones, religiones sapienter interpretando rem publicam conservarent. One must naturally recall Cicero's objective in making this speech - he is vehe­ mently appealing to this very group of people - but despite the likelihood of rhetorical exaggeration (or perhaps precisely because of it), Cicero asserts that these coinciding religious and political roles are not only acceptable, but indeed desirable from a societal point of view. Thus, from a Roman perspec­ tive, an "ideal" social and religio-political set-up featuring the same people in senatorial/magisterial offices and in priesthoods is by no means of dubious value. On the contrary, it is a prestigious combination of religious and political responsibilities and positions. In dealing with this question, it is important to remember that the sources on the various priests and priesthoods are few and late. This impairs our ability to reconstruct complete membership lists or carry out actual identifications. Our main source is Livy, whose communication of such information is - at best 343

Wissowa (1912) p. 491; Szemler (1972) p. 31.

173 very brief, and who says next to nothing about the individual roles of the priests. Ancient coins and inscriptions confirm the identity of some of the priests who held office. As for the Republican era, the only complete pontifical lists surviving are those for the years 210, 179, and 57 BC, and there are no com­ plete lists for the Xviri and XVviri.344 The formal interaction between the priests and the magistrates/Senate can, of course, be deduced from the religiopolitical procedure, but the fragmentary sources make the actual situation (for instance in terms of people holding two offices at once) much more difficult to clarify.345 The Xviri/XVviri and magisterial offices Looking at the information for the Republican era, one can, for example dur­ ing the period 210-44 BC, find (fairly reliable) evidence of 31 specifically named Xviri and XVviri, of which:346 a) 14 had served, simultaneously served, or later came to serve as consul b) 10 had served, simultaneously served, or later came to serve as praetor c) 7 apparently held no higher magisterial office Comparing the times at which these individuals assumed their religious and magisterial offices results in the following (incomplete) picture: a) 7 (possibly 9) became Xviri/XVviri before serving as magistrates b) 3 Xviri/XVviri served as magistrates before holding their religious office c) 7 Xviri/XVviri held either a lower-ranking magisterial office or none at all d) 12 are described too vaguely in the sources to qualify as any of the above The pontifices and magisterial offices For the Republican era, the sources contain (fairly reliable) evidence of 66 specifically named pontifices during the period 210-44 BC, of which:347 a) 51 had served, simultaneously served, or later came to serve as consul b) 9 had served, simultaneously served, or later came to serve as praetor c) 6 apparently held no higher magisterial office 344

Even so, this has not prevented a variety of attempts at reconstruction (for instance in RE and in Broughton (1951/1952)). In this connection, however, the relevant points are so speculative that I will refrain from discussing them in depth, as the individual identifications are not of vital importance in this context. 345 Only in relation to the rex sacrorum do the sources provide any clear evidence that this person may not hold any political (civilian or military) office, Livy 40.42.8-11; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 63; Dion. Hal. 4.74. Concerning the question of interaction, only a few examples are known of individuals hold­ ing two different offices as priests: prior to Julius Caesar there are five such examples, of which only one (C. Servilius Geminus, consul in 203 BC) served as both pontifex and Xvir. 34 *Cf. Broughton (1951/52); Szemler (1972) pp. 182-184. 347 Cf. Broughton (1951/52); Szemler (1972) pp. 186-187. Thanks to Cicero's enumeration in Cic. Har. resp. (6.12), we have a complete list of the members of the pontifical college in 57 BC, cf. Szemler (1972) p. 127.

174 Comparing the times at which these individuals assumed their religious and magisterial offices results in the following (incomplete) picture: a) 23 (possibly 30) became pontifices before serving as magistrates b) 8 (possibly 30) pontifices served as magistrates before holding their reli­ gious office c) 6 pontifices held either a lower-ranking magisterial office or none at all d) 19 are described too vaguely in the sources to qualify as any of the above The augures and magisterial offices For the Republican era, the sources provide (fairly reliable) evidence of 54 specifically named augures during the period 210-44 BC, of which:348 a) 39 had served, simultaneously served, or later came to serve as consul b) 5 had served, simultaneously served, or later came to serve as praetor c) 10 apparently held no higher magisterial office Comparing the times at which these individuals assumed their religious and magisterial offices results in the following (incomplete) picture: a) 18 (possibly 21) became augures before serving as magistrates b) 6 (possibly 7) augures served as magistrates before holding their religious office c) 10 augures held either a lower-ranking magisterial office or none at all d) 16 are described too vaguely in the sources to qualify as any of the above These figures indicate a tendency for the same people to hold religious and political offices - the very situation Cicero praises so highly in De domo sua. This makes it natural to ask whether the formal distinction between priest­ hoods and magistracies might, in practice, have been a technical detail? It is worth noting, however, that not all priests were or later became magistrates, and that not all magistrates were or later became priests. It should also be emphasized that the pontifex maximus could order a person simultaneously serving as priest and magistrate to pay a fine for putting his magisterial duties above his religious duties. In 189 BC, for instance, the pontifex maximus pre­ vented the praetor Q. Fabius Pictor from departing from Rome, since in his capacity as flamen Quirinalis he was barred from leaving the city.349 The mat­ ter ended with a provocatio and a fine for Q. Fabius Pictor (Livy 37.51.5): Religio ad postremum vicit; ut dicto audiens esset flamen pontifici iussus; et mult a iussu populi ei remissa.*50

348

Cf. Broughton (1951/52); Szemler (1972) pp. 184-186.

349 Livy Per. 37. 350 Livy Per. 19; Val. Max. 1.1.2 . Cf. Bleicken (1957).

175 This allows us to make several conclusions: for one thing, there must have been a need for measures to counter the practice of letting religio yield in political matters, and for another, this practice was obviously frowned upon. What is more, the authority exercised by this pontifex maximus casts doubt on the assumption, occasionally seen in modern politico-historical presentations, that the religious offices were nothing but a tool for political advancement. A typical work in this genre is D.E. Hahm's statistical examination of the priesthoods augures, pontifices, and Xviri sacris faciundis. Hahm concludes:351 "since new priests were usually young men about to embark on a career, we may infer that a priesthood was considered primarily a means of assistance for political advancement." Such conclusions present certain problems when examined from a religiosociological point of view. Hahm believes he is presenting a picture of the pres­ tige connected with the various priesthoods, illustrating his point by classifying the priests according to the chronology of their acceptance into a religious col­ lege and their assumption of magisterial offices, if any.352 Using, among other things, the average age of the members accepted into the priesthoods, Hahm concludes that in terms of prestige, the augures take first place and the pontifices rank second, while the Xviri are relegated to third place.353 Hahm is assuming precisely the point he seeks to prove. An implicit and explicit presumption behind both his presentation and his arguments, howev­ er, is that any Roman's actual goal is always to obtain a political position, which by inference reduces the importance of a religious office to begin with. This means, in effect, that Hahm is not measuring what he actually set out to meas­ ure - namely the prestige connected with the religious priesthoods per se - and the validity of his analysis seems questionable. The next logical step is to con­ sider whether it is even possible, based on the existing sources, to measure the value Hahm sets out to quantify in his attempt to rank the various priesthoods in terms of prestige. The trends apparent in the incomplete statistical material may greatly depend upon the information handed down, in the sense that the priests who did not also hold political offices were simply not as prominent in the information recorded. Moreover, as regards the issue of age, one should bear in mind that although an adulescens is normally between 15 and 30 years old, the upper limit can be greatly stretched. One eminent example is Cicero, who referred to himself as an adulescens while serving as consul at the age of 43.354 And not to forget: this same Cicero did not become an augur until ten years after his consulate. Generally speaking, the basis for Hahm's conclusions is rather flimsy. The same applies to his age distribution data, which seem unable to withstand the statistical treatment to which he insists upon subjecting them. 3^1 Hahm (1963) p. 82. Cf. Gunther (1964); ScuUard (1951) pp. 27-28. 352 Cf. the presentation in Hahm (1963) p. 85. 353 H a h m (1963) p p . 75-76; 8 4 - 8 5 . 354 Cic. Phil. 2.118.

176 This also leads us to question the reliability of Hahm's examination. As noted, the sources dealing with this field are extremely inadequate, and theoretically Hahm's conclusion could be attributed to the sole fact that there are considerably fewer sources that treat Xviri than treat augures. What is more, some of the material that does exist is exceedingly vague and must, to a great extent, rely on interpretation. Indeed, this is why Hahm's classification or "counts" deviate significantly from those of the more cautious Szemler, whose figures in turn deviate from the counts and per­ sonal identifications presented by scholars like Broughton and Patterson.355 Assuming, however, that one does accept Hahm's classification, personal identifications, and statistical experiments, his classification actually seems to undermine one of his own conclusions (as set out on page 83): A priesthood regarded as political patronage would be of little value to a man who already achieved the highest office of the state [...] Yet according to Hahm's own presentation (covering the period 218-167 BC), we know of 5 pontifices, 3 Xviri, and 1 augur who took up their religious offices after their consulates. What is more, during the entire Republican period, Szemler's classification cites 8 (perhaps 11) pontifices, 3 Xviriy and 6 (perhaps 7) augures who took up their religious offices after their tenure as consul.356 To begin with, this contradicts the implicit assumption of Hahm's study and its conclusion that religious offices were merely a means of achieving political advancement. What is more, it contradicts Hahm's own list of religious rank­ ings. The contradictions arise when one assumes that the individuals listed as holding religious offices after their consulates did not choose to do so because they were fools, but because such offices actually held considerable social and religious prestige. If one applies Hahm's own arguments and classification technique to his statistical material, then the pontifices must necessarily come in first (5 people), the Xviri second (3 people), and the augures last (1 person) - producing a conclusion that directly contradicts Hahm's own. Nevertheless, I do not intend to support this method of argumentation. On the contrary, I believe it shows that one must be very cautious in applying the type of politico-historical approach Hahm represents, solely viewing and rank­ ing religious offices and their prestige in terms of political advancement. Still, the sources irrefutably show that the religious colleges and political bod­ ies recruited men within the same aristocratic circles. The situation therefore had two important features: certain individuals did in fact hold multiple offices, and the various groups would naturally have discussed current religiopolitical affairs among themselves.357 3^5 Szemler (1972); Broughton

(1951/52).

356 Szemler (1972) p. 189. 357

Cf. Finley (1996) p . 56: "So there is the unending debate about the nature and the limits of the

Senate's authority over the magistrates, as if they were not the same people, drawn from a small circle of the nobilitas, and did not talk to each other before any formal steps were taken."

177 The circumstance that a given person could serve as both priest and magis­ trate is significant, not only from a general point of view, but also specifically in an analysis of portents and their interpretations as manifestations of society's social, religious, and political (dis)order or (dis)harmony with the pax deorum. At the same time it must be emphasized that Roman politics was not based on any actual political parties or rigid political platforms, but rather on shifting alliances revolving around key players. This, combined with the paucity of sources on the subject, makes it difficult to trace or understand the actual inter­ action/coincidence between magistrates and priests, as well as obscuring the political and religious consequences. Based on the analyses carried out in chapters 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, it is clear that the Roman religious offices per se seem to have held considerable social prestige.358 The sources on public portents clearly demonstrate how the formal proce­ dures governing Rome's religious and political bodies were intimately linked, and how they were established within a fixed framework that attributed enormous importance to both spheres. The sources would hardly reflect this if the religious aspect were simply born of political opportunism, and existed for the sole pur­ pose of ornamenting and augmenting the power of profane office-holders. Furthermore, the sources on the Republican era provide too little informa­ tion on the various offices to justify any general emphasis on the politico-his­ torical argument of religious offices as political tools and nothing more. Roman public portents and the priesthoods involved are clearly rooted in a religiopolitical context based primarily on mos maiorurn, and depending only sec­ ondarily on other factors. Such factors would, of course, have varied with time periods, individual personal relationships, and various other factors, including social, political, military, and religious circumstances. The haruspices As described earlier, the Etruscan haruspices were also involved in handling public portents in Rome. They were used to interpret both exta and prodigia, but the picture we can piece together from the sources is by no means clear or consistent: different groups of haruspices may have co-existed, or perhaps the sources speak of different religious functions performed by the same group. The haruspices repeatedly appear in connection with public prodigies as Etruscan religious experts called to Rome "ex tota Etruria" (cf. the prodigy table). They are recruited from Etruscan aristocratic families (principes, primores) and are generally portrayed in the sources as a prestigious group. 358

For information on the four most important colleges - pontifices (with the rex and flamines maiores), augures, Xviri sacris faciundis, and septemviri epulones, see Mon. Anc. 2.16: quattuor amplissima collegia; Suet. Aug. 100: sacerdotes summorum collegiorum; Cass. Dio 53.1.5; Fast. Praen. 17 January; CIL VI 903.921., V 6416., II 2062. Cf. Vanggaard (1988) chapter 9; Beard et al (1998). It should be noted that according to August. De civ. D. 6.3, Varro's books on priesthoods, Antiquitatum rerum humanarum et divinarum, deal precisely with the pontifices, augures, and Xviri.

178 Another (possibly discrete) haruspex group and/or function is linked to the sacrifices performed by the Roman magistrates. Such haruspices often went along on military campaigns, and their principal duty was to observe sacrificial entrails in connection with official public and military events. Scholars occa­ sionally assume that these public extispicy specialists were less high-ranking than those who interpreted prodigies, referring, among other sources, to evi­ dence from the Spanish colony of Urso (founded by Caesar in 44 BC), which describes a haruspex as being less well paid than a scribal59 We have no basis for comparing this with the general conditions in Republican Rome, however, as we are not familiar with other examples of payment the haruspices might have received. One should therefore be wary of attempting to assess the harus­ pices' social and religious status solely on the basis of this one example of a small remuneration. The sources provide more convincing evidence of a particular group that stands out among the other types of haruspices: the wandering "street-corner" haruspices, apparently self-styled practitioners of extispicy specializing in pri­ vate portents. Cicero and others describe this group as simple charlatans.360 It might be this kind of haruspices that Cato - the guardian of tradition who enforced the religious precepts with great gravitas - was alluding to with his ironic remark: mirari se, quod non rideret haruspex, haruspicem cum vidisset.361 We have no solid evidence from the time of the Republic concerning the pos­ sible organization of the Etruscan haruspices362 The sources usually speak of them in the plural, but without providing names or numbers. What is more, since they had no collegium in Rome, they were not one of the actual Roman priesthoods, and hence modern scholarship sometimes tends to portray them as very foreign.363 Macbain regards the way the Romans drew on the haruspices as quite exceptional:364 The presence in Rome of the Etruscan haruspices, who were, from time to time, summoned by the Senate and invited to participate in the interpreta­ tion and procuration of Roman prodigies, represents a unique state of affairs

^FIRA 360

I, 2 1 ; Cf. Rawson (1978) p. 144; Gargola (1995) p . 83.

Cic. Div. 1.132: non habeo [...] vicanos haruspices [...]> followed by a quote from Ennius con­

cerning a superstitiosi

vates inpudentesque

harioli aut inertes aut insani aut quibus egestas imperaf\

cf.

Cato Agr. Orig. 5.4: haruspicem, augurem, hariolum, Chaldaeum ne quern consuluisse velit; Plaut. Poen. 449n466; on public haruspices and private "street-corner" haruspices, cf. Beard et al. (1998) vol. I, p p . 19-21; Thulin (1906b); Wissowa (1912) p p . 543ff. 361 Cic. Div. 2.51. 362

An inscription dating from the early Roman Empire bears witness to a gathering of 60 haruspices

{CIL VI. 32439 L. Vinulleius : f. Pom. Lucullus arispex de sexaginta), b u t it is not known whether this was a local organization or one that covered all of Etruria. Cf. Latte (1960) p p . 158-159; for an earlier dating of the inscription, see Torelli (1975) p p . 119-121. 3 3

^ Cf. Latte (1960) p . 158.

364

Macbain (1975) p.239; 239, note 1.

179 and one which has never been wholly accounted for. [...] I know of no other society, ancient or modern, in which a priesthood of foreign nationality has enjoyed such an intimate relationship to the religious (and sometimes polit­ ical) life of the host people. Yet this type of relationship was hardly as unique as all that. Obvious parallels can be drawn to the way Rome frequently sought council with the Delphic Oracle (as noted in the prodigy table) and in the way Rome adopted the cult of Cybele from King Attalos of Pergamon (as discussed in chapter 6). A famous example is the group of legations sent by Croisos of Lydia to all significant ora­ cles in the eastern Mediterranean in connection with his planned attack on the Persian Empire. Another example of such contacts and "loans" is linked to King Amenhotep III of Egypt, who requested permission from his son-in-law, the king of Mitanni, to borrow the goddess Ishtar of Nineveh. The king of Mitanni granted this wish, but implored the Egyptian king to ensure the god­ dess's safe return. Evidently it was acceptable that foreign experts, gods, ora­ cles, and priesthoods could be given away and borrowed. This supports my view that there was nothing exceptional in the Roman Senate consulting an Etruscan priesthood that certainly possessed extensive religious expertise on various types of portents and divination. The prodigy table shows that the official Roman authorities systematically made use of these Etruscan priests in the interpretation of public prodigies.365 This is confirmed even in the earliest examples from the Republican era, and in many cases the haruspices are explicitly mentioned as involved in handling public prodigies (cf. PT 13; 15; 23; 40; 47; 59; 60; 64; 66; 71; 75; 85; 88; 91; 95; 97; 104; 112; 113; 116; 124; 125; 128; 130; 133; 137; 147; and 148).366 It is striking that in recounting Postumius' speech on the Bacchanalia affair in 186 BC, Livy enumerates the haruspical responsa on a par with pontifical responsa and Senate decisions as elements in Roman religion - elements intend­ ed to serve as opposites of the alien Bacchus cult.367 The haruspical responsa are also a staple element in the traditional religious complex underlying the ideal state as portrayed in Cicero's works De republica and De legibus (De legibus 2.21): Prodigia portenta ad Etruscos [et] haruspices si senatus iussit deferunto, Etruriaque principes disciplinam doceto.368

365

On private consultations, cf. Gell. NA 6.13-4. In many cases of prodigies falling under the areas of Etruscan expertise, such as the occurrence of hermaphrodites, the haruspices were undoubtedly involved, although the sources do not always explicitly say so. 367 Livy 39.16.7. This applies even if the contents of the speech are pure fiction on Livy's part. Cf. chapter 6 for the Bacchanalia affair. 368 Cf. Cic. Leg. 2.29: lam illud ex institutis pontificum et haruspicum non mutandum est, quibus hostiis immolandum quoique deo, cut maioribus, cui lactantibus, cut maribus, cuifeminis\ cf. 2.34. 366

180 Furthermore, it is worth noting that the haruspices were recruited among the Etruscan aristocratic families and must, by inference, have enjoyed consider­ able social status and prestige.369 Sources likewise testify to the fact that Etruscan principes became linked to Rome through marriages and Roman citi­ zenship, and that a number of very old Etruscan families had been established in Rome for centuries.370 Various sources, including a letter from Cicero to his friend Aulus Caecina of Volterra,371 show that the Etruscan institution was internalized in the aristo­ cratic families, passed on from father to son. A comment in De divinatione also bears witness to the importance of the art of haruspicy and the haruspices rela­ tions with the aristocracy, as well as the Senate's role in such matters: pursuant to a Senate decree, sons from the most prominent families were to study harus­ picy to prevent the discipline from deteriorating (De divinatione 1.92): Etruria autem de caelo tacta scientissime animadvertit eademque interpretatur quid quibusque ostendatur monstris atque portentis. Quocirca bene apud maiores nostros senatus turn cum florebat imperium decrevit ut de principum filiis x singulis Etruriae populis in disciplinam traderentur, ne ars tanta propter tenuitatem hominum a religionis auctoritate abduceretur ad mercedem atque quaestum}11 It is sometimes assumed that there was a general enmity or some sort of com­ petition between the Etruscan priesthood and the Roman Xviri, pontifices, and augures.373 However, a general rivalry between the haruspices and Xviri/pontifices374 is, in my opinion, unconfirmed by the sources. On the contrary, they describe several examples of cooperation, although one only occasionally glimpses the contours of any real "division of labour" or actual collaboration between the priesthoods. Apparently the individual priesthoods had different "specialities" within the field of public prodigies, and in certain cases two or three priesthoods were involved in handling the same prodigies/expiations and may have worked together.375 Particularly in connection with the haruspices, the sources emphasize interpretation and various calculations (PT 15; 66; 75; 85; and 95), and certain typological criteria seem to have been decisive in deter­ mining whether the haruspices should be called in. They were, for instance, 369 Cic. Fam. 6.6.3; cf. the emphasis in Munzer (1920) on the tradition of the Roman nobility con­ sidering the nobility in the other Latin cities as equals.

370 Cf. Harris (1971), Munzer (1920); Toynbee (1965) vol. 1, p p . 326-344. 371

Cic. Fam. 6.6.3. Caecina produced a Latin version of the Etruscan science of lightning, cf. Sen. Q Nat. 239. 372

373

Cf. Val. Max. 1.1.1.

As for the haruspices and the augures, see the discussion of the Gracchus affair in chapter 2.3; cf. Bloch (1963); Harris (1975); Macbain (1975). 374 Noted by, among others, Ruoff-Vaananen (1972) p. 152; 152, note 4. 375 However, it is evident from the prodigy table that in some cases the sources do not specify which priesthoods were involved in handling a prodigy.

181 more or less consistently involved in prodigies connected with lightning, defor­ mities, and hermaphrodites (PT 23; 47; 64; 88; 91; and 133). Naturally the function of the Xviri was also interpretive in nature, since they consulted the Sibylline Books. Unfortunately, the content of these interpretations is rarely mentioned in the sources, which usually just state that the pontifices determined the necessary expiation rituals (PT 47; 69; 74; 77; and 78) and named the gods to which they should be directed (PT 69). In certain cases - most notably those involving monstrosities - a constellation emerges in which the haruspices interpreted the prodigies while the Xviri performed various expiation rites and sacrifices (PT 47). As concerns possible typological criteria calling for the use of Xviri/libri Sibyllini, the priesthood is especially connected with such activities as plague expiation (PT 10; 12; 16; 21; 22; 27; 67; and 68). As previously mentioned, tradition dictates that the Sibylline Books should only be consulted in the event of particularly horrendous prodigies, and foreign rights and cults were mainly introduced as expiations through the Xviri and the libri Sibyllini. It is difficult to clarify the division of labour existing between the pontifices and Xviri in the field of public prodigies. One probable reason for this is that the pontifices were generally responsible for keeping and ensuring the survival of the entire Roman religious tradition as set out in the libri pontificii/annales maximi. The pontifices therefore handled many different matters: the calendar, precepts, sacrifices, processions, supervision, religious disputes, et cetera, including public prodigies. The most obvious dissimilarity is, of course, that the pontifices did not consult the Sibylline Books. The pontifices often deter­ mined sacrifices and rituals (PT 44; 47; 57; 61; 64; and 72) and also identified the gods to whom the sacrifices must be made (PT 50). There are several examples in which haruspices, Xviri, and/or pontifices are simultaneously involved in or directly cooperate on prodigies (PT 47; 60; 75; 88; 104; 113; and 124). Cicero points out several instances in which the haruspices and Xviri gave identical responses. 376 One good example of haruspices and Xviri being involved in the same prodigy actually has the two groups disagreeing on its interpretation (PT 75). A particularly noteworthy feature here is the Senate's specific order that both priesthoods be consulted in the matter (Livy 42.22.1): Ea res prodigii loco habita ad senatum relata est; patres et ad haruspices referri et decemviros adire libros iusserunt. Livy relates the interpretations of both priesthoods, and one can reasonably assume that the Senate officially accepted both responsa. Another example of the priesthoods' dividing the work and cooperating is seen in connection with an expiation in 207 BC (PT 47). After mentioning sev­ eral prodigies and their expiations, the records tell of a hermaphrodite prodi­ gy and a lightning prodigy, as well as the relevant expiations, describing the rit­ ual procedures in considerable detail:

376 Cic. Div. 1.97-98.

182 A hermaphrodite the size of a four-year-old was born in Frusino. The haruspices, who referred to the prodigy as foedum ac turpe, declared that the hermaphrodite must be removed from Roman territory without touching the ground and drowned. The live hermaphrodite was then shut up in a box and thrown into the sea. The pontifices ordered that three times nine virgins were to walk through the city singing, but while the maidens were practising a hymn in the temple of Jupiter Stator, light­ ning struck the temple of Juno Regina, which was located on the Aventkie. According to the haruspices' interpretation, this prodigy concerned the matrons, who were therefore instructed to bring a gift to the goddess, which they did. The Xviri prompdy appointed a day on which a further sacrifice must be made to the same goddess: from the temple of Apollo (on the Campus Martius), two white cows were led through the Porta Carmentalis into the city, followed by two cypress-wood statues of Juno Regina, carried aloft. Next came the twenty-seven singing virgins, and finally the Xviri wearing laurel garlands and toga praetexta. This procession walked along the Vicus Iugarius to the Forum, where it halted and a rope was passed from hand to hand while the maidens sang and kept time with their feet. The pro­ cession then continued along the Vicus Tuscus and Velabrum, crossing the Forum Boarium and passing down the Clivus Publicius to the temple of Juno Regina, where the two victims were sacrificed by the Xviri and the statues carried into the temple. This example illustrates a division of labour and a parity among the three priesthoods without any hint of enmity, competition, or ranking hierarchy according to their prestige as religious specialists.377 The division of labour raises the question of whether Rome consulted the Etruscan haruspices when Romans and Etruscans were at war. As Livy says on the topic (Livy 5.15.1): Prodigia interim multa nuntiari, quorum pleraque, et quia singuli auctores erant, parum credita spretaque, et quia hostibus Etruscis, per quos ea procurarent, haruspices non erant, [...] It is fairly difficult to imagine the city generally making use of Etruscan priests in public affairs during times of actual conflict. One example in the prodigy table (PT 24) claims that the haruspices attempted to deceive the Romans by intentionally interpreting a prodigy wrongly, due to enmity. In this case the guilty haruspices were revealed and killed. The source of this example is Aulus Gellius, who attrib­ utes the account to book 11 of the annates maximi and book 1 of Verrius Flaccus' Libri rerum memoria dignarum™ In another case, a haruspex is rewarded for con­ veying an interpretation that other haruspices had kept to themselves (PT 113). As the next chapter will demonstrate, the affair and the religio-political procedures to which Cicero's speech De haruspicum responso bears witness show how the harus­ pices retained considerable importance, even in the later years of the Republic. 377 Cf. Dumezil (1970) vol. II, p p . 4 8 2 - 4 8 3 . 378 Gell.NA 4.5.1-7.

3. CICERO AND PUBLIC DIVINATION At this point it will have become clear that Cicero is among the most important sources on divination and public portents. At the same time, however, it should be noted that Cicero's own approach to portents is complex and calls for a more detailed analysis. Although Cicero is known far better from his surviving texts than any other ancient author, his posthumous reputation is ambiguous, and pinning down his religious attitudes seems difficult. The question of Cicero's own religious views in itself has not often been examined, although it has frequently been incorporated into a wide variety of contexts and used to draw a very specific, often negative, picture of Cicero as a superficial, self-contradictory, hypocritical manipulator. The aversion towards Cicero goes back to Theodor Mommsen, who (among the other epi­ thets he used) testily called Cicero "Eine Journalistennatur im schlechtesten Sinne des Wortes".379 One of the Danish scholars conveying this general dis­ like of Cicero was Vilhelm Gr0nbech in his work entitled Hellemsmen.380 Surprisingly, even some later scholars specifically investigating Cicero reflect a negative attitude similar to the one John Ferguson expresses:381 As a person he [Cicero] arouses our pity rather than our sympathy; he is too self-revealing, and we know too much about him. The scholarly deliberations concerning Cicero and his views on religion are apparently quite emotional. I have therefore chosen to base my examination on a critical analysis of the attitudes and somewhat obsessive lines of reasoning that I believe underlie many modern interpretations of Cicero's views on por­ tents. Several decisive factors come into play here. For one thing, certain theo­ retical perspectives relating to the question of religious beliefs and religious behaviour, and to the individual and collective significance of religion, play a role. For another, methodological questions concerning the consequences of approaching the subject matter diachronically and/or synchronically have some significance. As regards the sources, I will mainly concentrate on Cicero's treatment of portents in, on the one hand, his two speeches De domo sua and De haruspicum responso and, on the other hand, two of his philosophical pieces, namely De natura deorum and De divinatione?*1 In different ways these works are good sources on divination and public por­ tents and on Cicero's attitudes to such matters. The two speeches, including a 379 Mommsen (1904) p p . 6 1 7 - 6 2 1 . 38OGr 0 nbech (1953) p p . 224-230. 381 Ferguson (1962) p. 83. 382

legibus.

I will also briefly discuss his philosophical, theoretical works on the state, De republica and De

184 responsum following a prodigy, provide significant insights into the Late Republic's religio-political disputes, procedures, and decision-making process­ es regarding public portents. The same speeches also provide an opportunity to see how Cicero argues his own case. Needless to say, this makes the orator's personal motives clear, and it is regrettable that no sources containing his opponent's arguments have survived. At all events, despite the need for increased awareness of issues of credibility in this case, the actual degree of reli­ ability, tactics, and rhetoric is not necessarily decisive for this study of portents. What is absolutely crucial, however, is a clarification of the religio-political con­ text and implications of the affair itself, and of the religious and political nature, interplay, and function of the arguments and tactics employed. In the two philosophical pieces, Cicero introduces Greek philosophy using examples and images taken from Roman religion and history. Here he demon­ strates philosophical arguments and methods applied to traditional Roman perceptions and practices within divinatio. This allows his readers to derive a considerable amount of factual information about Roman public portents and Roman history from the philosophical examinations and deliberations that give structure to the material. As discussed below, the question of Cicero's own views as expressed in these pieces is rather more complex. The scholarly propensity for expressing objections to or indignation over obscure points or apparent self-contradictions in Cicero's views on religion is, in fact, an age-old tradition: critics as early as Augustine were already com­ plaining about these deficiencies, seeing them as symptoms of Cicero's hypocrisy.383 Augustine and other fathers of the Church regarded pagan por­ tents as examples of an absurd, ludicrous superstition, 384 and there seems to be an obvious implicit connection between this outraged Christian interpretation and the interpretations many modern scholars give of Cicero's views on por­ tents and divination. Of the modern scholarship on Cicero that deals with the issue of his reli­ gious hypocrisy, one work merits particular mention, namely RJ. Goar's Cicero and Roman Religion.^5 This work deserves credit for its analysis in several respects, but when it comes to understanding Cicero's views on religion and prodigies, Goar primarily focuses on the issue of religious beliefs and feelings: "One suspects that his [Cicero's] religious views never touched the inner core of the man, that he did not have deep religious feelings."386 Goar also clearly expresses his own views on this question when, in dealing with Cicero's speech De haruspicum responso, he claims that Cicero is caught in a dilemma: "the dilemma of an Academic [Cicero] compelled by circumstances to speak posi-

383

August. De civ. D. 4.30; 5.9. August. De civ. D. 3.31; cf. the obscenum prodigium in Oros. Historiarum adversum paganos 5.15.20. 38 ^ Goar (1972). 386 Goar (1972) p. I l l , cf. pp. 29; 57; 62. 384

185 tively about haruspicine before a group [the Senate] that knew his philosoph­ ical learnings". As Goar concludes: Neither could he see that a speech such as the de haruspicum responso how­ ever he meant it to be understood by his audience, must inevitably con­ tribute to the propagation of superstition among the members of his own class - the very situation of which he complained in de divinatione.387 He consequently also assumes that Cicero must have felt a certain discomfort in facing the Senate, as the Senators "must have been quite aware of his true feelings about omens and oracles" 388 (my italics). Quite apart from the difficulties in establishing the nature of the feelings of a person who (for whatever reason) has chosen not to disclose his position on this point, I do not think Cicero had any reason to feel uncomfortable in the situation described. Goar's fixation upon belief and feelings is misplaced in an ancient Roman religious context, 389 and the postulated dilemma is, in my view, non-existent. In this case, unfounded speculations about "true feelings" seem to be overly focused on the notion of private belief in religious matters, and rooted in a Christian ethic that distorts the issue at hand. The author therefore overlooks the most crucial religio-political aspect, which is the public nature of the Senate's and the priesthoods' treatment of portents as collective religious matters, subject to firmly established procedures and ritual expiations. In the following I therefore seek to demonstrate why examining Cicero's views on portents need not necessarily involve such explanations as hypocrisy and deceitful manipulation, and to justify a characterization of the above-men­ tioned dilemma as fictitious. From my perspective, Cicero is not the one labouring under a misconception. The problem itself seems due to three fac­ tors: 1) the unsystematic mixing of two different groups of sources (namely the philosophical works and the speeches), 2) a strictly diachronic approach to the issue, and 3) an implicit Christian ethic together with an excessive focusing on the concepts of belief and emotions. I choose instead to interpret the above-mentioned sources paying close attention to their functions and contexts in relation to public divination. This seems to create greater consistency in the surviving testimony from Cicero's own hand, and to neutralize the apparently contradictory views that have pre­ occupied scholars examining Cicero's relation to divination. 387 G o a r (1972) p p . 62; 74. 388

Goar (1972) p. 57. Cf. the basic assumption in Heibges (1969b): "And yet, the reader of his pub­ lished orations, who is quite overwhelmed by the sheer abundance of religious material in these docu­ ments of a period that was presumably irreligious, cannot help wondering about the degree of the ora­ tor's sincerity when he discussed religion in public". See also Rawson (1975) pp. 10; 139; Suss (1965) pp. 323-325. For a different perspective, see in particular the excellent contributions to this discussion in Beard (1986); Schofield (1986); Beard et al (1998). 389 Cf. Beard et al. (1998) vol. 1, p. 42: "It is hard to know what religious conviction might mean in a world where no religious affiliation resulted from it."

186 The prelude to Cicero's speeches De domo sua and De haruspicum responso begins with Clodius' bill, proposed in 59 BC, demanding that anyone who "exe­ cuted a citizen without trial should be banished".390 This meant that in 58 BC Cicero was forced to leave Italy for exile in Greece, because of his role in end­ ing the Catiline Conspiracy. The decree was later repealed, and Cicero was called home in 57 BC.391 In the meantime, however, Clodius had ensured that Cicero's house on the Palatine had been confiscated. The contents of De domo sua indi­ cate that Clodius had Cicero's house vandalized, and the site consecrated, dedi­ cating a statue of Libertas on the spot.392 In this way Clodius intended to pre­ vent Cicero from reclaiming the land and the house if and when he returned to Rome. This led Cicero to appeal to the Senate, who referred the matter to the pontifices, to whom Cicero then addressed his De domo sua speech. One of the pivotal elements in this defence of Cicero's right to his own house is the importance of complying with Roman religious precepts.393 In dealing with this particular point, Cicero mainly referred to the fact that Clodius' con­ secration project had not been authorized by the Roman people, and had not been presented to and approved by the entire pontifical college, according to normal procedure.394 Cicero further claimed that certain ritual precepts had not been observed, concluding his objections against Clodius' project by asserting that the pontifex who had performed the consecration was a young, inexperienced, and recently appointed man, who was also the brother of Clodius' wife.395 Cicero thus based his case for repossessing his house and land mainly on religious arguments while simultaneously underscoring Clodius' tar­ nished reputation. Cicero's speech was successful: the pontifices declared the consecration invalid, and the Senate ordered the land returned to Cicero and the house rebuilt out of public funds.396 Clodius did not give up so easily, though. He devised a new strategy, which also had a religious foundation. Among the prodigies for 56 BC (PT 138) were noise and rumblings on the ager Latiniensis: quod in agro Latiniensi auditus est strepitus cum fremitus1 The Senate recognized this as a prodigy and consulted the haruspices, whose interpretation and instructions included the performance of an expiation, since loca sacra et religiosa prof ana haberi?^ This interpreta­ tion enabled Clodius (who was serving as aedile that year) to claim in connec390 Stockton (1971) p p . 188-189; Rawson (1975) p p . 106-145. 391 Cf. Stockton (1971) p p . 191-193. 392 Cic. Dom. 24.62; 41.110-113. 393 Cic. Dom.

52-55.

394 Cf. Cic. Att. 4.2.3: Si neque populi iussu neque plebis scitu is, qui se dedicasse diceret,

nominatim

ei rei praefectus esset neque populi iussu aut plebis scitu id facere iussus esset, videri posse sine religione earn partem arcae mihi

restitui.

395 Cic. Dom. 45: L. Pinarius Natta. See Broughton (1952) vol. II, p. 199. 396 Cic. Har. resp. 6.12-13. 397 Cic. Har. resp. 9.20, cf. Cic. Div. 1.36; 2.60. 398 Cic. Har. resp. 5.9.

187 tion with a contiom that this prodigy and its interpretation must concern Cicero's repossession of his land (including the Libertas statue400), thus pur­ portedly violating its consecration - so the matter continued. Addressing the Senate, Cicero reasoned in his speech De haruspicum responso that the inter­ pretation of the portents could not concern his house, precisely because the pontifices and the Senate had already declared that the land it stood on was not sacred ground.401 In so doing, Cicero refuted Clodius' interpretation of the portent, subsequently alleging that the prodigy and its responsum did not con­ cern Cicero at all, but rather Clodius himself, and referring to the Bona Dea scandal and Clodius' various sexual and criminal exploits. In other words, Cicero attributed the responsum to the scandal in which Clodius profaned the Bona Dea festival by sneaking into the celebration dressed in women's cloth­ ing, and Cicero repeatedly, and cleverly, dwelled upon Clodius' religious, sex­ ual, and political escapades:402 Once out of his saffron robe, his frontlet, his womanish slippers and purple stockings, his breast-band, his psaltery, his infamy and fornication - sud­ denly Publius Clodius has become a Popularis. It is also evident from the speech that Clodius was a XVvir,403 and in con­ nection with the Clodius scandal in 62-61 BC it is interesting to note that he held this office from 56 BC or earlier.404 So naturally, the Clodius scandal and his office as XVvir were obvious targets for Cicero's sarcastic allusions to Clodius as a champion of religion.405 Within the intricate complex of personal accusations and religio-political issues that Cicero weaves into De haruspicum responso, there is a leitmotif in his arguments consisting of the idea that the immortals control the world and can make their will known to Roman society through portents.406 Here Cicero establishes that in religious questions, one should respect the authority of 399 Whether he also spoke on this issue in the Senate is unknown. 400 Cf. Cic. Att. 42.23. 401 For information on Cic. Har. resp. and the dating of this speech, see Lenaghan (1969); Kumaniecki (1959); Gelzer (1937). 402 Cic. Har. resp. 21.44. 403 Cic. Har. resp. 13.26: Ne hoc quidem tibi in mentem veniebat, Sibyllino sacerdoti, haec sacra maiores nostros ex vestris libris expetisse? 404 From a religio-political viewpoint it is particularly interesting that in the Clodius scandal, irre­ spective of the issue of guilt and bribery and despite Clodius' acquittal, the Senate ordered the case to be handed over to the Vestal Virgins and the pontifices, who decreed that a religious violation had taken place, cf. Cic. Att. 1.13. See also Skydsgaard (1978) pp. 2 8 ^ 5 ; Brouwer (1989). 405 Cic. Har. resp. 5.9: religiosissimo sacerdote [...] de illo ipso sacrificio, quod fit pro salute populi Romani, quod post Romam conditam huius unius casti tutoris religionum scelere violatum est [... the Bona Dea festival] (6.12); uno illo solo antistite sacrorum (7.14); for more on the antistes, see Wissowa (1912) p. 483. 406 The same view is presented in Cicero's Catilinarian speeches, for instance in Cic. Cat. 3.9.21: Hie quis potest esse tarn aversus a vero, tarn praeceps, tarn mente captus qui neget haec omnia quae videmus praecipueque banc urbem deorum immortalium nutu acpotestate administrari? Cf. 3.8.18-19; 2.13.29.

188 Rome's ancestors, according to whom public portents are to be interpreted and play a decisive role in society's actions. Portents, history, and politics are per­ manently interwoven, forming a matrix in which political stability is contingent upon correct religious behaviour, and historical events are dependent upon divine plans that can, to a degree, be deciphered through portents. That is why Cicero's views on Roman history must be included in any analysis of his views on portents and religio-political matters.407 Seen in this perspective, Cicero's approach to portents and divination seems to be quite serious.408 The assess­ ment that Cicero simply uses religion as a strategic political instrument disre­ gards not only the historical perspective, including the significance of mos maiorum, but also the fact that if the religious aspect did not play a role per se, but was reduced to political posturing, then the entire complex of problems, and Cicero's line of reasoning, would collapse and appear meaningless as well as ridiculous. At no point do Cicero's speeches question the religious aspect p6T se. On the contrary, Cicero and Clodius both consistently attempt to put one another in an unfavourable light by presenting their opponent as being in breach of official Roman cult.409 The importance of the religious aspect is also evident in the proceedings themselves. It is therefore meaningless to present the use of tactical religio-political manoeuvring as an argument that can justify reducing the issue to a matter of hypocrisy, political manipulation and the exploitation of religion.410 Instead the affair should be regarded as evidence of the viability of religious argumentation. Whether serving tactical purposes or not, the mere fact that people involved in religio-political rhetoric accused their opponents of violating the religio or disturbing the pax deorum must be taken to mean that the gods are perceived as interacting with mortals in matters affecting the welfare of Roman society. If so, then in this particular case Cicero might have been genuinely convinced that Clodius' comportment in the Bona Dea scandal really did amount to a seri­ ous violation of the religio.An However hostile the relationship between Cicero and Clodius may have been, the scandal was a religious violation, and when seen in this light, the episode (at least in terms of its interpretation) could very

407

This applies whether or not one regards Cicero's view of history as nostalgic, as Thompson (1992) and others do. See also Rawson (1991) pp. 58-79. 408 Cic. Har. resp. 5.10. 409 The same relationship between the profane and sacred world is illustrated in the Catilinarian speeches, when they present Catiline as a threat to Roman society and Roman religion (Cic. Cat. 1.5.12). 410 Cf. Heibges (1969a) p. 846: "The speech, [Har. resp.] to be sure, shows clearly how portents, prophecies and priestly sayings were manipulated by Roman politicians, and Cicero is clever enough to wrest the weapon of religion out of Clodius' hands to beat the enemy on his own ground."; Goar (1972) p. 71: "Therefore most of Cicero's pronouncements on religion have an exaggerated air about them, an aura of false rhetoric." Cf. Taylor (1949 (1975)) pp. 87-90; Rawson (1991) pp. 149-168. 411 Cf. Cic. Att. 1.13.3; 1.18.2. Stockton's interpretation of Cicero's motives in connection with the Bona Dea scandal do not take the religious side of the matter into account at all. Stockton's claim that Cicero "betrayed" Clodius, cf. Stockton (1971) p. 161, is therefore based on a discussion that exclu­ sively views the affair as an example of political opportunism. Cf. Tatum (1990).

189 well be related to the actual responsum about profaning a sacred area - with­ out necessarily implying any kind of manipulation. An important point documenting this possibility is Cicero's reference to an assembly during which Clodius was met with laughter when speaking of reli­ gious neglect and violations.412 Cicero naturally intends this hint at Clodius' own violation of the Bona Dea festival to further undermine Clodius' overall credibility and his religious integrity. Yet, if one were to adhere to the idea of Cicero's religious hypocrisy on this point as well, it would effectively result in a kind of "double hypocrisy": Cicero, himself fallen prey to allegations of reli­ gious hypocrisy, reveals Clodius' (fairly concrete) religious double-dealing and deceit. Such double hypocrisy on Cicero's part is improbable, and quite risky in the relevant situation, for the laughter of the assembly clearly shows that those who excel in empty rhetoric in public are exposed. And one would cer­ tainly imagine that the same would apply to a Cicero addressing the pontifices and the Senate. In its own way, Cicero's speech De haruspicum responso is a unique source of information on public divination and portents, in the sense that it enables the reader to infer the responsum from the haruspices, both in form and in content. A compilation of all the passages from this responsum rendered in Cicero's speech reads as follows: (5.9): (10.20):

(10.21): (16.34): (17.34): (17.37): (19.40):

(26.55): (26.56): (27.60):

412

Loca sacra et religiosa prof ana haberi; Quod in agro Latiniensi auditus est strepitus cum fremitu;[ ...] Exauditus in agro propinquo et suburbano est strepitus quidam reconditus et horribilis fremitus armorum; [...] Postiliones esse lovi, Saturno, Neptuno, Telluri, dis caelestibus; Ludos413 minus diligenter factos pollutosque; Oratores contra ius fasque interfectos;414 Fidem iusque iurandum neglectum;415 Sacrificia vetusta occultaque minus diligenter facta pollutaque; Ne per optimatium discordiam dissensionemque patribus principibusque caedes periculaque creentur, auxilioque divinitus deficiantur*qua re ad unius imperium res redeaf - difficult manu­ script, cf. Loeb (1965) p. 368. Ne occultis consiliis res publica laedatur; Ne deterioribus repulsisque honos augeatur; Ne reipublicae status commutetur\

Cic. Har. resp. 5.8. According to Cicero (Cic. Har. resp. 11-12), it has to do with Clodius' disturbance of ludiMegalenses. 414 An allusion to the murder of some Egyptian legates resulting from intrigues devised by Ptolemaeus Auletes (Cic. Har. resp. 16.34). 415 According to Cicero (Cic. Har. resp. 17.36), it concerns Clodius' bribing of the judges in the Bona Dea affair. 413

190 Despite some obscure points, this specific example sheds light on: 1) the con­ tents of the prodigy itself, 2) the reason the prodigy happened, 3) the deities linked to the prodigy, and 4) the expiations the prodigy required. One can, of course, discuss the extent to which the speech renders the exact wording of the written responsion, and the question of whether it might have been embellished or expanded here and there.416 It is impossible to check this responsum for elements of fiction or dramatization, and Cicero's concluding emphasis is by no means surprising:417 Yet my entire speech has been pleading for the cause, not of my own digni­ ty, but of the religio of the state. My words were perhaps too many, but the views that those words express are those of the haruspices. Although it is impossible to determine how faithful the reproduction is, and although it may not be an exact copy of the haruspices response, it seems prob­ able that the essence remains intact. A great number of people were familiar with the actual circumstances of the responsum, and this would make com­ pletely distorting the text both unwise and pointless in this context. Regardless of whether the wording of the original responsum may have been distorted to a greater or lesser degree, the religio-political significance of public portents is demonstrated by the mere fact that these incidents developed into a high-pro­ file case concerning issues involving the Senate, haruspices, and pontifices, and in which Clodius and Cicero each presented their own version of the case. In this light, Cicero's De domo sua and De haruspicum responso speeches consti­ tute very significant testimony for the religio-political decision-making process applied in such cases - although of course one lacks the version of the case that Clodius' presented to the pontifices. Among other things, this affair illustrates the way religion and politics are interwoven, and how, as a consequence, religion might lay a foundation for political and personal issues, rendering them legitimate. Hence manipulation to stay with that term - should not surprise us, nor is it a decisive argument for those seeking to prove a Ciceronian ungodliness or a late Republican religion in serious decline. One could discuss the tactical manoeuvring of those involved, but in an ancient Roman context the religio-political tactics used would hardly have had the blasphemous undercurrents sometimes implied by later scholars. More importantly, the case and its outcome demonstrate that the religious foun­ dations provided a viable basis for the tactics used. In this connection the mod­ ern scholarly fixation on whether or not Cicero truly believed in this or that por­ tent plays a lesser role. The crucial point here is that from a historical and reli­ gio-political perspective, Cicero was convinced of the benefit and value repre­ sented by public portents as an institution firmly anchored in mos maiorum. 416

Cf. Madvig (1882) vol. 2, p. 535. Cic. Har. resp. 28.61: [...] Sedhaec oratio omnis fuit non auctoritatis meae, sed publicae religionis. Mea fuerunt verba fortasse plura, sententiae quidem omnes haruspicum [...] 417

191 Additionally, Cicero did not only regard portents and their interpretations as significant when they related to his own house. References to such portents are also found, for example, in his Catilinarian speeches, in which Cicero refers to a number of prodigies occurring during his consulate (PT 133) that seemed to foreshadow Catiline's conspiracy.418 Furthermore, the institution of public portents, its procedures, and its priesthoods played a significant role in the ideal constitution outlined by Cicero in his works De republica and De legibus. It is tempting to describe these two works as embodying a sort of Weberian Idealtyp when Cicero, discussing the nature of the State, constructs a non-existent, ideal constitutional model with a variety of characteristic definitions and elements. These definitions and elements are taken from: a) Greek concepts and laws (such as Solon's laws), b) Roman mos maiorum (the Twelve Tablets and other sources), and finally c) Cicero's own assessments of Rome's constitution, including his views on the contemporary problems of the State and on necessary social, political, and reli­ gious reforms. In the ideal synthesis that Cicero constructs in these two works, public portents form the very foundation of the model constitution,419 and the existence of divination is recognized in accordance with Stoic thinking.420 As explained above, one of the many things De domo sua and De haruspicum responso demonstrate is that when dealing with religio-political disputes involv­ ing portents - and in this instance involving Cicero personally - Cicero does not resort to philosophy, but relies on the very foundation of, and authority embodied in, Roman society and its respect for the inherited institutions. Nevertheless, if one compares Cicero's attitudes towards portents in the speeches with his treatment of portents in a philosophical context, it is easy to see some of the apparent self-contradictions that have bothered scholars and helped to create a picture of Cicero as a manipulative hypocrite. The problem stems from the fact that about ten years after treating public portents serious­ ly in the two speeches, Cicero is found ridiculing portents, especially in his De divinatione.421 Some of these portents even happen to be the same as those he had regarded seriously a decade earlier, and on which he had based the argu­ ments presented in his speeches and elsewhere. The first book of De divinatione deals positively with the various types of portents and divination from a Stoic point of view. Here divination and por418

Cic. Cat. 3.8.18-19. The usual scholarly assessment of this is expressed in Kroll (1933) p. 5: "Das schlimmste war vielleicht, dass die angeblichen Prodigien stimmungsmassig wirkten und dem Aberglauben immer neue Nahrung gaben". Cf. Goar (1972) pp. 4 3 ^ 4 . 419 Cic. Leg. 2.20-21; 2.30-34. 420

Cic. Leg. 2.32. For interpretations of Cicero's ideal model of a constitution, see Krarup (1956); Schmidt (1973); Rawson (1973); Schofield (1995). 421 As concerns the dating of Cic. Div. and Cic. Nat. D., letters to Atticus indicate that Cicero stud­ ied their subject matter intensively during the summer and fall of 45 BC, and that Cic. Div. was clearly written before Caesar's death; cf. Pease (1920) vol. VI, pp. 13-15. The two pieces are clearly linked, and everything points to Cicero having used the same Greek sources for both works.

192 tents become meaningful in light of the idea that all things are connected and destined to take place in a given sequence - the concept of Fate. The gods, determining Fate, already know of the connections, and can communicate them to mortals by means of portents. In a sense this aligns divination and public portents with the Stoic perception of the world as a stable, undivided unit in which unfavourable portents violating the order of society can be seen as an expression of the existence of the immortals, and vice versa. From the Stoic's point of view, it is therefore consistent to accept portents and divination.422 This stands in contrast to the Academic approach taken in the second book of De divinatione, which strongly polemicizes against portents and divination: refer­ ring primarily to natural causal connections and the significance of coinci­ dence, 423 the sceptical Academic has his doubts about portents and their inter­ pretation. 424 Due to the formal framework of De divinatione, the first book con­ tains numerous examples of prodigies: sweating statues of deities, rains of blood and showers of stone, earthquakes, and so on. Among the terrifying prodigies occurring around the outbreak of the Marsic War, Cicero mentions how "mice gnawed at the sacred shields in Lanuvium, which the haruspices con­ sidered to be the worst omen of all."425 In the second book of De divinatione, however, he argues against public portents, posing questions like "Are we real­ ly so foolish and so thoughtless as to consider it an omen when something is nibbled on by mice, whose principal occupation is, after all, nibbling?" 426 It is precisely this Academic scepticism in the second book that has fuelled the idea of Cicero's hypocrisy and his postulated dilemma, for scholars have perceived the second book as a direct expression of Cicero's own personal 422 Cf. Cic. Div. 1.6; 1.82-83; 1.125-127; 2.61; Cic. Nat. D. 2.13; Cic. Fat. 33. Chrysippus is partic­ ularly preoccupied with portents, and according to Cicero (Cic. Div. 2.130), he defines divinatio as "the ability to recognize and explain the portentous signs that the gods send to the mortals", describing its task as one of "presaging how the gods are inclined towards the mortals, what they are divulging, and what expiation they require."; cf. Christensen (1962); Suss (1965); Gigon (1973); Long & Sedley (1987); Friis Johansen (1991) pp. 554-589. 423 Cic. Div. 2.13-19; 2.47^9; 2.61-62. 424 Cic. Div. 2.8. The second book begins and ends with the academic standpoint: "In my reply to these questions [those of the Stoics] you will find that I establish nothing, but investigate matters and am often in doubt and unsure of myself."; 2.150: "Since, however, it is the principle of the Academy not to present any decision of one's own, but rather to find out what seems most probable, to compare rea­ sons, to present all viewpoints, and without pronouncing any inviolable judgement of one's own to leave the minds of the audience free and undisturbed, we will perpetuate this custom, which we have learned from Socrates." Cf. Long & Sedley (1987); Friis Johansen (1991) pp. 590-622; Suss (1965). The con­ cept of providence does not exist in Epicurean philosophy, as the world is believed to consist of atom­ ic collisions occurring at random. Portents and divination consequently hold no significance for the Epicureans. Although basically assuming that the gods do exist, they do not believe in divine interven­ tion in mortal affairs by means of portents. The Epicureans also reject the concept of portents with ref­ erence to their conviction that human fear of the unpredictable gods and their anger should be over­ come, Cic. Nat. D. 43-56; Lucr. De Rerum Natura 1.62ff, cf. Long (1974) pp. 41^49; Long & Sedley (1987) vol. 1, pp. 144-149; Friis Johansen (1991) pp. 526-539. 42

^ Cic. Div. 1.99. Cic. Div. 2.59.

426

193 views and attacks on divinatio. This perception can be traced back to Augustine427 and has been predominant since Pease presented his analysis, stating that "The need of an attack upon divination was becoming more and more apparent."428 (See chapter 4 for further discussion). A number of more recent scholars also rely on this perception, among them Goar, who prefers to regard the second book of De divinatione (with my italics) as: an all-out polemic against superstition, in the construction of which Cicero is willing, for the sake of intellectual honesty, to say what he really thinks about augury, haruspicine, and the Sibylline Oracles, discarding his usual posture of belief in every area of the state religion.429 Other works interpreting these apparent contradictions between Cicero's views on portents, as presented in his speeches and in the second book of De divina­ tione, steer clear of actually accusing him of hypocrisy. They achieve this by regarding the contradictions as a result of Cicero's personal evolution - an evo­ lution that supposedly progressed from a traditional (primitive) Roman reli­ gious perspective to a more sophisticated Greek philosophical approach.430 In such scholarly works, Cicero's religious views are solely presented on the basis of a diachronic analysis mainly focusing on the second book of De divinatione. In the eyes of Wilhelm Siiss, for instance, Cicero's manner of dealing with por­ tents is "geistvoll und witzig in ihrer ganzen Lacherlichkeit".431 The hypothesis of development regards both Cicero and the concept of religiousness from an implicitly personal, evolutionist point of view that substitutes philosophy for religion. A similar view lies, for instance, behind the wording that Elizabeth Rawson applies to Cicero and his like-minded contemporaries: their "conver427

August. De civ. D. 5.9: In libris vero de divinatione ex se ipso apertissime oppugnat praescientiam futurorum. 428 Pease (1920) part 1, pp. 12-13; Momigliano (1984) p. 209; Linderski (1986) p. 2230; Guillaumont (1984); Goar (1972) pp. 62; 74; Rawson (1972), in Rawson (1991) p. 66. See in particular Beard (1986) and Schofield (1986). 429 Goar (1972) p. 101; cf. pp. 102-103: "De Divinatione, however, is concerned with a pressing spir­ itual problem, and its aim is to destroy superstition without discarding belief. In order to be consistent, Cicero must include augury and haruspicine in his attack." Cf. Rawson (1991) p. 127. For further dis­ cussion of the term "superstition", see chapter 4. 430 Cf. Guillaumont (1984) p. 168: "Une maturation interieure s'est sans doute produite, amenant Ciceron a une critique plus radicale de la divination." 431 Finding support in Lactantius, Siiss (1965) p. 324 emphasizes Cicero's hypocrisy towards the superstitious mob, cf. Lactant. Div. inst. 2.3.2: Cicero [...] cum multa dixisset, quae ad eversionem religionum valerent, ait tamen non esse ilia vulgo disputanda, ne susceptas publice religiones disputatio talis extinguat. Even so, the passage in Cicero, of which Siiss emphasizes the beginning, ends with nothing less than an assertion that the religious ceremonies of the state must be upheld with the greatest admi­ ration and respect, cf. Cic. Nat. D. 1.61: Quaeritur primum in ea quaestione quae est de natura deorum sinte dei necne sint. "Difficile est negare'. Credo si in contione quaeratur, sed in huius modi sermone et in consessu [familiari] facillimum. Itaque ego ipse pontifex, qui caerimonias religionesque publicas sanctissime tuendas arbitror, is hoc quod primum est, esse deos persuaderi mihi non opinione solum sed etiam ad veritatem plane velim.

194 sion to philosophy."432 Moreover, the evolutionary approach rests on a chrono­ logically unstable foundation, as it implies that Cicero wrote De legibus before writing De divinatione, even though attempts to date De legibus have been com­ plex and have yielded few solid results.433 It is nonetheless striking that schol­ ars launching such attempts base their arguments on an implied evolutionist approach.434 We have no actual surviving information on when De legibus was written, when it was published, or whether Cicero even completed it. What we do know, thanks among other things to its many references to De republica, is that De legibus was intended to be a sequel to the former work. Then again, it is worth noting that De legibus is not mentioned in De divinatione (2.1-3), in which Cicero lists his philosophical works - among them De republica. One might therefore reasonably conclude that at the time (around 44 BC, that is) Cicero had not yet completed De legibus.^5 This weakens the chronological argument for claiming that Cicero's views on portents were controlled by a per­ sonal evolution ending in his rejection of divinatio in De divinatione. Whatever the case may be, I believe that the Academic approach in the con­ clusion of De divinatione does not actually signal a rejection of public portents. In keeping with a sociologically oriented definition of the concept of superstitioy as set out in chapter 4 of this study, I interpret Cicero's concluding com­ ments in De divinatione4^6 as a rejection of superstitio, including the taking and interpreting of portents not officially approved - its opposite being religio, including the official types of divination involving auspicia, prodigia, and exta. This is in accordance with the concluding reference made in De divinatione to De natura deorum, in which the interpreting of portents is approved by the Academic Cotta, and the official types of divination are allocated to the field of religio 4J>1 This reading of the final passages in De divinatione does not support

432Rawson(1975)p. 10. 433 Cf. Schmidt (1969); Rawson (1973) in Rawson (1991) p. 125-148. 434 For instance according to Rawson (1991) p. 127: "And the acceptance of divination, in the past at least, in 2.32 is unlikely to have been written after Cicero had come out openly against all forms of it in the De divinatione." 435 Still, this does not rule out the claim that parts of this work were probably written in the 50s BC, cf. Rawson (1991) pp. 125-129. 436 Cic. Div. 2.148-149: Nee vero (id enim diligenter intellegi volo) superstitione tollenda religio tollitur. ...; (2.149): Quam ob rem ut religio propaganda etiam est, quae est iuncta cum cognitione naturae, sic superstitionis stirpes omnes eligendae. Instat enim et urget et quo te cumque veneris persequitur, sive tu vatem sive tu omen audieris, sive immolaris sive avem aspexeris, si Chaldaeum si haruspicem videris, si fulserit si tonuerit, si factum aliquid erit de caelo si ostenti simile natum factumve quippiam. Cf. chapter 4. 437 Cic. Nat. D. 3.5: Sed cum de religione agitur, Coruncanium P. Scipionem P. Scaevolam pontifices maximos, non Zenonem aut Cleanthen aut Chrysippum sequor, habeoque C. Laelium augurem eundemque sapientem quern potius audiam dicentem de religione in ilia oratione nobili quam quemquam principem Stoicorum. Cumque omnis populi Romani religio in sacra et in auspicia divisa sit, tertium adiunctum sit si quid praedictionis causa ex portentis et monstris Sibyllae interpretes haruspicesve monuerunt, harum ego religionum nullam umquam contemnendam putavi [...]. Cf. Cic. Nat. D. 3.43: Ouando enim me in hunc locum deduxit oratio, docebo meliora me didicisse de colendis diis inmortalibus iure pontificio et more

195 a personal, total rebuttal of divinatio as a whole. On the contrary, even the scep­ tical, Academic approach seems to accept public portents out of consideration for both the multitude and the preservation of the state.438 To recapitulate, the two hypotheses based on hypocrisy and evolution have several flaws in common. First, they disregard the fact that Roman religion was generally a communal affair, not a matter of individual commitment, personal faith, or a body of dogma. Secondly, the essential element in Roman religion was the performance of rituals - a fact that also renders private concerns such as hypocrisy and spiritual development rather irrelevant. Cicero defines religio as cultus deorum^9 and as demonstrated repeatedly throughout this study, the institution of Roman public portents revolves far more around social, religious, and political behaviour than around faith. Consequently, a third flaw is disre­ gard of the fact that Roman religio, politics, and history are different aspects of the same portentous phenomenon. As mentioned earlier, this intermixture sometimes leads to pragmatic approaches and measures that may well be in accordance with Roman cult, but which appear to be full of double-dealing and deception when viewed from the perspective of the modern world's distinction between religion and politics and its presumption of an intimate linking of reli­ gion and personal, emotional commitment. Finally, because of their preoccupation with the influences exerted by Greek philosophy, the two hypotheses disregard the way in which the behaviour of the traditional collective religion can, in practice, continue to hold considerable importance, even as new and different theoretical, philosophical, or religious ideas gain ground. 440 An example of this would be one of Cicero's journeys to Greece during which (according to Plutarch) the Roman orator studied Greek philosophy in Athens and afterwards consulted the Delphic Oracle. 441 True or not, 442 Plutarch's account provides no evidence of any dilemma in simultane­ ously pursuing philosophical studies and consulting oracles.

maiorum capedunculis his, quas Numa nobis reliquit, de quibus in ilia aureola oratiuncula dicit Laelius, quam rationibus Stoicorum. 438 Cf. Cic. Div. 2.70: [ ...] retinetur autem et ad opinionem vulgi et ad magnas utilitates reipublicae mos religion disciplina ius augurium collegi auctoritas. 439 Cic. Nat. D. 2.8: [...] religione id est cultu deorum [...] 440 In other words, the institution of divination and public portents can very well be philosophical­ ly refuted without impacting Roman religious practice. A parallel could be found in the genre of Juvenal (Juv. Sat. 6.314-341), which makes the Bona Dea festival an object of satirical attacks and alleged obscenities, though not causing us to doubt the cult's religious practices and significance. 441 Plut. Vit. Cic. 5.1: "So when Cicero, full of anticipation, leaned towards politics, his initiative was dampened by an oracular response, for when he asked the god at Delphi how he should gain the great­ est recognition, Pythia instructed him to allow his own nature, and not the recognition from the major­ ity, to direct his life." 442 Cf. Guillaumont (1984) p. 103 suggests that: "S'il consulte l'oracle, c'est peut-etre plus par fidelite platonicienne que par conviction religieuse", or alternatively on p. 104 that: "Peut-etre n'a-t-il jamais cru a l'inspiration de la Pythie. Mais il a pu voir dans l'oracle un depositaire de l'ancienne sagesse des

196 In seeking to elucidate Cicero's views on portents by combining a diachronic and a synchronic perspective, the main issue requiring attention is: what was the actual aim of those works from which scholars believe they can deduce Cicero's religious position? In De natura deorum, Cicero states that he wishes to "explain philosophy to my countrymen".443 His ambition is to treat Greek philosophy in Latin, which means that the primary purpose of the works is pre­ senting Greek philosophy to Latin readers. This endeavour is, of course, coloured partly by Cicero's selecting the issues he finds particularly interesting, and partly by his elaborations, which use images and examples taken from Roman history.444 This enables Cicero to demonstrate the application of philo­ sophical arguments and methods on traditional Roman religious ideas and practices. That does not mean, however, that the author's main interest is to systematically present his own views. On the contrary, the principal aim of De divinatione and De natura deorum seems to be the carrying out of intellectual, philosophical exercises that allow the author to illustrate and formulate - in Latin - the various views, including the doubts about portents to which philo­ sophical questions give rise. In the discussion of Cicero's views on portents, one should therefore be wary of attempting to rigidly identify Cicero's own voice in De divinatione. I disagree with the generally accepted hypotheses that assume the primary aim of this work was to launch a personal attack on divinatio, and that here Cicero finally dares to say what he truly believes, and/or that this is the result of a personal development progressing from traditional Roman reli­ gion to sophisticated Greek philosophy. I take the opposite view concerning Cicero's views on portents in De divina­ tione, strongly emphasizing his desire and ability to present, in a philosophical context, conflicting positions on the same issue without choosing sides himself.445 Some of his letters and the preface to De natura deorum provide evidence of two significant reasons for Cicero's philosophical studies at this time. One was his grief following the death of his daughter Tullia in 45 BC,446 the other his isolation from political life at the time.447 One source confirming that philosophy - rather than public religion - gave Cicero the strength to maintain some equanimity in times of private and political grief is a letter (written in 44 BC) to his faithful secretary Tiro:448

Grecs et lui demander conseil sur l'orientation de sa vie" (p. 104). This only confirms the above-men­ tioned scholarly bias regarding the question of faith in matters of divination. 4 «3 Cic. Nat. D. 1.7-8, cf. Cic. Div. 2.4-5; 2.150. 444 As emphasized in Davies (1971), here Cicero creates a new literary genre and equips Roman soci­ ety with a philosophical vocabulary. 445 Cicero was not bound to a specific philosophical school - at least not after the Greek fashion although at one point he chose the Academy and was naturally influenced here by his academic teach­ ers, particularly Philon and Antiochus, and teachers of Stoicism, mainly Poseidonius and Diodotus. Cf. Beard (1986); Schofield (1986). 446 On Cicero's great sorrow and despondency after Tullia's death (including his plans to build her a fanum), see Cic. Att. 12.14; 12.18; 12.19; 12.20; 12.36; 12.40; 12.41; 13.26; Cic. Nat. D. 1.9; cf. Hoeg (1964). 447 Cic. Nat. D. 1.7; Cic. Div. 2.6. 448 Cic. Fam. 16.23.2.

197 And our friend Atticus once saw me gripped with panic and thinks I am still in that condition; he cannot see that I am now protected by the safeguard of philosophy. In summing up the situation it is fair to say that the scholarly assessments and slight indignation in discussing Cicero and public divination lack a contextual recognition of the way Cicero's views on portents are mainly dictated by the fact that philosophy is a studium sapientiae, whereas official Roman religion is an established part of mos maiorum. In other words, for Cicero, Greek theory is one thing, Roman practices another; ideas are one thing, behaviour another. The fathers of the Church, such as Augustine and Lactantius, did not distinguish between the two in relation to pagan portents and had no qualms about mixing various religious and philosophical ideas, since all of it was more or less ungodly anyway. This should not be held against them and is, of course, a result of the very different dichotomy applied by Church fathers: a dichotomy consisting of vera sapientia (that is, Christianity) on the one hand and falsa sapientia (that is, paganism, including divination) on the other.449 While polemicizing in the service of a higher cause, Augustine fails to recognize the possi­ bility that Cicero is actually polemicizing in the service of philosophy. Augustine's bias must be kept in mind, but it is nevertheless interesting that modern scholarship sometimes seems to continue to focus on the question of faith, and to mix sources of a very dissimilar nature. Additionally, Roman reli­ gion is confounded with Greek philosophy in the analysis of Cicero's attitude towards public portents, and thus the picture of a hypocrite emerges. To put it differently, the scholarly interest in Cicero's religious position (still) seems to be dependent upon a radically different perception of religion than the one appli­ cable to ancient Roman cult. My own conclusion is that Cicero was not a hypocritical manipulator, nor did he necessarily undergo any particular evolution that replaced religion with philoso­ phy. The point is that he treats portents from two different angles: one a religiopolitical view rooted in mos maiorum, and the other a philosophical view that springs from the Graeco-Roman acculturation process and Cicero's wish to make Greek philosophical ideas accessible to Latin readers. When presenting Greek philosophy, Cicero examines all possible and probable facets of an issue, in this case portents. When acting as a Roman, a politician, an orator, and an augur, however, Cicero considers the Senate's religio-political procedure, the cult, and its historical roots far more important than the portents' potential (improbabil­ ity from a philosophical point of view. This is emphasized by the considerable social and religious prestige Cicero associates with the office of augur, which he himself was clearly proud to hold from 53 BC onwards.450 449

Cf. Lactant. Div. inst. 4.28.11: Religio veri dei cultus est, superstitio falsi. Cf. also chapter 4. Cf. Linderski (1972) pp. 190-200. Cicero wrote a work about the augural discipline that has unfortunately been lost. In the 50s BC, Appius Claudius also wrote a work about this discipline, which he dedicated to Cicero. 450

198 It is a problem in terms of methodology that a strictly diachronic analysis of Cicero's stand on portents focuses on seemingly confusing discrepancies and self-contradictions, resulting in a failure to include the relevant contexts and functions of the orations and the philosophical works, respectively. A syn­ chronic analysis, however, shows that a contextual difference is reflected in Cicero's dual attitude towards portents. It is neither odd nor hypocritical that two different attitudes are discernible, depending on the sources (that is, the contexts) examined. The one approach, taken in De dorno sua and De haruspicum responso, has to do with religio-political practice (even when manipulation is involved). The other approach, taken in De divinatione and De natura deorum, has to do with the dissemination of theoretical philosophy, during which Cicero examines portents from various points of view To Cicero, philosophy was a diversion, an intellectual and educational pursuit, whereas religion was a historical, social, and political necessity for preserving the welfare of res publica. By applying a sociological, synchronic angle to an analysis of Cicero's stand on portents his alleged self-contradictions, dilemmas, and hypocrisy in religiopolitical questions seem to be eliminated.The scholarly tendency (ever since Augustine) to imply a Christian ethics concerning religious belief, develop­ ment, hypocrisy, and politics makes the individual's feelings and beliefs/super­ stitions - not rituals and procedure - the touchstone of what "religion" is (or ought to be), which, in my view, says more about scholarship than it does about Cicero's views on divination.

4. DIVINATION AS SCIENCE "Das Wissen griindet sich am Schluss auf der Anerkennung" L. Wittgenstein, Uber Gewissheit.451

It is outside the scope of this study to discuss all the modern interpretations of the concepts "religion" and "science" and the theories behind the religion-sci­ ence-magic tripartition, not to mention the many relevant definitions within philosophy, sociology, anthropology, history, and the study of religion.452 Naturally, the various academic disciplines have not reached any definition­ al consensus, nor have scholars within the individual academic fields. Nevertheless, many hypotheses concerning these subjects revolve around the common central concepts of rationality and irrationality,453 and despite their dissimilar objectives, they share a tendency to regard divination as a sort of par­ adigm for the concept of irrationality. It is therefore necessary to define more precisely this study's attitude towards the issue, since the source material indi­ cates it would be far more constructive to apply an alternative approach to div­ ination in the Roman world. To my mind, the basic modern viewpoint that divination is irrational seems pointless, both in religio-historical analyses in general, and in connection with official Roman divination in particular. My view is primarily based on my conviction that rationality is a relative, cul­ ture-bound, and context-related concept:454 the academic notion that rational­ ity is a basic, cross-cultural, universal phenomenon455 is an unwieldy postulate that is more or less impossible to document. I therefore cannot support the optimistic conclusion presented in a very relevant work on the applicability of the rationality concept to the academic study of religion:456 Rationality has indeed been questioned. However, the outcome of the cri­ tique is not a dissolution but the emergence of a multi-stranded and richer notion of rationality. If the concepts of culture and religion are polythetic, then why should comparable criteria not hold for rationality?

451 Wittgenstein (1989) p. 194. 452 Cf. Tambiah (1990); Hollis & Lukes (1982); Wilson (1970); Putnam (1981) p p . 103-216; and Neusner et at. (1989). For more on the rationality debate, see in particular the collection of articles in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997). T h e articles in this collection each in their own way espouse the con­ cept of rationality, and even a single more critical contribution to the debate would have been refresh­ ing. T h e usefulness of the modern scholarly magic-religion dichotomy in relation to Roman divination is discussed below. 453 Cf. Winch (1970). 454 Cf. Barnes & Bloor (1982); Geertz (1984). 455 Cf Hollis (1982); Buchowski (1997). 456 Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997) p. 18.

200 My response to this is that despite attempts to free rationality from its logicopositivistic connotations, it is not simply a matter of equating "rationality" with "culture" and "religion". The concept of rationality is still more vague and less manageable than either of the latter. One reason is that in the final analysis, "rationality" inevitably implies relative value judgments and vague criteria, both from an emic and an etic point of view. There is always a significant risk that these value judgments and criteria have not been firmly established at the beginning of the analytical process, and that it may even be impossible to suf­ ficiently clarify them due to limitations imposed by the sources. For instance, it is impossible to satisfactorily define the components of ancient Roman "rationality" by applying the existing assortment of modern theories. In a cer­ tain sense, the introduction in the above-mentioned work illustrates the prob­ lematic nature of the concept: Sinding Jensen emphasizes that "Rationality, unquestionably, has to do with our being reasonable", cleverly quoting the adage "When in Rome, do as the Romans" - but at the same time concluding that "whether one wants to play along is an entirely different question."457 The quest to define rationality as a concept basically concerns the philoso­ phy of science and the philosophy of religion.458 Moreover, whether one chooses to categorize various religious ideas as rational or irrational, the con­ cept is very limiting from a religio-sociological perspective. This is partly due to the above-mentioned definitional ambiguities and the risk of implied, rela­ tive value judgements. In addition, the concept's religio-philosophical ties with ideas rather than behaviour also play a role. Finally, there is the risk that in using the term "rationality", scholars seek not only to imbue the object of their scrutiny with one type of rationality (which either encompasses or excludes the religious object), but also themselves seek to exhibit a (second?) type of (sci­ entific?) rationality, sometimes even choosing particular text passages using a (third?) type of (personal?) rationality. These problems are evident in several of the most recent contributions to the debate on rationality that continues in scholarly circles: Religious phenomena appear to challenge the assumption of rationality; supernatural entities, justification by faith, and other hallmarks of religion are not easily fitted into rational explanations. 459 Consequently, the concept of rationality goes against my intention to under­ stand ancient Roman society as far as possible on its own terms, despite the fragmentary sources. Furthermore, the concept of rationality is not in accor­ dance with my emphasis on the fact that different cultures organize their expe-

457

Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997) pp. 21 and 20. For more on the philosophy-of-science aspect, see Wiebe (1997); Wiebe (2000). For a philosophy-of-religion perspectivization of the concept, see Kippenberg (1997). 4 ^Kamppinen (1997) pp. 79; 87; 95; cf. also Trigg (1997) pp. 99-103; 114-116; Sinding Jensen (1997) pp. 122-126; Martin (1997) pp. 152-155; Kippenberg (1997); Wiebe (1997) pp. 174-183. 458

201 rience and perceptions using a wide range of concepts, or - in short - that dif­ ferent cultures apply different classifications. If one still insists on applying the modern concepts of rationality/irrational­ ity460 the wording must reflect certain contextual limitations: Roman divina­ tion represents a series of assumptions and institutionalized behavioural pat­ terns that attribute rational qualities (in the modern sense) to that which is irra­ tional (in the modern sense). This is done by establishing causal contexts based on the systematic observation of signs/portents that are interpreted according to specific rules and patterns. I consequently believe that, based on the sources dealing with public por­ tents in Roman religion, it is possible to regard divination as a scientific disci­ pline that is first and foremost characterized by its reliance on the systematic organization of actual observations. I define the term "scientific discipline" as an institutionalized body of knowledge that builds on systematic, empirical examinations of connections that seek an understanding of the world and include the establishment of profane and sacred contexts. It should, of course, be emphasized that just as religio is not identical with "religion" in the modern sense, the ancient, religious expertise internalized through generations and referred to by the terms sapientia, scientia, ars, and disciplina can hardly be perceived as "a science" in the modern sense of the word.461 No words in Latin correspond to the modern concepts "religion", "politics", and "science". Nevertheless, the ancient institution of public portents does have certain fea­ tures and functions reminiscent of modern sciences, albeit the axioms are fun­ damentally different and the ancient discipline of public divination does not employ modern science's claim of objective knowledge. The most significant similarity lies in the empirical basis of the ancient insti­ tution and in the diachronic, comparative treatments and systematization of this material, on which the interpretation itself is based. Another similarity between divinatory science and modern science is the establishment of causal contexts with the purpose of achieving an understand­ ing of the world. It is true, however, that modern science mainly establishes profane causal relations, whereas the interpretation oiprodigia, auspicia, and 460

Cf. the preface of Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), which insists on "the necessary centrality of rationality for any academic study of religion", and Buchowski (1997) pp. 41-42. For an excellent dis­ cussion of the rationality concept viewed in relation to divination and political decision-making process­ es in Antiquity and in modern societies, see Meyer (2002); see also Bagge's analysis of rational political behaviour, for instance in the Icelandic sagas and modern Western democracies in Bagge (1999). 461 As far as public portents are concerned, it seems difficult to determine the exact differences in the meaning of these terms. If anything, it looks as though ars is the term most frequently used for the actual practice of taking portents, while sapientia, disciplina, and scientia also concern the practical, rit­ ual elements but particularly cover the theoretical aspects, cf. Cic. Leg. 2.33: Sed dubium non est quin haec disciplina et ars augurum evanuerit iam et vestustate et neglegentia. Cf. Linderski (1986) pp. 2237-2241. Linderski's claim (on p. 2238, note 361) that Cicero does not use the term ars in connection with haruspical practices is incorrect: Cicero does use ars, for instance in Cic. Div. 1.92.

202

exta leads to the establishment of causal contexts within the sacred field of communication between gods and mortals - contexts that are decisive to the understanding and continuity of Roman society. The things predestined by divine will to take place in society could, to some extent, be foretold and pos­ sibly affected or regulated by mortals through portents, divination, and expia­ tion, provided the rituals were performed correctly. Fertile mules can serve to illustrate the similarity between the establishment of causal connections in modern science and ancient divination. The Romans regarded a mule giving birth as a prodigy.462 A causal context was established, in that such an empirically rare event was regarded as an unfavourable omen indicating that the pax deorurn had been violated. Equilibrium could only be re-established by performing rituals in accordance with the traditional knowl­ edge and expiations regarding fertile mules. Modern science also considers a mule giving birth as an empirically rare event. Although the frame of reference is different here, a causal context is also established for the event, in this case with reference to the scientific knowledge of chromosome numbers. Under normal circumstances, both mules - offspring of a mare (horse) and a jack (donkey) - and hinnies - offspring of a jennet (don­ key) and a stallion (horse) - are infertile because of the different number of chromosomes in horses and donkeys. In special circumstances - that is, if a female mule or a female hinny is served by a stallion or jack - the normal bio­ logical constraints are occasionally surmounted, and a mule conceives. Consequently, modern science establishes the causal context by estimating the biological improbability in accordance with theoretical genetics,463 and a mule giving birth is not regarded as a breach of the pax deorum, but as a breach of biological normalcy. As described in chapter 3, scholars usually employ Cicero's De divinatione as evidence of his personal disbelief in portents. Whether or not one agrees with this presentation of the work and its author, I believe it is possible to use De divinatione and other sources to draw a picture of the Roman institution of public portents, demonstrating its professional and scientific nature. A crucial factor is Cicero's splitting of divinatio into two: in De divinatione he distin­ guishes between "natural" forms of divination (such as dreams) and "scientif462 Cf. the prodigy table, P T 43; 61; 122; 148. 463

Here it should be noted that it would not necessarily have made any difference if the Romans had been familiar with the chromosomal explanation, as such knowledge might be inconsequential in the given religious context. One parallel example is found in Warner (1937), which deals with the Murngin tribe's knowledge of biological paternity. Warner demonstrates that particular religious ideas concern­ ing paternity do not reflect inadequate knowledge of the biological aspect, but simply show that social rather than biological paternity is the important factor in a matrilineal society. Hence, it is quite possi­ ble for a society to apply two different (and contradictory) causal contexts, one sacred and one profane (see also chapter 2.1, note 93 in the present study). This aspect is often ignored in discussions about rationality/irrationality and science/religion.

203

ic" forms of divination.464 We are interested in the latter forms, which, accord­ ing to Cicero, include: 1) reading of entrails, 2) lightning, 3) other omens (prodigies), and 4) augural interpretations. Cicero emphasizes that scientific divination builds partly on assumptions and partly on long-standing observa­ tions.465 The theoretical division of divinatio is explained using a sort of con­ trasting approach: the scientific form is characterized by knowledge of the past and the future obtained through observations and interpretations, whereas the natural form of divination applies no observation, interpretation, or ratio and is brought about by the unhindered movement of the soul, for instance in dreams or ecstatic trances, De divinatione 1.34: The one [type of divination] carries a scientific quality, the other lacks it. The scientific quality is found in those who, through observation, have acquired knowledge of past events, and through deduction seek knowledge of future events. The scientific quality, however, is lacking in those who, without method and without deduction based on observation and recorded signs, presage the future in a sort of unloosed and unbridled emotional state.466 It should be strongly emphasized here that (unlike modern society)467 Cicero does not contrast divinatio with ratio. On the contrary, he refers to two types of divina­ tio, one based on ratio and the other not. In this context, however, we can hardly take ratio to mean "reason", as opposed to irrationality, although this is the inter­ pretation used in several translations of the text, most notably the Loeb transla­ tion468 and the Danish translation by F. Blatt, T Hastrup, and P. Krarup.469 I believe it would be more appropriate to take the term to mean "a procedure that can be justified by argumentation" - in other words "method" or "demonstration 464

Cic. Div. 1.12: duo sunt enim divinandi genera, quorum alterum artis est alterum naturae. Cic. Div. 2.26: artificiosum constare partim ex coniectura partim ex observatione diuturna. 466 Cic. Div. 1.34: [...] unum quod particeps esset artis, alterum quod arte careret. Est enim ars in Us qui novas res coniectura persequuntur, veteres observatione didicerunt. Carent autem arte ii qui non ratione aut coniectura observatis ac notatis signis sed concitatione quadam animi aut soluto liberoque motu futura praesentiunt. Cf. Serv. Aen. 3.359: nam ut ait Cicero omnis divinandi peritia in duas partes dividitur. Nam aut furor est, ut in vaticinantibus, aut ars, ut in haruspicibus, fulguritis sive fulguratoribus, auguribus. Et omnia ista ex se pendent, licet propriis finibus contineantur. Servius' source for this passage remains unknown. Perhaps he could have taken it from Cicero's lost work De auguriis? Cf. Pease (1920) vol. VI, p. 10. 467 Cf. Meyer (2002) p. 173: "In our society we hold the ideal that effective decision-making is a part of a rational, secular and more or less scholarly process. " [...] "How then, can a modern historian com­ prehend the importance of religion and divination in ancient society, or to be more exact: to what extent can a decision-making process that involves omens, prophecies and oracles be classified as rational behaviour in our moderne sense of the word?" 468 Loeb Div. 1.34: "Those diviners employ art, who, having learned the known by observation, seek the unknown by deduction. On the other hand those do without art who, unaided by reason or deduc­ tion or by signs which have been observed and recorded, forecast the future while under the influence of mental excitement, or of some free and unrestrained emotion." 4 ^9 Blatt et al (1970) vol. Ill, p. 351 (Cic. Div. 1.34). 465

204

of evidence".470 Translating ratio as "reason" seems to make the word pair "reason" and "deduction" a rather odd parallel in this context. At all events, the concept of ratio is used to characterize the scientific form of divination as opposed to the nat­ ural form.471 It is definitely worth noting, however, that of those scholars who per­ sist in defining ratio as "reason" in this context, the vast majority have taken the inconsistent approach of referring to Cicero's rationalistic denial of divination. This is an approach that has held a prominent position in the scholarship since it was most clearly formulated in Pease's classic comment on De divinatione:472 Against popular ignorance, then, on the one hand, and political and anti­ quarian obscurantism on the other, the De Divinatione stands forth as a vig­ orous rationalistic protest [...] The angle from which Pease regards the source is clearly evolutionistic, and it seems unfair to level reproach at a presentation so unmistakably marked by contemporary thinking. It is strange, however, that this approach - be it explicit or implicit - has survived to resurface in modern scholarship, which generally claims to have left classical evolutionary thinking behind. In my view, this example further confirms that rationality is a relative concept that cannot be isolated from the particular cul­ tural context - ancient or modern - to which it applies. This holds true for Cicero's perception of divinatio as well as for Pease's perception of divinatio, even to the point of including Pease's perception of Cicero's perception of divinatio™ De divinatione emphasizes that as far as scientific divination is concerned, the many years of continued observation [pbservatio) have allowed the experts to amass large amounts of knowledge (scientia) concerning the connections between the occurrence of certain signs and subsequent events.474 Cicero declares that although mortals cannot explain why each individual thing happens, it is sufficient to establish that the things do happen. He makes the comparison that if one were to claim a magnet is a stone that attracts iron without being able to explain why, it is not the same as denying the existence of the phenomenon. According to Cicero's reasoning, one must regard public portents in the same way, thus not refuting the scientific divinatio, which can not only be observed with one's own eyes, but which has been handed down as an ancestral tradition.475 470 Cf. Cic. Fam. 6.63, which describes the Etruscan discipline of divination as a methodical system: [...] ratio quaedam Etruscae disciplinae [...]. 471 Cf. Cic. Dip. 1.128: [...] sic in causis conditae sunt res futurae, quas esse futuras aut concitata mens aut soluta somno cernit aut ratio aut coniectura praesentit. 472 Pease (1920) pp. 12-13, cf. p. 37. 473 Cf. Meyer s conclusion regarding political decision-making processes in Antiquity, Meyer (2002) p. 181: "The distinction between a religious world view, including divination, on the one hand and a secular scholar­ ly and scientific one, on the other hand, is from a larger sociological and historical perspective artificial." 474 Cic. Div. 1.109; 1.2. 475 Cic. Div. 1.86. The tradition of the ancestors does also recognize divination from the Sibylline Books, even though it is traditionally connected with a state of ecstasy (natural divination). That is why

205 The theoretical categorization into "scientific" and "natural" divinatio is attributed to the Stoics.476 According to the Stoic presentation of public por­ tents (for which Cicero allows his brother Quintus to serve as spokesman in the first book of De divinatione), all events are determined in advance by the immortals, and time is likened to a long rope that is gradually uncoiled. Only the gods know the order of events and the motivations for the future, but reli­ gious experts can divine it by observing the signs.477 The scientific form of div­ inatio consists in diachronically, and systematically, studying the connections between certain signs and certain events and comparing this information with the relevant knowledge contained in divinatory tradition.478 Consequently, sci­ entific divinatio relies on a written tradition, but according to Cicero, when encountering portents never before observed, the experts can also make inter­ pretations without using deductions from the past.479 In other words, this scientia comprises the religious expertise on portents, includ­ ing not only the actual observation of portents, but also "historical" motiva­ tions,480 religious classifications, and techniques for interpreting portents.481 The scientia forms the basis of future norms, actions, and events, various interpreta­ tions and precautions, and possible instructions concerning expiation rituals.482 In this way, the historical, empirical, and technical aspects of divination are unit­ ed in the systematic knowledge used by skilled specialists to learn what plans the gods have for Roman society.483 Portents may relate to human behaviour in conthe Xviri have been appointed to interpret this type of divinatio. Certain dreams are also recognized, provided they are relevant to the state (cf. Cic. Div. 1.4), but it is primarily the scientific divinatio that is a fixed cultic element in Roman society, making it a firmly established part of official Roman religion. 476 Cic. Div. 1.72: Quae vero aut coniectura explicantur aut eventis animadversa ac notata sunt, ea gen­ era divinandi, ut supra dixi, non naturalia sed artificiosa dicuntur; in quo haruspices augures coniectoresque numerantur. Haec inprobantur a Peripateticis, a Stoicis defenduntur. Cf. 1.82-84. 477 On the Stoic concept of predictability, see Friis Johansen (1991) pp. 104 and 579-583. 478 Cic. Div. 1.27. In connection with prodigies there was also a procedure involving a sort of verifi­ cation in the Senate, during which eyewitnesses were sometimes produced, cf. chapter 2.1. 479 Cic. Div. 1.72 Quorum alia sunt posita in monumentis et disciplina, quod [et] Etruscorum declar­ ant et haruspicini etfulgurales et rituales libri, vestri etiam augurales, alia autem subito ex tempora coniec­ tura explicantur, [...] 480 Concerning auspices in this context, see chapter 2.3 (for instance the accounts of Romulus' tak­ ing auspices and of Numa's inauguratio); concerning extispicy, see chapter 2.2 (for instance the origin legend of Tages); and concerning prodigies, see chapter 2.1 (for instance the legend of the Lacus Albanus prodigy). 481 Cf. the Etruscan tripartition into exta, fulgura, and ostenta, corresponding to the libri haruspici­ ni, fulgurates, and rituales. 482 See the prodigy table in chapter 2.1. 483 The concepts of religio and scientia are thus closely linked in the field of public divination. Cicero's definition of religio as cultus deorum (Cic. Nat. D. 2.8) makes the religious experts' scientia appear as both the foundation of and the justification for this religio, as well as the instrument whereby it is perpetuated - and this applies to both the behavioural/ritual aspect (as exemplified in expiations rituals, repeated and correct observations of entrails, and so on) and to the conceptual aspect (as exem­ plified in determining causal contexts and in the concept of pax deorum).

206 travention of preordained events (most often expressed in the occurrence of prodigies) or to the gods' approval/disapproval of future actions, such as assem­ blies, consular elections, and military actions (most often involving auspices and the reading of entrails). Overall, in Cicero's presentation, scientific divination deals with specific systematic investigations of, and measures taken to respond to, connections between certain phenomena - in the literal sense of the word - and the divinely predestined fate of mortals.484 A key aspect in understanding divination as a science is the special temporal dimension that applies to portents in Roman religion: in order to be pre­ dictable, the future must already exist in the past and the present. Portents convey messages that are accessible at all times for the experts who, based on knowledge acquired in the past and applying ritual practices established in the past, are able to interpret particular phenomena in the present to determine their significance for the future. All of this takes place within the totality and in the order preordained and controlled by the gods. One passage that supports this is Cicero's statement that the haruspices interpretations build on repeated observations of the same connections between events and the signs that pre­ cede them:485 for it [scientific divination] is the product of boundless eternity, and since the outcome of events has proven to be the same time and again, having been preceded by the same signs, a science has been created because the same results has so often been observed and noted. Generally speaking, I would formulate this as the main principle behind a sci­ entific perception of public portents: Roman public portents are concerned with the registration, systematization, interpretation, and potential expiation of present phenomenon relating to future events, based on past experience. Theoretically speaking, this perspective might boil down to a variation on one of the seminal phrases from Danish scholarship on so-called primitive reli­ gion: the past - the present - the future^ Danish historians of religion mainly use this formulation in connection with cult celebrations, as described by Vilhelm Gr0nbech in his Essay om kultdramaet.^1 Although Gronbech's exam­ ples in this work mainly come from Old Norse material, his perception of the 484

Cicero's polemicizing against portents and divination in the second book of Cic. Div. does not change the significance of the scientific methods he mentions in the first book. The academic standpoint in the second book repeatedly emphasizes the importance of coincidence in connection with the scien­ tific aspect of divination. The author polemicizes against the Stoic philosophers (2.35-36), challenging extispicy by referring, for instance, to the lack of consensus (2.28). Cf. chapter 3. 485 Cic. Div. 1.25: [...] est enim ab omni aeternitate repetita, in qua cum paene innumerabiliter res eodem modo evenirent isdem signis antegressis, ars effecta eadem saepe animadvertendo ac notando. 486 "fortid er lig nutid er ligfremtid" Cf. Hvidtfeldt (1958); Hvidtfeldt (1961) pp.16; 21-22; Pallis (1926). 48 ' Gronbech (1955) pp. 221-225; cf. Vanggaard (1985) pp. 95-96.

207 principles governing "primitive" religion also cover the Greek and Roman worlds, 488 and in my opinion, this theoretical formulation could promote an understanding of the special religious temporal dimension characteristic of Roman divination.489 Naturally, even in the field of scientific divination, history belongs to the past. However, it also embodies qualities of the present, in that it is systemati­ cally incorporated into interpretations of portents. At the same time it is also identified with the future because experts can foretell the divine plans for the future by systematically considering the historical, empirical evidence. When the present includes the past, and the future is divined by means of portents with tradition acting as the connecting link, then from a ritual and an interpretational point of view one could speak of an "omnitemporal state" in the per­ ception of divination - a sort of concord between past, present, and future.490 To sum up, Roman divination emerges as a scientific discipline grounded in its own special temporal dimension and characterized by strict professionalism, applying a special methodology to 1) observe various portentous phenomena, 2) classify this information, 3) apply critical criteria and 4) carry out compara­ tive analyses, and 5) perform diachronic investigations. The entire system of divination is grounded in a set of actual observations, and the empirical analy­ ses are carried out by religious experts who interpret the material, within the special temporal dimension, with the overall aim of understanding the world and establishing sacred and profane contexts. These same elements can be used to characterize modern science, even though the axioms of ancient div­ ination are fundamentally different from those of modern science,491 and even though modern science (normally) separates the establishment of profane and sacred contexts. Analysing Roman divination as a science creates a striking contrast to the way Roman portents are generally referred to and treated in modern scholarship. Several works are strongly influenced by theories of magic/superstition, and often introduce portents as the opposite of, or sometimes even a precursor to, a "higher" and more "genuine" and "developed" religion, meaning religious ideas and cults revolving around individual, anthropomorphic deities. The magic-religion dichotomy often implies a value judgment - a pre-religious state of Urdummheit - that seems slightly dubious in a scholarly context. This is because the dichotomy is an offshoot of early evolutionistic studies of so-called primitive cultures conducted by anthropologists and historians of religion. On 488Gr 0 nbech(1955)p.22O. For more on the temporal dimension and the construction of identity, see the schematic repre­ sentation in chapter 6. 490 To my knowledge, no one has yet thoroughly investigated the temporal perspectives in ancient Roman religion. For a central philosophical discussion of temporal perception issues, see Mead (1932); cf. Abbott (1999). 491 Cf. Wittgenstein (1989) p. 136: "Die Wahrheit gewisser Erfahrungssatze gehort zu unserem Bezugssystem". 489

208

this point especially James Frazer's classification in The Golden Bough492 has influenced much of the scholarship within Ancient History and the History of Religion. It is worth noting, however, that in Danish circles this dichotomy was, in fact, compellingly rejected quite early on by Gronbech. One conclusion in the paper he presented at the fourth international Congress on the history of religion, held in Leiden in 1912, was that:493 "Magic" is not only an ethnological misnomer, when it is dispensed with a liberal hand on facts only partly understood, - it has the mischievous effect of substituting a word for an idea, and thus relieving us of the trouble to understand. Nevertheless, more recent scholarship offers a wealth of attempts to classify the relationship between religion and magic/superstition.494 In the following, I will examine two models related to ancient Greek and Roman sources and attempt to apply these models to public Roman divination. Many works refer to Jonathan Z. Smith's theoretical model of the dichotomy between magic and religion:495

1 2 3 4 5

Magic Undifferentiated Impersonal External Taboo Relations of fear (such as avoidance or propitiation)

Religion Differentiated Personal or individual Internal Ethics Relations of reference (such as submission or petition)

Smith's either/or distinctions and the general contents of his five categories are fairly typical of this type of model, but when applied to the content and form of Roman public portents they are not only inadequate, but misleading as well. The meaning of category 3: "External/Internal" is unclear, but presumably "External" should be taken to mean that magic is directed towards an individ­ ual's surroundings, whereas "Internal" is supposed to mean that religion is directed towards the spiritual life of the same individual.496 This approach, 492

Frazer (1900), abbreviated edition 1978, pp. 63-79; cf. Tylor (1871) pp. 112-144. On the first step of Frazer's progress chart, magic was perceived as a sort of pseudo-science that was rational but erroneous, and which could not distinguish between things and thoughts. The second step featured reli­ gion, centred on the idea of divine intervention, and the third and final step introduced science as a replacement for the concepts of divine power. The value of the extensive material collected in The Golden Bough should not, however, be underestimated simply because of the work's rationalistic tone and choice of classification. 493 Gronbech (1913) p. 12. For details on Gronbech's rejection of the evolutionist approach and a scholarly perspectivization of his paper, see Tybjerg (1996). 494 For one of the most recent contributions, as well as a scholarly review, see Sorensen (2000). 49 ^ Smith (1978) p. 431. 496 The tendency in other models of magic and religion is the opposite, however. Cf. Versnel (1991).

209 however, is centred on the individual, and it therefore fits very poorly into the present context. Furthermore, the model's static character renders it unsuitable for demonstrating relevant religio-historical and/or sociological changes. Should anyone wish, in spite of this, to position public portents within Smith's framework, they would end up characterizing Roman divination as: Category 1: religion Category 2: magic Category 3: magic Category 4: magic and religion Category 5: primarily magic with elements of religion The obvious conclusion is that the magic - religion model briefly outlined above clarifies absolutely nothing with respect to public portents, and is indeed practically useless judging from this attempt to apply it to empirical material. Incidentally, this problem is not uncommon for models of this sort. Unfortunately, however, the model does seem to confirm the elegant, provocative, and often-quoted point that Smith himself made in a different context: [...] there is no data for religion. Religion is solely the creation of the schol­ ar's study. It is created for the. scholar's analytic purposes by his imaginative acts of comparison and generalisation.497 Nor does Hendrik Versnel's cataloguing of magic and religion seem very appli­ cable to Roman public portents, and his efforts to strike a more sociological pose do not really improve the distinctions set out in his four categories:498 1. Intention. Magic is employed to achieve concrete, mostly individual goals. Religion is not primarily purpose-motivated, or at most focusses on intan­ gible long-term goals which concern the collective issues of society. 2. Attitude. Magic is essentially manipulative. Man is both the initiator and the executor of processes he controls with the aid of knowledge which he has, or which is put, at his disposal. Religion views man as dependent upon powers outside his sphere of influence. This entails an attitude of submis­ sion and supplication. The opposition is thus one between "instrumental, coercive manipulation" and "personal, supplicative negotiation". 3. Action. Magic is characterized by the attention paid to the technical side of the manipulation, precision of formula and modus operandi. Professional experience is often required since the knowledge is secret. But if all the instructions are observed, there is an expectation of direct results. In so far as religion, on the other hand, admits of intended effects 497 Smith (1982) p. 11. 498 Versnel (1991).

210 (prayer for health, votives, private oracles), the results are never depend­ ent upon a professional specialist, though his skill may be required as a mediating factor, nor on the suppliant, but solely and exclusively on the free favour of sovereign gods. 4. Social/moral evaluation. Since the goals of magic often run counter to the interests of other members of the society, magic easily acquires the con­ notation of an anti-social or at least a-social activity, thus leading to the Durkheimian dichotomy: magic is immoral, anti-social, deviant, whereas religion has positive social functions, is cohesive and solidarizing.499 Re category 1: Intention - here public portents would he primarily religion, but also magic. Re category 2: Attitude - here one might initially characterize public portents as both magic and religion, but in a certain sense Roman public portents seem to be based on the presumption that the dichotomy described by Versnel does not exist. The thing is, the portentous phenomena themselves emanate from divine powers that lie "outside [man's] sphere of influence". Even so, at the same time public portents are "essentially manipulative" from a ritual point of view, since "Man is both the initiator and the executor of processes he controls with the aid of knowledge which he has, or which is put, at his disposal", name­ ly in the actual taking, interpretation, and potential expiation of portents. Re category 3: Action - here public portents would be magic as well as religion, as they are only believed to be effective if the prescribed activities are carried out, and the correct formula used, with meticulous precision. The procedure is expected to have the desired effect, but this completely depends on the gods, something that causes Versnel's dichotomy to break down. Re category 4: Social/moral evaluation - here public portents would be purely religion, as the Roman institution of public divination and portents is neither "immoral" nor "anti-social". Versnel goes on to claim that "As far as antiquity is concerned, the typical rites of primitive Roman religion have induced its characterization as a 'magical reli­ gion' ".500 This statement is misleading when applied to public portents, and it is impossible to reconcile Versnel's theoretical attempts at categorization with the results of the present study of Roman public portents.501

499 Versnel (1991) pp. 178-179, Versnel's italics. ^ V e r s n e l (1991) p. 179. 501 Despite more recent sociological terminology, Versnel's concepts of magic and religion do not differ significantly from Frazer's, and the question is: does such a perception of the dichotomy not lose its meaning entirely when detached from the evolutionistic approach that accompanies it in Frazer's work?

211 It is quite telling and somewhat problematic that public portents do not fit into the schematic representations of the magic-religion dichotomy but actually have more in common with the concept of science as defined in certain mod­ ern discussions of the topic. This is true, for example, of the presentation given in Religion, Science and Magic in Concert and in Conflict,502 which in this con­ text also demonstrates not only a continuation of (what I see as) the unfortu­ nate distinction between "magic and miracles" on the one hand and "true reli­ gion" on the other, as well as (what I see as) the similarly unfortunate charac­ terization of science as rational and magic as irrational: And we ask how the distinction between religion and magic serves - if it does at all - when we turn to the distinction between science (meaning sys­ tematic learning conducted along public and rational lines) and magic (meaning the opposite)503 [...] Defining magic and miracle or true religion invokes familiar distinctions, drawn from philosophy and sociology alike. How to define science apart from magic presents a more difficult problem. By science we mean systematic learning that produces normative and public results, based on rational argument from shared facts, whether in medicine or in physics or in philosophy or in history or in any other realm of inter­ pretation and explanation.504 Thus, an uncritical application of the magic-religion dichotomy to Roman matters seems to lead to ambiguities, and to the faulty or inappropriate nar­ rowing of perceptions of Roman religion in general and of Roman divination in particular.505 One of the most important considerations here is the notion that superstitio can be "translated" within the framework of the above-men­ tioned terminology applying to magic.506 This gives superstitio, which is in itself a difficult concept to clarify, an unfortunate quality of "superstition" in the modern, Christian-rationalistic sense of the word, making an already complex task even more difficult. Hence, besides disagreeing with Goar's interpretation of Cicero's views on portents, I also disagree with the catego­ rization of public portents as superstitio.501 As outlined in the analyses in chapters 2 and 3, that which Goar defines as "superstition" is actually offi­ cial Roman cult.

5° 2 Neusner et al. (1989). 503

Neusner et al. (1989) p. 4.

504

Neusner et al. (1989) p. 6.

505

An uncritical application of the magic-religion dichotomy can be found in several frequently

quoted works, such as Scullard (1981). 506 Naturally a detailed analysis of superstitio is far too extensive to be included within the scope of this study. However, since scholars customarily regard portents as superstitio, I do touch upon the ques­ tion from a sociological point of view, and in relation to official public portents during the Republican era. For more on this topic, see Grodzynski (1974). 507 G o a r (1972) p p . 32 and 101-103.

212 Another problem in this connection lies in certain theories based on compara­ tive etymological studies. One of these is Robert Muth's interpretation, 508 according to which superstitio is presented as a translation of the Greek word "ekstasis":*» Wenn wir trotz allem annehmen, superstitio sei die Ubersetzung von griechisch k|AJxife) dann ist auch diese Tatsache fur die Erkenntnis des Wesens der romischen Religion iiberaus lehrreich. So peinlich genau sich die Romer um die Erfiillung kultischer Verpflichtungen kiimmerten, so sehr erschien ihnen eine innere Anteilnahme, religiose Inbrunst, Gottesliebe, echte Hingabe an das gottliche numen unwesentlich, ja es befremdeten sie solche Gefiihls- und Willenskategorien. Die Ekstase, das Heraustreten der Seele aus dem Ich, weil es sich der Gottheit anheimgeben will, jede Form eines Enthusiasmus, setzt denn auch ein anderes Gottesbild voraus, das Bild einer vorstellbaren erhabenen Gottheit, die hochster Hingabe wiirdig ist. Deshalb ist die Ekstasis, die superstitio, gebrandmarkt als Gefuhlsiiberschwang und Fanatismus, fiir die Romer also Aberglaube. Muth's grandiloquent, psychologizing description is difficult to reconcile with the way the sources mentioned below use the word superstitio. Superstitio espe­ cially seems to denote inadequate recognition of the true nature of the gods, 510 and here it is worth emphasizing Varro's assertion that he who is governed by superstitio fears the gods, while he who is governed by religio is merely in awe of the gods in the same way that he is in awe of his parents - not fearing them as he does his enemies.511 One of the weaknesses in Muth's definition is his focus on religious emotions and his lack of attention to the behavioural, ritual side of the matter with which the sources are often most concerned. I prefer instead to take a more sociological approach to the ancient distinction between religio and superstitio, regarding both the distinction and the sources in light of the portents' function as an identity-gen­ erating institution (see chapter 6). Therefore, based on this study of public por­ tents, I would venture to suggest that the following definitions of religio and super­ stitio should be used in connection with divination during the Roman Republic: On the one hand, in situations where the Senate and priesthoods - indirectly or explicitly - approved of ideas and rituals in the public or private sphere, the term religio was used to signify properly observed cultus deorum, including the correct interpretation of divine matters. On the other, in situations involving

508Muth (1978) pp. 338ff.; cf. Otto (1909). *>9Muth(1978)p. 352. 510 Perhaps this could support a parallelization of superstitio with the Greek "deisidaimonia" rather than with "ekstasis"? Cf. Otto (1909) and Grodzynski (1974). 511 August. De civ. D. 6.9: A superstitioso dicat [sc. Varro] timeri deos, a religioso autem tantum vereri ut parentes, non ut hostes timeri.

213 ideas and rituals that did not - indirectly or explicitly - have the approval of the Senate and the priesthoods in the public or private sphere, and which could potentially be regulated or forbidden by order of the Senate, the term supersti­ tio was used to signify a type of improperly observed cultus deorum, including misinterpretation of divine matters. 512 According to this definition, superstitio has no fixed, predetermined content. On the contrary, it seems to be a religio-political, value-oriented variable that can be employed in a given situation to define and possibly regulate undesirable reli­ gious actions and ideas. Whether the various definitions and potential regulato­ ry measures actually had the desired effect is, of course, quite a different matter. Livy includes a number of passages that support such an understanding of superstitio. In connection with a terrible drought in 430 BC, Livy speaks of how the aediles fought against a growing superstitio of foreign origin, including the introduction of new rites based on prophecies made for private gain. The aediles were ordered to ensure that only Roman gods were the object of cultic worship, and only in the traditional fashion.513 In a similar account concerning the year 213 BC, Livy describes how people increasingly paid heed to foreign rites and "minor priests and soothsayers"514 as a result of unrest during the Second Punic War. He emphasizes in particular that Roman rites were being neglected by the women of the city.515 At one point the aediles attempted to clear the crowd out of the Forum and impound the for­ eign ritual objects. This attempt nearly ended in violence, and the affair led to a Senate order commanding anyone in possession of books with prophecies, prayers, or instructions for rituals to hand them over to the praetor urbanus before the first of April. In addition, no one was allowed to perform sacrifices according to new or foreign rituals in any public or consecrated locations.516

512

This definition is, however, purely sociological and therefore does not systematically cover the ways in

which the various ancient philosophical schools applied the concept. Cicero frequently defines superstitio as poppycock, as in Cic. Nat. D. 2.70; 3.92; Cic. Div. 1.7; 2.19; 2.125; and Cic. Dom. 105. In this connection it is difficult to discern whether, and if so to what extent, the various philosophical applications of the term superstitio influenced official roman religion and religio-politics. Livy's occasional linking of prodigies with superstitio seems to express scepticism in the specific cases concerned rather than any general assessment, and Livy more often uses the term religio in connection with public portent matters, cf. 21.62.1; 43.13.1-2. 513

Livy 4.30.9: Nee corpora modo adfecta tabo, sedanimos

na invasit, novos ritus sacrificandi vaticinando inferentibus

quoque multiplex religio etpleraque

exter­

in domos, quibus quaestui sunt capti supersti-

tione animi, donee publicus iam pudor ad primores civitatis pervenit cernentes in omnibus vicis sacellisque peregrina atque insolita piacula pacis deum exposcendae. Datum inde negotium aedilibus ut erent ne qui nisi Romani di neu quo alio more quam patrio 514

animadvert-

colerentur.

Livy 25.1.8: Sacrificuli ac vates [...]

515 Livy 25.1.6-12. 516

Livy 25.1.11-12: M. Aemilio praetori urbano negotium ab senatu datum est ut eis religionibus

ulum liberaret. Is et in contione senatus consultum

pop-

recitavit et edixit ut quicumque libros vaticinos preca-

tionesve aut artem sacrificandi conscriptam haberet, eos libros omnis litterasque ad se ante kal. deferret, neu quis in publico sacrove loco novo aut externo ritu sacrificaret.

Apriles

214 It is also typical, and consistent with the above definition, that in connection with the Bacchanalia scandal Livy underscores Roman integrity by having Postumius' speech contain a description of the magistrates' efforts to eradicate rites and ideas that were non-Roman or not officially approved,517 although the cult of Bacchus is not referred to as actual superstitio. Furthermore, considering Livy's description of the Senate decision itself-which shows he was well-informed on this point - it is remarkable (even if Postumius' speech and other elements were pure fabrication on Livy's part)518 that from the time the Bacchanals began to gain momentum and the organisation's social patterns and political influence began to defy Senate control, leading the Senate to introduce sanctions against them, the Bacchanals were treated by the Senate decision and in Livy's narrative as prava religio - on a par with superstitio?1^ Additionally, it is noteworthy that Postumius' speech clearly shows that the actual sanctions ordered by the Senate against the Bacchus cult were regarded as a potential cause of superstitio - that is, a misinterpretation of divine will - and therefore had to be legitimated, referring to divine approval of the Senate's countermeasures against the cult.520 The above definitions, and the linking of the superstitio and religio concepts to Roman identity and integrity, are further supported by the complex of laws Cicero proposes for an ideal constitution in his De legibus. According to these laws, distinctly new or foreign deities are prohibited unless they have been offi­ cially approved, and private worship may only include gods whose cult has been handed down from the ancestors.521 The examples demonstrate how, in certain cases, superstitio could be perceived as a threat to Roman identity, religio, mos maiorum, and res publica, and there­ fore obstructed by the Senate. On this basis - and in accordance with the abovementioned definitions - superstitio and religio can be regarded as significant ele­ ments in the construction of Roman identity, with superstitio often being char­ acteristic of "the others", meaning related to foreign, incorrect cultus deorum and misinterpretation of divine will.522 Another piece of testimony to this effect is Cicero's stereotypical remark denoting foreign augury as superstitio, whereas Roman augury is referred to as a science.523 Thus, both the concept of religio

517

Livy 39.16.8: Quotiens hoc patrum avorumque aetate negotium est magistratibus datum uti sacra externa fieri vetarent, sacrificulos vatesque foro circo urbe prohiberent, vaticinos libros conquirerent comburerentque, omnem disciplinam sacrificandi praeterquam more Romano abolerent. For more on the Bacchanals, cf. chapter 5. 518 For an evaluation of the historical material in relation to the fictitious elements in Livy's account, see Cova (1974); Toynbee (1965) pp. 394-400. 519 Livy 39.16.6-11. 520 Livy 39.16.10-11. 521 Cic. Leg. 2.19: "Separatim nemo habessit deos neve novos neve advenas nisipublice adscitos; privatim colunto quos rite a patribus <cultos acceperint>." 522 Superstitio is also used in the sense "incorrect cultus deorum" when Cicero applies the concept to describe Clodius' behaviour during the Bona Dea festival, cf. Cic. Do?n. 105. 523 Cic. Div. 2.76: Externa enim auguria, quae sunt non tarn artificiosa quam superstitiosa, videamus.

215 and that of superstitio play a role in (re) constructing and consolidating Roman identity when the Senate orders sanctions against superstitio while seeking to re­ establish and fortify religio according to mos maiorum (see chapter 6). The necessity of distinguishing between and evaluating superstitio on the one hand and religio on the other in matters of portents is also touched upon in De divinatione.524 In continuation of Cicero's views on portents as discussed in chap­ ter 3, I believe that the sociological definition of superstitio outlined above can also clarify the meaning of Cicero's final comment in De divinatione 2.148:525 However, I would like it to be made completely clear that the destruction of superstitio does not mean the destruction of religio [...] [2.149:] Just as one should therefore even promote the religio that is linked to the knowledge of nature, so should all shoots of superstitio be weeded out. Superstitio is pres­ ent, it is insistent, pursuing you wherever you turn: when you hear a sooth­ sayer speak or a portent recounted, when you make a sacrifice or observe a bird, when you consult a Chaldaean or a haruspex, when there is lightning or thunder, when something is struck by lightning or some other portentous phenomenon occurs. I interpret the statement in this passage as Cicero's distancing of himself from superstitio understood as non-officially approved private taking and inter­ pretation of omens. This could apply, for instance, to a few of the previously mentioned "natural" forms of divination, such as dreams, or to the form of vana superstitio mentioned by Columella in another context,526 and linked to the haruspices, undoubtedly alluding to the private, self-proclaimed, wander­ ing "street-corner" haruspices of dubious repute, whom Cicero also mentions in his De divinatione™ Opposite this type of non-official, private divination referred to as superstitio stands the officially approved Roman institution of public portents, for which the Senate acts as supreme authority. I take the above passage from Cicero to mean that in connection with such portents, what is practised is a justified religio, provided the portents involved have been approved by the official procedures, the priesthoods, and the Senate. I also take it to mean that the area of divination and portents may include a 524 Cic. Div. 1.7: [...] in quo iudicandum est quantum auspiciis rebus divinis religionique tribuamus; est enim periculum ne aut negglectis iis impia fraude aut susceptis anili superstitione obligemur. For Pliny's views on magic, see Plin. HN 30.1-2. 525 Cic. Div. 2.148: Nee vero (id enim diligenter intellegi volo) superstitione tollenda religio tollitur. ...; (2.149): Quam ob rem ut religio propaganda etiam est, quae est iuncta cum cognitione naturae, sic superstitionis stirpes omnes eligendae. Instat enim et urget et quo te cumque verteris persequitur, sive tu vatem sive tu omen audieris, sive immolaris sive avem aspexeris, si Chaldaeum si haruspicem videris, sifulserit si tonuerit, si tactum aliquid erit de caelo si ostenti simile natum factumve quippiam. $26 Columella Rust. 1.8.6: Haruspices sagasque quae utraque genera vana superstitione rudes animos ad impensas ac deinceps adflagitia compellunt ne admiserit. 527 Cic. Div. 1.132: [...] vicanos haruspices [...]; cf. Cato Agr. Orig. 5.4.

216 class of erroneous over-reactions and improper cult taking the form of super­ stitio, as could be the case in connection with portentous phenomena that lacked official approval. This interpretation is also in accordance with Cicero's concluding reference in De divinatione on the issue of superstitio. Here he refers to his own De natura deorum, in which he quotes Cotta, the Academic, as saying that the official forms of divination belong precisely within religio and consist of sacra and aus­ picia, combined with the knowledge the interpreters of the Sibyl and the haruspices have handed down concerning portents, that is, prodigies and the reading of entrails.528 The end of the text makes it clear that Cotta unambiguously sup­ ports this institution of public portents as a cornerstone in the foundation of the state, and as a form of communication between mortals and the immortal gods. Thus, auspicia, prodigia, and the reading of exta appear as inherited, official divination traditions that should be upheld and revered, as opposed to super­ stitio, which should be eradicated. 529 According to this interpretation of De divinatione's closing lines, Cicero does not refute divinatio as a whole, as scholars have often claimed.530 Conversely, he allows the sceptical academic view to approve official public portents with reference to the preservation of the state.531 To sum up, a more detailed analysis of Roman public portents shows, among other things, that in a Roman religious context, modern scholars often associ­ ate the concepts superstitio and religio uncritically and vaguely, with the pres­ ent-day magic-religion dichotomy. Furthermore, scholarship in the field seems to lack synchronic investigations into the actual practices and contexts relating to Roman public portents. At its worst, the application of the modern dichoto­ my seems suspiciously reminiscent of Lactantius, according to whose distinc­ tion religio veri dei cultus est, superstitio falsi.532 Such Christian criteria of truth hold little significance when the terms are used in the pagan sense. Nor were they particularly useful during the Roman Empire, when Pliny the Younger in his correspondence with Emperor Trajan referred to Christianity as superstitio. As for the treatment of Christians and ex-Christians, it was not questions of truth, but participation in the cult itself - in supplicatio to the Roman gods and the emperor - that determined whether they were executed or not.533

528 Cic. Nat. D. 3.5: Cumque omnispopuliRomani religio in sacra et in auspicia divisa sit, tertium adiunctum sit si quid praedictionis causa exportentis et monstris Sibyllae interpretes haruspicesve monuerunt, harum ego religionum nullam umquam contemnendam putavi mihique ita persuasi, Romulum auspiciis Numam sacris constitutis fundamenta iecisse nostrae civitatis, quae numquam profecto sine summa placatione deorum immortalium tanta esse potuisset. ^ Cic. Div. 2.148. 530 Cf. chapter 3. «1 Cf. Cic. Div. 2.70. 532 Lactam. Div. inst. 4.28.11. 533piin. Ep. 10.96-97.

217 As described above, the term superstitio was generally used in a derogatory sense and often described as vana and inanis. The term's actual meaning varies from case to case, depending on author, time, place, and (quite crucially) the intended aim of the description / criticism / countermeasure in relation to the relevant superstitio and its practitioners. At issue is, of course, the identity of "the others". The sociological definition of superstitio presented here defines it as a type of incorrect cultus deorum (meaning ideas and rites that do not have the implied or explicit approval of the Senate and priesthoods). This definition specifically seeks to take into consideration the potential varieties of meaning embodied in the concept due to its relative and dynamic religio-political func­ tion, which naturally calls for a more detailed examination of each individual context. Superstitio being such a dynamic concept, it is probably in this very quality that one can find a partial explanation for why the empirical material rarely fits into the theoretical, static and problematic models and generaliza­ tions practised ever since Frazer attempted to classify and distinguish between magic, religion, and science.

5. PUBLIC PORTENTS AND AGER ROMANUS VERSUS AGER PEREGRINUS Mommsen's hypothesis concerning Roman prodigies and the ager Romanus has, more or less, formed the basis of all subsequent scholarship on the sub­ ject.534 Mommsen claimed that prodigies were only approved by the Senate as public if they occurred on ager Romanus. Working from the general postulate that the prodigies expiated as public portents in Rome must have taken place on ager Romanus, Mommsen believed he could determine the areas included in ager Romanus by examining the geographical locations in which the prodi­ gies occurred. He therefore used the prodigies as a source to determine the extent of ager Romanus^ Mommsen and later scholars find support for this hypothesis and justify a rigid rule of thumb for the rejection of prodigies using the following passage from Livy: (43.13.6) Duo non suscepta prodigia sunt, alterum quod in privato loco factum esset, -palmam enatam in impluvio suo T. Marcius Figulus nuntiabat - alterum quod in loco peregrino: Fregellis in domo L. Atrei hasta, quam filio militi ernerat, interdiu plus duas horas arsisse ita ut nihil eius ambureret ignis, dicebatur.™ Several things make this passage noteworthy and problematic: 1) The text generally seems to formulate two distinctions: a) prodigies occurring on private property are rejected since they are not public, and b) prodigies are rejected because they occur on ager peregrinus. 2) The text is partially unclear in relation to these very distinctions: appar­ ently, Livy's second example not only took place on ager peregrinus (at the time Fregellae was a Latin colony and therefore not Roman territory), but on private property as well. 3) The reference to Fregellae applies to the year 169 BC, but the compre­ hensive material reports two prodigies occurring in Fregellae before that time (PT 43 in 211 BC, and PT 48 in 206 BC), both of which were evidently accepted and expiated without any problems. As will become evident, this also applies to various other prodigies reported from ager peregrinus.

534

Mommsen (1853). Concerning later scholarship, see note 539 in this chapter. Mommsen (1853) p. 168: Quae si recteposita sunt, apparet ea quae deprodigiis referuntur earn utilitatem habere, ut inde de agri publici finibus coniecturam capere liceat. 536 Livy 43.13.6: "Two prodigies were not treated as public matters: the one because it had occurred on a privately-owned spot - T. Marcius Figulus reported that a palm had sprouted in his impluvium the other because it had occurred on foreign territory: at Fregellae it was said that in the house of L. Atreus a lance he had bought for his son, a soldier, had blazed for more than two hours without the fire consuming any part of it." 535

220

4) The body of sources contains several examples of prodigies that were appar­ ently observed on private property, but expiated as public prodigies.537 5) The text also gives rise to a variety of questions: What sources did Livy use for this particular passage? Why these sudden, atypical details con­ cerning rejected prodigies? Is it conceivable that Livy's source here was not the tabulae pontificum, since the passage deals with non-approved prodigies? We do not know. It is, at any rate, indisputable that not only the course of events (meaning the rejection of the two prodigies), but also the reasons for the rejection came from Livy's source, as indicated by the subjunctive used in a causal clause as a sign of virtual oratio obliqua. Perhaps there were minutes of the Senate assemblies or lists giving information on the rejected prodigies, as well as those that were approved? We still do not know why Livy speaks of such rejections in this particular text. It may be because shortly before this passage,538 he expresses his disappointment at the lack of official prodigy reporting, and registration, in his own day. This may have made him especially meticulous in including the prodigy information the source(s) handed down from the past. 6) Finally, if the ager Romanus-peregrinus distinction was such a firmly fixed and well-known criteria as Mommsen's hypothesis claims, then why both­ er to report prodigies from ager peregrinus at all? The above passage from Livy seems far from able to supply any decisive evi­ dence supporting the Romanus-peregrinus distinction as a firm criterion for accepting or rejecting prodigies during the Republican period. The ambiguities of Livy's text indicate the author's uncertainty about various distinctions, and his unfamiliarity with an institution that had lost its great religio-political sig­ nificance by the time he himself was writing. The passage seems rather differ­ ent from Livy's other prodigy references, which are probably ultimately based on the annales maximi, and it is too insubstantial and too ambiguous to justify the formulation of a solid rule. From a legal perspective, the Romanus-peregrinus distinction became devoid of meaning after the Social War, since the entire Italic region enjoyed Roman citizenship rights from 89 BC onwards. At any rate, a more detailed investigation of all the available material does not prove that such a religious distinction between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus was a rule for the approval or rejection of prodigies.

537 1 have taken this into consideration in my definition of a public prodigy, placing the main empha­ sis on the Senate's approval of the relevant event, cf. chapter 2.1. 538 Livy 43.13.1-3.

221 Nonetheless, except for minor additions and adjustments, the part of Mommsen's hypothesis that applies this Livy passage as a fixed general rule for the approval or rejection of prodigies has been followed by several later scholars in the field, and it still lives on in some of the more general presen­ tations of Roman religion.539 It should, however, be stressed that other sources provide evidence that several cities and areas from which officially approved prodigies were reported presum­ ably did not qualify as ager Romanus when the actual episodes were reported. Most of these areas were Latin colonies, allies of Rome, or Roman provinces. It is often difficult and sometimes impossible to determine, with exact cer­ tainty, the Romanus or peregrinus status of the areas in question. One reason is the existing uncertainty as to the meaning of the term ager Romanus. Another is the general lack of information about the different cities and regions in the body of historical sources. Finally, the geographical information attached to the prodigies is sometimes vague and imprecise - like in Lucanis, in Apulia, in Sicilia, or ex Bruttis. The following lists do not include the areas of which scholars are most uncertain, and my figures are based on information and maps taken from Beloch (1926), Afzelius (1942), Toynbee (1965), and Macbain (1975).540 Latin colonies that probably qualified as ager peregrinus at the time of reporting: Cales(PT25;40) Ariminum(PT33;57; 112) Spoletium (PT 40; 124) Hadria (PT 40; 57) Fregellae(PT43;48) Alba Fucens (PT 48) Setia (PT 49) Suessa Arunca (PT 53; 54) Ardea(PT54;94) Lacus Fucinus (PT 90) Bononia (PT 92) Carseoli (PT 122)

« 9 Luterbacher (1904/1880); Wulker (1903); Krauss (1930); Rawson (1971); Ruoff-Vaananen (1972). Cf. Fowler (1911/1971) p. 331, note 8: "The rule seems to have been that no prodigia were accepted, and procurata by the authorities, which were announced from beyond the ager Romanus". Latte (1960) p. 204: "auch hier gilt der Grundsatz, dass Prodigien, die sich in peregrino oder in privato solo ereignen, den Staat nichts angehen". For a different view, see especially Macbain (1975; 1982) and Rosenberger (1998). 540 As a result, the information I have recorded differs somewhat from the conclusions in RuoffVaananen (1972) on this issue, since the author's presentation is strongly influenced by her desire to develop Mommsen's hypothesis.

222

Allies that probably qualified (up until 91 BC) as ager peregrinus at the time of reporting: Etruria (PT 33; 113)*» Praeneste (PT 35; 40; 79; 89; 90; 104; 122)542 Mantua (PT 40) Arretium (PT 54; 59; 109; 119; 122; 123; 124) Apulia (PT 40; 95; 122) Gabii (PT 40; 12)™ Compsa(PT 41; 84)544 Marrucini (PT 40)545 Tarquinii(PT44;112; 115) Volsinii(PT46;112;121;122) Arpi (PT 35; 98)546 Lucania (PT52; 107; 112; 122)547 Ferentinum (PT 94)548 Perusia (PT 110) Faesulae (PT 119; 121; 123) Ameria (PT 112)549 Tuder (PT 112)550 Nuceria(PT 112)551 Urvinum (PT 120)552 Vestini (PT 121; 124)553 Volaterrae (PT 123)554 Teanum Sidicinum (PT 79)355 Regium (PT 91; 124)556

541

Much of Etruria remained allied to Rome until the Social War.

542 Ally until the Social War. 543 Cf. Beloch (1926) p . 155. 544 Ally until the Social War. 545 Ally until the Social War. 546 Ally until the Social War. 547 After the Second Punic War, however, much of Lucania became ager Romanus,

cf. P T 52.

548 Toynbee considers this a part of ager peregrinus, whether it be the Ferentinum in Etruria or in Latium. 549 Ally until the Social War. 550 Ally until the Social War. 551 Part of ager peregrinus, provided it is the Nuceria in Campania. 552 According to Beloch and Toynbee, an ally until the Social War, whether it be Urvinum Hortense or Urvinum Mataurense. 553 After 241 BC, half of this became Vestini Romani while the other half remained Vestini socii until the Social War, cf. Toynbee. 554 Ally until the Social War. ^

Ally until the Social War.

556

Ager peregrinus, provided it is the Regium in Bruttium.

223 Foreign areas and provinces that probably qualified as ager peregrinus at the time of reporting: Gallia (PT 34; 36; 74; 100; 107; 113) Sicilia (PT 35; 40) Syracusa (PT 71) Aetna (PT 89; 92; 97) Sardinia (PT 35) Macedonia (PT 53) Liparae(PT65 [?]; 97; 125) Hiera (PT 125) Catina557 (PT 100) Cephallenia(PT81;89) Cyrene (PT 98) Liguria(PT36) Obviously these lists seriously undermine Mommsen's hypothesis, and later scholars have been greatly inconvenienced by these "exceptions", which account for a sizeable proportion of the entire prodigy material. Such a large subgroup cannot acceptably be labelled as exceptions to the rule, yet Mommsen believed that such "exceptions" could be explained as particularly terrifying prodigies that had occurred on ager peregrinus. The idea that Rome made exceptions of this kind in order to deal with unusually horrible prodigies, despite their having occurred on ager peregrinus, is untenable. A comparison of the above lists with the classification of prodigies testifies to the expiation of several very commonplace, and not very gruesome, prodigies that took place on ager peregrinus. One of the most notable scholarly developments of Mommsen's ager Romanus-ager peregrinus hypothesis comes from Eeva Ruoff-Vaananen.558 She follows Mommsen's path, posing the question:559 "Would the Roman Senate have accepted prodigia from Etruria, although it was ager peregrinus} Or should we assume that the respective Etruscan towns had been incorporated into the ager Romanus?" If one considers the entire body of sources, her vague answer does not seem convincing: "there is no evidence which would speak against the assumption that Arpi, Arretium, Faesulae, Tarquinii, and Volaterrae had been incorporated into the ager Romanus." It should, however, be emphasized that no evidence supports her assumption, either. On the contrary, a number of prodigy reports from non-Roman (and non-Etruscan) territories actually challenge it. While expanding on the Mommsen hypothesis, Ruoff-Vaananen asserts that several areas, hitherto accepted by scholarship as ager peregrinus, are actually 557 In Sicily. 558 R U off-Vaananen (1972). 559 Ruoff-Vaananen (1972) p. 152.

224

not ager peregrinus. She claims, for instance, that Fregellae is not ager peregri­ nus, as Livy states, but rather "ager Latinus", and that this is the reason why prodigies from that area can be accepted. Yet this still fails to explain the nonLatin "exceptions", and adding to the discussion a term ("ager Latinus") that does not, in fact, appear in this specific ancient context does little to clarify the issue. It is, of course, correct that from a territorial perspective Fregellae is ager Latinus', but that does not necessarily exclude the term and status of ager pere­ grinus in this context. Opposing this mutually exclusive relationship, Ruoff-Vaananen's interpreta­ tions imply that Latin territory can be equated with ager Romanus. In the reli­ gious sense this is contradicted by the above-mentioned passage from Livy (43.13.6) and the Varro passage cited below. In the legal sense it is contradict­ ed by information from Cicero of how Roman citizens occasionally settled in Latin colonies to avoid penalties or fines560 - which would not make sense if Latin colonies were regarded as being on a par with ager Romanus, since in that case their citizens would still be punishable. E. Rawson also develops Mommsen's hypothesis, suggesting that prodigies occur­ ring on ager peregrinus were not expiated. She explains the "exceptions" pardy as a problem reflecting the question of the annales maximi, and also submits the assumption that the relevant prodigies were indeed reported, but not expiated.561 As concerns the prodigies and the annales maximi, Rawson claims562 that the main sources do not go back to the annales maximi, but to certain special, local prodigy lists compiled by Varro and others, which ostensibly served as the direct source for writers such as Pliny. According to Rawson, Varro and Livy s sources supposedly included, among others, Antipater, Sisenna, and Sulla. Rawson further assumes that Antipater, Sisenna, and others used the accounts of portents given in the Hellenistic historiography as their sources, and that these prodigy lists were written after the Social War, at which time the ager Romanus-peregrinus distinction ceased to exist. Rawson argues that this explains why prodigies reported from ager peregrinus, which she considers non-genuine, resurface in Livy and Obsequens, proving that the annales maximi were not Livy's source.563 In this question, Rawson draws conclusions based on the rather asymmetri­ cal picture given by the sources, which do not always mention the prescribed expiations of the prodigies. However, as mentioned previously, I do not believe one can deduce that because the expiations were not recorded, they did not take place. I would contend that the expiation of the relevant prodigies was 560

Cic. Pro Caecina 33.98: Certe quaeri hoc solere me non praeterit, ut ex me ea quae tibi in

non veniunt audias, quemadmodum,

mentem

si civitas adimi non possit, in colonias Latinas saepe nostri cives pro­

fecti sint. Aut sua voluntate aut legis multa profecti sunt, quam multam si sufferre voluissent, turn manere in civitate

potuissent.

561 Rawson (1971) p. 163. 562 Rawson (1971). 563 Rawson (1971) p . 165. Cf. Macbain (1982).

225 understood. As is evident in the prodigy table, the sources mention expiations in several places, also in connection with prodigies occurring on ager peregri­ nus (see for example PT 46, 54, 89, 91, and 121). In view of the entire body of prodigy material, Rawson's idea of such local prodigy lists is based on an unsta­ ble statistical analysis - especially with respect to fertile mules in Reate.564 Incidentally, a couple of mules seem to have slipped, unnoticed, through the statistical mesh (one in Apulia, PT 122, and one in Rome, PT 148), further undermining Rawson's hypothesis. Quite apart from that, in comparison with the abundance of documented prodigies, the mule-based line of argument seems an insubstantial foundation on which to build a hypothesis of the exis­ tence of local prodigy lists.565 More important, however, are the examples of prodigies in ager peregrinus that were expiated. This directly challenges the hypothesis, as the expiation material certainly could not conceivably have orig­ inated in the Hellenistic historiography, but would more readily point to the annales maximi or some similar source. In short, Rawson, too, insists upon meticulous compliance with the Romanus-peregrinus distinction in connection with the approval of prodigies. She consequently claims that prodigies were reported that per se could not be expiated. I find this improbable, considering the public prodigy institution's principal idea that a prodigy signals a disturbance of the pax deorum that can only be reconciled through ritual expiation. It is obvious that the discussion of prodigies in relation to the ager Romanusager peregrinus distinction is complicated by the fact that in some cases it is dif­ ficult or impossible to determine the exact content of the designations ager Romanus and ager NN\ the content can vary depending on time, place, and author perspective, and on the geographical, religious, political or legal context. Originally, the term ager was used to denote independent territorial areas, as in ager Romanus, ager Gabinus, ager Tusculanus, and ager Lanuvius. Although in time these areas came under Roman domination in one way or another, in practice they continued under local government rule, and ager NN therefore remained the technical term used for the respective areas in prodigy matters. 564

Rawson (1971) p. 164: "Of the remarkably frequent Reatine prodigies, seven out of eight are con­ cerned with monstrous births of mules or foals: mula peperit in 211 and 190, three-footed mules were born in 182,179 and 163; a fivefooted mule in 130, and a five-footed eculeus in 203. The only comparable events are a three-footed ass in Calatia in 172 and in Esquiliis, and the Lucanian and/or Bruttian fivefooted eculeus referred to above. It is hardly enough to say with Luterbacher that the superstition may have had its home in Reate; it is an obvious sort of prodigy, while ortliche Spezialprodigien are more usually tied to a special monument or cult like the blood of St. Januarius or the miraculous Madonna of today. Instead, it looks as if somebody had made a special collection of the occasions on which the prodigy had occurred there." 565 Cf. Macbain (1975) p. 37. Although Macbain is also fond of statistics in this field, he refutes Rawson with reference to Varro, who was a Reatine himself and speaks of mule-breeding going on in the region (Varro Rust. 2.8.3-6), but does not mention the many mule-related prodigies occurring there at all (PT 43; 61; 69; 82; and 95). Nor does Pliny make any mention whatsoever of mules or Reate. These speculations could go on endlessly: perhaps Varro wrote about mule prodigies in his Antiquitates rerum divinarum? Perhaps Pliny was just not interested in mules? We do not know.

226 One good example is the following report occurring at a time (177 BC) when ager Crustuminus was also considered ager Romanus (PT 71):566 Livy 41.9.5: [...] lapidem in agro Crustumino in lucum Martis de caelo cecidisse; puerum trunci corporis in agro Romano natum et quadrupedem anguem visum [...] This religiously and geographically oriented perspective is also evident in the way Livy, in one of his prodigy enumerations (PT 77), mentions two separate show­ ers of stones (44.18.6): semelin Romano agro, semelin Veiente- and this at a time (169 BC) when Veii had already legally been incorporated into the ager Romanus.361 Thus, generally speaking, the use of the designation ager NN in the prodigy material must be seen in light of the existing religio-political/geographical situation, implying that the designation reflects an early perspective.568 The term ager Romanus also has a more legal quality that rests on the basic distinction in Roman law between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus as opposites. People living within ager Romanus were subject to Roman law, whereas people living outside were not. Furthermore, the legal perspective implies a distinction between: 1) coloniae Latinae, which were organized as autonomous city-states whose inhabitants (excluding Roman citizens) were regarded in Roman law as peregrini, and the land as ager peregrinus. This was opposed to 2) ager publicus and the founding of coloniae civium Romanorum, which were Roman colonies consisting of Roman citizens, modelled on Roman society and enjoying ager Romanus status. In addition, there were 3) socii and 4) provinciae, which had local governments and basically consisted of peregrini, although there were variations depending on the time, place, and various types of treaties, some including full or partial achievement of Roman citizenship. It is worth noting that only two passages in the material on prodigies specif­ ically refer to ager publicus. First there is Livy s report for 200 BC (PT 52), which mentions a five-footed foal569 in Lucanis in agro publico. This prodigy is men­ tioned last in the list of prodigies, in which the first prodigy (flames in the sky) also happens to occur in Lucania. Usually the prodigies are listed together for each local area, which might imply that prodigies observed on ager publicus were listed independently in the original lists. Nevertheless, this example is an ambiguous one, not only because "Lucania" is a slightly vague location,570 but also because "flames in the sky" are difficult to classify as occurring on either ager publicus or ager peregrinus.311 566Beloch (1926) p. 270 and map; Toynbee (1965) vol. 1, p. 172, note 1. 567

Cf. Livy 41.19.4.

568

Cf. Varro's religious delimitation (regarding auspicia) of ager Romanus as distinct from areas such

as ager Gabinus, peregrinus, bosticus, or incertus, Varro Ling. 533, see below. 569 Livy 31.12.7. 570

Much of Lucania became ager publicus after the Second Punic War, cf. Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, pp. 119-121.

571

Another explanation for the separate mention of the two Lucanian prodigies could be that two

different sources were collated - unless, of course, it is just a coincidence.

227 Agerpublicus is mentioned a second time in Livy's prodigy report for 167 BC, where a Roman citizen from the ager publicus in Calatia reported blood drip­ ping from his hearth for three days and two nights (PT 78).572 Another factor determining the way the sources use the term ager Romanus may be the late, legally oriented perspective that became prevalent after the Social War, which saw the extension of Roman citizenship throughout Italy. From this perspective, tota Italia might possibly be identified with ager Romanus.513 As already noted, however, the prodigy material demonstrates that in these religious matters there is no categorical "either/or" related to the Romanus-peregrinus distinction in Roman public prodigy administration - nei­ ther in practice nor in theory. The empirical material amply demonstrates that this distinction was not applied in practice. As for its theoretical use, it seems appropriate to draw a parallel to the information Varro gives relating to augur­ al practices in his De lingua Latina. 5.33: Ut nostri augures publici disserunt, agrorum sunt genera quinque: Romanus, Gabinus, peregrinus, hosticus, incertus. Romanus dictus unde Roma ab Rom

o; Gabinus ab oppido Gabis; peregrinus ager pacatus, qui extra Romanum et Gabinum, quod uno modo in his servntur auspicia; dic­ tus peregrinus a pergendo, id est a progrediendo: eo enim ex agro Romano primum progrediebantur: quocirca Gabinus quoque peregrinus, sed quod auspicia habet singularia, ab reliquo discretus; hosticus dictus ab hostibus; incertus is, qui de his quattuor qui sit ignoratur. Scholars are uncertain as to when this five-fold division arose, but the distinc­ tion between ager peregrinus and ager hosticus can only go back to the time after the meaning of the word hostes changed from "foreign" to "enemy" - a change that may have taken place in the fourth century BC.574 Studies of Roman religion often quote this passage from Varro, but only rarely include its final lines, which are highly noteworthy in this particular con­ text. In my interpretation of the text,575 ager Gabinus51^ is peregrinus according

572 Livy 45.16.5-6. 573 For a recent hypothesis on this issue, see Mouritsen (1998) and below. 574 Martino (1975) vol. 2, p p . 17-18. 575 Varro Ling. 5.33: "As our public augurs explain it, there are five types of fields: Roman, Gabine, pere­ grine, hostic, uncertain. Roman is derived from Romulus, from whom Rome was named; Gabine takes its name from the town Gabii; peregrine territory is subjugated and friendly land that lies outside the Roman and the Gabine land, because in these latter, the auspices are followed in one and the same manner; pere­ grine is derived from pergere, meaning "to go ahead": that is, from progredi "to advance": for into it their first advance was made out of the Roman land; the Gabine is similarly peregrine, but because it has aus­ pices of its own special sort, it is kept separate from the rest [of foreign territory]; hostic is derived from the hostes, "enemies"; uncertain is that [territory] which is not known as belonging to one of these four." 576 Scholars disagree on which areas were actually included in ager Gabinus. Cf. Catalano (1978) p p . 494-495; Mommsen (1887) vol. 3, p p . 598, note 4; Palmer (1990).

228 to Roman law, but differs from other ager peregrinus with respect to auspicia, in which field the religious practice is the same as within ager Romanus311 Regarding prodigies in particular, and public portents in general, it is worth noting that a certain type of augury was also practised in ager peregrinus, and that ager Gabinus had the same auspices as ager Romanus, even though ager Gabinus was, at the same time, regarded as ager peregrinus. Although the passage from Varro deals with augury, it is in this context natural to apply the same theoretical principal to public prodigies: from a legal, technical point of view, geographical areas can be classified as ager peregrinus while still being included in a religious system (the Roman prodigy institution's religio-political procedure and expiation) that is practised on ager Romanus. Neither theoret­ ically nor practically does one exclude the other. The existence of such a principal might explain the sources' many examples of accepted public prodigies from ager peregrinus, combined with the fact that the Senate's approval of the prodigies was the decisive factor governing the religio-political approval of public prodigies. The idea that Roman society did not distinguish sharply between ager pere­ grinus and ager Romanus in matters concerning prodigies is also confirmed by Livy's choice of words when dealing with such matters. Following an enumer­ ation of prodigies and the explicit notation of their expiations (PT 48), Livy states that "more than all the prodigies that were reported from peregrine ter­ ritory, or observed at home, it frightened men that the fire went out in the tem­ ple of Vesta; and the Vestal Virgin who was to tend the fire that night was flogged to death upon the order of the pontifex P. Licinius."578 It is also worth noting that the sources contain several examples of annual prodigy lists containing only reports from areas outside the city, including areas that were probably ager peregrinus at the time of reporting. Reports of prodigies (up until the Social War) in which the prodigies solely took place in areas outside Rome, including ager peregrinus, are as follows: PT 13: Lacus Albanus PT 36: Liguria, Gallia, several islands, all of Italy PT 39: Sinuessa, Lanuvium PT 41: Caietae [?], Aricia, Tarracina, Compsa, Amiternum PT 46: Capua, Cumae, Casinum, Ostia, Caere, Volsinii PT52: Lucania, Privernum, Lanuvium, Sabini, Frusino, Sinuessa PT 53: Suessa, Formiae, Ostia, Velitrae, Bruttium, Macedonia PT 54: Veii, Lanuvium, Ardea, Capua, Arretium, Velitrae, Suessa Aurunca, Sinuessa 577

For information on ager Romanus antiquus, see Ov. Fast. 2.671ti. (concerning Terminalia); Strabo 5.3.2 (concerning Ambarvalia); cf. Alföldi (1962). 578 Livy 28.11.6: Plus omnibus aut nuntiatis peregre aut visis domi prodigiis terruit animos hominum ignis in aede Vestae extinctus, caesaque flagro est Vestalis cuius custodia eius noctis fuerat iussu P. Licini pontificis (my underlining).

229 PT 74: Lanuvium, Privernum, Veii (Remens), Pomptinum, Gallia PT 82: Anagnia; Frusino; Reate PT 89: Praeneste, Cephallenia, Aetna PT 91: Regium, Puteoli PT 106: Ager Stellatinus PT 107: Mons Albanus, Lucania, Privernum, Gallia PTlll:TrebulaMutusca PT 121: Volsinii, Faesulae This list bears witness to a systematic interest in, and the systematic treatment of, prodigies occurring outside Rome, even for the years in which no prodigies at all were registered in the city itself. The same interest is reflected in the many earthquakes recorded in 217 BC. Cicero and Pliny give accounts of earthquakes all over Italy, and Pliny explicitly says that in a single year (217 BC), earthquakes were reported from 57 locations (PT 36). A significant element in the discussion of prodigies and the ager Romanus-peregrinus distinction is Macbains previously mentioned theory of "religious ostracism",579 which must necessarily reject portions of the Mommsen hypothe­ sis while simultaneously assuming that the Romanus-peregrinus distinction was used to justify the rejection of certain prodigies. Thus, according to Macbain, the rejection of the Fregellae prodigy in 169 BC can be explained as a political mes­ sage that the Senate was tired of immigrants from Fregellae and therefore seized the opportunity to establish Fregellae as agerperegrinus.580 It is unlikely that such a message would make any notable impression on the inhabitants of Fregellae in this particular respect, but the interpretation is consistent with Macbain's gener­ al argument, and with his hypothesis that the prodigies and their expiations con­ tain political messages of Roman supremacy aimed at recalcitrant, discontented peoples. Macbain emphasizes the following passage (concerning 344 BC, PT 17) in his discussion of the Romanus-peregrinus distinction: Livy 7.28.7-8: Prodigium extemplo dedicationem secutum, simile vetusto montis Albani prodigio; namque et lapidibus pluit et nox intediu visa intendi; librisque inspectis cum plena religione civitas esset, senatui placuit dictatorem feriarum constituendarum causa did. Dictus R Valerius Publicola; magister equitum ei Q. Fabius Ambustus datus est. Non tribus tantum supplicatum ire placuit sed finitimos etiam populos, ordoque Us, quo quisque die supplicarent, statutus. Macbain then concludes: This is the earliest recorded instance of peregrines (clearly distinguished by Livy from the tribus - the citizens) being included in a Roman expiation. It 579 Cf. chapter 1. 580

Macbain (1975) pp. 170-171. Cf. Macbain s detailed examination of the prodigies (1975); (1982).

230

is to be taken closely and in the same context with the Tarentine ritual of four years earlier. An unmistakable message of Roman religious and political hegemony is being conveyed to disaffected Latins.581 In this connection, however, one must not forget Rome's efforts to stabilize its relationship with these neighbouring Latin peoples, and from this point of view the above-mentioned expiation can be regarded as an incorporative action combined with a demonstration of Rome's religious and political power. For one thing, there was a tradition for this type of cultic association, as Livy also suggests,582 and for another, such actions served to (re)establish a common reli­ gious frame of reference. If one emphasizes the aspect of assimilation, the same mechanism seems to apply here as applies, for instance, when Rome annexed a foreign cult, making its incorporation into Rome's official state religion a sort of religio-political "justification" and demonstration of unity. (This issue will be discussed further in the next chapter.) In this light, the above-mentioned expiation in 344 BC and prodigies generally occurring outside ager Romanus and approved by the Senate for expiation - can be regarded as a kind of religio-political documen­ tation and consolidation of religious and political power and cohesion. Evidence of the Senate's religio-political influence throughout Italy in mat­ ters relating to prodigies can be found not only in the reporting of prodigies from ager peregrinus and their expiation in Rome, but also in prodigy expia­ tions that cover all of Italy. One example occurred in 181 BC (PT 67), when the Xv/n/Senate/consuls determined the appropriate expiation for a plague prodi­ gy: three days of supplicatio and feriae per totam Italian?.5S3 Thus, during the Republic, the institution of public prodigies promoted a religio-political cohesion between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus and estab­ lished a common religious frame of reference featuring Rome and the Senate as the administrative centre. As discussed above, in relation to prodigies Mommsen established the role of the ager Romanus-ager peregrinus distinction as one of fixed opposites, declar­ ing it to be a general rule, a main criterion in justifying the approval or rejec­ tion of prodigies. Since Mommsen's "general rule" relies on a single, problem­ atic passage from Livy and is also contradicted by much of the empirical mate­ rial, I believe that this rigid interpretation of the ager Romanus-peregrinus dis«iMacbain(1975)p.206. 582 [...] simile vetusto montis Albaniprodigio, cf. Livy 1.31.1. 583 Livy 40.19.5: Isdem auctoribus et senatus censuit et consules edixerunt ut per totam Italiam triduum supplicatio et feriae essent. Besides public portents, it is worth noting the repeated plundering of Proserpina's treasure chamber at Locri (in 204 and 200 BC), after which the Senate intervened and ordered the pontifices to determine the expiation rites that had to be observed, the sacrifices that had to be made, and the deities to whom they must be directed. (Livy 29.19 and 31.12). Livy likens the accounts of the 200 BC looting with the prodigy reports occurring just afterwards in 31.12.5: Curam

231 tinction leads to some distortion of the issue. Mommsen's basic point of view and his hypothesis are presumably dictated by the legalistic background and perspectives traditionally seen in portions of the German scholarship. Nevertheless, I still have no doubt that areas legally holding the status of ager peregrinus were able to have their prodigies recognized by the Senate, and thus officially expiated according to Roman practices. If one does not insist on the Romanus-peregrinus distinction being one of religious opposites in public por­ tent matters, a more satisfactory cohesion among the sources is re-established. Another aspect of public prodigies during the Republic also surfaces, namely the establishment of a common religious frame of reference surmounting legal and territorial boundaries with Rome at its religio-political centre. The way in which the institution of prodigies established this common framework, stretch­ ing even beyond ager Romanus, helped to create a religio-political balance between Rome and independent non-Roman territories. On the one hand, the Senate's institutionalized interference can be regarded as Rome exercising power towards non-Roman societies. On the other hand, it remains a conse­ quence of the way Romans regarded prodigies as an expression of an actual dis­ turbance in the relationship between gods and men - expiation being the only means of (re-)establishing the necessary balance between the realms of the pro­ fane and the divine. If one examines public prodigies from this perspective, it is not necessary to explain the prodigies occurring outside ager Romanus as "exceptions". On the contrary, they can be regarded as an intentional, religio-political incorporation of others into a religious aspect of "the Roman world".584 Another notable example of Rome operating outside ager Romanus in religious matters is the Bacchanalia affair. In 186 BC the Senate issued a decree intro­ ducing restrictions on Bacchanals, and many devotees of the Bacchus cult, both in and outside Rome, were arrested, and some even sentenced to death.585 Three complex questions present themselves: What actually provoked the affair? Why did Rome focus on the Bacchus cult in particular? Was the affair an extraordinary episode in Roman religio-politics or not? Despite numerous scholarly studies, these difficult questions remain largely unresolved.586 Modern interpretations of the affair differ radically, depending on where their focus lies. Some emphasize what, to the Roman mind, was the cult's out­ landish emotional, ecstatic, orgiastic nature, with reference to Plautus and Livys descriptions of excessive behaviour involving sex, drinking, violence, and insanity. Others prefer to seek explanations in the Roman establishment's fear of political conspiracy, social unrest, et cetera.

expiandae violationis eius templi prodigia etiam sub idem templus pluribus locis nuntiata

accenderunt.

584 Cf. chapter 6. 585 Livy 39.17.1-7; 39.18. 586 Cf. Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, p p . 3 8 7 - 400; Cova (1974); North (1979); Pailler (1988, including bib­ liography); G r u e n (1990) p p . 3 4 - 7 8 ; Beard et al (1998) p p . 91-96.

232

In the present study, the treatment of these issues is limited to only one aspect of the Bacchanalia affair, namely an aspect relevant to clarifying the rela­ tionship between public religion/portents and the ager Romanus-ager peregrinus distinction, and to the question of Roman religio-political identity and the Romanization of Italy. The contents of the senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus are summed up on a bronze tablet from Bruttium {ager Teuranus).387 The status of ager Teuranus itself at this time is unknown,588 but the decree is directed towards thefoederati and the regulations apply to the cives, latini, and socii, which also included Italic towns independent of Rome at the time. The Senate decree's promulga­ tion throughout Italy is also documented in Livy 39.14.7: in urbe Roma et per totam Italiam edicta mitti. The text on the bronze tablet indicates that the aim of the Senate decree was not necessarily total eradication of the cult, since it allowed the cult s participants to retain their shrines and perform their rituals in groups of up to five - provid­ ed they applied to the praetor urbanus and obtained permission from the Senate with a quorum of 100.589 Naturally, in practice this procedure and the way it was administered by the praetor urbanus and Senate could significantly reduce active worship within the Bacchus cult. Livy confirms the wording of the Senate decree,590 also mentioning the possibility of performing Bacchic rituals at ancient cultic sites or when certain traditional rites were called for.591 This testimony, combined with the fact that the cult survived despite the Senate's countermeasures592 - and the fact that long before 186 BC it had obviously existed peaceful­ ly in various locations throughout Italy593 - could indicate that the Bacchanalia affair should be regarded primarily as a power demonstration involving control and limitation of the cult's religious organization594 and activities. In my opinion, this interpretation is more plausible than is the scholarly view that the purpose of the Senate decree was to totally eradicate the Bacchus cult. 587ILLRP 511 (=ILS IS). 588 Cf. Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, p. 120, note 1. W ILLRP 511; Livy 39.187-9; cf. Tierney (1947); Sordi (1985) pp. 150-151. 590 Livy 39.18.7-9. 591 Livy 39.18.7-8: Datum deinde consulibus negotium est, ut omnia Bacchanalia Romae primum, deinde per totam Italiam diruerent, extra quam si qua ibi vestusta ara aut signum consecratum esset. In reliquum deinde senatus consulto cautum est, ne qua Bacchanalia Romae neve in Italia essent. Si quis tale sacrum sollemne et necessarium duceret, nee sine religione etpiaculo se id omittere posse, apud praetorem urhanum profiteretur, praetor senatum consuleret. 592 For evidence of the continued existence of the Bacchus cult, see Elia & Pugliese Carratelli (1975). 593 Cf. Plautus' descriptions of the cult; Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, p. 387; concerning the votum about a temple for Ceres, Liber, and Libera in 496 BC, see PT 1. Liber is normally identified with Dionysus, but the cult of Liber on the Aventine seems to have been unaffected by the Bacchanalia affair, cf. Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, p. 388; Gruen (1990) pp. 150-152; and Pailler (1988). 594 The Bacchus cult's recruitment of new followers was apparently unconcerned with social strati­ fication, and as far as we know its special type of organization had no precedent in Rome. This could be one of the reasons the Senate wished to control it, but that still does little to explain why the wish arose at that particular time.

233

It should be noted, however, that even after the affair itself, investigations of Bacchic cult activities continued outside Rome, for instance in Apulia in 182 and 181 BC, and in Tarentum in 184 BC, where the Senates religio-political authority in such questions was clearly demonstrated.595 These circumstances, combined with this type of persecution being relative­ ly atypical in Rome's treatment of foreign cults, indicate that the affair was probably aimed at displaying the Senate's authority, firmness, and ability to strike hard and fast - and per totam Italiam - in matters of religio-political con­ cern.596 This interpretation may possibly find support in the tendency, visible in some of the sources, to present rather theatrical, stereotypical descriptions of the cult and of the affair itself. Many of these include accusations of coniuratio, stupra, and flagitiaP1 giving the affair a certain quality of moral and reli­ gio-political overexposure, with Bacchus in the role of the whipping boy. From this point of view, the affair can be regarded as the Senate making an example, and going all out to demonstrate its power and its pivotal role in Italy's religious and political consolidation process. The Bacchic cult did not necessarily have to be stamped out, but it obviously had to be brought under Senate control. Even though the cult's emotional, ecstatic nature undoubtedly contrasted with certain traditional Roman values, the Bacchanalia affair does not represent a sudden religious break with the tolerance and incorporation of foreign cults that was otherwise rather typical of official Roman religion. In other words, the Senate's interference in the religious matters of independent territories was not exceptional, although the Bacchanalia affair is admittedly a drastic example that seems to revolve around something quite different, and something much larger, than an aversion to Bacchus and the nightly excesses of his followers. Occasionally, modern studies of the Bacchanalia affair express surprise at, and sometimes even denial of, the fact that Rome interfered in the religious affairs of independent regions.598 Yet consider the Senate's and indeed the entire religiopolitical establishment's interference in connection with the expiation of prodi­ gies in and outside ager Romanus. Seen from this angle, the Senate's repressive interference with the Italic Bacchic cults may seem slightly less surprising, although it remains a very different and much more radical manifestation. 595 Livy 39.19.-10: L. Duronio praetori, cut provincia Apulia evenerat, adiecta de Bacchanalibus quaestio est, cuius residua quaedam velut semina ex prioribus malis iam priore anno apparuerant; sed magis inchoatae apud L. Pupium praetorem quaestiones erant quam ad exitum ullum perductae. Id persecare novum praetorem, ne serperet iterum latius, patres iusserunt. Cf. Livy 39.41.6. For more on the Senate's powers, cf. Polyb. 6.13; see below. 596 Cf. Cic. Leg. 2.37: Quo in genere severitatem maiorum senatus vetus auctoritas de Bacchanalibus et consulum exercitu adhibito quaestio animadversioque declarat. m Livy 39.13.10-14; 39.15.6-10; 39.16.1-7, cf. Toynbee (1965) pp. 393-396; Cova (1974) pp. 97-104. 598 For the predominant view, cf. Galsterer (1976) p. 128: "Im Sakralwesen waren alle nichtromischen Gemeinden selbstverstandlich unabhangig".

234

As for the Bacchanalia affair and the ager Romanus-peregrinus distinction, as well as the issue of Italic Romanization, a fresh historical and historiographic perspective in the most recent scholarship on the ancient world seeks to find an alternative to the traditional treatments of these extensive and complex issues.599 Henrik Mouritsen refutes the idea that Rome interfered with the inter­ nal affairs of independent regions. He goes on to reject the presentations given by Mommsen and later scholars of the Italic Romanization process, which rests on the assumption that Romans and other Italic peoples had formed a national identity as early as the third century BC, implying that Italic peoples saw them­ selves as part of a collective state structure under Roman control.600 Based on a valid criticism of the obviously contemporary, evolutionistic, and now obsolete definition Mommsen constructed for the concept of "nationali­ ty", Mouritsen offers an alternative interpretation, which in many ways rede­ fines and postpones the process of Italic Romanization.601 This study will only discuss two major elements in Mouritsen's argumenta­ tion, both of which are relevant for this analysis of public portents and their role in, and interaction with, Roman society, including the construction of Roman and Romano-Italic religio-political identity. The first major element pertinent to my topic is Mouritsen's assumption that when Livy writes Italia and tota Italia, he actually means, simply, ager Romanus. According to Mouritsen, the designations Italia and tota Italia supposedly reflect a late perspective applied by Livy to the Italic issue.602 In one sense, Livy's later perspective is a tempting explanatory model applied to a complex subject. However, the hypothesis is also problematic in certain respects when seen in light of the Senate's management of public por­ tents and other activities outside ager Romanus. The principle underlying the hypothesis that views tota Italia as identical with ager Romanus rests on two episodes (both discussed previously in this study): a prodigy expiation in 181 BC, and the Bacchanalia affair in 186 BC. With regard to the first episode Mouritsen claims that when Livy - describ­ ing a Senate decree (quoted above) for expiation of a plague through three days of supplicatio and feriae - writes that the expiation must take place per totam Italiam, then due to the late perspective one must take it to mean only ager Romanus.m Several objections can, however, be made to this interpretation. For one thing, shortly before giving this information Livy says that the plague was so extensive there was hardly enough time to bury the dead,604 ^Mouritsen (1998). 600 Mouritsen (1998) pp. 23-37. 601 Mouritsen (1998) pp. 59-86; 73-175. 602 Mouritsen (1998) p. 47. This supposedly applies to Polybius' use of the term Italia as well, although in one instance, however, Mouritsen believes that Polybius probably does mean both ager Romanus and ager peregrinus (pp. 45^7). 6 °3SeePT67. 604 Livy 40.19.3: Pestilentia in agris forisque et conciliabulis et in urbe tanta erat ut Libitina funeribus vix sufficeret.

235 and, obviously, the plague makes no distinction between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus. He further states that the plague so seriously decimated the Latin allies that Rome had difficulty recruiting men for military service.605 This means that in addition to the social and religious catastrophe the plague caused in the city, it also led to a military problem that stretched far beyond the confines of ager Romanus. From this religio-political perspective, the Senate's interest in having the plague prodigy expiated in all locations ravaged by disease is obvious. In this case I am convinced that "per totam Italiam" is actually intended to mean "per totam Italiam".606 For another thing, Livy's perspective is admittedly unclear on certain religious points,607 but I still believe he is copying sources that (at least ultimately) go back to the annales maximi in his enumerations of prodigies, their geographical inci­ dence, and their expiation.608 On this background it seems peculiar that Livy's ostensibly "late perspective" should only be clearly visible in the above-men­ tioned example, and not in the rest of his prodigy material. Elsewhere Livy's prodigy material reproduces, on the contrary, an early perspective of his source(s) with respect to religio-political and geographical specifications (see for instance Livy 41.9.5 and 44.18.6, discussed earlier in this chapter). Thirdly, there is the question of whether Mouritsen's hypothesis would claim that the perspective issue also applies to an author like Cicero, whose prodigy reports include one in connection with the Battle of Lake Trasimene (in 217 BC) that mentions portents in the form of earthquakes in Liguria, Gaul, on several islands, and in "tota Italia" (PT 36).609 In this case the expression cannot pos­ sibly be equivalent to ager Romanus, and the " late perspective" explanation is not viable in this case either, since Cicero expressly states that he has this information from Coelius.610 The fourth objection revolves around a passage from Polybius (6.13), which unambiguously speaks of the Senate's authority to intervene in Italic affairs involving murder, conspiracy, poisoning, and similar offences. Once again Mouritsen refuses to accept that this could apply to Italian ager peregrinus, claiming that Polybius only wrote "Italia" because:

6

°5 Livy 40.19.6-7.

606 it

Would

only be meaningful for the Senate to limit the expiation to the ager Romanus

if

Mommsen's hypothesis on public prodigies and ager Romanus were correct - which I do not believe it is, as previously explained. 607

In connection with the proclamation of a dictator in Sicily in 210 BC, Livy (27.5.15) declares that:

[...] patres extra Romanum

agrum - eum autem Italia terminari - negabant dictatorem dici posse. Cf.

27.29.5. T h e rule that a dictator could only be proclaimed within the ager Romanus is presumably meant for potential application at a time when Rome might be attacked by enemies from nearby, hence pre­ venting a consul in enemy territory from appointing a local dictator - and naturally a non-Italic dicta­ tor was unthinkable in the original context. 608 Cf. Livy 27.37.6 (PT 47); 39.22.5 (PT 64). 609

Cic. Div. 1.78. Plin. HN 2.200 states that 57 earthquake reports were submitted that year.

610

T h e historian Lucius Coelius Antipater wrote a seven-volume work about the Second Punic War,

completing it around 115 BC. Both Cicero and Livy used this work as a source.

236 To describe the senate's jurisdiction "Italy" was a convenient term - and far more elegant than "the Roman territories outside Rome" [...] The statement of Polybius can now be summarised as follows: the consuls ruled in the city of Rome, while geographically external matters fell under the authority of the senate. Therefore, 6.13.4-6 does not list the powers of Rome, but the senate's sphere of competence. [...] Polybius is, in other words, not dis­ cussing the modern "Italian question" and cannot be used to illuminate it.611 Hopefully this conclusion is not to be taken as a general standard for modern source criticism, although it is, of course, regrettable that Polybius does not discuss Mouritsen's hypothesis. What is more, in this context there seems to be little or no difference between "the powers of Rome" and "the senate's sphere of competence". The point is that crimes commited in Italy which required a public investigation such as treachery, conspiracy, assassination, and scandals involving poison fall under the jurisdiction of the Senate. As demonstrated in this chapter, however, several religio-political examples testify to the fact that this jurisdiction included also Italian ager peregrinus. This leads to the second major argument chosen from Mouritsen's Romanization hypothesis: his interpretation of the Bacchanalia affair.612 Continuing along the lines of his first argument, he claims that the Roman prohibition against the Bacchanalia was only applicable in ager Romanus, and that Livy's account con­ tains no indication that it affected the Italic peoples.613 What Mouritsen is effec­ tively saying is that the Senate decree did not concern the independent allied areas or the Latin areas, and that when the decree (as reproduced on the bronze tablet from ager Teuranus) mentions socii and latini, it is only referring to the Latins and allies who have settled within ager Romanus. As he consequently con­ cludes:614 "According to this interpretation the SC de Bacchanalibus no longer constitutes proof of Roman law and jurisdiction being extended to the allies". Rather than explaining the decree's wording, this feels more like an attempt to explain it away. What is more, the conclusion seems difficult to reconcile with the measures mentioned above to control the activities of the Bacchus cult initiated by the Senate in 184 BC in Tarentum, and in 182 and 181 BC in Apulia - at times when the city of Tarentum and parts of Apulia were not yet ager Romanus.615 Ironically, from a religio-sociological point of view Mouritsen in some ways seems to agree with the very scholar he so vehemently criticizes throughout his book: Mommsen. The similarity lies in Mouritsen's basic perception of the Bacchanalia affair, in which he actually preserves Mommsen's distinction

611 Mouritsen (1998) pp. 4 6 ^ 7 . When Polybius (6.21.4) explains that consuls send their orders to the allied cities in Italy, it must, however, include Italian ager peregrinus. 612 Livy 39.14.4; 39.14.7; 39.15.6; 39.17.2; 39.18.7-8; Mouritsen (1998) pp. 49-58. 61

3 Mouritsen (1998) p p .

614 61

52-55.

Mouritsen (1998) p. 55.

5 Livy 39.41.6-7; 40.19.9-10; cf. Toynbee (1965) vol. 2, p p . 3 2 0 - 3 2 1 ; 397, note 2; 398-399.

237 between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus in religious matters. This is identi­ cal to Mommsen's (obsolete) legalistic perspective. In the same way Mommsen erroneously assumed that historical and religio-historical affairs were governed basically by legal and constitutional regulations, Mouritsen's interpretations of both the 181 BC prodigy expiation and the Bacchanalia affair in 186 BC are based on legal distinctions and discussions rather than on an analysis of the actual religious and religio-political contexts. This is somewhat odd, since reli­ gion and religio-politics are definitely the main theme in Mouritsen's two exam­ ples, whatever one's view of the details - and in the latter example of the many loose ends - of the episodes in question. Based on the prodigy table and examples already discussed above, an intrigu­ ing point concerning the ager Romanus-peregrinus distinction is revealed. A Roman prodigy whose expiation clearly involve people from ager peregrinus occurred as early as 344 BC. The prescribed expiation in this early case is sup­ plications, not only among the Roman citizens, but also among the neighbour­ ing peoples (finitimi populi) ,616 Even more seminal to this discussion, however, are the recurring expiations in Rome itself of prodigies reported from areas regarded as ager peregrinus. All in all, the public prodigy sources and the Bacchanalia affair demonstrate that in practice, the legal distinction between ager Romanus and ager peregrinus is not decisive in terms of the Senate's authority in religio-political matters occur­ ring outside ager Romanus.611 Given this, the Bacchanalia affair can be seen as part of an effort to consolidate Italy and underscore the Senate's religio-politi­ cal control, rather than an attempt to eradicate the Bacchus cult. Judging from the empirical prodigy material, public portents appear to have served as an identity-promoting institution that not only facilitated the integra­ tion of non-Roman cults, but also aided Rome's religio-political control and incorporation of non-Roman territories. As discussed further in chapter 6, this role could very well be one of several factors influencing the complex issue of Italy's Romanization. If so, it supports the view that Rome carried out early, systematic efforts to incorporate other peoples. From this point of view, the institution of public prodigies bears wit­ ness to the construction and extension of a sort of Romano-Italic identity in religio-political matters. Sources also describe how Roman colonies and military camps established outside ager Romanus were planned and built to conform to a typical Roman augural pattern. 618 One example that connects the founding of colonies with a religious organization modelled on that of Rome is a bronze tablet with inscrip­ tions concerning the design of a Roman colony at Urso (in Southern Spain),

616

Cf. PT 17; Macbain (1975) p. 206; Livy 7.28.7-8 (quoted earlier in this chapter). Contrary to the conclusion given in Mouritsen (1998) p. 49: "This brief survey has revealed no securely documented examples of official Roman intervention on Italian ager peregrinus." 618 Livy 41.18.7-10; Polyb. 6.27. 617

238

founded by Julius Caesar in 44 BC.619 Besides the previously mentioned pres­ ence of haruspzces,620 the inscriptions speak of such issues as the establishment of pontifical and augural colleges (mainly outlining regulations, status, and rights patterned on Rome),621 as well as the taking of auspices and the estab­ lishment of a pomerium. Such a ritual foundation is depicted on a relief from the Roman colonia of Aquileia.622 In the ritual, a furrow is ploughed to mark the colony's sacred outer limits, and the plough is raised to mark the gates.623 In conclusion, the study of Roman public portents can help shed light on the processes that played a role in Italic Romanization. Many different processes came into play within various fields of activity, including language, politics, social structures, and religion. This agrees with the findings presented in more recent archaeological studies,624 which voice reservations about the tendency in earlier archaeological and historical scholarship to support generalized ideas of homogeneous, sudden, massive waves of integration. On the contrary, the Romanization of Italy seems to have consisted mainly of slow, dialectic process­ es that showed significant variation from place to place (and even from one neighbouring town to the next), and naturally varied even more between urban and rural areas. Furthermore, local Etruscan elites could easily show clear signs of Romanization, for instance in language and politics, while simultaneously retaining elements from their own religious traditions. Volterra, for example, demonstrates a relatively advanced Romanization, linguistically visible in a number of Latinized Etruscan names625 and reflected in certain religious prac­ tices: by the end of the first century BC, most funerary inscriptions in Volterra were in Latin, and Roman and Etruscan cults existed side by side. At the same time, however, Volterra's aristocratic elite - the main players in the region's interaction with Rome - preserved typical Etruscan funerary cult traditions well into the Roman Empire. They continued to practise cremation and placed their alabaster urns in subterranean funerary chambers, sometimes decorating them with bilingual inscriptions. Thus, the Romanization of Italy was clearly far more complex than hitherto assumed, and the field lacks a more thorough, systematic investigation into the religio-political and identity-related aspects of the acculturation processes through which Romanization was achieved. Rome's conquest of Italy affected a wide variety of societies that differed in structure, ethnic identity, language, religion, status, privileges, independence, 619

Dessau ILS 6087, 64-67. The Roman name of the colony was Colonia Genetiva

Julia.

620 Cf. chapter 2.4. 621

Cf. Crawford (1996).

622

Aquileia, Museo Archeologico,

62

3Cf. Plut. Vit.Rom.

inv. no. 1171. Cf. Beard et al. (1998) vol. II, p p . 242-244.

11.1-4.

624

Cf. Terrenato (1998).

625

This applies to such names as the influential aristocratic family Caecinae, which is a Latinization

of the Etruscan "Ceicna", cf. Terrenato (1998) p p . 105-106.

239 voting rights, and civil rights,626 and much scholarly effort has been expended on clarifying whether Roman expansion was a meticulously planned strategy or the result of more arbitrary circumstances.627 It is, however, far beyond the scope of this study to evaluate the Romans' motivation for expanding, and ulti­ mately the discussion revolves around psychological issues, which are - like the psychological aspect of public portents themselves - impossible to clarify with­ out the concrete sources we lack today. I shall therefore simply conclude that throughout the Republican period, Roman divination was consistently characterized by various structures, includ­ ing one of systematic communication and interaction with non-Roman territo­ ries in matters regarding public portents. This is evident not only from the importance of public auspices in the ritual establishment of Roman colonies, but also from the role extispicy played as a standard element in Roman sacrifi­ cial procedure. Last but not least, it is also evident from the significance of pub­ lic prodigies. The prodigies and their expiations contributed to create a com­ mon religious identity and frame of reference, which was consolidated by a fixed religio-political procedure in Rome that might involve up to three differ­ ent priesthoods. A crucial element in this interaction was the Senate's status as the supreme decision-making body, approving or rejecting prodigies observed on non-Roman territory and sanctioning the subsequent expiations aimed at re-establishing the pax deorum.

626

Cf.Skydsgaard (1999). Cf. Madvig (1882) vol.1, pp. 16-17; Rostovtzeff (1928); Badian (1968); Harris (1979); North (1981); Torelli (1995); Beard & Crawford (1985); Mouritsen (1998). 627

6. PUBLIC PORTENTS, RELIGIO-POLITICS, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROMAN IDENTITY This study has focused on the way in which public portents interacted with Roman society, analysing and discussing the interrelations between taking, reporting, rejecting, and expiating portents. It has examined the various con­ sulting practices and procedures established and applied in the various con­ texts, as well as the communication channels between citizens, consuls, Senate, and priesthoods. It has also considered the question of portents occurring out­ side ager Romanics and the incorporation of new cults by means of public por­ tents. My findings concerning this interaction between public divination and Roman society indicate that certain contexts, structures, and components typ­ ifying public portents played an important role in the ongoing process of (re)constructing Roman identity in religio-political affairs, both internally and in relation to non-Roman cultures. The basis of this assumption is that, like any other society, Roman society was a sociologically fragile construction, constantly at risk of collapsing into chaos. Avoiding such social anarchy requires constant reproduction of a collective identity. I believe the mechanism of divination played a significant role in this process of identity construction through its ability to create a coherent whole, which - as demonstrated earlier - comprised past, present, and future, thereby linking contemporary society to its predecessors and successors in an institu­ tionalized, orderly, and meaningful totality. Over and above their relevance to the frailty of societal constructions and the latent threat of collapse, public portents naturally operated on an individ­ ual level as well. Here various psychological and emotional elements relating to the future played an obvious role. Unfortunately, however, the sources con­ tain little information that might shed light on these personal psychological factors, which is why (as mentioned in the introduction) I have been unable to engage in any systematic investigation of these factors. Nevertheless, as far as the psychological aspect is concerned, I am occasionally inclined to agree with Lucian, who in his work on Alexander of Abonuteichos claims that oracles, such as the one at Delphi, exist by virtue of the two great tyrants of human life: hope and fear.628 The concept of Roman identity is defined in this context as society's construc­ tions of norms, values, and modes of action, which are characterized as unique and fundamental to Roman society. What we are dealing with here, then, is a society's self-perception, or perhaps more accurately the contents of its Selbstbild. This term emphasizes the focus on the collective, official picture a society paints of itself, and which is used to identify that society, its distinctive

628 Luc. Alex. 8.

242

characteristics, and its members in relation to other cultures.629 It should be stressed, however, that due to the nature of the sources, this Selbstbild prima­ rily portrays the Roman elite. One of the most important elements in forming a Selbstbild is comparing oneself with other cultures. In this connection, Cicero expresses a significant attitude in De natura deorum: Roman society may be either equal or inferior in all other aspects, but in matters of religion, the Romans are clearly superior to other cultures.630 This attitude is also reflected in the author's previously men­ tioned comparison in De divinatione, where he refers to Roman auguria as a sci­ ence while referring to foreign auguria as superstition1 The same Selbstbild is traceable in examples of ancient insistence on distin­ guishing between, for instance, Greek and Roman religious components, or Etruscan and Roman components, despite the existence of a definite, signifi­ cant, and long-standing cultic syncretism.632 Although worthy of note, it is irrelevant in this context that the Romans' identity-related distinctions in this question do not necessarily agree with the observations made by modern his­ torians and archaeologists. It is, of course, not crucial to Roman self-perception that archaeological evidence testifies to, for instance, a very early EtruscoRoman acculturation.633 What is crucial, however, is that various sources main­ tain a distinction between Roman and Etruscan religious ideas, priesthoods, and cults, even though a number of Etruscan components - not least those relating to divination - had in practice been incorporated long before into Roman rituals and identity as fixed ingredients. Discussing the role of public portents in constructing Roman identity admittedly involves the Etruscan sci­ ence of interpreting exta and prodigia as elements in Rome's cultus deorum, but theoretically this remained separate from the Roman science, which dealt with auspicia. Still, the Etruscan science enjoyed considerable respect as an impor­ tant type of religious expertise that played a necessary part in maintaining the pax deorum and thereby sustained Rome's social identity. This also shows that the concept of identity is not an immutable component in any social structure, but one that is closely linked to attitudes - which are, of course, notoriously susceptible to change. Thus, the concept of identity must be seen in the light of historical events and shifting interactional and organization­ al patterns. On the basis of the investigations and conclusions in the preceding chapters, the relationship between Roman divination and identity will be further clarified, both theoretically and with empirical examples, in the following. 629

Naturally, the institution of divination and public portents is only one of many cultural con­ structions defining Roman identity. 630 Cic. Nat. D. 2.8: Et si conferre volumus nostra cum externis, ceteris rebus aut pares aut etiam inferiores reperiemur, religione id est cultu deorum multo superiores. Cf. Cic. Div. 2.76. 631 Cic. Div. (2.76): Externa enim auguria, quae sunt non tarn artificiosa quam superstitiosa, videamus. 632 Cf., for example, the episode involving T. Gracchus and the haruspices in section 2.3. 633 Cf. CorneU (1995) pp. 147-148; 162-163; Coarelli (1985) vol. 1, p. 177. See also Wiseman (1989) for details of Rome's two periods of Hellenization, during the Archaic and the Hellenistic periods of Greek culture, respectively.

243 As mentioned earlier, "identity" is defined here in a strictly sociological sense, that is, as a social phenomenon. Additionally, I intend to keep an appropriate distance from concepts like the Durkheimian school's "collective conscience" or the term "mentality", considering that such terms have certain personal-psy­ chological connotations that would prove pointless to the discussion at hand. 634 A simplified schematic presentation of my hypothesis on divination and public portents as an identity-constructing institution might look like this:635 DIVINATIO

past

present

future

mos maiorum tradition

res publica identity

pax deorum continuity

sanctions/ regulations

consolidations/ institutionalizations

legitimizations/ innovations

This schematic illustration presents central elements and mechanisms at work within the social contexts and dialectic relationships that typify the interaction between divination and society. In short, I have tried to illustrate the process­ es that make the social construct of divination a functional and meaningful institution. It is fundamental to my hypothesis that the established procedures, obser­ vations, and interpretations play a significant role not only in linking the pro­ fane and the sacred spheres, but also (cultically) in melding the past, present, and future into one continuous entity. The identity hypothesis and the schematic presentation show how divination operated in two directions - backwards and forwards. Their backward opera­ tion lies in the way interpretations and rites constantly reconstruct the past while systematically organizing contemporary, empirical observations in rela634

An exhaustive discussion of the scholarship's numerous interpretations of the concept "collective identity" lies outside the scope of this study. I would nevertheless like to emphasize the contributions in Berger & Luckmann (1966). More recent scholarly contributions on cultural theory include Assmann's model in Assmann (1992), 2 n d edn 1999, p. 131, which is applied to ancient material from Egyptian, Semitic, and Greek cultures (cf. pp. 163-293). For more on the concept of identity, see Heinrich (1979). 635 One can only make a purely analytical distinction between the various schematic components, since empirically they are too closely interrelated.

244 tion to the reconstructions of past experience. Their forward operation lies in the way cultic activities are carried out with the aim of perpetuating social prosperity and continuity. That is why the main component in divination and the construction of identity is the temporal dimension: past, present, and future, as described in chapter 4. In this particular context, the equation "past = present = future" characterizes the unique temporal perception in the religious sphere surrounding Roman observation and interpretation of portents. A temporal perception arises as the result of interaction, and in this case the temporal perspective is a result of the ritual and religio-political interaction patterns and procedures used when com­ municating with the gods via portents. The identity hypothesis therefore relies on the assumption that the religious temporal perspective "past = present = future" is fundamental to the portent institution that must constantly (reinter­ pret and (re) construct Roman identity and ensure Roman society's continued prosperity. Within this process, the temporal dimension is bound in a dialectic rela­ tionship with the religio-political dimension, creating three key elements cru­ cial to Roman identity: mos maiorum^ res publica, and pax deorum. These concepts are fundamental to the role of divination and public portents as a sus­ tained, identity-reproducing mechanism, since present observations, interpre­ tations, and ritual actions are deeply rooted in the continuous reconstruction of mos maiorum aimed at maintaining the pax deorum, and thereby safeguard­ ing the res publica. Tradition - is embodied in the institution's deep roots in mos maiorum and the religio-political measures instituted by society to maintain, and potentially rein­ force, Rome's collective identity. The reference system supporting this tradition is contained in various lists and libri, which contain systematic presentations of, and references to, the cultic activities, portent observations, and interpretations of the past. Identity - means the religio-political identity constructed by the institution's various social, religious, and political relations and communication structures. These lead to the construction of Roman society's Selbstbild and its relation to non-Roman cultures, which tie in with tradition and with the future interests of the community. Continuity - lies in establishing coherence and agreement between the past, the present, and the future with the purpose of maintaining the welfare of Roman society. Continuity and the pax deorum are guaranteed by means of practising the appropriate religio and divinatio. The identity-generating process also includes three sub-elements that are close­ ly intertwined: sanctions, consolidations, and legitimizations.

245 Sanctions - are an absolutely fundamental mechanism in the institution of pub­ lic portents. As described previously in this study, taking auspices, reading entrails, and observing prodigies can lead to social, religious, political, and mil­ itary sanctions. Public sanctions often followed breaches of social and religious norms or actions, as seen, for example, in connection with women's impudicitia or the incestum of Vestal Virgins, as discussed in chapter 2.1. Regarding the question of identity, portents can lead to sanctions relating, for instance, to Roman society's social and religio-political stratification. An example of this would be an interpretation of a portent that declares two plebeians cannot serve as consuls simultaneously, as discussed in chapter 2.3. Consolidations - are generally established by means of ritual repetitions, reli­ gio-political procedures, and patterns of interpretation. The communication and interaction patterns connected with taking, interpreting, and expiating portents serve to (re)create and ensure the basic relations and structures of society. Significant aspects of this are the consolidation of the traditional prac­ tices, and the Senate's authority and status as the central decision-making body in matters concerning portents - in other words, all of the various social, reli­ gious, political, and military ramifications upon which divination as an institu­ tion exerted a decisive influence. Legitimization - is also an absolutely fundamental mechanism, most clearly seen, for instance, in connection with acculturation processes and the intro­ duction of new cults. The legitimizing function is also obvious in connection with the observation of auspicia and exta, the interpretation of which could legitimize, for instance, military engagements. In relation to public portents' interaction with society, the institution helps generate identity in that it functions as a generally accepted interpretational model for, what Berger and Luckmann's sociological terminology would refer to as the socially constructed objective reality.636 Through society's continuous processes of internalization, socialization, and institutionalization, and by virtue of the prevailing religio-political definitions and frames of reference, portents were empirically accessible in Roman everyday life. The empirical ver­ ification and the science of portents was administrated by the Senate in con­ junction with the relevant religious specialists. In this context, "empirical veri­ fication" and "science" are to be understood as the religious knowledge borne by experience gained through observations, and subsequently organized sys­ tematically and transferred to the next generation of specialists, as described at length in chapters 2, 3, and 4. This body of knowledge was absolutely central to the institutionalization of public portents, and to society's religio-political activities and identity construction.

636

Berger & Luckmann (1966).

246 The institution of public portents externalized itself by means of systematic social and religio-political activities aimed at maintaining a balanced society and a social order. In that sense, it seems natural to regard the concept of pax deorum as an expression of the social order human society must constantly cre­ ate and recreate in relation to both the past and the future. By way of exten­ sion, it must therefore be concluded that the Senate, with its supreme authori­ ty to accept or reject prodigies, was, in a sense, able to decide the degree of imbalance Roman society would experience. In the following, I aim to substantiate the hypothesis outlined above and the schematic model presenting public portents as an identity-generating institu­ tion. I shall do so by empirically analysing two noteworthy examples: the intro­ duction of the Magna Mater cult and the Venus Erycina cult. I have chosen these examples because they clearly reflect the hypothesis's components of Roman identity construction, both inwardly (in the mainte­ nance of traditional patterns of actions, norms, and values) and outwardly (regarding foreign policy matters and the incorporation of foreign cults). They also clearly illustrate the establishment of links between the profane and sacred spheres, as well as links between the past, present, and future. Both examples, therefore, document major aspects of public portents' significance to Roman identity and religio-politics. As noted in the prodigy table, a number of foreign cults were incorporated into official Roman religion as a consequence of prodigies and the subsequent instructions taken from the libri Sibyllini. One prominent example is the cult of Cybele from Asia Minor, which was incorporated into Roman religion in 204 BC through the libri Sibyllini and the Delphic Oracle (PT 49). This example not only illustrates crucial characteristics in the construction of Roman religio-polit­ ical identity, but also sheds light on certain aspects of the acculturation process that came to influence Roman religion from the third century BC onwards. The background information contained in the sources on the introduction of this cult and consulting the Delphic Oracle emphasizes the social unrest, the hardships, and the many prodigies occurring during the Second Punic War. Hannibal moved from Spain across Gaul, successfully crossing the Alps. Very early in the war he had already won great victories in the Po valley. This suc­ cess was followed by Hannibal's triumph at Lake Trasimene (PT 36), where his forces utterly destroyed the army of Flaminius. Then came the Roman defeat in the disastrous Battle of Cannae (PT 37), and the following years also saw numerous Roman legions defeated while the enemy advanced into Italy. In 216 BC, Rome's misfortune in battle and the ominous prodigies that accompanied it (PT 34-51) led to the consultation of the libri Sibyllini and the Senate decided to send Q. Fabius Pictor to the Delphic Oracle.637 The choice 63/ Livy 22.57.4-5; Plut. vit. Fab. Max. 18.3; cf. Latte (1967) pp. 258-263; Gruen (1990) pp. 6-33; on Q. Fabius Pictor and Graeco-Roman historiography, see Momigliano (1962), 1990 edn, pp. 80-108.

247

of Fabius Pictor underscores the religio-political importance of the enterprise. Besides belonging to the prominent gens of Fabia, he possessed considerable military and political experience, and in his capacity as Senator he must have been thoroughly familiar with Rome's foreign and domestic policy concerns during this difficult period, and with the relevant Senate discussions. He was also renowned for his diplomatic skills and his comprehensive knowledge of Greek language and culture. Here it should be noted that Fabius Pictor's Annales Graeci may have been among Livy's sources, potentially giving him access to a contemporary source with first-hand knowledge of the situation from a central religio-political vantage point.638 We know from Appian that Fabius Pictor himself described his journey to Delphi.639 It is moreover evident that in choosing sources for his work, Livy considered the issue of contemporary sources. Not only did Livy prefer Fabius Pictor as his source for the number of dead in the Battle of Lake Trasimene because Pictor's work was contemporary.640 Livy also lamented his inability to find any contemporary statements regarding the "wr optimus" chosen to receive the goddess641 (see below). Fabius Pictor returned to Rome with a responsum from the Delphic Oracle,642 which he translated from the Greek, and which con­ tained instructions on how, and to which deities, sacrifices were to be made if the Romans wished to win the war. According to Livy's quote from this responsum, gifts taken out of the war booty were also to be sent to the Pythian Apollo: Livy (23.11.2-3): Si ita faxitis, Romani, vestrae res meliores facilioresque erunt, magisque ex sententia res publica vestra vobis procedet, victoriaque duelli populi Romani erit. Pythio Apollini re publica vestra bene gesta servataque e lucris mentis donum mittitote deque praeda, manubiis spoliisque honorem habetote; lasciviam a vobis prohibetote.

The men Plutarch refers to as "manteis" (18.3) who were consulted in this situation were probably haruspices and not, as the Loeb translation suggests, the augures. «8 Cf. Livy 1.44.2; 2.40.10; Polyb. 3.9.3-5; Plin. HN 110.71. «9 App. Hann. 27.116; 27.166. 640 Livy 22.7.4 641 Livy 29.14.9. The circumstance that Fabius Pictor gives Livy access to a contemporary source does not mean, of course, that this figure, holding such an important role, might not also have idealized and dramatized particular motives and episodes in the same way Livy himself did many years later. 642 For more on the Delphic Oracle, cf. Parke & Wormell (1965); Roux (1977); Rougemonts (1977); Fontenrose (1978); Maass (1993). According to the tradition, the first official contact with the oracle regarding the Republic's prodigies took place as early as 398 BC, namely in connection with the Lacus Albanus prodigy, cf. chapter 2.1, PT 13. (On the period before the Republic, see Livy 1.56.4-13.) Latte (1967) pp. 223-224 dates Rome's first contact with the Delphic Oracle to a petition in 216 BC, refuting all previous examples as belonging to "das Reich der Fabel" (p. 224, note 1). I must say, however, that this reasoning does not seem to have much bearing on the significance the oracle held in Roman religio-politics. Whether the oracle was actually consulted in 398 BC or not, the account of the Lacus Albanus prodigy confirms several assumptions: 1) it links the occurrence of prodigies to consultation of the oracle, 2) it testifies to the oracle's authority, and 3) it demonstrates the significance of a contact ini­ tiated by the Roman Senate to the Delphic Oracle.

248 Livy's narrative emphasizes that Fabius, who had also received a laurel garland that he was to wear on his journey back to Rome, there placing it on the altar of Apollo, painstakingly followed all instructions, and that the Senate ordered supplicationes.64} After the Romans defeated Hastrubal in 207 BC, won victories in Spain, and made peace with Philip V of Macedonia in 205/204 BC, they complied with the answer from the Delphic Oracle - given eleven years earlier - and sent a lega­ tion bearing gifts for the Pythian Apollo taken from the war booty. Having made an animal sacrifice to this same Apollo, the legation found the entrails favourable (laeta exta), and a responsum presaged a victory surpassing the one from whose spoils they were bestowing gifts upon the deity.644 When the libri Sibyllini were once again consulted in 205 BC following cer­ tain prodigies, the reply was that if an enemy sought to make war on Italic soil, he could be defeated if the Idaean Mother of Pessinus was taken to Rome. This was seen to be confirmed by the above-mentioned omens from Delphi, and the Senate therefore decided to introduce the cult of Cybele into Rome by exploit­ ing their good connections with King Attalos. A legation was sent to Attalos, consulting the Delphic Oracle about the matter on the way. The oracle replied that the undertaking would be successful and prescribed that the goddess was to be received by the vir optimus Romae.643 The members of the legation were given the cone-shaped cultic stone identified with Cybele/Magna Mater, and the Senate appointed the young Publius Scipio Nasica as "vir optimus" to receive the goddess. She was initially carried up to the temple of Victoria on the Palatine, but the Senate later ruled that she should have her own temple. After the war, a temple to the Magna Mater was therefore constructed (also on the Palatine). It was consecrated in 194 (or 191) BC, and games were instituted in her honour. 646 The annual Megalesia Festival featuring lectisternium and ludi was thus a "Romanized" celebration of the Magna Mater, with no direct copy­ ing of the original contents of the Cult of Cybele. Furthermore, as regards the introduction of the cult, it is worthy of note that the Senate placed restrictions on Romans wishing to participate in it. The god­ dess had been accompanied by her own eunuch priests, who ran the cult. According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman citizens were forbidden to take oaths as priests and priestesses of the goddess and were barred from tak­ ing part in the cult's peculiar rituals. The Senate only granted permission for a few ritual public processions on special holidays.647 Apparently even the slaves of Roman citizens were prohibited from participating in some of the Phrygian cultic activities. This is evident from the fact that a slave's self-castration in 101 BC was listed and expiated as a prodigy (PT 114), the action being categorized

643 Livy 23.11.1-6. 6

44 Livy 29.10.1-6.

645 Livy 29.11.5-8. 646 647

Livy 29.14.8-15; 36.36.3-5; an alternative to this account is presented in Ov. Fast. 4.255-72. Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.19.3-5.

249 as inappropriate human behaviour. Such behaviour was in breach of mos maiorum, and the Senate could decide to treat it as an unfavourable portent requir­ ing expiation in the same way as other prodigies (see chapter 2.1). Several sources incidentally reveal a Roman aversion to such self-castrated galli with their outlandish garb and their ritual oriental music with its noisy drums, pipes, and cymbals.648 The historical circumstances are a significant factor in clarifying why this cult, highly deviant by Roman standards, was nonetheless incorporated into the city's religion following the oracular instructions. The events clearly involve foreign policy issues, as the cult was "borrowed" from King Attalos, Rome's ally during the war against Philip of Macedonia. Bearing in mind the legend that the Romans were descended from Ilion, it is also possible that certain mythical or historical traditions played a role in the cult's introduction. This mythical relationship might have been considered beneficial to Rome's politi­ cal relations with Asia. Indeed, the idea that the Romans originally came from Troy existed at the time and was respected on both sides. According to Livy's account of consul Publius Scipio's arrival at Ilion in 190 BC,649 he was received there as an honoured guest, and the Romans were celebrated as descendants of the Trojans, while they in turn took pride in their origin. Ovid and Virgil also refer to the idea of Rome's Trojan ancestry, but it must still be acknowledged that there is no solid evidence of such links playing a role in the actual intro­ duction of the Magna Mater cult into Rome in 204 BC.650 Finally, Livy under­ scores the importance of Rome's prestige: the distinguished legation sent to col­ lect the goddess had been assigned five quinqueremes, allowing them to travel in a style that would reflect the Roman dignitas and earn respect for the city.651 To recapitulate, the introduction of the Magna Mater cult is an example of how innovations were institutionalized by means of public portents and legitimated - in this case - by the occurrence of prodigies. The foreign cult was, however, incorporated in a Romanized version, that is, in accordance with Roman tradition, and it was consolidated by regulating the Roman citizens' participation in the cultic activities. The example of the slave's self-mutilation being registered and expiated as a prodigy illustrates how a Roman sanction could be managed by means of public portents, and thus by the Senate, with mos maiorum and pax deorum as the legitimating factors. Consequently, the introduction of this cult established links between the profane and sacred spheres, as well as connections between the past {mos maio­ rum), present (the prodigies and the cult's introduction), and future (ensuring the pax deorum and guaranteeing the continuity of Roman society).

648

For instance Juv. Sat. 6.511-521.

649

Livy 37.37.2.

650

Ov. Fast. 4.251; Verg. Aen. 9.80-81. On Mount Ida as the birthplace of Aeneas, son of Aphrodite and Anchises, see Horn. II. 2.820-821; Gruen (1992) pp. 6-51. 651 Livy 29.10.4.

250 Another foreign cult that was integrated in official Roman religion via the libri Sihyllini and could be used to exemplify the religio-political (re)construction of Roman identity - both inwardly and outwardly - is the cult of Venus Erycina (PT 36). This cult was introduced as an expiation following the Roman defeat at Lake Trasimene, which was ascribed to divine anger with consul C. Flaminius' neglegentia caerimoniarum auspiciorumque.652 Originating on Mount Eryx in Sicily, this cult was adopted in Rome when the city built a tem­ ple on the Capitoline. Here, too, it is necessary to consider the historical con­ text in order to understand the introduction of this cult, its syncretistic form, and its identity-constructing function. The sources show that Mount Eryx was a prominent religious and military/political location653 that belonged to the Carthaginians from the late fifth century BC onwards. The strongly fortified temple complex654 became a particu­ larly important strategic position for the Roman troops seeking to take the area in 247 BC under the leadership of consul L. Junius Pullus. Hamilcar, however, recaptured Eryx, sparking an ongoing struggle to regain the area until the deci­ sive Roman victory in 242/41 BC,655 after which Sicily became a Roman province. Polybius provides evidence of the Romans' earliest encounters with the cult, describing the temple of Eryx as Sicily's richest and most magnificent.656 Diodorus also offers certain information that sheds light on the acculturation process and the question of Roman identity. This information testifies to Roman participation in the cult and the Senate's efforts to adapt to customs that were rather unusual when compared with normal Roman practices. According to Diodorus, Roman consuls, praetors, and other magistrates active­ ly took part in the Eryx cult not only by making traditional sacrifices and offer­ ings, but also by "indulging in pleasures and dealings with women with much frivolousness, because they believe that only by doing so could they ensure that their presence pleased the goddess." 657 This is doubtless a reference to the common practice of ritual prostitution linked to the temple of Eryx.658 Besides briefing his readers on this highly agreeable form of cross-cultural intercourse, Diodorus establishes the great religious and military importance of the place 652

Livy 22.9.7: Q. Fabius Maximus

dictator iterum quo die magistratum

orsus cum edocuisset patres plus neglegentia caerimoniarum

auspiciorumque

iniit vocato senatu, ab dis quam temeritate atque insci-

tia peccatum a C. Flaminio consule esse, quaeque piacula irae deum essent ipsos deos consulendos pervicit ut, quod non ferme decernitur, nisi cum taetra prodigia nuntiata sunt, decemviri libros adire

esse,

Sibyllinos

iuberentur.

653 Thuc. 6.2.3; Herodotus 5 . 4 3 ^ 5 ; Diod. Sic. 13.80.6; 14.48; 14.55.7; 15.73.2; 20.10.3. 634

Cf. ancient coins depicting the temple of Eryx and the encircling wall; Babelon (1885) vol. 1, p.

376, N o 1. 655 Diod. Sic. 24.1.10; 24.9-10; Polyb. 1.55.5; 1.58.1. 6

56Polyb. 1.55.8-9.

657 Diod. Sic. 4.83.6-7, cf. Strabo 6.2.6. 658

Ritual prostitution is probably a feature originating with the Phoenician cult of Astarte, which is

identified with the local Eryx cult, cf. the Phoenician inscription "to the mistress Astarte from Eryx", cf. CISem 1 (1) p p . 135-140, original translation into Italian: Lagumina (1877) vol. 2, P. 396. Concerning Venus Erycina, cf. CIL 1 (2) 2221; 2222; and 2223.

251 with evidence of Rome's pronounced religio-political interest in the Eryx cult. One of the details confirming this is his subsequent information that according to a Senate decree, Sicily's seventeen most faithful towns were to make contri­ butions of gold to the goddess, and the temple was to be guarded by two hun­ dred soldiers. As previously mentioned, the annexation of the Venus Erycina cult is linked to C. Flaminius' violation of Roman religion in 217 BC, when he disregarded the unfavourable omens from the gods. Flaminius ignored unfavourable auspices and unfavourable prodigies: when he was advancing with his legions against Hannibal, he and his horse tumbled to the ground suddenly and for no appar­ ent reason, and a standard bearer was completely unable to move the standard. Flaminius paid no heed to these omens, and within hours he himself was killed and his army annihilated in the Battle of Lake Trasimene. According to Cicero, whose source was Coelius Antipater, violent earthquakes also occurred throughout Italy while the battle was being fought.659 Back in Rome, Quintus Fabius Maximus brought the issue of Flaminius' religious violation before the Senate in 216 BC, and it is noteworthy that Rome's defeat at Lake Trasimene was attributed to Flaminius' religious infringement rather than to any incompetency on his part. 660 The case ended with the con­ sultation of the libriSibyllini, and the expiations prescribed (PT 36) included the construction of a temple to Venus Erycina on the Capitoline. A votum on the issue was made by Q. Fabius Maximus, justified by a responsum from the libri fatales indicating that the man whose imperium in the state was greatest was to make the votum. The responsum further underscores the importance of the correlation between military/political status and religious powers and duties. The Venus Erycina temple was consecrated in 215 BC.661 A particularly identity-generating characteristic that merits note in connection with the Eryx cult's role in official Roman religion is the link between the Aeneas legend and Venus Erycina as a cultic figure who could be mythically established as the original ancestress of the Roman people. 662 Her prominent position in the religious centre on the Capitoline may have been intended to highlight this aspect, and at any rate it showed that Venus Erycina (like Magna Mater) was not regarded as a typical introduction of a foreign cult, since such cults were generally relegated to the area outside the pomerium. With the incorporation of the Eryx cult into official Roman religion, the state accepted an already syncretistic cult that held considerable importance in 659

Cic. Div. 1.77; Plut. Vit. Fab. Max. 3.2; cf. Livy 22.3-7 for a description of the battle.

660 Livy 22.9.7; Plut. Vit. Fab. Max. 43', cf. Cicero's remark on the death of the generals P. Claudius, Junius, and C. Flaminius in Cic. Nat. D. 2.8: Quorum exito intellegi potest eorum imperiis rem amplificatam 661

qui religionibus

publicam

paruissent.

Livy 22.10.10; 23.30.13-14; 23.31.9

662 Diod. Sic. 4.83.5; Ov. Fast. 4.876; According to Thuc. 6.2.3, Eryx was founded by the Elymians, a Trojan people who had settled in Sicily, cf. Verg. Aen. 5.159-60, which presents Aeneas as the founder of the temple of Eryx; cf. Latte (1967) p p . 185-186; Schilling (1954); Galinsky (1969); Gruen (1992) p. 14-15.

252 the Sicilian region. Its incorporation led to the association between Venus Erycina and the Aeneas legend, both being central elements in legitimizing the adoption of a foreign cult, and in (re)constructing Roman identity. Some years later, a reinterpretation was made of the extensive ritual prosti­ tution linked to the cult on Mount Eryx: in another version of the cult in Rome, Venus Erycina became the deity of the city's prostitutes. The temple of this Venus Erycina cult was built in 181 BC not far from the Porta Collina663 - in other words, this temple was located outside the pomerium. We do not specif­ ically know why the temple was built, nor do we have any testimony of actual ritual prostitution in connection with the Roman cult. There nevertheless seems to be little doubt that the ritual prostitution originally associated with the Eryx cult is what linked this particular Venus Erycina cult near the Porta Collina with Rome's meretrices.664 At any rate it is especially notable with respect to the construction of Roman identity that Venus Erycina as the origi­ nal ancestress is situated within the pomerium, while in her capacity as protec­ tress of the prostitutes, she is situated outside it. All in all, the adoption of the Eryx cult into official Roman religion in the guise of Venus Erycina indicates an element of intentional identity construction that had a bearing on Rome's religio-political and military profile. What occasioned the introduction of the cult was a combination of serious disturbances in the pax deorum and a severe military defeat.This provides examples of important sanctions for military and religio-political action that disregard mos maiorum and cause immediate violation of the pax deorum. The military history and significance of the Eryx cult therefore came to hold par­ ticular relevance for the expiation of the events that took place in 217 BC. At the same time the innovation of the Eryx cult could be legitimated by means of tying the legend of Aeneas in with Venus Erycina, following the tra­ dition of Venus as the original ancestress of the Roman people. As was the case when the Magna Mater cult was established, this new cult also linked the profane and sacred spheres, as well as linking a mythical past (Aeneas and Venus Erycina) with present religio-political interests (the prodi­ gies and their expiations, and the legitimization of Rome's relations to Sicily) and the future (the restoration and maintenance of the pax deorum, meaning the welfare of Roman society). The adoption of the Eryx cult into official Roman religion could therefore be seen in the light of the Senate's religio-political interest in cultically and "his­ torically" linking Sicily and the Eryx cult with Rome, using this to justify their assumed interdependence. In short, public portents served to legitimize the introduction of the Venus Erycina cult on the Capitoline. This represents a manifestation and consolida­ tion of Roman power and a religio-political, identity-related documentation of Sicily's status as a Roman province. 663 664

Livy 40.34.4. Ov. Fast. 4.865-876; remedia amoris 549; Strabo 6.2.6.

253 Another noteworthy example of how Roman identity was asserted by means of public portents was the ritual sacrificing of Greeks and Gauls that took place in connection with prodigy expiations (PT 32, 38, and 106). These live burials at the Forum Boarium have frequently been the subject of scholarly debate. So far no one has been able to present a satisfactory religio-political explanation for them,665 and this study will contribute no further attempts in that direction. It seems sensible to link the sacrifices to military threats (as Cassius Dio does, cf. PT 32), but the issue is shrouded in uncertainty, and Rome does not seem at any time to have been threatened by Gauls and Greeks simultaneously. Certain sources allude to a connection between the sacrifices and prodigies involving the incestum of Vestal Virgins (PT 38 and 106), who are also buried alive as punishment. 666 The key element in both situations is that the founda­ tion and continuity of the Roman res publica, and thereby Roman identity, is seriously jeopardized by Vestal Virgins committing incestum and by threats from external enemies. Asserting Roman identity is also a significant issue in the above-mentioned Bacchanalia affair of 186 BC, as well as in the Senate decrees banning the Chaldaeans (139 BC) and the Greek philosophers and rhetors (161 BC) from Rome.667 Although the exact circumstances remain unclear, this must have been a matter of demonstrating and reinforcing Roman tradition and identity rather than systematically attempting expulsion - at least when it came to the philosophers and rhetors who converged on Rome in increasing numbers, par­ ticularly after the Macedonian Wars. At all events, the measure hardly targeted the many Greek philosophers and teachers who were privately employed in Rome. Moreover it seems clear that there was no widespread or deep aversion to the Greek philosophers: just six years later, three of Greece's most promi­ nent philosophers 668 were sent as envoys from Athens to the Senate in Rome. This would hardly have been a wise move if Rome were officially, consistently, entirely opposed to Greek philosophers. 669 A final example of the internal sanctions and consolidation of Roman norms and behaviour - in this case in relation to feminine castitas - is found in the introduction of the Venus Verticordia cult. The sources on Venus Verticordia must be considered in the light of two dif­ ferent cultic events: the consecration of a simulacrum to Venus Verticordia around the time of the Second Punic War, and the consecration of a temple to ^ Cf. Cichorius (1922) pp. 7-10; Hoffmann (1933) p. 26ff.; Latte (1960) pp. 256-257; Bloch (1963) pp. 101-103; Briquel (1981); Beard et al (1998) vol. I, pp. 80-82. 666 Although not at the forum boarium, but at the campus sceleratus. 667 Cf. Gell. NA 15.11; Livy Per. 54; Val. Max. 1.3.3. According to a Senate decree, two Epicurean philosophers were also banished in 174 (or 154) BC, but the reason remains unknown; Ath. 12.547a; Ael. VH 9.12; Gruen (1990) pp. 177-178. 668 Diogenes the Stoic, Cameades the Academic, and Critolaus the Peripatetic. 669 Despite Cato's hostile behaviour on this occasion, cf. Gruen (1990) pp. 174-177; Cic. Tusc. 4.5.

254 her in 114 BC. Whether there was any cultic connection between simulacrum and temple is unknown, as the literary evidence on these events is very limited. What is significant in this connection, however, is that according to Valerius Maximus,670 during the Second Punic War the Senate addressed the Xviri regarding the impudicitia of certain Roman women. The libri Sibyllini were consulted, and a decision was made to consecrate a statue in honour of Venus Verticordia with a view to turning the minds of the Roman women, "a libidine ad pudicitiam"', as Valerius Maximus put it. Unfortunately the sources do not touch upon the specific circumstances surrounding the introduction of the cult, but as it turned out, the problem resurfaced about a century later. Based on the different analyses in the preceding chapters, and on this chapter's empirical examples, Roman divination and public portents seem, from a theo­ retical, sociological perspective, to have been an identity-generating institution dealing with religio-political matters relevant to the state's domestic and for­ eign policy. More detailed examinations in this study have found further that this identity (re)construction had a dual function. Not only did the interaction of public portents with Roman society serve internally as a factor that pre­ served traditional values and was used to ensure and maintain social balance, and to assert Roman identity in accordance with mos maiorum. Public portents and divination also functioned externally as a dynamic factor used to help incorporate and consolidate foreign cults and promote Rome's policy of expan­ sion. It should be noted, however, that the "innovations" did not typically involve replacing old ideas with new ones. The integration of new cults was handled in an ongoing process in which, via interpretations in the present, the institution of divination reconstructed the past anew with a view to the future. From the perspective of identity, the stress hypotheses treated earlier in this study are relevant in the sense that particularly difficult and violent times can make it extraordinarily necessary to (re)create and establish a social identity. Nevertheless, crisis and stress hypotheses do not constitute an adequate expla­ nation, as a number of other situations can also call for the assertion of a reli­ gio-political identity. Examples already mentioned include acculturation sce­ narios, both peaceful and hostile. Thus, the identity hypothesis presented in this chapter makes for greater coherence in the sources: unlike the stress hypothesis, it explains such factors as the taking year-round of portents to guarantee and legitimize various social, religious, political, and military situations. It explains the many continuous, annually recurring prodigies and expiations that also took place in times of peace and were sometimes reported from non-Roman territories. Finally,

670 Val. Max. 8.15.12: Merito virorum commemorationi Sulpicia Ser. Paterculi/ilia, Q. Fulvi Flacci uxor, adicitur, quae, cum senatus libris Sibyllinis per decemviros inspectis censuisset ut Veneris Verticordiae simulacrum consecraretur, quofacilius virginum mulierumque mens a libidine ad pudicitiam converteretur, et ex omnibus matronis centum, ex centum autem decern sorte ductae de sanctissima femina iudicium facerent, cunctis castitate praelata est. Cf. Solin. 1.126.

255 applying the identity hypothesis uncovers a mechanism that fulfilled Roman society's demand for social order, stability, and continuity - a demand that also prevailed outside times of crisis. In this light, divination and public portents were part of an apparatus that guaranteed Roman norms, values, and actions, and indeed the continuity of Roman society itself. A final conclusion, once again based on empirical examples and the identi­ ty hypothesis, is that the acculturation processes not only played a role in changing Roman religion by adding new elements, but also threw Roman iden­ tity into relief. This becomes evident, for instance, in an examination of the Magna Mater cult's introduction into Rome: on the one hand, the cult was adopted and incorporated at the highest official level, while on the other, the Senate sought to curb the cult by limiting Roman participation in its originally Phrygian rituals. A similar approach is found in Rome's adoption of the Venus Erycina cult, with a temple on the Capitoline on the one hand, and the non-inclusion of the Eryx cult's ritual prostitution on the other. Here, however, we also see a sort of reinterpretation in connection with the introduction of an alternative Venus Erycina cult for Rome's prostitutes. In closing, I believe that divination and public portents could and did play an important role in demonstrations of power and assertion of Roman identity in connection with the Senate's various religio-political decisions and controls concerning foreign influences on Roman religion. This aspect must be regard­ ed as a significant part of the acculturation that unfolded in Roman society. The processes of acculturation are sometimes simplified and misrepresented as pas­ sively receptive and strictly "positive" assimilation. In connection with such misrepresentations, scholars sometimes tend to emphasize a deterioration or a decline in the importance of Roman religion in the later years of the Republic.671 A detailed examination of the substantial efforts (and pages) scholars have devoted to this topic would be far too exten­ sive to be included in the present study. Even so, it is noteworthy that sources like the prodigy lists seem to contain little or no convincing evidence to back the common perception of Roman religion's demise.672 Despite the minor decrease in the number of public prodigies, and despite Livy's and Cicero's remarks on, and complaints about, the waning significance of public portents,673 the conclusion based on the many examples in this study is that the institution of public portents does not seem to have deteriorated sig­ nificantly during the Late Republic.674 Thus, when it comes to divination and 671

Cf. this study, chapter 1. For other views, however, see Liebeschuetz (1979); Rosenberger (1998)

chapter IV; Beard et al. (1998). 672 Cf. P T 80-150. 673

Livy 43.13.1; Cic. Div. 1.25; Cic. Nat D. 2.9; Cic. Leg. 2.23. Although Livy, Cicero, and others point

out that some of the public portents have fallen into obscurity, as explained earlier they did pass on frag­ ments that clarify the official Roman institution of public portents as it operated throughout the Republic. 674

Pliny does, however, give a good example of how certain ideas relating to public portents

changed, cf. Plin. HN 7.34: Olim androgynos vocatos et in prodigiis habitos, nunc vero in deliciis.

256 public portents, the deterioration so often mentioned by modern scholars should be seen as more of a transformation. This transformation did not become clear until the beginning of the Roman Empire, a period that witnessed a shift from public portents - relevant to society as a whole - to private (and, increasingly, favourable) portents - relevant to the emperor's personal life and situation. The transformation was contingent upon the existence of a new polit­ ical order, manifested in the changeover from one form of government to another, the shift from Republic to Empire. Unfortunately, however, the vari­ ous perspectives this era offers for studying portents and their significance to Roman identity and religio-politics fall outside the scope of this work and will have to be pursued elsewhere.

CONCLUSION Throughout this work I have sought to demonstrate how the institution of pub­ lic portents during the Republic was related to specific actions, norms, and val­ ues that were of crucial importance to Roman society, not only in terms of reli­ gion, but also historically and sociologically. The study has examined how the institutionalization of divination and public portents was inextricably linked to the political organization of the Roman Republic. Auspicia, prodigia, and the reading of exta were related to a wide variety of public actions connected with social, religious, political, and military matters. The investigation of the sources demonstrates that ritualized behaviour, meticulous observance of customs, and religious technical know-how was of fundamental importance in the actual handling of auspicia, exta, and prodigia in Roman society. Similarly, the considerable emphasis placed on the ritual expia­ tion of certain public prodigies shows that behaviour and standards of conduct were central components in the administration of divination and public por­ tents. Activities that had been carried out against the will of the gods were detri­ mental to the welfare of society. This behavioural aspect of Roman religion in general, and of the institution of public portents in particular, is one of the most important reasons why the present study - to the extent the fragmentary sources have allowed it - has endeavoured to combine a historical and religio-historical diachronic approach with a sociological synchronic perspective. As a result, this work contains discussions and analyses that take issue with a number of views prevalent among modern scholarship dealing with the subject in question: The issues treated include the so-called stress hypotheses and manipulation hypotheses used by a number of scholars to interpret public portents. The explanatory validity of these hypotheses is, however, limited both in scope and in time, and as demonstrated, religio-historical and historical interpretations seem to overlook certain sociological aspects connected with the institution of public portents. Whether one focuses on psychic stress or political manipula­ tion, it is a consequence of the momentary nature of these generally accepted hypotheses that they ignore certain sociological mechanisms of the institution and society's ongoing and incontestable demand for compliance with the reli­ gious and political obligation to observe, interpret, and expiate portents. In the same way that the augur defined a templum, establishing its legitima­ cy as a sacred area for the performance of religious and political activities, the entire area of divination and public portents in its institutionalized form defines and establishes the legitimacy of various social, religious, political, and military decisions significant to the Roman res publica. These institutionalized religio-political behavioural patterns were not meas­ ures that could be set aside, for instance in times of peace and stability or in sit­ uations where it would seem politically convenient. Omissions or negligence in connection with taking, interpreting, or expiating portents could, in itself, con-

258 stitute a particularly unfavourable omen. That is why an affair like the Bibulus controversy - however one might view the political circumstances - demon­ strates that even in critical situations near the end of the Republic, ignoring portents and religio-political procedure was a very serious matter indeed. The same conclusion must also be reached in the matter of Cicero's house: howev­ er one might assess the religio-political disputes and the related speeches and underlying motivations, the whole affair, and the procedures themselves, demonstrate the significance of public portents - even in the later years of the Republic. By extension, and in opposition to some of the views held by other scholars, I conclude that Cicero was not necessarily a hypocritical manipulator in matters concerning portents, nor did he necessarily undergo any particular process of personal development during which philosophy replaced religion. As I have clarified, scholarship's general assessments and barely hidden indignation regarding the subject of Cicero and public portents seem to lack a systematic, context-related investigation of how Cicero's views on portents are, above all, dictated by the difference between Greek philosophy and Roman religion, and by the difference between theory and practice. Cicero treats divination based on two different points of view and in two different contexts. The way he deals with divination and public portents in his speeches De domo sua and De haruspicum responso springs from a religio-political perspective that is rooted in the mos maiorum, whereas the way he deals with the subject in De divinatione and De natura deorum springs from a philosophical perspective rooted in the Graeco-Roman acculturation process. On the one hand we meet Cicero, the disseminator of Greek philosophy, examining and polemicizing against various (im)possibilities relating to portents. On the other we meet Cicero, the politi­ cal orator, treating religio-political disputes on the basis of established Roman religious practices. The decisive factor in the latter case is the procedure of the Senate and priesthoods, combined with the cult and its historical foundation. In that connection, the potential philosophical (im)probability of the portents is irrelevant. In this discussion, it is obvious that as a source, Cicero's various statements must be thoroughly evaluated in order to clarify various philosophical and polemical statements and their cultic validity. Despite this, it is just as clear that even Cicero's highly polemical statements contained various elements and ref­ erences that held actual cultic significance. When the author derides measures like examining the caput iocineris, or mocks the expiation of portents based on mice nibbling on gold in a temple, surely he could not believe his readers would find it amusing unless he were alluding to existing ideas and procedures related to public portents. As will also have become clear during the study, a critical assessment of Cicero as a source must conclude that much of the factu­ al information deducible from De divinatione and his other works is actually confirmed by other sources written by authors whose intentions were very dif­ ferent from Cicero's.

259 By applying a sociological, synchronic perspective to the issue of Cicero's views on portents, I believe it is possible to establish greater coherence and congruity between the sources. A sociological examination of the sources and their various obscure points and problems calls attention to contextual cir­ cumstances and religio-political realities rather than to Cicero's personality. Hence, on this point, the study has sought to eliminate Cicero's alleged selfcontradictions, dilemma, and hypocrisy concerning religio-politics. As for my means and methods, I have aimed to avoid the restricted methodology and the evolutionist thinking that underlies much of previous scholarship and, not least, I have shunned the tendency to apply an angle that makes the feelings, beliefs, or superstitions of the individual - rather than Roman society's ritual actions and religio-political procedures - the touchstone of how religio(n) is perceived. As further regards this particular question, I disagree with the modern theorization on divination and public portents as varieties of superstition or magic. I have sought to demonstrate how some of the modern presentations constrict the scholarly perspective on Roman divination and public portents with their uncritical application of the magic-religion dichotomy and the concepts "rationality" and "irrationality". Instead, I also approach this issue from a more sociological position, exam­ ining the question of the ancient distinction between religio and superstitio with respect to public portents, and analysing the relationship between these two concepts in light of the function of divination as an identity-constructing insti­ tution. This leads to the presentation of definitions of religio and superstitio, focusing on the way these concepts are embedded in the religio-political pro­ cedures. Religio includes the Senate's and priesthoods' accepted ideas and rit­ uals applying to the public and private spheres, and can potentially be pro­ moted or regulated by means of Senate decisions. Focus on religio therefore implies the sense of proper cultus deorum, including appropriate rituals and correct interpretation of divine matters. Superstitio, on the other hand, includes ideas and rituals that are not accepted by the Senate and priesthoods for appli­ cation in the public or private sphere. Such ideas and rituals can potentially be forbidden or regulated by Senate orders. Superstitio is focused on as a type of improper cultus deorum, including inappropriate rituals and faulty interpreta­ tions in divine matters. In relation to these definitions, my interpretation of a passage such as Cicero's final remark in De divinatione sees the author distanc­ ing himself from private divination and interpretations that lack official approval, as opposed to officially recognized Roman divination and public por­ tents. From this perspective, divination and public portents played an impor­ tant role in Roman religio/cultus deorum and were vital to the construction of Roman identity and integrity. This study's examination of the relationship between public portents and ager Romanus and ager peregrinus also analyses the portents' role in Roman religio-

260 politics and in the construction of Roman identity. On the basis of this exami­ nation it is possible to see that these portents not only functioned as a power­ ful internal institution in Roman society, but also played an external role in rela­ tion to Rome's dealings with non-Roman territories. In this instance I do not agree with the hypothesis proposed by Mommsen and his followers concerning the prodigies and ager Romanus, for this hypoth­ esis is contradicted by a great deal of the empirical material. In practice, gen­ eral application of the Romanus-peregrinus distinction was not used as the cri­ teria for prodigy approval or rejection. In my view, there is no doubt that even areas regarded in the legal sense as ager peregrinus could have their prodigies accepted by the Senate, and therefore also officially expiated within the Roman system. By ceasing to consider the Romanus-peregrinus distinction as one that defines religious opposites in portent matters, it is possible to achieve a more satisfactory coherence in the source material. This also brings another aspect of public portents during the Republic to the foreground: the establishment of a common religious frame of reference that transcends legal and territorial boundaries and has its powerful religio-political centre in Rome. The prodigy institution's establishment of a common frame of reference, even outside ager Romanus, thus helped to create a religio-political balance between Roman and independent non-Roman territories. The Senate's institutionalized interference can therefore be seen in one sense as an expression of the wielding of power over other communities in Italy. At the same time, it can be seen in another sense as a consequence of the Romans regarding prodigies as expressions of actual disturbances in the relationship between mortals and gods - a relation­ ship in which expiation alone could (re)establish the necessary balance between the profane and sacred spheres. Throughout the Republican era, Roman divination and public portents were characterized by structures that included systematic communication and interac­ tion between the Senate and non-Roman territories, and consequently, Roman pub­ lic portents can help shed light on the processes involved in Italy's Romanization. This is true not only of public prodigies, but also of public auspices, which played a role in the ritual foundation of Roman colonies, and public extispicy, which was a firmly established part of the sacrificial procedure used in con­ nection with Rome's military expansion. Divination and public portents thus led to the foundation of common religious frames of reference, which were consolidated by firmly fixed procedures and priesthoods, either based in Rome or modelled on Roman practices. The study subsequently concludes that the common religious frame of refer­ ence was an important aspect of the institution's ongoing construction of Roman identity. This aspect is discussed further through the presentation of an identity hypothesis, assuming that, cultically speaking, a special religious per­ ception of time, past = present = future, formed the underpinnings of the insti­ tution that continuously had to (re)interpret and (re)construct Roman identity and ensure the continuity and prosperity of Roman society.

261 Based on analyses of the available sources, the identity hypothesis seeks to clarify how public portents functionally reached into the past as well as the future. They reached back because the institution of public portents continued to reconstruct the past in connection with interpretations and rites, systemati­ cally organizing current, empirical observations in relation to these reconstruc­ tions of past experience. And they reached forward because the interpretations and prescribed rituals took place in relation to future actions, ensuring the pax deorum in the interest of Roman society. Empirical evidence supporting my proposed view of divination and pub­ lic portents as components in an identity-constructing mechanism includes, for instance, the introduction of the cults worshipping Magna Mater, Venus Erycina, and Venus Verticordia. These examples reflect the various elements that served to construct Roman identity, both inwardly regarding the main­ tenance of traditional behavioural patterns, norms, and values, and outward­ ly regarding foreign-policy affairs and the incorporation of new cults. At the same time, these examples serve to illustrate the way divination established connections between the profane and sacred spheres and mythical-cultic connections between past, present, and future. The examples therefore doc­ ument important facets of the role public portents played in Roman identity and religio-politics. In addition, public portents fulfilled Roman society's demands for social order, stability, and continuity, and in this light, the institution of divination served as a guarantor of Roman norms, values, and actions, and indeed of the continuity of Roman society. Thus, this institution reflects a quest for a society in equilib­ rium, which is probably one of the reasons why all types of new beginnings in Roman society were closely linked with the interpretation of portents, an activ­ ity meant to continuously uphold balance and order. As demonstrated throughout this study, the sociological function of the insti­ tution of public portents could be both incorporative and segregative in religio-political matters, depending on the Senate's various decisions and restric­ tions with respect to internal Roman affairs as well as foreign relations and influences. In both cases, the construction of identity and the demonstration of power seem to be vital aspects of the institution. The natural conclusion is that Roman society had internalized the notion of portents as phenomena that were both necessary and empirically accessible in everyday life, and that depending on the type of omen, its meaning could be interpreted by experts based on the systematic registration and knowledge of similar events in the past. All in all, Roman divination has the characteristics of a scientific discipline rooted in a special religious temporal dimension, and including a methodology for the observation of various portentous phenomena and the classification of these data based on fixed criteria, comparative analyses, and diachronic inves­ tigations. The entire system of divination was structured around sets of actual observations, and the empirical analyses were carried out by religious experts

262 who interpreted the portents with the overall aim of understanding and secur­ ing the world by establishing sacred and profane interconnections. In the scientific divination of Republican Rome, we find the present recon­ structing the observations, interpretations, and expiations of the past in order to ensure the future. Through the ongoing interpretational process of divination, which involved consulting various experts and libri and following the ritual pre­ scriptions according to the mos maiorum, religio-political balance and identity were (re)established - in short, the pax deorum was perpetually renewed.

DANISH SUMMERY Formalet med denne afhandling er en undersogelse af det offentlige varselsvaesen i republikkens Rom med henblik pa savel religiose som historiske, sociologiske og tekniske sammenhasnge. Kildematerialet viser at det romerske varselsvaesen er noje relateret til en rsekke konkrete handlinger, normer og vaerdier af afgorende samfundsmaessige betydninger og at varselsvaesnet som religios institution er uloseligt knyttet sammen med den romerske republiks politiske organisationsform. Pa samme made som auguren definerer et templum og identificerer det som i sakral forstand gyldigt omrade for religios og politisk aktivitet, saledes defi­ nerer og identificerer varselsvassnet under et i institutionaliseret form gyldigheden af diverse sociale, religiose, politiske og militaere dispositioner of betydning for den romerske res publica. I forlasngelse heraf er de religionspolitiske procedures den rituelle adfasrd og dens akkuratesse af fundamental betydning i forvaltningen af det offentlige varselsvaesen til bestemmelse af gudernes vilje og dermed samfundets velfasrd. Som konsekvens heraf og som folge af kildematerialets karakter tilstraeber denne afhandling - hvor kilderne tillader det - at kombinere en historisk og religionshistorisk diakron tilgang med en sociologisk synkron synsvinkel i behandlingen af en raekke abne sporgsmal og uloste problemer, som praeger antikforskningens udlasgninger af det romerske varselsvassen. I kapitel 1 praesenteres kildematerialet og der foretages en kritisk gennemgang af gasngse forskningshistoriske synsvinkler pa emnet. Det gaelder de sakaldte stresshypoteser og manipulationshypoteser, hvis forklaringer kun har begraenset og momentan gyldighed og overser vassentlige sociologiske forhold i forbindelse med samfundets vedvarende krav om overholdelse af religiose og politiske forpligtelser til at iagttage, tolke og sone varsler, Ligeledes diskuteres forskningshistoriens tendenser til i varselsanliggender at fokusere ensidigt pa sporgsmal om "tro" - og i denne sammenhaeng ikke mindst det misvisende begreb "overtro" - i stedet for at fokusere pa sporgsmal om adfaerd, religionspolitisk procedure og interaktion. Denne afhandlings analyser laegger saledes hovedvaegten pa varselsvsesnets institutionaliserede religionspolitiske adfasrdsmonstre og kontekster samt dertil knyttede religiose, sociale, politiske og militaere betydninger. Med dette udgangspunkt analyserer kapitel 2 de fragmentariske litteraere, epigrafiske og arkaeologiske kilder vedrorende de tre hovedgrupper indenfor den officielle varselstydning: prodigia, exta og auspicia (kap 2.1, 2.2 og 2.3), samt de fire involverede praesteskaber: pontifices, Xviri sacris faciundis, augures og haruspices (kap. 2.4). Som folge af kildematerialets karakter er det i forbin­ delse med prodigierne muligt at foretage en diakron gennemgang i skemaform (kap. 2.1). I tilknytning til diverse tekstinterpretationer diskuteres desuden moderne udlaegninger af konkrete varselsanliggender og arkaeologiske vidnesbyrd som f.eks. den etruskiske bronzelever fra Piacenza.

264 Kapitel 3 behandler Cicero som kilde til varselsvassnet i romersk religion. Selve varselssagen vedmrende Ciceros hus, affasrens problemstilling og proce­ dure bevidner, uanset hvordan man end bed0mmer de religionspolitiske stridigheder og de dermed forbundne taler og motiver, varselsvassnets fortsatte betydning - ogsa henimod republikkens slutning. I sammenhseng hermed konkluderes desuden, at Cicero i varselsanliggender ikke n0dvendigvis har vaeret en hyklerisk manipulator, eller har undefgaet en saerlig personlig udvikling, hvor religionen er blevet erstattet af filosofien, saledes som nogle af antikforskningens gasngse synspunkter haevder. Som det er fremgaet, synes forskningshistoriens generelle bed0mmelse og anstr0g af forargelse i sp0rgsmalet om Cicero og varselsvassnet at savne en systematisk kontekstrelateret iagttagelse af, at Ciceros behandling af varsler f0rst og fremmest er dikteret af forskellen pa grassk filosofi og romersk religion og forskellen mellem teori og praksis. Cicero behandler varsler ud fra to forskellige synsvinkler i to forskellige kontekster. Fremstillingen af varselsvaesnet i talerne De domo sua og De haruspicum respon­ se* udspringer af en religionspolitisk synsmade forankret i mos rnaiorum, mens fremstillingen af varselsvaesnet i De divinatione og De natura deorum udsprin­ ger af en filosofisk synsmade som folge af den hellenistiske akkulturationsproces. Nar Cicero formidler graesk filosofi, unders0ges og polemiseres imod diverse (u)muligheder i forbindelse med varsler. Nar Cicero derimod taler i religionspolitiske stridigheder er det romersk religi0s praksis der taeller. Afg0rende er her senatets og praesteskabernes religionspolitiske procedurer, samt kulten og dens historiske forankring. Afhandlingens synkrone synsmade og konklusioner pa dette punkt S0ger saledes at eliminere Ciceros postulerede selvmodsigelser, dilemma og hykleri i religionspolitisk henseende og at undga megen hidtidig forsknings metodiske snaeverhed og evolutionistiske tankegange. Dette gadder ikke mindst forskningshistoriens tendenser til en individualreligi0s synsvinkel, der g0r den enkeltes tro/overtro - og ikke ritualer og reli­ gionspolitiske procedurer - til pr0vestenen for hvad religio(n) er. Netop dette sp0rgsmal f0rer videre til kapitel 4 om varselstydning som videnskab. Her afvises den gaengse opfattelse af varselsvaesnet som overt ro (superstitio), og endvidere S0ges demonstreret, hvorledes moderne fremstillinger indsnasvrer perspektivet pa det romerske varselsvassen, nar de ukritisk opererer med dichotomien magi og religion og med begreberne rationalitet og irrationalitet. I stedet anlasgges ogsa her en mere sociologisk synsvinkel pa sp0rgsmalet om den antikke distinktion mellem religio og superstitio i relation til varselsvaesnet, og forholdet mellem disse begreber analyseres i lyset af det offentlige varselsvaesens funktion som identitetsskabende institution. Dette f0rer til fremsasttelse af definitioner pa religio og superstitio, som tager udgangspunkt i begrebernes forankring i den religionspolitiske procedure, hvor religio indbefatter de af senat og praesteskaber accepterede forestillinger og ritualer i offentligt eller privat regi. Saledes fokuseres pa religio i betydningen korrekt cultus deorum og herunder korrekt tolkning of guddommelige forhold, mens superstitio indbe­ fatter forestillinger og ritualer, som ikke er accepterede af senat og prassteska-

265 ber i offentligt eller privat regi. I forlaengelse heraf konkluderes at varselsvaesnet indgar som et vaesentligt element i romersk religio og romersk identitet og integritet. Kapitel 5 undersoger udstraekningen af denne form for religio, saledes som den kommer til udtryk i forholdet mellem varselsvaesnet, ager Romanus og ager peregrinus. I dette sporgsmal konkluderes bl.a. at varselsinstitutionen som ele­ ment i romersk religionspolitik og konstruktionen af romersk identitet ikke blot gaelder internt i det romerske samfund, men ogsa viser sig i forholdet til ikke-romersk territorium. Th. Mommsens tese om prodigierne og ager Romanus afvises og dermed distinktionen ager Romanus/peregrirnus som en hovedregel ongaende kriterier for godtagelse/afvisning af prodigier. Tesen modsiges af en stor del af det empiriske materiale, som tydeligt demonstrerer, at ogsa omrader der juridisk set var ager peregrinus kunne fa prodigier godtaget af senatet og dermed sonet i officielt romersk regi. Hvis man derimod ikke fastholder distinktionen Romanus/peregrinus som i religios forstand modsaetninger i relation til varsels­ vaesnet skabes en mere tilfredsstillende sammenhaeng i kildematerialet. Endvidere fremtraeder herved et nyt aspekt af varselsvaesnet i republikken, nemlig etableringen af en faelles religios referenceramme pa tvaers af juridiske og territoriale graenser og med et religionspolitisk centrum i Rom. Det romerske varselsvaesen er saledes igennem hele republikken karakteriseret ved strukturer, der indbefatter en systematisk kommunikation og interaktion mel­ lem senatet og ikke-romerske territorier i varselsanliggender. Som folge heraf kan inddragelse af det romerske varselsvaesen bidrage til belysning af de processer, der indgar i romaniseringen af Italien. Dette gaelder ikke blot senatets institutionaliserede indgriben via prodigievaesnet, men ogsa auspicievaesnets forbindelse til den rituelle grundlaeggelse af romerske kolonier, samt indvoldstydningen som ele­ ment i den faste romerske offerprocedure. Herigennem etableres faelles religiose referencerammer, der konsolideres af fasdagte religionspolitiske procedurer og praesteskaber enten i Rom eller kopieret efter romersk model. Det konkluderes derfor, at den faelles religiose referenceramme fremstar som et vigtigt element i varselsinstitutionens stadige (re)konstruktion af romersk identi­ tet og dette aspekt viderefores i kapitel 6. Pa grundlag af det samlede kildemateriale og de foregaende kapiders analyser fremsaettes her en identitetstese, som antager at den saeregne religiose tidsopfattelse fortid = nutid = fremtid i kultisk forstand er baerende for den varselsinstitution, som til stadighed skal (re)interpretere og (re)konstruere romersk identitet og sikre det romerske samfunds bestaen. Formalet med tesen er bl.a. at tydeliggore, hvorledes varselsvaesnet opererer bade bagud og fremad. Bagud fordi varselsvaesnet til stadighed rekonstruerer fortiden i forbindelse med tolkninger og ritualer og systematisk organiserer empiriske iagttagelser i relation til fortidens erfaringer og fremad fordi disse kultiske foreteelser sker i relation til fremtidige handlinger og samfundet velfaerd og kontinuitet. Som yderligere empiriske belaeg for tesen om varselsvaesnet som en identitetsskabende institution analyseres bl.a. indforelsen af kultene for Magna

266 Mater, Venus Erucina, og Venus Verticordia. Disse eksempler afspejler de forskellige elementer i konstruktionen af romersk identitet savel indadtil med hensyn til opretholdelse af traditionelle adfasrdsm0nstre, normer og vasrdier som udadtil i relation til udenrigspolitiske anliggender og inkorporering af nye kulte. Desuden illustreres hermed divinationens etablering af savel sammenhaenge mellem den profane og den sakrale sfaere som kultisk-mytiske sammenhaenge mellem fortid, nutid og fremtid, og dermed dokumenterer eksemplerne vassentlige sider af varselsvsesnets betydning for romersk identitet og religionspolitik. Yderligere soger tesen at vise, hvorledes varselsvassnet opfylder det romerske samfunds krav om social orden, stabilitet og kontinuitet og fremstar som garant for romerske normer, vasrdier og adfaerd. Sammenfattende kan den romerske varselstydning karakteriseres som en slags videnskabelig disciplin, der er funderet i en saeregen religi0s tidsdimension og indbefatter en metodik for observation af diverse varselsfasnomener samt klassifikation af disse data pa baggrund af fastlagte kriterier, komparative analyser og diakrone unders0gelser. Hele tydningssystemet hviler pa sast af faktiske iagttagelser og de empiriske analyser foretages af religi0se eksperter, der tolker materialet med et overordnet henblik pa en forstaelse af verden/guderne via etablering af profane og sakrale kontekster. Gennem varselsinstitutionens tolkningsproces, iagttagelse og konsultering af diverse libri og ved efterf0lgelse af de rituelle forskrifter if0lge mos maiorurn (gen)skabes en religionspolitisk identitet funderet i romersk tradition - eller kortere sagt: pax deorum (re)etableres med henblik pa det romerske samfunds velfaerd og kontinuitet.

BIBLIOGRAPY Abbott, A. (1999), "Temporality and Process in Social Life" in Engelstad & Kalleberg (1999), pp. 28-61. Afzelius A. (1942, Die Römische Eroberung Italiens: 340-264 v. Chr., Copenhagen. Alföldi, A. (1962), "Ager Romanus Antiquus", Hermes 90 (1962), 187-213. Alföldi, A. (1965), Early Rome and the Latins, Ann Arbor. Altheim, E (1951), Römische Religionsgeschichte I—II (1931-1933), BadenBaden. Ampolo, C, (1990), in Eder, W. (ed.), Staat und Staatlichkeit in der frühen römischen Republik (1990), Stuttgart. Assmann, J. (1992), Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung, und politis­ che Identität in frühen Hochkulturen, 2nd edn. 1999, Munich. Astin, A.E. (1964), "Leges Aelia et Fufia", Latomus 23 (1964), 421-445. Babelon, E. (1885), Description historique et chronologique des monnaies de la republique romaine, Paris. Badian, E. (1958), Foreign Clientelae, Oxford. Badian, E. (1968), Roman Imperialism in the late Republic, 2nd edn, Oxford. Bagge, S. (1999), "Honour, Passion and Rationality. Political Behaviour in a Traditional society" in Engelstad & Kalleberg (1999), pp. 109-129. Barnes, B. & Bloor, D. (1982), "Relativism, Rationalism and the Sociology of Knowledge" in Hollis & Lukes (1982), pp. 21-47. Beard, M. (1986), "Cicero and Divination: The Formation of a Latin Discourse",/^ vol. 76 (1986), 33-16. Beard, M. (1993), "Looking (harder) for Roman Myth: Dumézil, declamation and the problems of definition" in Graf, F. (ed.), Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft. Das Paradigma Roms, Leipzig, pp. 44-64. Beard, M., & North, J.A. (eds) (1990), Pagan Priests. Religion and Power in the Ancient World, London. Beard, M., & Crawford, M. (1985), Rome in the Late Republic. Problems and Interpretations, London. Beard, M., North, J.A. & Price, S. (1998), Religions of Rome, vols I—II, Cambridge. Beloch, J. (1926), Römische Geschichte bis zum Beginn der punischen Kriege, Berlin. Beloch, J. (1964), Der Italische Bund unter Roms Hegemonie. Staatsrechtliche und Statistische Forschungen, Studia Historica 1 (1964), Rome. Berger, PL. (1967), The Sacred Canopy. Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion, N.Y. Berger, PL. & Luckmann, T (1966), The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York. Blatt, E & Hastrup, T. & Krarup, P. (1969/1970) Ciceros filosofiske shifter vol. I & III, Copenhagen.

268 Bleicken, J. (1957), "Kollisionen zwischen Sacrum und Publicum", Hermes 85 (1957), 446-480. Bloch, R. (1962), "La divination romaine et les livres Sibyllins", Revue des étydes latines, 40 (1962). Bloch, R. (1963), Les prodiges dans l'antiquité classique, Paris. Boardman, J. (1985), Greek Sculpture, London. Bottéro, J. (1974), "Symptomes, signes, écritures en Mésopotamie ancienne" in (ed.) J.-P. Vernant, Divination et Rationalité, Paris, pp. 70-197. Bouché-Leclercq, A. (1882), Histoire de la Divination dans l'antiquité, vol. I-IV (1879-1882), Paris. Boyce, A.A. (1937), "The Expiatory Rites of 207 B.C.", TAPA 68 (1937), 157-171. Boyce, A.A. (1938), "The Development of the Decemviri Sacris Faciundis", TAPA 69 (1938), 161-187. Bremmer, J.N. (1993), "Three Roman aetiological myths" in Graf, F. (ed.) Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft. Das Paradigma Roms, Leipzig, pp. 158-174. Bremmer, J.N. & Horsfall, N.M. (1987), Roman Myth and Mythography, London. Briquel, D. (1981), "Des propositions nouvelles sur le rituel d'ensevelissement de Grecs et de Gaulois au Forum Boarium", Rev.Et.hat. 59 (1981), 30-37. Broughton, T.R.S. (1952), The Magistrates of the Roman Republic I—II [American Philological Association, Monograph 15), 1951-1952 and supp. 1960. Brouwer, H.HJ. (1989), "Bona Dea: the Sources and a Description of the Cult", Etudes préliminaires sur les religions orientales dans Vempire romain 110(1989). Brunt, P.A. (1965), "Italian Aims at the Time of the Social War", JRS 55 (1965), 90-109. Buchowski, M. (1997), "Anti Anti-Rationalism: Anthropology and the Rationality of Human Acts" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 24-43. Borner, F. (1953), "Der Commentarius", Hermes 81 (1953), 210-250. Cassola, F. (1962), I gruppi politici romani nellll secolo a.G, Trieste. Catalano, P. (1960), Contribua allo studio del diritto augurale 1, Torino. Catalano, P. (1978), "Aspetti spaziali del sistema giuridico-religioso romano. Mundus, templum, urbs ager, Latium, Italia", ANRW II.16.1. (1978), 440-553. Christ, K. (1979), Krise und Untergang der Römischen Republik, Darmstadt. Christensen, J. (1962), An Essay on the Unity of Stoic Philosophy, Copenhagen. Cichorius, C. (1922), "Staatliche Menschenopfer", Römische Studien (1922), 7-20. Coarelli, F. (1985), IlForo Romano. 1. Periodo Arcaico, 2. Periodo repubblicano e augusteo (1983-1985), Rome. Colonna, G. (1984), "II fegato de Piacenza e la tarda etruscità cispadana", Studi in memoria di M. Zuffa, Rimini, pp. 171-184.

269 Cornell T.J. (1995), The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars, London. Cova, P.V. (1974), "Livio e la repressione dei Baccanali", Athenaeum 52 (1974), 82-110. Crake, J.E.A. (1940), "The Annals of the Pontifex Maximus", Classical Philology J>5 (1940), 375-386. Crawford, M.H. (1989), "Aut sacrom aut poublicom" in Birks, P. (ed.) New perspectives in the Roman Laws of Property. Essays for Barry Nicholas, Oxford, pp. 93-98. Crawford, M.H. (1996), Roman Statutes, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, Supp. 64 (1996) vol. 1, 393-454. David, (1963), "Roman Nobility and the Three Major Priesthoods 218-167 B.C.", TAPA vol. 94 (1963), 73-85. Davies, J.C. (1971), "The Originality of Cicero's Philosophical Works", Latomus 30.1 (1971). De Sanctis, G. (1953), Storia dei Romani, vol. 4, Florence. Deecke, W. (1880), "Das Templum von Piacenza", Etruskische Forschungen 4 (1880). Deecke, W. (1882), "Nachtrag zum templum von Piacenza (die Leber ein tem­ plum)", Etruskische Forschungen und Studien, II Heft (1882), 65-87. Degrassi, A. (1947), Inscriptiones Italiae, vol. 13, (1947/1963), Rome. Diels, H. (1890), Sihyllinische Blätter, Berlin. Ducati, P (1925), Etruria Antica, vol. 1, Rome. Dumézil, G. (1970) Archaic Roman Religion, vol. I-II, Chicago (1966, La religion romaine archaique suivi d'un appendice sur la religion des Etrusques, Paris). Durkheim, Emile (1976), The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, London (originally appeared in French (1912) as Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Le système totémique en Australie, Paris). Durkheim, Emile (1895), Les règles de la métode sociologique, Paris. Elia, O. & Pugliese Carratelli, G. (1975), "Il santuario dionisiaco di S. Abbondio a Pompei" in Orfismo in Magna Grecia, Atti del quattordicesimo convegno distudisulla Magna Grecia (1975) Naples, pp. 139-153. Engelstad, F. & Kalleberg, R. (eds) (1999), Social Time and Social Change. Perspectives on Sociology and History, Oslo. Feeney, D. (1998), Literature and Religion at Rome. Cultures, contexts and beliefs, Cambridge. Ferguson, J. (1962), The religion of Cicero. Collana di studi Ciceroniani'IL Finley, M.I. ((1983) 1996), Politics in the Ancient World. Fontenrose, J. (1978), The Delphic Oracle, Berkeley. Fowler, W.W. (1899), The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic, London. Fowler, W.W. (1911), The Religious Experience of the Roman People, (1971) New York. Frazer, J.G. (1900), The Golden Bough. A Study in Magic and Religion, (2nd edn 1900, abr. edn 1978 (1922)). Frier, B.W. (1979), Libri annales pontificum maximorum: The Origins of the

270

Annalistic Tradition. Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome (1979), Rome. Frothingham, A.L. (1914), "Circular Templum and Mundus. Was the Templum only rectangular?", American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 18 (1914), 302-320. Gagé, J. (1955), Apollon romain. Essai sur le culte d'Apollon et le development du Aritus Graecus à Rome des origines à Auguste, Bibliothèque des Ecoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome 182. Galinsky, G.K. (1969), Aeneas, Sicily, and Rome, Princeton. Galsterer, H. (1976), "Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien", Münchener beiträge zur papyrusforschung und antiken rechtsgeschichte, 68. Heft (1976), Munich. Gargola, DJ. (1990), "The colonial commissioners of 218 B.C. and the foun­ dation of Cremona and Placentia", Athenaeum 68 (1990), 465-473. Gargola, DJ. (1995), Lands, Laws and Gods. Magistrates and Ceremony in the Regulation of Public Lands in Republican Rome, North Carolina. Geertz, C. (1984), "Anti anti-relativism", American Anthropologist 86 (2) (1984), 21-47. Gelzer, M. (1937), "Die Datierung von Ciceros Rede de haruspicum responso" Klio 30 (1937), 1-9. Gennep, A. van (1909), Les Rites de Passage, Paris. Gigon, O. (1973), "Cicero und die griechische Philosophie", ANRW 1.4 (1973), 226-261. Goar, RJ. (1972), Cicero and the State Religion, Amsterdam. Graf, F. (1993), "Der Mythos bei den Römern. Forschungs- und Problemgeschichte" in Graf, F. (ed.) Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft. Das Paradigma Roms, Leipzig, pp. 25-43. Grodzynski, D. (1974), "Superstitio", Revue des études anciennes vol. 76 (1974), 36-60. Gruen, E.S. (1990), Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy, Leiden. Gruen, E.S. (1992), Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome, New York. Gronbech, V. (1913), Soul or Mana. Paper read to the 4. international congress for the history of religions at Leyden 1912, Copenhagen. Gronbech, V. (1915), Primitiv religion, Stockholm. Gr0nbech, V. (1953), Hellenismen, Livsstemning - verdensmagt (abridged ver­ sion of Hellenismen I—II (1939)). Gr0nbech, V. (1955), UEssay om kultdramaef in Vor Folkeœt i Oldtiden (orig­ inally appeared in English in 1931 as The Culture of the Teutons. Essay on Ritual Drama), 2nd edn, pp. 220-281. Guillaumont, F. (1984), Philosophe et augure. Recherches sur la théorie cicéronienne de la divination, Latomus 184 (1984). Günther, R. (1964), "Der politisch-ideologische Kampf in der römischen Religion in der letzen zwei Jarhunderten v.u.Z.", Klio 42 (1964), 209-297. Hahm, D.E. (1963), "Roman Nobility and the Three Major Priesthoods 218-167 B.C.", TAPA 94 (1963), 73-85.

271 Halbwachs, M. (1925), Les cadres sociaux de la mémoire, Paris. Harris, W.V. (1975), Rome in Etruria and Umbria, Oxford. Harris, W.V. (1979), War and Imperialism in Republican Rome 327- 70 BC, Oxford. Heibges, U. (1969a), "Religion and Rhetoric in Cicero's Speeches", Latomus 28 (1969) Heibges, U. (1969b), "Cicero, A hypocrite in religion?", American Journal of Philosophy, 90 (1969), 833-849. Herbig, R. (1957), "Zur religion und Religiosität der Etrusker", Historia 6 (1957), 123-132. Heurgon, J. (1959), "The Date of Vegoia's Prophecy", JRS vol. 49 (1959), 41-45. Heurgon, J. (1965), "Note sur la lettre dans les inscriptions étrusques" in Studi in onore di Luisa Banti. Hoffmann, W. (1933), Wandel und Herkunft der sibyllinischen Bücher in Rom, Leipzig. Hollis, M., & Lukes, S. (1982), Rationality and Relativism, Oxford. Hollis, M. (1982), "The Social Destruction of Reality" in Hollis & Lukes (1982), pp. 67-86. Hvidtfeldt, A. ( 1958), Teotl and *Ixiptlatli. Some Central Conceptions in Ancient Mexican Religion. With a General Introduction on Cult and Myth, Copenha­ gen. Hvidtfeldt, A. (1961), Religioner og kulturer. Nogle hovedtrœk af den almindelige religionshistorie, Copenhagen. Hvidtfeldt, A. (1991), Hellenistiske religioner, Copenhagen. Heeg, C. (1964), Introduktion til Cicero. Kunstneren - statsmanden - mennesket, Copenhagen. Jacoby, F. (1958), Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 1923-1958, Stuttgart. Jensen, PJ. (1968), Illustreret Religionshistorie, (eds) Asmussen, J.P & Laessoe, J., vol. 3, Copenhagen. Jensen, T & Rothstein, M. (2000), Secular Theories on Religion. Current Perspectives, Copenhagen. Jeyes, U. (1989), Old Babylonian Extispicy. Omen texts in the British Museum, Leiden. Johansen, K.F. (1991), Den europœiske filosofis historié, vol. 1, Copenhagen. Kajanto, I. (1957), God and Fate in Livy. Annales Universitatis Turkuensis, Turku. Kamppinen, M. (1997), "Religious Models and Problem Solving: A Cognitive Perspective on the Roles of Rationality in Comparative Religion" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 78-98. Kaulins, A. (1980), The Etruscan Bronze Liver ofPiacenza: an Ancient Starfinder and Calendar. Kippenberg, H.G. (1997), "Rationality in Studying Historical Religions" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 157-166. Klotz, A. (1936), "Cassius Dio zur Geschichte des zweiten punischen Krieges", RM 85 (1936).

272 Klotz, A. (1940), Livius und seine Vorgänger, Leipzig. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla (2000), Babylonian Liver Omens. The Chapters Manzazu, Padanu and Pan Takalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series mainly from Assurbanipal's Library, CNI vol. 25, Copenhagen. Kornemann. E. (1911), Die älteste Form der Pontificalannalen Klio 11 (1911). Krarup, P. (1956), Rector rei publicae. Bidrag til fortolkning af Ciceros "de re publica", Copenhagen. Krauss, F.B. (1930), An Interpretation of the Omens, Portents, and Prodigies Recorded by Livy, Tacitus, and Suetonius, diss., Pennsylvania. Kroll, W. (1933), Die Kultur der ciceronischen Zeit, vol. 2, Leipzig. Kumaniecki, K. (1959), "Cicero's Rede de haruspicum responso", Klio 37 (1959), 135-153. Körte, G. (1905), Die Bronzeleber von Piacenza, RM 20 (1905), 348-379. Lagumina, B. (1877), "Il nome fenicio di Venere Ericina", Archivio storico Siciliano, Palermo. Larsen, M.T. (1997), Gudens skugge. Det assyriske imperiums historié, Copenhagen. Latte, K. (1960), Römische Religionsgeschichte, Munich. Leiderer, R. (1990), Anatomie der Schafsleber im babylonischen Lebenorakel Eine makroskopisch-analytische Studie, Munich. Lenaghan, J.O. (1969), A Commentary on Cicero's Oration. "De Haruspicum Responso," The Hague. Levene, D.S. (1993), Religion in Livy, Mnemosyne, suppl. vol. 127, Leiden. Lewis, N. (1976), The Interpretations of Dreams andPortents in Antiquity, Toronto. Liebeschuetz, J.H.G. (1979), Continuity and Change in Roman Religion, Oxford. Liegle, J. (1942), "L. Aemilius Paullus als Augur maximus im Jahre 160 und das Augurium des Heils", Hermes 11 (1942), 249-312. Linderski, J. (1965), Constitutional Aspects of the consular Elections in 59 B.C. (1965/1990). Linderski, J. (1972), "The Aedilship of Favonius, Curio the Younger and Cicero's Election to the Augurate", HSCP 76 (1972), 181-200. Linderski, J. (1986), "The Augural Law", ANRW II.16.3 (1986), 2146-2312. Linderski, J. (1995), Roman Questions. Selected Papers 1958-1993, Stuttgart. Linderski, J. (1990), "The Auspices and the Struggle of the Orders" in Linderski (1995), pp. 560-574. Lintott, A.W. (1968), Violence in Republican Rome, Oxford. Long, A.A. (1974), Hellenistic Philosophy, London. Long, A.A. & Sedley, D.N. (1987), The Hellenistic philosophers, Cambridge. Luterbacher, F. (1904), Die Prodigienglaube und Prodigienstil der Römer. Eine Historisch-Philologische Abhandlung, Programm Burgdorf, 2 nd edn (I st edn 1880). Macbain, B. (1975), The function of Public Prodigies and their Expiation in Furthering the Aims of Roman Imperialism in Italy down to the Period of the Social War, diss., Pennsylvania. Macbain, B. (1982), Prodigy and Expiation: A Study in Religion and Politics in Republican Rome. Latomus vol. 177.

273 Madvig, J.N. (1882), Den romerske Stats Forfatning og Forvaltning, vol. 1-2 (1881-1882), Copenhagen. Magdelain, A. (1964), "Auspicia ad patres redeunt" in Magdelain (1990), pp. 341-383. Magdelain, A. (1968), Recherches sur l' " Imperium''. La loi curiate et les auspices d'investiturey Paris. Magdelain, A. (1969), "Uauguraculum de l'arx à Rome et dans d'autres villes" in Magdelain (1990), pp. 193-207. Magdelain, A. (1976), "Le pomerium archaïque et le mundus" in Magdelain (1990), pp. 155-191. Magdelain, A. (1977), "L'inauguration de l'urbs et l'imperium" in Magdelain (1990), pp. 209-228. Magdelain, A. (1990), lus imperium auctoritas. Etudes de droit romain. Collection de Vécole française de Rome 133, Rome. Maggiani, A. (1982), "Qualche osservazione sul fegato de Piacenza", Studi Etruschi vol. 50 pp. 53-88. Maggiani, A., & Montanari, G.B. (1989), Il fegato etrusco di Piacenza, Piacenza. Malcovati, H. (1955), Oratorum Romanorum Fragmenta Liberae Rei Puhlicae, 2 nd edn, Turin. Marquard, O. & Stierle, K. (eds) (1997), Identität, Munich. Marquardt, J. (1885), Römische Staatsverwaltung (2nd edn), Leipzig. Martin, L. H. (1997), "Rationalism and Relativity in History of Religions Research" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 145-156. Martino, F. De (1975), Storia della costituzione romana, vol. 2 (2nd edn 1972-1975) Naples. Mayer, E. (1968), "Das Sauprodigium und sein religionsgeschichtlicher Hintergrund", Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae (1968), Budapest, 198-208. Mead, G.H. (1932), The Philosophy of the Present, Chicago. Meer, L.B. van der, (1987), The Bronze Liver of Piacenza. Analysis of a polythe­ istic Structure, Amsterdam. Meer, L.B. van der, (1989), "The Evolution and Structure of the Etruscan Pantheon", Cosmos 5 (1989), 77-91. Meier, C. (1995), Caesar (1982/1995), London. Meyer, J.C. (2002), "Omens, prophecies and oracles in ancient decision-mak­ ing. Formalistic and substantivistic approaches", Analecta Romana Institua Danici Supplementum XXX (2002), 173-183. Millar, F. (1984), "The Political Character of the Classical Roman Republic 200-151 B.C.", JRS vol. 74 (1984). Millar, F (1966), A Study of Cassius Dio, Oxford (1964). Momigliano, A.D. (1962), The Classical Foundation of Modern Historiography (1961-1962), 1990 edn, Berkeley. Momigliano, A.D. (1984), "The Theological Efforts of the Roman Upper Classes in the First Century B.C.", Classical Philology vol. 79 (1984), pp. 199-211.

274 Mommsen, T. (1853), "Epistula de Romanorum Prodigiis ad Ottonem Jahnium", Gesammelte Schriften vol. VII 1909, Berlin. Mommsen, T. (1887), Romische Staatsrecht, Leipzig. Mommsen, T. (1904), Romische Geschichte III, Berlin. Mouritsen, H. (1998), Italian Unification. A Study in Ancient and Modern Historiography, London. Muth, R. (1978), "Vom Wesen römischer 'religio' ", ANRW vol. II.16.1. (1978), 290-354. Miinzer, F. (1920), Romische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, Stuttgart. Maass, M. (1993), Das Antike Delphi Orakel, Schätze und Monumente, Dar­ mstadt. Nash, E. (1961), Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome vol. 1-2 (1961-1962), London. Neusner, J., Frerichs, E.S. & McCracken Flesher, P.V. (eds) (1989), Religion, Science and Magic in Concert and in Conflict, Oxford. Nickel, R., Schummer, A. & Seiferle, E. (1979), The Viscera of the Domestic Mammals, 2 nd ed., Berlin. Norden, E. (1939), Aus Altrömischen Priesterbüchern. Skrifter utgivna av kungl. humanistiska vetenskapssamfundet i Lund XXIX, Lund. North, J.A. (1979), "Religious toleration in Republican Rome", PCPS 25 (1979), 85-103. NorthJ.A. (1981), "The Development of Roman Imperialism", JRS 71 (1981). Nougayrol, J. (1955), "Les rapports des haruspicines etrusque et assyro-babylonienne, et le foie d'argile de Falerii veteres", Academie des inscriptions et belles-lettres. Comptes rendus des seances de l'annee 1955, Paris, pp. 509-519. Ogilvie, R.M. (1965), A Commentary on Livy, Books 1-5, Oxford. Otto, W.F. (1909), "Religio und Superstitio", Archiv Fur Religionswissenschaft 12 (1909), 533-554. Pailler, J.-M. (1988), Bacchanalia: la repression de 186 av. J.-C a Rome et en Italie, Bibliotheque des Ecoles francaises dAthenes et de Rome 270 (1988), Rome. Pallis, S.A. (1926), The Akitu Festival, Copenhagen. Pallottino, M. (1956), "Deorum Sedes", Studi in onore di A. Calderini e R. Paribeni, Milan. Pallottino, M. (1968), Testimonia linquae etruscae. Palmer, R.E.A. (1990), "A new fragment of Livy throws light on the Roman Postumii and Latin Gabii", Athenaeum vol. 68 (1990), 5-18. Parke, H.W. (ed. B.C. McGing) (1988), Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity. Parke, H.W. & Wormell, D.E.W. (1965), The Delphic Oracle, Oxford. Pauly-Wissowa (1893-1980), Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart. Pease, A.S. (1920), "M. Tulli Ciceronis de divinatione", University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature (1920-1923), Illinois.

275 Peruzzi, E. (1976), "la formula augurale di Varrone LL VII.8", Atti del congresso internazionale di studi Varroniani, Rieti (1976), vol. 2, pp. 4 4 9 ^ 5 6 . Peter, H. (1967), Historicorum Romanorum Reliquiae (2nd edn), Stuttgart. Pfiffig, A J . (1998), Religio etrusca (no changes to the 1975 edition), Wiesbaden. Platner, S.B. & Ashby, T. (1929), A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, London. Powell, J.G.F. (ed.) (1995), Cicero the Philosopher Twelve Papers, Oxford. Rasmussen, S.W. (2000), "Cicero's Stand on Prodigies: A Non-existent Dilemma?" in Wildfang & Isager (2000) pp. 9-24. Putnam, H. (1981), Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge. Radke, G. (1963), "Quindecemviri sacris faciundis", Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll (eds), XXIV, 1114-1148, Stuttgart. Rawson, E. (1971), "Prodigy Lists and the Use of the Annales Maximi", The Classical Quarterly, vol. 21 (1971), 158-169. Rawson, E. (1972), "Cicero the Historian and Cicero the Antiquarian" in Rawson (1991). Rawson, E. (1973), "The Interpretation of Cicero's De legibus", ANRW 1.4 (1973), 334-356. Rawson, E. (1974), "Religion and Politics in the Late Second Century BC at Rome" in Rawson (1991). Rawson, E. (1975), Cicero. A Portrait, Plymouth. Rawson, E. (1978), "Caesar, Etruria and the Disciplina Etrusca", JRS (1978), 132-152. Rawson, E. (1985), Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic, London. Rawson, E. (1991), Roman Culture and Society. Collected Papers, Oxford. Ridgway, B.S. (1970), The Severe Style in Greek Sculpture, New Jersey. Robertson Smith, W. (1894), Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (1889). Robertson, M.M. (1975), A History of Greek Art, Cambridge. Rosenberger, V. (1998), Gezähmte Götter Das Prodigiewesen der römischen Republik, Stuttgart. Rossbach, O. (ed.) (1898 (1910)), T Livi. Periochae omnium librorum, fragmenta oxyrhynchi reperta, lulii Obsequentis prodigiorum liber, Leipzig. Rostovtzeff, M. (1928), A History of the Ancient World (1926-1928), vol. 2, Rome, Oxford Rothstein, M. (ed.) (1996), Liv og Virkelighed. Vilhelm Gronbechs Primitiv reli­ gion, Copenhagen. Rougemonts, G. (1977), Corpus des inscriptions de Delphes. Tome 1. Lois sacrees et reglements religieux, Paris. Roux, G. (1977), Delphi. Orakel und Kultstätten, Munich. Ruoff-Väänänen, E. (1972), "The Roman Public Prodigia and the Ager Romanus", Arctos 17 (1972), 139-155. Rüpke, J. (1990), Domi militiae. Die religiöse Konstruktion des Krieges in Rom, Stuttgart.

276 Saint-Denis, E. (1942), "Les enumerations de prodiges dans l'oeuvre de TiteLive", Revue de philologie, 16 (1942), 126-142. Salmon, E.T. (1970), Roman Colonization under the Republic, London. Salmon, E.T. (1982), The Making of Roman Italy, London. Schilling, R. (1954), La religion romaine de Venus, Paris. Schilling, R. (1979), Rites, cultes, dieux de Rome, Paris. Schmidt, P.L. (1968a), Iulius Obsequens und das Problem der Livius-Epitome: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der lateinischen Prodigienliteratur. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in Mainz. Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, Nr. 5 (1968). Schmidt, P.L. (1968b), "Zum Text livianischer Prodigienberichte", Hermes vol. 96 (1968), 725-732. Schmidt, P.L. (1969), "Die Abfassungszeit von Ciceros Schrift tiber die Gesetze", Collana di Studi Ciceroniani 4 (1969), Rome. Schmidt, P.L. (1973), Cicero "De re publica": Die Forschung der letzen fiinf Dezennien", ANRW I.4 (1973), 262-333. Schofield, M. (1986), "Cicero for and against Divination", JRS vol. 76 (1986), 47-65. Schofield, M. (1995), "Cicero's definition of Res Publica" in Powell (ed.) Cicero the Philosopher, pp. 63-83. Scullard, H.H. (1951), Roman Politics 220-150 B.C., Oxford. Scullard, H.H. (1967), The Etruscan Cities and Rome, Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Scullard, H.H. (1981), Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic, London. Shackleton Bailey, D.R. (ed.) (1965), Cicero's letters to Atticus, vol. 1. Sinding Jensen, J. & Martin, L.H. (eds) (1997), Rationality and the Study of Religion, Aarhus. Sinding Jensen, J. (1997), "Social Facts, Metaphysics and Rationality in the Human Sciences" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 117-135. Skovgaard Jensen, S. (1962), "Silvanus and his cult", Analecta Roman Instituti Danici II, pp. 11-40. Skydsgaard, J.E. (1968), Varro the Scholar, Copenhagen. Skydsgaard, J.E. (1974), The Disintegration of the Roman Labour Market and the Clientela Theory (Sixth International Congress on Economic History), Copenhagen. Skydsgaard, J.E. (1978), Pompeius vender tilbage. Studier i romersk politik ar 62-59. Studier fra Sprog- og Oldtidsforskning, Copenhagen. Skydsgaard, J.E. (1999), "The Shaping of Roman Italy", Analecta Romana Instituti Danici XXVI (1999), 161-165. Smith, J.Z. (1978), "Towards Interpreting Demonic Powers in Hellenistic and Roman Antiquity", ANRW vol. II.16.1 (1978). Smith, J.Z. (1982), Imagining Religion. From Babylon to Jonestown, Chicago. Sordi, M. (1985), "Pax deorum e liberta religiosa nella storia di Roma", La Pace nel mondo antico, Scienze storiche 36 (1985) Milan, 146-154. Stambaugh, J.E. (1978), "The Functions of Roman Temples", ANRW vol. 1.16.1 (1978), 554-608.

277

Starr, I. (1983), Rituals of the Diviner, Bibliotheca Mesopotamia, vol. 12, Malibu. Starr, I. (1990), "Queries to the Sungod. Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria", State Archives of Assyria, vol. 4, Helsinki. Stockton, D. (1971), Cicero. A Political Biography, Oxford. Strnad, E. (1982), "Mondkreis oder agrarischer Zyklus? Erneute Betrachtung des 'Speichenrades' auf der Bronzeleber von Piacenza", Klio 64 (1982), 467-470. Stiss, W. (1965), "Cicero. Eine Einfuhrung in seine philosophischen Schriften", Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, 109-385. Szemler, GJ. (1972), The priest of the Roman Republic, Collection Latomus vol. 127. S0rensen, J. (2000), Essence, Schema, and Ritual Action. Towards a Cognitive Theory of Magic, PhD thesis accepted at the University of Aarhus. Tambiah, SJ. (1990), Magic, Science, Religion and the Scope of Rationality, Cambridge. Tatum, WJ. (1990), "Cicero and the BONA DEA Scandal", Classical Philology 85 (1990), 202-208. Taylor, L. R. (1949/1975), Party Politics in the age of Caesar (1949/1975), Berkeley. Terrenato, N. (1998), "Tarn firmum municipium: The Romanization of Volaterrae and its cultural implications", JRS vol. 88 (1998), 94-114. Thompson, Lloyd A. (1992), "Cicero the politician", Collana di studi Ciceroniani, II, (1992). Thulin, C.O. (1906a), "Die Gotter des Martianus Capella und die Bronzeleber von Piacenza", Rel.-Gesch. Vers, und Vorarb. 3.1. Thulin, C.O. (1906b), Die etruskische Disciplin, vols I—III, 1906-1909, Gothenberg. Tierney, J.J. (1947), "The senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus", Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 51 (1947), 89-117. Torelli, M. (1966), "Un Templum augurale d'eta repubblicana a Bantia", Rendiconti dellAccad. deiLincei21 (1966), 293-315. Torelli, M. (1975), Elogia Tarquiniensia, Florence. Torelli, M. (1995), Studies in the Romanization of Italy, Alberta. Toynbee, A.J. (1965), Hannibal's Legacy. The Hannibalic Wars' Effects on Roman Life vol. 1-2, Oxford. Trigg, R. (1997), "Rationality, Social Science and Religion" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 99-116. Tybjerg, T (1996), "Vilhelm Gronbechs Primitiv religion set pa baggrund af samtidens religionshistoriske forskning" in Liv og Virkelighed. Vilhelm Gronbechs Primitiv religion, Rothstein, M. (ed.), Copenhagen, pp. 91-126. Tylor, E.B. (1871), The Origins of Culture. Primitive Culture part 1, (reprinted 1958), New York. Ungern-Sternberg, J. von (1993), "Romulus-Bilder: Die Begriindung der Republik im Mythos" in Graf, F. (ed.) Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft. Das Paradigma Roms, Leipzig, pp. 88-108.

278 Vacano, O.W. v. (1973), "Vulca, Rom und die Wölfin. Untersuchungen zur Kunst des frühen Rom" ANRWIA (1973). Valeton, I.MJ. (1889), "De modis auspicandi Romanorum", Mnemosyne 17 (1889), 275-325. Vanggaard, J. (1985), "Bemaerkninger om kult og mythe i dansk religionshistorie", Religionssociologiskeperspektiver, Chaos (1985), 93-100. Vanggaard, J. (1988), The Flamen. A Study in the History and Sociology of Roman Religion, Copenhagen. Versnel, H.S. (1991), "Some Reflections on the Relationship Magic-Religion", Numen vol. 38 (1991), 177-197. Walsh, P.G. (1961), Livy: His Historical Aims and Methods, Cambridge. Warburg, M. (1985),"Robertson Smith - Fixpunkt og innovator i religionssociologien" Religionssociologiske perspektiver, Chaos (1985), 9-34. Warner, W.L. (1937), A Black Civilization. A Social Study of an Australian Tribe (1937/1958). Weinreich, O. (1953), "Omina- und Prodigienkataloge in ältesten römischen Epos", Studies Presented to D.M. Robinson, vol. 2, pp. 1147-1154, St. Louis. Weinstock, S. (1946), "Martianus Capella and the cosmic system of the Etruscans", ]ournal of Roman Studies 36, (1946), 101-129. Weinstock, S. (1951), "Libri Fulgurales", Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. 6, pp. 122-153. Westrup, C.W. (1929), "On the Antiquarian-Historiographical Activities of the Roman Pontifical College", Det Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser, 16.3., Copenhagen Wiebe, D. (1997), "Dissolving Rationality: The Anti-Science Phenomenon and Its Implication for the Study of Religion" in Sinding Jensen & Martin (1997), pp. 167-183. Wiebe, D. (2000), "Why the Academic Study of Religion? Motive and Method The Study of Religion" in Jensen. T & Rothstein, M. (eds) (2000), Secular Theories on Religion. Current Perspectives, Copenhagen, pp. 261-279. Wildfang, R.L. & Isager, J. (eds) (2000), Divinations and Portents in the Roman world, Odense. Wildfang, R.L. (2000), aFulgura et Fulmina: or what it portends when the fam­ ily tomb is struck by difulmen quod decussif in Wildfang, R.L. & Isager, J. (eds) (2000) pp.67-78. Wilson, B.R. (ed.) (1970), Rationality, Oxford. Winch, P. (1970), "Understanding a primitive society" in Wilson (1970), pp. 78-111. Wiseman, TP. (1989), "Roman Legend and Oral Tradition", JRS 79 (1989), 129-137. Wissowa, G. (1912), Religion und Kultus der Römer (2 nd edn 1971), Munich. Wittgenstein, L. (1989), Über Gewissheit (378). Ludwig Wittgenstein Werkausgabe Band 8, Anscombe, G.E.M. & von Wright, G.H. (eds), 3. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main. Wood, J.R. (1980), "The myth of Tages", Latomus 39, 325-344.

279 Wülker, L. (1903), Die geschichtliche Entwicklung des Prodigienwesens bei den Kömern. Studien zur Geschichte und Überlieferung der Staatsprodigien, diss., Leipzig. 0rsted, P. (1994), Gajus Julius Caesar. Politik og moral i det romerske imperium, Copenhagen. SOURCES As for the ancient sources, I have used Loeb where no other edition is specifi­ cally mentioned. I have also made use of: Ciceros filosofiske skrifter, vol.1 & III, transl. F. Blatt, T. Hastrup, & P. Krarup (Copenhagen 1969-70). Cicero's letters to Atticus, ed. D.R. Shackleton Bailey, vol. 1 (1965). Corpus inscriptionum latinarum, T. Mommsen (Berlin 1918). De viris illustribus. Deeds of famous men, ed. Walter K. Sherwin (Oklahoma 1973). Isidorus, Etymologiarum sive originum, lib. XI-XX, ed. W.M. Lindsay, vol. 2 (London 1911). Macrobius, Saturnalia. Bibliotheca scriptorum graecorum et romanorum Teubneriana (1963). Paulus Orosius, Historiarum adversum paganos, libri VII, ed. Carolus Zangemeister (Hildesheim 1967 / Vienna 1882). Valerius Maximus, Valere Maxime, /aits et dits memorables, liv. I—III, ed. Robert Combes, Collection des universites de France (PAssociation Guillaume Bude, Paris 1995). MAPS The maps in this work are essentially based on maps and information obtained from Beloch (1926) and Toynbee (1965).

ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Lacus Curtius, E. Nash, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome 1961. Figure 2. Inscription, E. Nash 1961. Figure 3. The Lacus Curtius relief, E. Nash 1961. Figure 4. The Back of the Lacus Curtius relief, E. Nash 1961. Figure 5. Bidental with inscription, K. Latte 1960. Figure 6. Bilingual inscription on a burial urn from Pesaro, R.A. Staccioli, La lingua degli etruschi, Rom 1967. Figure 7. The bronze liver of Piacenza, Museo Civico, Piacenza. A. Maggiani & G.B. Montanari 1989. Figure 8. The bronze liver of Piacenza, Museo Civico, Piacenza. A. Maggiani & G.B. Montanari 1989. Figure 9. Drawing of Tuscan bronze mirror, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Firenze. Figure 10. Details of Tuscan bronze mirror, A J. Pfiffig 1998. Figure 11. Bronze mirror from Vulci, Museo Gregoriano Etrusco, Rom. A. Maggiani & G.B. Montanari 1989. Figure 12. The bronze liver of Piacenza, Museo Civico, Piacenza. A. Maggiani & G.B. Montanari 1989. Figure 13. Real sheep livers. Photos Christian Sorensen & Jens Erik Skydsgaard. Figure 14. Inscription on the bronze liver of Piacenza, A. Maggiani 1982. Figure 15. Inscription on the bronze liver of Piacenza, A. Maggiani 1982. Figure 16. Funerary urn from Volterra, Museo Guarducci. A. Maggiani & G.B. Montanari 1989. Figure 17. Funerary urn from Volterra (details), A. Maggiani 1982. Figure 18. Terracotta liver from Falerii Veteres, Museo Nazionale di Villa Giulia. Figure 19. Babylonian liver model, A. Maggiani 1982. Figure 20. Babylonian liver model with inscriptions, Trolle Larsen 1997. Figure 21. The bronze liver of Piacenza, Museo Civico, Piacenza. A. Maggiani & G.B. Montanari 1989. Figure 22. A sheep's liver with infected bile duct, R. Leiderer 1990. Figure 23. A silver dinar from 46 BC, E. Babelon 1885-86. Maps A. B. C. D.

Northern Italy. Rome and neighbouring areas. Southern Italy. Sicily.

282

MAP INDEX: LOCATIONS OUTSIDE ROME PLACE Aefula Aenaria (Ischia) Aetna Ager Calenus Ager Latiniensis Ager Stellatinus Alba (Fucens) Ameria Amiternum Anagnia Anio Antiochia Antium Apulia Ardea Aricia Ariminum Arpi Arpinum Arretium Asculum Atella Ateste Auximum Avernus

PRODIGY TABLE NUMBER 55 124 89, 92, 97 25 138 81, 106 48 112 34,41,59,60,86,93,110 43, 44, 49, 50, 77, 78, 82, 93 113 143 35, 48,50, 81 40, 95, 112 54,94 37,41,51,58,85,113 33,57,112,130 35 50,98 54,59, 109,119, 122, 123,124 124 47, 110 120 73,75 150

Bononia Bovianum Bruttium

2 126 53

Caere Caiatia Calatia Cales Campania Capena Capua Carseoli Casinum Catina (Catania) Caura Cephallenia

34,35,37,46,48,73,81,86,120 41,66 75,78 40 71,73,79 35, 44, 56 35, 45, 46, 47, 50, 54, 58, 69, 71, 81, 130 122 46,79 100 87 81,89

MAP A C D A/B A/B B A A A B B B C B B A C B A A C A A C A C C A B B A/B C A/B B B B D

Clusium Compsa Croton Crustumerium (Clustumina) Cumae Cyrene

130 41,84 99 71 42,46,51,77,124,142 98

Eretum Etruria Eufrat

43 33, 113 139

Faesulae Falerii Ferentinum Formiae Fregallae Fregenae Frusino

119, 121, 123 35 94 25,53,55,59,81 43,48,122 55 47,50,51,52,55,82,86

Gabii Gallia (ager Gallicus) Gravisca

40, 72, 81 34,36,74,78,100,107,113 72

Hadria Hiera

40,57 125

Ilium

86

Lacus Albanus Lacus Fucinus Lake Trasimene Lanuvium Lavinium Liguria Liparae Lucania Luna

14,45 90 36 34,39,40,49,52,54,58,73,74 78, 79, 86, 87 90 36 97, 125 52, 107, 112, 122, 139 88,94,112

Macedonia Mantua Marrucini Minervium Minturnae Mons Albanus Mutina

53, 135, 143 40 40 78 47, 60, 77, 94 41, 45, 137, 148 147, 148

284 Nar Nuceria Nurcia

57 113 61, 109, 116, 118

A C A

Ostia

45,46,53,95,146

B

Padus (Po) Pergamon Perusia Picenum (Picentes) Pisaurum Pompeii Pomptinum Portus Herculis Praeneste Privernum Ptolemais Puteoli

109, 146 143 110 33,34,57,59,64,112,115 118 133 74 90 35, 40, 79, 89, 90, 104, 122 45, 52, 74, 81, 104 143 61,71,91

A

Reate Regium

42, 43, 50, 61, 66, 69, 77, 82, 95, 132 91, 124

A A

Sabine territory Sardinia Satricum Satura Saturnia Setia Sicilia Sinuessa Spoletium Suessa Aurunca Suessula Syracuse

37, 45, 52,56, 73 35 48 99 75, 104 49 35,40 39, 45, 52, 54, 73 40, 124, 134 53,54 42 71

A

Tarquinii Tarracina Teanum Sidicinum Tralles Trebula Tuder Tusculum

44, 112, 115 41, 44, 48, 49, 60, 69, 79, 81, 90, 95 79 143 110,111,112 112 44, 61, 72

B A B

Umbria Urvinum

64 120

A A

A A A C B B B/C C

B A B D B A B B D A B B

285 Veii Velitrae Venafrum Vestini Volaterrae Volsci Volsinii Volturnum

47,54,73,74,77,79,98 51,53 120 121, 124 123 121 46, 112, 121, 122 60, 130

A B B A A B A B

MAPS

A. Northern Italy.

C. Southern Italy.

GENERAL INDEX acculturation, 13, 140, 197, 238, 242, 245, 246, 250, 254, 255, 258 Aesculapius, 3, 140, 197, 238, 242, 245-246, 250, 254-255,258 Annates maximi, 16-21, 23, 37, 170, 181182, 220, 224-225, 235 Apollo, 50, 182, 247, 248 Appian, 23,247 Astarte, 130, 250 Attus Navius, 150, 151 Augustine, 22-24, 117, 184, 193, 197, 198 Babylonian hepatoscopy, 136, 137, 138,146 Bacchanalia, 179, 214, 231, 232, 233, 236, 237,253 Bacchus, 130, 179, 214, 231, 232, 233, 236, 237 Bellona, 30 Bibulus, Marcus Calpurnius, 50, 160, 163, 164, 165,166,258 Bona Dea, 171, 187, 188, 189, 195, 214 Bronze liver, 117, 118, 120, 122, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146,148 Caesar, 119, 120, 123, 132, 133, 150, 153, 164, 165, 166, 171, 173, 178, 191, 238 Caecina, Aulus, 180, 224, 238 Calpurnius Piso, 17 caput iocineris, 120, 121, 122, 126, 146,258 Cassius Dio, 23, 253 Catiline Conspiracy, 186 Cato, 170, 178,215,253 Ceres, 232 Chalchas, 125, 126 Chaldaeans, 253 Christianity, 22, 24, 197,216 Chrysippus, 122, 123, 192 Cicero, Marcus Tullius, 9, 11, 12, 15, 22, 24, 26,35, 37,38,52, 117, 119, 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 139, 141, 143, 149, 150, 151, 153, 154, 156, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 166, 167, 168, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 211, 213, 214, 215, 216, 224, 229, 235, 242, 251, 255, 258, 259, 264 Claudius Pulcher, Appius, 150 Claudius Pulcher, Publius, 161 Claudius Quadrigarius, 17, 18 Clodius, Publius, 164, 165, 167, 171, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190,214

coloniae, 132, 226 Columella, 215 Concordia, 50 Cornelius Labeo, 141 cosmologyl34, 142, 143 Cottal94,216 cultus deorum, 195, 205, 212, 213, 214, 217, 242, 259, 264 Delphic Oracle, 32, 37, 38, 179, 195, 246, 247,248 Demeter, 131,250 Diodorus Siculus, 23, 250 Dionysius of Halicarnassus, 23, 37, 248 emissarium, 38 Epicureans, 192 Fabius Maximus, Quintus, 157, 158, 160, 166,250,251 Fabius Pictor, Quintus, 119, 174, 246, 247 Falerii Veteres, 135, 136, 137 feriae, 48, 230, 234 Festus, 118, 125 Fides, 50 Flaminius, Caius, 42, 161, 246, 250, 251 Fortuna, 42 Galerus, 124 Gallus, Gaius Sulpicius, 43 Gellius, Aulus 16, 23, 48, 50, 151, 182 Gracchus, Tiberius Sempronius, 154 Hannibal, 122, 123,246,251 Hercules, 132 hermaphrodites, 39, 179, 181 Herodotus, 250 impudicitia, 41, 245, 254, 286 incestum, 41, 42, 171, 245, 253 Juno Regina, 182 Jupiter, 50, 51, 120, 130, 149, 150, 152, 170, 182 Lactantius, 193, 197,216 Lacus Albanus, 37, 38, 205, 228, 247 Lacus Curtius 38, 39,40, 41 Lacus Fucinus, 221 Lake Trasimene, 161, 235, 246, 247, 250, 251 Lex Aelia et Fufia, 163 Lex Ogulnia, 159, 171 Liber, 232 Libera, 232 Libertas, 186, 187

294 Libri augurales, 150 Libri fatales, 37, 38, 251 Libri fulgurates, 44, 125, 141, 143 Libri haruspicini, 119, 125, 143, 205 Libri pontificii, 170, 181 Libri rituales, 125 Libri Sibyllini, 169, 170, 181, 246, 248, 250, 251,254, Livy, 15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,26,27, 28, 29, 30, 35, 37, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49,50, 51, 117,118, 120, 121, 122, 132, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 179, 181, 182, 213, 214, 219, 220, 221, 224, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 255 Lydus, 125 Macrobius, 23 magic, 9, 25,26,27, 199,207, 208,209,210, 211,215,216,217,259 Magna Mater, 246, 248, 249, 251, 252, 255, 261 manipulation hypotheses, 25, 26, 30, 31, 154,257 manzazu, 136, 137, 138 Marcellus, Marcus Claudius, 150, 157, 158, 160, 163 Martianus Capella, 141, 143 mos maiorum, 17, 20, 26, 31, 43, 177, 188, 190, 191, 197, 214, 215, 243, 244, 249, 252, 258, 262, 264, 266 mules, 12, 17,31,42,202,225 Nigidius Figulus, 44, 141 Numa, 44, 149, 152, 195, 205 Obnuntiatio, 163, 164, 165, 168 Obsequens, Julius, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 35, 42, 44, 45, 120, 224 Orosius, 22-24, 42 Ovid, 23, 42, 249 padanu, 136 pars familiaris, 139, 143 pars hostilis, 122, 134, 135, 143 patricians, 155, 158, 159, 160, 169 Pava Tarchies, 124 pax deorum, 20, 33, 35, 41, 43, 117, 138, 161, 162, 177, 188, 202, 205, 225, 239, 242, 243, 244, 246, 249, 252, 261, 262, 266 Philon, 196 Piacenza, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 126, 127, 128, 133, 136, 137, 139, 145, 148, 263 plebeians, 155, 158, 159, 160, 169, 171, 245

Pliny, the Elder, 23, 27, 40, 119, 120, 130, 141, 143, 215, 216, 224, 225, 229, 255 Pliny the Younger, 216 Plutarch, 23, 42, 43, 152, 195, 247 Polybius, 18, 26, 31, 32, 46, 234, 235, 236, 250 pomerium, 151, 152, 154, 155, 238,251, 252 Posidonius, 122 Proserpina, 230 provinciae, 226 Pyrgi, 130 Pythian Apollo, 247, 248 rationality, 199, 200, 201, 202, 204, 259 religio, 154, 156, 167, 174, 175, 190, 194, 195, 197, 201, 205, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216,244,259,264,265 respublica, 12, 32, 140, 167, 189, 198, 214, 243,244,247,253,257,263 Romanization, 10, 232, 234, 236, 237, 238, 260 Salus, 41 sapientia, 197, 201 Saturn, 132 Scaevola, P. Mucius, 16 scientia, 149, 156, 201, 204, 205 Second Punic War, 18, 23, 29, 30, 45, 213, 222,226,235,246,253,254 Seneca, 23, 44 Servius, 44, 132 Silvanus, 130 Sisenna, 17, 224 Social War, 17, 220, 222, 224, 227, 228 socii, 222, 226, 232, 236 Spurinna, 119, 132, 133 Strabo,23,228,250,252 stress hypotheses, 25, 26, 29, 254, 257 Suetonius, 23, 27, 120, 164 Sulla, Lucius Cornelius, 117, 121, 143, 169, 170, 171,224 superstitio, 9, 194, 197, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215,216,217,242,259 syncretism, 242 tabulae pontificum, 16, 19, 20, 220 Tages, 124, 125, 205 Tarchunus, Aule, 124 Tarquinius Superbus, 150, 169 templum, 50, 133, 134, 135, 149, 151, 257, 263 Urso, 178, 237 Valerius Antias, 17, 18 Valerius Maximus, 23, 254 Varro, 17, 22, 23, 50, 141, 147, 151, 159, 170, 177, 212, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228

295 Veii, 37, 226, 228, 229 Venus Erycina, 246, 205, 251, 252, 255, 261, 266 Venus Libitina, 131 Venus Verticordia, 41,42,253,254,261,266 Verrius Flaccus, 16, 42, 182 Vesta, 151,228 Vestal Virgins, 41, 42, 171, 187, 245, 253 Victoria, 248

Virgil, 249 vitium, 154, 156, 157, 158, 160, 161, 162, 164, 165, 166,167 Vitruvius, 132 Volterra, 133, 134, 180,238 Vulcan, 132 Vulci, 125, 126 Zeus, 129

Printed in Rome, September 2003 for «L'ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER by TIPOGRAF s.rl, ROME