B L 805 A9 MAIN UC-NRLF $B im bb3 Zbc TUnivcxsit^ ot dbica^o FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFBLLER HE DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE AND INSCRIPTIONS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (department of latin) BY HAROLD L. AXTELL ^ OF TVc UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 1907 ¥ L>; >-^. ^^j mm^i^-nj^/m^ TLbc XXnivctsii^ of (TbtcaQO FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER THE DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE AND INSCRIPTIONS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (department of latin) BY HAROLD L. AXTELL OF TV'i UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 1907 Ji COPTEIGHT 1907 By The Univeesitt of Chicago Published September 1907 Composed and Printed By The University of Chiotgo Press Chicago. Illinois. U. S. A. TO MY MOTHER IN GRATEFUL APPRECIATION OF HER SYMPATHY AND ENCOURAGEMENT Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/deificationofabsOOaxterich PREFACE In the following treatise the writer has had two objects, in pursu- ance of which the treatise falls into two parts. In Part I an attempt is made to classify the certain and probable deified abstractions besides those in doubt, and to set forth the most important facts about thern. In this I have not aimed at an exhaustive or encyclo- paedic treatment, or to serve the purpose already accomplished by the various dictionaries and manuals upon Roman religion. The main facts of each cult are briefly set forth and, for these, ancient and modern sources have been freely used; but the chief aim has been to discuss at length obscure and disputed points. For this reason more space has often been given to uncertain, though less prominent, examples than to well-known cults. In Part II, I have intended to give a general survey of the origin and position of these deities as a class among the Romans. The evidence of coins and plastic art has not been used, except incidentally in a few cases, since a thoroughgoing investigation in these branches would have been too extensive for the present work. It is to a study of Professor G. Wissowa's Religion und Kultus der Romer that the inception of this opusculum is due, as also its guidance in many respects. I am also greatly indebted to Professor Gk)rdon J. Laing, of the University of Chicago, under whose con- stant supervision my work has been carried on. Professors F. F. Abbott, W. G. Hale, Paul Shorey, and Edward Capps, and Mr. B. L. Ullman have also given me valuable help and advice. Harold L. Axtell University of Idaho June, 1907 BIBLIOGRAPHY Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL.). Ephemeris epigraphica (Eph. epig.). L'annee Spigraphique (L'ann. epig.). Notizie degli Scavi (Notisie). Orelli-Henzen, Inscriptiones latinae (Orelli). Dessau, Inscriptiones latinae selectae (Dessau). Boissieu, Inscriptions antiques de Lyon. Ruggiero, Dizionario epigrafico. Babelon, Monnaies cotisulaires (Babelon). Cohen, Medailles imperiales. Eckhel, Doctrina numorutn veterum (DNU). Roscher, Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie (Roscher). Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclop'ddie der classischen Altertums-Wissenschaft. Daremberg- et Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquites. Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung (Rom. S.V.). Preller, Romische Mythologie (Preller). Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Romer (R.-K.). Wissowa, Gesammelte Abhandlungen (Gesam. Abhandl.). Domaszewski, Die Religion des romischen Heeres. • Carter, De deorum romanorum cognominibus. Engelhard, De personiHcationibus, quae in poesi atque arte romanorum inveni- untur. Aust, De aedibus sacris populi romani conditis. Henzen, Acta fratrum Arvalium. Gilbert, Geschichte und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum. CONTENTS PAGE Part I. The Deified Abstracts as Individual Cults ... 7 I. State-Cults 9 A. Of the Republican Period 9 B. Of the Empire 31 II. Abstracts Popularly But Not Officially Worshiped ... 43 III. Occasional and Individual Deifications 48 IV. Doubtful Examples 50 Part II. The Deified Abstracts as a Class 59 I. Their Origin 59 II. The Deified Abstracts in Literature 67 A. Literature of the Republic 69 B. Literature of the Early Empire . 76 C. Literature of the First and Second Centuries a. d. . 79 D. Literature of the Late Empire 83 • • E. The Christian Fathers 85 III. The Abstracts in the Inscriptions 86 Indices 99 I. Index of Deities 99 II. Index of Authors 100 OF PART I. THE DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS The cases of deification to be considered in this paper may be grouped merely for convenience according to Cicero's classification, De nat. deor. ii. 19. 28 (cf. Wissowa Religion und Kultus der R'dmer [R.-K.], p. 271), as (i) virtues, virtutes, and (2) desirable conditions, res expetendae. The latter class will be interpreted rather broadly to include such material concepts as connote a quality or condition ; e. g., Annona, "abundance," and Pecunia, "wealth." On the other hand, an abstract idea specialized in a purely material way as Tranquillitas, "sea-calm," is practically as concrete as any natural object deified, e. g., Nympha, and is there- fore excluded. In some cases the distinction is not easy to make, but in these cases considerations of general usage and relationship have been the determining factor in the selection. It is more difficult to define deification ; for, apart from all metaphysical speculation as to the essence of deity, into which it is not my purpose to enter, it is impossible to set a sharp limit between personification and deification, so closely related are the two provinces. To personify is to give personality to an object or power; to deify is to ascribe superhuman attributes. Given the principle that certain qualities are actually deities, every quality is a potential god, and the circle is limited only by the number of abstractions which the mind is capable of making. And the circle is not the same for every mind. Qualities so rare and so important to one man as to seem sacred spirits at work in the universe are to another but mere notions. Many, therefore, of the qualities which we find embodied in personality in imaginative literature may have seemed to their authors true deities and not merely rhetorical figures ; but, as there is no way of definitely determining this fact, they must be disregarded. We must rely, therefore, on external evidences of worship, which in order of importance may be classified somewhat as follows : first, temples, priests, and festi- vals ; second, shrines, and altars ; third, the use of the word sacrum in formulae and of the word deus or dea; fourth, statues, reliefs, and figures on coins. Temples, priests, and public festivals in Rome are evidence of 8 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE State-cults. Altars^ and shrines are in themselves signs only of private or perhaps popular worship ; for many religious cults were allowed perfect liberty privately, in so far as they did not become centers of political activity or degrade the morals (cf. Wissowa R.-K., p. 408). The term sacer implies worship (Marc. iii. 3. 2), but in poetry, like deus and dea, it became weakened by rhetorical use to mean anything revered and cherished as rare; cf. the English "divine." Even in inscriptions it came to be used with pure appellatives, as in memoriae cuiusdam sacrum, and once it is found in an honorary inscription to a person ; viz., III. 398, M. Aimilio M. f . Pal. Proculo praef. fabr. M. Lepidi Aug. .... procos. sacrum Civitas Perga- men. h(onoris) causa. This too is upon an altar.^ Cf. VI. 27455, Sacrum M. Titieno M. f. Martiali ; also VI. 24815. Statues, reliefs, and figures with legends upon coins do not of themselves afford sufficient proof of a cult. They are only the artistic expression of mental concepts, embodied personifications revered, but not necessarily deified. Stripped of the ever-present cornucopia, helmet, scepter, veil, or wreath, they are the same female figure (cf. Wissowa R.-K,, p. 9), and even with these symbols it is not seldom impossible to distinguish between them (cf. R. Engelhard De personiUcationihus, pp. 56-64). The extent to which mere qualities are symbolic on coins is seen in the dedica- tion Alacritati on a coin of Gallien (Cohen II, no. 54). For others see Wissowa R.-K., p. 280. It is questionable whether a thorough study of the figures and their symbols, as this scholar suggests, would determine what were the true deities, since the caprice of an artist is as great as the rhetorical personification of a poet. Both care little for actual facts of cult. This kind of evidence would *It has been held that in some cases altars imply no true worship, but are simply commemorative; e.g., Tac. Ann. i. 14, aram adoptionis ; iii. i8, ultioni ; iv. 74, clementiae (see Furneaux and Nipperdei ad loc.) ; Cic. Phil. 14. 34 ; Suet. Aug. I ; CIL. IX. 3079» 3837 ; VI. 3474, 361 1 ; Thes. Hng. Lat., p. 388 ; Ruggiero Diz. epig., p. 594, The passage from Cicero implies figurative worship, that from Suetonius is doubtful in text and meaning. The altars with inscriptions upon them are in honor of some person, but they may well have been used at the same time for the worship of some deity also. For Tacitus see below, p. 80. These few exceptions, if valid, are insufficient to throw any material doubt upon the use of an altar for worship in any other case. 'The representations, however, of a palm and an oak tree with serpents near by may possibly indicate real worship of the genius. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 9 transcend the limits of the present paper, and, like rhetorical per- sonification, it is used here only in connection with more certain proofs of worship. In accordance with these various kinds of evidence, the deified abstractions fall naturally into three classes : I. State-cults. II. Popular but unofficial cults. III. Occasional and individual deifications. I. STATE-CULTS A. OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD In chronological order, as far as they can be determined, these are: FoRTUNA, or, by her earlier and fuller designation, Fors For- TUNA. — ^Varro L.L. v. 64 names Fors as separate from Fortuna, and other writers use this name, but it is not found in the actual cult According to tradition, Servius Tullius (Ancus Marcius, Plut. De fort. Rom. 5) founded two temples^-one at the first mile-stone on the Via Portuensis, the other in the Forum Boarium. The loca- tion of these temples outside the Pomerium and the traditional designation of Servius Tullius as their founder indicate that For- tuna was not a native Roman deity, but that she was adopted very early, probably from neighboring Italic communities, e. g., the Sabines (Praeneste, Varro loc. cit.), the Latins (Antium), the Etruscans (Ferentinum), or the Umbrians (Fanum Fortunae). See Peter in Roscher I. 1548. Most probably she was a beneficent power of good luck in the earliest stage. This conception of her function is supported by her worship among those of humble state in the temple of Servius Tullius, by the mythical stories of her association with that fortu- nate youth, by her various services to women, and by the fact that she was sung and honored by farmers after successful harvest (Ovid Fasti vi. 771, 569 ; iv. 375 ; Columella x. 311). The evidence is much too incomplete to determine which of these various phases was the earlier. Marquardt {Rom. S.V. Ill, p. 578) supported by Wissowa {R.-K., p. 206), seems to hold that originally she was a goddess of agriculture and horticulture. They cite Columella x. 311. But that passage is far too incidental, as Peter (Roscher I. 1502 f.) has seen ; and even if it is granted that the farmers worshiped her (and it lO DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS JN ROMAN LITERATURE was natural that they should), this by no means implies that they alone worshiped her. For how can we derive her functions as a goddess of women from an agricultural starting-point? The late farm-calendars {CIL. P, p. 280) adduced by Wissowa afford no help, for they name sacrifices to deities not restricted in origin to agricultural relations ; e. g., Mercury, Hercules, Spes, Salus. They simply pick out important sacrifices for the various months. The situation of the temples in the country would be more significant evidence did we not know of Fortuna Muliebris ad IV miliarium in via Latina. Finally, the absence of Fortuna, in the list of ancient agricultural gods in Varro De re rust. i. i. 6, is strange if she had been originally revered as a goddess of the farm alone. From a spirit of good fortune she became, in a later conception, one of chance (incerti casus, Cic. De nat^eor. ii. 11. 28), and this shift in conception, due possibly to the Greek idea of Fortuna caeca et exoculata (Apul. vii. 2), led to designations bona and mala (Plant. Aul. 100; Rud. 501), so that under the latter epithet an altar was erected on the Esquiliae (Cic. op. cit. iii. 25. 63). This Greek influence is seen also in the cult of Fortuna lovis puer Primigenia, the first-born daughter of Jupiter, with its system of lots at Praeneste, which cult was not introduced into Rome until 194 B. c, when after the siege of Crotona the consul built a temple to Fortuna publica populi Romani Quiritium, on the Quirinal, followed by others in the same locality and on the Capitoline. Numerous other cults of various names sprang up, representing functions and relations which were in many cases very minute, so that in these specializations she became of no more distinct individ- uality than a genius; cf. Fortuna huius loci (CIL. III. 10399) »* Fortunab (us) Verulanae (VI. 182) ; per Fortunas (vestras) ves- trosque Genios, (Apul. viii. 20), and Peter in Roscher I. 1521 ff. As a special protector of private homes she was frequently included among the Penates (Helbig Wandgemdlde, pp. 73 ff.)- The emperors, beginning with Augustus, gave great prominence to Fortuna Redux, honoring her with an altar and annual games on the anniversary of the return of Augustus from the East in 19 B. c. She was brought into relation with the cult of the emperors by the cognomen Augusta. Recognizing Fortuna as the supreme deity in crises, the state officials placed images of the Fortunae Antiates on the throne of Jupiter during Poppaea's confinement in DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS II 63 A. D. (Tac. Ann, xv. 23). Antoninus Pius had the golden image of Fortuna in his sleeping-room, and transferred it to that of Marcus Aurelius as the sign of his succession (Julius Capitoli- nus iii. 12. 5, 6). It is not strange that many considered her dearum praecipua (Fronto, p. 8, Naber). The Roman armies of the Empire gave an important place to the goddess of chance. Domaszewski (Religion des romischen Heeres, p. 40) suggests that Vespasian was the first to introduce the cult, as previously it was contrary to Roman spirit to emphasize the importance of chance in the army, which intended to master its power. But that the connection between Mars and Fortuna was seen at least in republican times is proved by the companion dedica- tions to Mars and Fortuna de praidad (XIV. 2577, 2578). The juxtaposition of Fortuna with Hercules in the inscriptions of the equites singulares (VI. 31140, 31 145, 31148-49; cf. also IX. 4674) may point to some inner relationship between these cults, possibly derived in some way from the myth that Hercules gave the horn of Amalthea to her (Porph. ad Hor. Carm. i. 17. 14; cf. Wissowa Gesam. Ahhandl, p. 303, who also shows that no German deity was concealed in the name Fortuna in these inscriptions). Concordia. — The goddess of harmony had her first temple on the east slope of the Capitoline above the Forum, built in 367 b. c. by the dictator Camillus to commemorate the reconciliation of plebeians and patricians after the passage of the Licinian laws. Of the origin of this cult we know nothing besides these facts. But Preller (11^, p. 260) and Peter (in Roscher I. 915) consider Con- cordia originally a secondary designation ("Nebenform") for Venus, derived perhaps from Venus Cloacina, who, they say, had a shrine in the vicinity of the temple of Concordia. This hypothesis, however, is not justified by the extant evidence, which is (i) a coin of Mussidius Longus, bearing the figure of a building inscribed cloacin(a) on the reverse side, the obverse showing the face of Concordia; (2) a resemblance of Concordia on two coins of the gens Vinicia to Venus Victrix. But Venus Cloacina is only a guess by Pliny (N,H. xv. 119) to explain a deity that had long since lost its original signification to everybody, in the same way as Venus Murcia and Venus Libitina had lost theirs (cf. Pauly- Wissowa EncycL IV. 60 f.). As for the resemblance to Venus Victrix (Peter), it is not sufficiently marked to be convincing. 12 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Venus Victrix has a diadem and other forms that Concordia lacks. Venus Erycina (Babelon Monnaies consulaires I, p. 379) seems more Hke her, and Fides (Babelon II, pp. 127 and 136) has a similar expression. The ornaments of laurel, earring, and necklace are not decisive, for they are found on other deities (cf. the necklace of Anna Perenna). This evidence, therefore, is far too slight to give any degree of probability to Preller's identification. There would be as good reason to connect her with Juno from the African inscription (VIII. 4197, lunoni Concordiae Aug.), in which the combination evidently signifies the marriage state, and Concordia is doubtless appositive. But from this juxtaposition we cannot infer any orginal identity of the two. So far as we know, Concordia was always an independent conception. Besides the temple near the Forum, there was another on the arx in 216 b. c, erected to commemorate the suppression of a military revolt in Gaul (Liv. xxii. 33. 7). Again after the civil war in 44 B. c. the Senate established the cult of Concordia Nova, and in 10 b. c. Augustus founded a sanctuary for her in conjunction with Salus and Pax. Later the cult typified, besides political con- cord, the cordial relations in the emperor's family ; e. g., between Tiberius and Livia {CIL. X. 810; Ovid Fasti vi. 637), Nero and Agrippina (VI. 2041, 1. 31, Concordiae honoris Agrippinae), Vitel- lius and Galeria (VI. 2051, ii, 1. 13). Vitellius was fawningly called Concordia by the senators and took the name as a cognomen (Suet. Vitel. 15). Statins {Silv. i. 2. 239, 240) speaks of our goddess in the aspect of marriage. Still later the reference is to the relations between the emperors and their heirs: Concordia Augus- torum {CIL. VIII. 17829), Augusta ^ (ibid.; cf. VIII. 8301, and Hiibner Annali 1864, p. 263). The importance of this state-cult is strikingly attested by the fact that in Patavium a special organization of Concordiales existed, inferior in rank, but connected with the Augustales (CIL. V. p. 268, nos. 2307, 2843, 2865, 2869, 2872). But, outside the sphere of a state-cult, Concordia was also 'The phrases Concordia Augusti (CIL. VIII. 18891. ii. 465) and Concordia ipsius (VI, p. 479) are difficult to understand ; for the harmony of one person is impossible. Mommsen (ad VIII. 18891) assumes two statues each set up to the Concordia, or harmonious spirit, of one of the two rules. Hiibner (ad II. 465) connects this phrase with the reading Concordia p(opuli) R(omani) on coins, and conjectures that it refers to the cordial relations of Augustus with the Roman people. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 1 3 frequently honored throughout the Empire. I will mention a few interesting cases. In Africa a statue of Concordia Perpetua was set up by a city subject to a neighboring colony, but having its own commonwealth (VIII. 15447; cf. also VIII. 6942). In Sicily the Lilybaean state erected a temple of Concordia Agrigentinorum for the neighboring state of Agrigentum, possibly recalling their inter- ference and restoration of peace in the affairs of their neighbors or the harmonious attitude of the latter toward themselves (X. 7192). In Thamugudis, Africa, the inhabitants, having constructed a forum with their own hands and means, at the order of the authorities (ordo) erected pedestals to Concordia populi et ordinis (VIII. 2342). The armies apparently did not commonly worship this deity, but we find a temple (?) erected to Concordia var(iarum) stationum in connection with the Genius b(ene)fidariorum (XIII. 6127; Eph. Epig. IV, pp. 383, 400; Domaszewski op. cit., p. 107). Salus. — In Salus we have another ancient Italic divinity attested by archaic inscriptions from Praeneste, Pisaurum, and Horta; viz., Salutes pocolom (I. 49), Salute (I. 179). In some unknown way the Sabines assumed a relation between her and Sancus, as the name Salus Semonia indicates (see references in Wissowa R,-K., p. 122). She was given a temple on the Quirinal in 302 B.C. ( Varro L. L. v. 52 ; Liv. x. 1.9: dedication day August 5, Fasti Amiterni; Cic. Pro Sestio 131) as the goddess of welfare, in which sense Plautus refers exclusively to her, while Terence sometimes couples her with Aesculapius (e. g., Hecyra 338). This is due to the fact that just after Plautus' time, in 180 b. c, she was identified with Hygieia, the wife of Aesculapius (Liv. xl. 37. 1-3). But the more general conception of the earlier period endured along with this new narrow specialization (e. g., Ter. Adelp. 761 ; cf. Cic. In Verr. iii. 131 ; Pro. Font. 21 ; Ad Att. xii. 45. 3) down into the empire (V. 428, Saluti Augustae pro incolumitate Piquenti; XIII. 1589, Saluti generis humani). This deified abstract is one of the most important in the list, at least in the Empire. The frequent prayers to her alone and con- jointly with the Capitoline trinity which are preserved in the records of the Arval Brothers show this. It is not certain, however, \ that in these she is always the donor of welfare, as Wissowa holds. In the prayer in behalf of the good health of Nero, the probable heir to the throne (50-54 a. d., VI, no. 2034), Jupiter, Juno, 14 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Minerva, and Salus are the deities invoked; but the formula, instead of being abbreviated by a reference to the same words used above to Jupiter, as is the case with the prayers to Juno and Minerva, and usually with those to Salus (cf. CIL. VP, p. 466, 1. 13; p. 510, 1. 20; p. 514, 1. 4; p. 524, 1. 17. and elsewhere), is repeated in full as follows: [Sa]lus publica populi Romani Q[uiri- tium te quaesumus precam]urque uti tu Neronem .... salvom incolumemque con [serves et in reliquom malae vjaletudinis primo quoque [tempore praestes expertem ....]. The reason for this unusual repetition lies apparently in the conscious recognition that Salus was the special patron of health. Moreover, as Aesculapius and Hygieia-Salus were of Greek origin, and the Greek religion did not prescribe a male sacrifice to a male deity and a female to a female as the Roman did (Wissowa R.-K., p. 137), the exceptional sacrifice in CIL. VI. 2037 = VI. 32352, Saluti eius b(ovem) m(arem), if the copy is correct, may have been due to a confusion of the Roman goddess with the Greek. On March 30 Salus populi Romani was worshiped together with Janus, Concordia (above, p. 12), and Pax. In the farm-calendars she is mentioned with Spes and Diana as divinities to receive sacri- fices in August, and she was doubtless a household goddess (cf. her name on a gem (XL 6712^®^), and on a clay vessel (II. 6257^^^), but it is surprising that we have no private inscription to her in Rome. Like Victoria and Fortuna, she is often very closely coupled with the great gods (III. 10109; Uann epig. 1899, 7), and she seems to have had a temple with the Capitoline trio in Lam- baesis (VIII. 2648) and with Roma in Pergamum (III. 399). She was worshiped throughout the Empire (cf. Claudian Carm. Min. 30. 188), with temples at Venusia (IX. 427), Ariminum (XL 361), Capera (II. 806), and with other cults in Lugdunum (XIII. 1782), Pompeii {Notizie 1891, p. 265), and Britain (VII. 100). If we may judge from the mention of a flaminica in Urbs Salvia near Ancona and the probable derivation of that city's name, apparently Salus was the patron deity of that city. It is somewhat surprising that the regular Roman armies did not honor her (Domas- zewski op. cit., p. 43), although she was a favorite deity of the equites singulares (see Fortuna above, p. 11). We may also mention in this connection Hygieia, who came into Rome as part of the cult of Aesculapius in 293 b. c, and existed DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 1 5 long after she was officially identified with, and absorbed by, Salus in i8o B.C. Thus in 153 a. d. we find a lex collegi Aesculapi et Hygiae (sic) in Rome (VI. 10234), but it is noticeable that here, and in nearly all the inscriptions where the Greek form occurs, the wor- shipers are Greek (e.g., X. 1546, 1571 ; ^I. 2092; VI. 17, 18, 19; IX. 5823). Rarely is the goddess mentioned apart from Aescula- pius (Orelli 1582; XL 4128, 5025). In the temple of Aesculapius and Salus in Lambaesis were altars to Aesculapius and Hygieia. Valetudo, or Bona Valetudo, is a variant and translation of Hygieia, apparently used to distinguish the Hygieia-Salus from the native Salus of general welfare. So on the denarius of M. Acilius Glabrio (54 b. c.) appears the head of Salus on the one side with the name Salutis, and the figure of Hygieia on the other with the title Valetu(do). Also in a bilingual inscription from the Asclepieion of Athens (III. 7279) Valetudo stands as the equiva- lent of *YyieLrj. Much more ancient, however (third century B. c.?), is the inscription from Lecce in southern Italy (IX. 3812) : V. Vetius Sa. f. Valetudne d. d. 1. m. See also IX. 3813 : Annius Vecus Valetudne donum dat. In Africa at Auzia a public temple was dedicated in 235 a. d. to our deity with the full name Bona Valetudo (VIII. 20747) ; cf. VIII. 9610 at Manliana in the same region: Bonae Valetudini sacrum ex responso Herculis L. Pesc(ius) Honoratus sac(erdos) d. d. d. p. CCXXII. \ Victoria. — ^The first known temple to Victoria was founded August I, 294 B.C., upon the Palatine (Liv. x. 33. 9; xxix. 14. 14). It was on the clivus Victoriae, but its exact position is uncer- tain. This and the adjoining chapel of Victoria Virgo, founded in 193, are the only seats of this cult in Rome of which we hear. The early history of the goddess has been much disputed recently. Formerly it was commonly held that she was a very ancient divinity, going back in origin to Vica Pota, with whom she was confused (Asconius, p. 13). Her equivalent was seen in the Sabine goddess Vacuna (Preller I, pp. 408 ff. ; II, p. 244, n. 3; cf. Wissowa, p. 44, n. 3). Recently, however, Wissowa (R.-K., pp. 127 f.), upon evidence at first sight very significant, has advanced the theory that this cult was an offshoot from that of Jupiter Victor. He calls attention to the facts that (i) in the records of the sacri- fices of the Arvales to the gods in behalf of the ruling house we find, following the Capitoline trinity, at one time Jupiter Victor, at 1 6 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE another Victoria, and in one case (VI. 2086, 1. 27) the two are coupled in a pair thus: lovi Victori b(ovem) m(arem) a(uratum) et Victor iae b(ovem) f (eminam) a(uratam) ; (2) the temple of Victoria on the Palatine was built a year after that of Jupiter Victor on the Quirinal( ?).* These facts, shrewdly noted and ingeniously fitted together, are certainly indicative of a close connection between the said cults ; nevertheless, I do not believe they are sufficient to establish the genesis of Victoria from Jupiter. For, in the first place, the Arval Brothers, wishing to make their list complete and inclusive of deities presiding over all phases of the emperor's life, would think in some cases of Jupiter Victor as the helper toward victory, at other times would cover that idea by naming Victoria herself. Naturally Jupiter Victor would be named oftener than the other gods with the same cognomen, e. g., Mars, Hercules, or Venus, because of his supreme importance and greater prestige. As to the coupling of the two deities by the word et in VI. 2086, 1. 2^ (213 A. D.), this is done for the purpose of filling out and dwelling on the idea of victory, much in the same way as in the reign of Trajan prayers were uttered to lovis Victor, Mars Victor, Victoria, and Hercules Victor, the chief gods of victory (VI. 2074). And if a more significant meaning be seen in this use of et, and it be granted that the Arvals saw in Victoria a feminine counterpart to the great god of victory, it by no means follows that such a conception of the third century a. d. was general or was held in the €arly republic when the cult began. Of course, Jupiter Victor would often be coupled with Victoria, oftener possi- bly than any other god; but the other deities were also, to some extent. In fact, a very good theoretical case for Mars Victor as the original starting-point might be made out from the facts (i) that Victoria follows directly upon Mars Pater and Mars Victor in the above-named inscription, while lovis Victor has preceded and is separated by Salus from this group; (2) that Mars and Victoria are very frequently joined in inscriptions — e.g., VII. 220; III. 1098, 5790, 5897, 5898; XIII. 6593. In Raetia (III. 14370) the two divinities had a common temple. The second point rests on the supposed inner connection between * Gilbert {Rom in Alterthum III, p. 428) saw a connection between the two cults, on the supposition that this latter temple was on the Palatine. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 1 7 the founding of the temples of Jupiter Victor and of Victoria in suc- cessive years. But that this is more than a coincidence is by no means sure. At all events, the natalis of the latter was on the Kalends and not the Ides, which is the date sacred to Jupiter Victor ; and since the location of this cult is uncertain, the argument from space relations is entirely lacking. On the whole, therefore, this theory is not convincing, and it is much simpler to consider our goddess an independent deification of a very early date. The notion of victory is quite as important and general as that of the sky or of war. To the early Romans engaged in struggles against their hostile neighbors it was an all- important and common conception, and to me it seems quite as prob- I able that they thought of a special spirit granting them success in ■ war as that they thought of it as coming from their sky-god. From the general notion of victory, any god might be looked upon as assisting toward it, and thus we find Jupiter (lovis). Mars, Hercules, Venus, Diana, Fortuna, Minerva, and Lar with the cog- nomen victor or victrix respectively. (Cf. Carter De deorum romanorum cognominibus under "victor;" A. Baudrillart Divinites de la Victoire, p. 84.) Furthermore, ancient evidence points to this deification as a native Italic cult. The Sabines worshiped her under the name Vacuna, if we may trust Varro (Aero, ad Hor. Epp. i. ic 49), who probably is corroborated by the inscription of Vespasian (XIV. 3485).** Victoria was also honored in Latium, if we may trust the word Vitoria (a dialectal peculiarity or a mistake for Victoria) on a mirror (I. 58) and on a cestus (Baudrillart, pp. 48 f.), and among the Marsi {CIL. I. 183, 184). Finally, Dionysius Halicarnassus (I. 32) states that there was an ancient altar in her honor upon the Palatine. In the face, therefore, first of the belief of the ancient Romans • See Baudrillart op. citu, pp. 32 ff. I agree in the main with the author's conclusions, though nothing certain can be proved as to the identity of this temple with the ancient shrine of Vacuna. An analogue, however, may be cited for the replacing of the old name Vacuna by the new Victoria in the substitution of Salus for Hygieia in prayers by order of the authorities in charge of the Sibylline books in 180 B.C. (Liv. xl. 37. 2) ; also in the fluctuation between the designations Aesculapius et Hygia and Aesculapius et Salus on the temple and altars in Lambaesis (VIIL zsygz, 2589, 2590). 1 8 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE and their antiquarian Varro, and of the evidence from inscriptions, which point toward cults of Victoria among Sabines, Marsians, aind Latins ; second, of the general recognition of a spirit of victory in Vica Pota going back perhaps to 509 B.C., it is not safe to establish a theory of origin based on a fancied relation whose main support is a single inscription of the late empire. Mommsen's identification with Vitula, "Exultation," is due to an error of Macrobius (Sat. iii. 2. 11). Victoria was apparently never worshiped outside the sphere of military conquest. As was noticed above, her name was very fre- quently joined with that of Mars, especially in Gaul and the eastern provinces where they had temples together (III. 14370®, XIII. 6593; cf. III. 1098, 5790, 5897, 5898). Fortuna is another com- mon associate (XIV. 4002; VI. 2314; cf. Baudrillart, pp. 87 f., for other examples of her cult). Among the dii militares she stood next in rank to Jupiter and Mars. But the armies specialized the notion to represent either the victorious might of the Imperator (with reference often to a particular victory) or the power of the troops. This specialization is strikingly illustrated by an inscription from Tunis, Africa (Cagnat. L'ann epig. 1895, ^o. 71) : Pro' salute et victoriis Imp. Caes Gordiani Pii Felicis Aug. .... cum statuis Victoriarum tribus .... aedificavit et dedi- cavit Here the emperor has a temple to his several Victories, each having her own statue. There is nothing but pure flattery of the emperor, and it is not the goddess who was honored, but the victories themselves were exalted as divine.® \ Spes. — During the First Punic War, in 258 b. c, a temple was erected to Spes in the Forum Holitorium, whose natalis was August I (Fasti Vallenses, CIL. I, p. 320), but it is quite probable that this deification was made much earlier than this date. For the name Spes Vetus, known throughout Roman history, referred to a district near the Porta Labicana, and was probably given to an older sanc- tuary of Spes to distinguish it from the later more prominent public temple. There is, however, little warrant, as Wissowa (R.-K., pp. 273 f.) has shown, for assuming with Preller (II, p. 253) that she was an agricultural deity connected with Venus, the Italic goddess of the garden. While Tibullus in i. i. 9 prays that she may not •Victoria, cited as a deity in Index, L'ann. epig. 1903, no. 107, is, of course, only a woman's name, as is shown by the epitaph accompanying it. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS I9 fail the farmer, but give him heaps of grain/ in ii. 6. 20-28 he generaHzes her functions, viz.: Spes favet et fore eras semper ait melius Spes alit agricolas, Spes sulcis credit aratis semina, quae magno fenore reddat ager; haec laqueo volucres, haec captat arundine pisces cum tenues hamos abdidit ante cibus : Spes etiam valida solatur compede vinctum (crura sonant ferro, sed canit inter opus) ; Spes facilem Nemesim spondet mihi sed negat ilia. Ei mihi, ne vincas, dura puella, deam. In Plautus (e.g., Cist. 670, Spes sancta), where we meet first in literature with this goddess, the meaning is always general in the several passages referring to her (Bacch. 893; Pseud. 709; Merc. 867; Rud. 231, 275), and in later literature there is no trace of this assumed original specification. The figures with the pomegranate bud or flower ® are merely symbolical like the cornucopia, and prob- ably go back to the representation of the Greek *EAiris; cf. Elpis and Nemesis on a marble vase in Rome, the former holding a branch in the left hand and a pomegranate flower in the thumb and first finger of the right (Roscher, see Elpis). Macrobius (i. 21, 24) represents lustitia (Virgo) holding a wheat-ear in her hand. As a deity dear to mankind her full name is Bona Spes, found on a seal, a brass ring at Rome, and an amphora (XI. 6705^**; IX. 6080). She had temples in Ostia (XIV. 375^^), an altar at Aricia (XIV. 2158), and statues mentioned as gifts to Fortuna ' It would be as valid to suppose that Pax was originally a garden deity from Tibullus i. 10. 45 : At nobis Pax alma veni spicamque teneto perfluat et pomis candidus ante sinus especially as Ovid (Fasti i. 104) says: pax Cererem nutrit, pacis alUmna Ceres. " It is difficult to explain the meaning of this symbol. Possibly in the bud and the opening flower there is hope of a perfect future. At any rate, the fact that Indulgentia also carries a flower in the same position on coins of Alexander Severus (Cohen* IV, no. 65) shows that the symbolic content was lost and this symbol came to be merely conventional. In the same way Concordia was given the olive branch without reference to any material sphere. On the other hand, there may be some support for Preller's view in a dedication to Fortuna, Spes, and Venus (VI. i5594)» where, besides, a globe, pole, wheel, and crown with Cupids and a dove, attributes of Fortuna and Venus, we find a bough laden with apples. 20 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE (XIV. 2853, 2867). With the latter she is often connected. Horace (Carm. i. 35. 21) places her with Fides in the retinue of Fortuna, and in Capua these three have a cult in close conjunction (X. 3775). But whereas she is contrasted favorably with Fortuna in an epigram, Fortuna innocentem saepe, numquam Bona Spes deserit (Ribbeck Appendix Sententiarum II, 1. 255), sepulchral inscriptions often mock her ; e. g. XL 6433, Spes et Fortuna, valete, nil mihi vobiscum est: alias deludite quaeso. By the emperors she was worshiped with special regard to the youth, the "hope" of the house, after Augustus established a special supplicatio to her and luventas on the anniversary of his assump- tion of the toga virilis (October 18). Only once, however, was she brought into the prayers of the Arval Brothers (VP, 2043, 1- 10). For other references to Spes Augusta see Wissowa op. cit. Fides. — The conception of good-faith was made sacred in the dim antiquity of the Roman state, although the first temple of which we hear was founded on the Capitol jLii^_254_or 250 b. c. Tradition ascribed this deification to Numa or the Sabines (Plut. Numa 16; Dion. Hal. ii. 75; Varro L.L. v. 74), and the antiquity of this goddess was designated by the epithet cana; cf. Verg. Aen. i. 292, Cana Fides et Vesta, Remo cum fratre Quirinus lura dabunt. Better evidence, however, is her relation with the ritual of the ancient flamens (Livy i. 24. i). The idea of faith and fidelity had a close association with Jupiter from the earliest times, and with the title Dius Fidius the great god of the heavens was worshiped in a temple on the Quiri- nal founded 466 b. c. It is the usually accepted theory that Fides was an offshoot of this cult (Preller I, p. 251 ; Wissowa, pp. 48, 123 f.), on the following evidence: (i) The fact, above mentioned, that the three flamens of Jupiter, Mars, and Quirinus rode annually to the temple of Fides on the Capitol, and, with their right hands covered to the tips by white bands, offered sacrifice. The function of the Flamen Dialis shows that he was in early times connected with the worship of Fides. (2) The proximity of the temple of Fides to that of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. This is assured by Cato's remark, quoted by Cicero (De off. iii. 29) : qui iusiurandum violat, is Fidem violat, quam in Capitolio vicinam lovis O. M., ut in Catonis oratione est, maiores nostri voluerunt. (3) The cult of Dius (Diovis) Fidius on the Quirinal. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 21 These facts certainly indicate a close connection of "faith" with the supreme god of Olympus, which the Romans themselves recognized. Whether it means more than this — i. e., an actual genesis — cannot be demonstrated. For, without taking up the general question of such evidence as (2) and (3), which will be discussed later (p. 65), one or two objections present them- selves. Why, if the annual sacrifice were a relic of a rite peculiar to Jupiter, did the other flamens take part? Is it not as simple to believe, with Livy (whether Numa instituted the ceremony or not is immaterial), that it was a rite intended to show that faith was a basic principle of the state, that Fides therefore took front rank as a state-cult, and that they bound themselves to good- faith? Cf. Aulus GelHus xx. i. 39: sed omnium (virtutum) maxime atque praecipue fidem colunt sanctamque habuit tarn privatim quam publice. On the other hand, the most positive evidence of all is lacking, viz., the coincidence of dedication days. The date of Fides, the Kalends of October, is not the same as that of Dius Fidius, the Nones of June, nor a day sacred to Jupiter. The full name of the goddess was Fides publica populi Romani ^ Quiritium and had reference to the strict maintenance of a pledge which was the meaning of the symbolic ritual; cf. also Catullus XXX. II f. However, only one inscription from the republican / period is extant, on a third-century cippus from Picenum. In the empire the customary cognomen Augusta was given her also (IX. 5422, 5845) and the phase of her cult emphasized was that of loyalty to the emperor. One curious inscription (X. 5903) possibly refers to conjugal fidelity. Another (IX. 60), on the tomb of a trader which alludes to his anxiety concerning trade and expenses, regards her apparently as the patroness of commercial credit, as follows: Alma Fides, tibi ago grates, sanctissima diva; f\ fortuna infracta ter me fessum recreasti; {' tu digna es, quam mortales optent sibi cuncti. Though represented as a military deity on coins (Fides legionum, etc.), she is not found among the cults of the army.® N Hongs. — This deity was rarely honored outside the sphere of "One veteran, however, dedicates an offering to her (III. 14342^). Inscrip- tions are rare, although the cult lasted probably as late as Arcadius, Honorius, and Theodosius (Notizie 1880, p. 53). / 22 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE war/® His temple was vowed in the war with the Ligurians, 233 B. c, and sooij afterward was dedicated. In 205 M. Claudius Marcellus built a temple of Virtus in close connection with it, so that these two cults became virtually one, and dedications to Honos alone are rare. (Examples are V. 5892, 5869, 4449; XII. 1815, III. 5123. The usual order is Honos et Virtus, but the reverse occurs in III. 3307.) Marius built upon some hillside another temple of beautiful symmetry, but without marble (Vitr. praef. 17), and Pompey built a sanctuary for these deities at the same time with those for Felicitas and Venus Victrix. The origin of the cult is unknown, but the story of Cicero (De legg. ii. 58) regarding the discovery of the lamina inscribed Honoris near the Porta Collina and the removal of graves to make room for a temple there probably goes far back, since in this vicinity an ancient inscription was found reading: M. Bicoleio V. 1. Honore donom dedet merito. As a military deity, Honos was individualized with reference to the legion, and also very curiously to its eagle : e. g., XIII. 6690 : Genium legioni (sic) XXII Pr. P. F. Honori aquilae leg. s. s. (?) Aurelius . . . . ; also XIII. 6708, 6752; cf. Domaszewski op. cit., pp. 41 f. Probably Honos did not occupy a prominent place in the religion of the emperors. He is mentioned only once in the prayers of the Arval Brothers (CIL. VI. 2044, 1. 5 ; 66 a. d.), when a cow was sacrificed to him. If we are not to think of an error in the record, Wissowa's brilliant suggestion of Greek influence in this cult is quite plausible (R.-K., p. 137). For an analogous case see Salus, above. Moreover, we find no use of the cognomen Augustus except on a coin of Antoninus ( Coh. II, no. 449) . At Ter- racina there were games given to him (X. 8260), and at Narbo a special collegium was devoted to him (XII. 4371). Ops. — Although without a sanctuary until probably the third century (293-218 b. c), and worshiped only in the Regia by the Vestal Virgins, Ops is the oldest of the abstracts, and perhaps the only one native to the ancient Romans; for her name is preserved in the calendars of ancient festivals in the terms Opalia and Opi- consiva. This latter name and the by-name Ops Consiva identify her closely with Consus, as Wissowa (R.-K., p. 168, and Roscher "See, however, CIL. V. 4449, 7468; XI. 3147; HI. 7599, for political allu-. sions ; V. 5892, for commercial. Orelli 1815, cited by Wissowa in Roscher, is called spurious by Henzen. N DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 23 III. 932) has shown, the connection with Saturn having been derived from the false identification of Saturn with Cronos, and of Ops as a Roman deity of the earth with Rhea or Terra, the wife of Cronos. Varro ( L.L. v. 64) considers her of Sabine origin, brought into Rome by Titus Tatius. The temple on the Capitoline is not mentioned till 186 b. c. (Aust. De aedihus, no. 56). Another cult. Ops Opifera in the Forum ( ?), was established between 123 and 114 b. c. (Plin. N.H. xi. 174; Fasti Amit., December 19). As the early cult referred especially to the abundance of the crops, it is possible that the latter was thought of particularly as a goddess of assistance. The word ops has this meaning as early as Ennius (fragment in Vah- len 126; cf. Cic. Tusc. disp. iii. 19. 44), and this is the only meaning of opifer found in literature and inscriptions ; e. g. : Ennius (ed. Vahlen, p. 109), fidem opiferam socium advocaret; Ovid. Met. xv. 653, cum deus Aesculapius in somnis opifer consistere visus; Orelli 1753, Fortunae Opiferae pro salute; etc. The sacrifice mentioned in the calendar of the Arvales {CIL. I^, p. 326, August 23) to Ops Opifera, Volcanus, luturna, the nymphs, and Quirinus, would under this theory have been performed to secure help in case of fire.^^ Outside of Rome only a temple at Praeneste is known (XIV. 3007), and but few inscriptions are extant. The use of Ops in literature has been fully and accurately treated by Wissowa in Roscher III. 935 if. LiBERTAS. — Much difference of opinion has arisen regarding the external facts of this cult. There are allusions to temples of Libertas, of Jupiter Libertas, and of Jupiter Liber on the Aventine (Liv. xxiv. 16. 19; Mon. Ancyr. 4. 6; Fast. Arval., September i). Jordan {Eph. Epig. I, p. 237) and Aust (op. cit. v. Jupiter Liber- tas) apparently took the first two names to refer to the same cult. Wissowa (Roscher III. 2032, R.-K., p. 126) made the two latter equivalent, but rightly asserted a separate temple for Libertas built before 238 b. c. by a certain Gracchus. Following Preller (I, p. 195 ; II, pp. 252 f.), he derives Libertas from Jupiter Libertas, whom all the above-named scholars consider one deity (cf. Aust. in Roscher II. 663 f.^^) — a conclusion supported by two similar inscriptions found outside Rome (XIV. 2579; XI. 658). "The phrase Opi divinae (IX. 2633), seems also to mean "divine help," but is suspicious ^Roscher III. 935). " Becker IHandb. der r'dm. Altert., p. 721), Babelon (op. cit I, p. 473), and 24 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE On this theory, the intermediate stage in the differentiation is found in Jupiter Liber, whose function of creative power became subordinated to that of freedom. (Cf. CIL. III. 14203^, where Greek slaves set up a statue of this god to record their manumis- sion.) As a god of freedom, then, he was sometimes called Jupiter Libertas, from whom Libertas became independent, and her relation to the parent-deity was preserved by the fact that her natalis was on the Ides (cf. Wissowa R.-K. loc. cit., and Carter op. cit., p. 13). The fundamental idea of Libertas was apparently personal liberty, as we may infer from the fact that a painting of the battle in which the slaves secured their manumission was placed in the temple in 238 b. c. (Liv. ibid.). During the regime of Caesar the cult stood for political liberty, freedom from despotism, and in this sense Brutus and Cassius exalted the goddess. Similarly, in the Empire, after the death of despotic rulers like Nero and Domitian, she was exalted and given the cognomen Augusta (11. 2035; also V. 326, Genio Lib. Aug. may perhaps be filled out as Genio Liber- tatis Augustae).^^ Mens. — Mens had a cult upon the Capitol founded 215 b. c. natalis June 8, as the giver of intelligence (August. De civ. dei iv. 21; Tertul. Ad nat. ii. 15), which quality the Romans deified after their disastrous mistake at Trasimenus. The seat of her cult in southern Italy (Paestum), and the dedication of the cult in Rome in conjunction with that of Venus Erycina, a Sicilian god- dess, point to Greek origin; but the assumption by Preller that Mens was practically a cognomen of Venus Erycina is not war- ranted. (Cf. Wissowa R.-K., p. 260, with whom I agree in toto). Although Mens is loosely used sometimes for animus, "disposi- tion," in literature and in the inscriptions (e.g., XIII. 2313; VIII. 16463), yet we have no evidence for understanding, with Preller, the special sense of a "loyal disposition" in the worship by the guilds of slaves and freedmen (I. 1156; X. 472, 4636, 1550). Blanchet (in Daremberg and Saglio III, p. 1199) hold that two distinct deities were joined in one cult. It is certainly difficult to explain on the hypothesis of one cult the coin of the Egnatian gens, which almost surely represents Jupiter and Libertas standing on the porch of a distyle temple. "Mommsen ad loc. is mistaken in holding this impossible on the ground that lunoni would be required; cf. Genio Pacis (VIII. 17832), Genio Victoriae (II. 2407), etc. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 25 Cicero (De legg. ii. 19. 31 ; De nat. deor. ii. 61 ; ii. 79; Hi. 88) evidently regarded this cult with great honor, and frequently cited it as a typical deified abstraction worthy of true worship. The cognomen Salus seems to have been given to Mens in the following public inscription from Tibur (XIV. 3564: Menti Bonae Saluti Q. Caecilius Q. 1. Philadelphus, P. Aquillius P. 1. Bonus mag. quinq. ex pec. conl. f. c. idemque signum dedicarunt). But see below, p. 97. . Virtus. — As a state deity, Virtus was not a goddess of virtue in general, but of courage in battle. Our first official notice concern- ing her couples her with Honos, with whose temple Marcellus joined one for her (Liv. xxvii. 5. 7; xxix. 11. 3; see Honos above). We have also, however, some records of her as an independent deity. In 134 B. c. P. Scipio Africanus Minor erected an altar to com- memorate the capture of Numantia. While we hear of no separate temple in Rome, we have inscriptional evidence of a saltuarius Vir- tutis in Ferrara {CIL. V. 2383), a collegium in Nepet (XI. 3205), and a priest in Mauretania (VIII. 9026, 9027), which imply temples. Few inscriptions to Virtus Augusta are extant. Among them are VII. 397; VIII. 16528; II. 1062; VII. 1135, the last-named of which is quite interesting. It is upon a bas-relief from Britain referring to legio II victrix pia fidelis, and represents Mars Vic- tor, winged Victories, and Virtus, the latter bearing a vexillum inscribed Virt(uti) Aug(ustae). (Cf. Domaszewski, p. 41; Eph. epig. III. 100.) We also find her specialized with reference to some particular emperor ; e. g., VIII. 7095, statua ^"^ aerea Virtutis domini n(ostri Antonini) ; Uann. epig. 1894, no. 136, Virtuti invicti Imp. Since Virtus and Bellona were both goddesses of war, they were frequently thought of together. Bellona was called the escort or attendant of Virtus, deae pedisequae Virtutis Bellonae {Rev. arch. XXXII [1898], p. ^6s = L'ann. epig. 1898, no. 61). In another example Bellona is the cognomen of Virtus in the fusion of the two conceptions, viz.. In h. d. d. d. deae Virtuti Bellon(a)e^* c " Statues of Virtus mentioned here and in XIV. 69 were probably of the helmeted Amazon type seen on coins as early as M. Aquillius (loi B.C.; see Engelhard op. cit., p. 60). " The fact that here Bellona, as Dessau 3805 points out, is probably the Ma-Bellona of Cappadocia, matters little upon this point. 26 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE montem Vaticanum vetustate conlabsum (sic) restituerunt civitatis Mattiacorum, etc. Whether in V. 6507 Virtuti Bellonae one or two deities are mentioned is uncertain; at any rate, Virtus is more prominent. Victoria too is called Virtutis comes (VIII. 18240). As in the monuments, so in literature, Virtus usually is "Valor" (Cic. De nat. deor. ii. 61. 79; iii. 88; De legg. ii. 19. 28; and especially, Phil. xiv. 35). The Culex (294 ff.) represents Venus and Virtus honoring the marriage made by Peleus and Telamon. Statins calls her "cruenta" (Silv. i. 662). See also Flor. i. 2; Apoll. Sidon ii. 502; Amm. Marc. xiv. 6. 3; and Sil. Ital. v. 126; XV. 18, in which latter passage Virtus debates against Voluptas before the younger Scipio. But the wider meaning of worth or virtue is seen in a few cases ; e. g., feminine virtue in Ovid Ars. amat. iii. 23. Pliny (xxxv. 70) describes a painting by Parrhasius in which are repre- sented Philiscus, a comic poet, Liber, a Thracian nurse, and Virtus, who from the connection must represent excellence in composition of comedy. Here, then, Pliny translated the Greek 'Aperrj. St. Augustine (op. cit. iv. 20, 21, 24) conceived of Virtus as Worth or Virtue, and said that Virtus and Felicitas could have comprised sufficiently all the ideas worshiped by the Romans. Possibly Virtus in Horace Carm. saec. 58 stood for virtue. ^ luvENTAS. — luventas, later Inventus, did not receive a separate shrine till 191, but the deity was known long before this in connec- tion with the great temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, in which she had an aedicula in the vestibule of the cella of Minerva (Plin. N.H. xxxv. 108). This fact, with two others — viz., that every youth who assumed the toga virilis brought an offering to Jupiter Opti- mus Maximus, and that two inscriptions (IX. 5574; XL 3245) read lovi luventuti (they, however, were found outside of Rome and belong to the imperial period) — points to an early inner relation between the cults. Later, under the influence of Greek mythology, the Roman deity was identified with Hebe, a goddess of a similar sphere, but personi- fied as the cup-bearer of Zeus and wife of Hercules — an identifica- tion maintained throughout Latin literature (Cic. Tusc. disp. i. 65; De nat. deor. i. 112; Hon Carm. i. 30. 8). To 4ier in this role a supplication was made in 218 (Liv. xxi. 62-69) at the temple of Hercules, and a new temple was dedicated near the Circus Maximus by C. Licinius Lucullus in 191 (Liv. xxxvi. 36. 7). The cult seems DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 27 to have continued in the charge of the Luculli, for in 60 the annual ludi on January i were omitted on account of the domestic trouble of M. LucuUus (see Cic. Ad Att. i. 18. 3, and Boot's note). Cicero says: eius {sc. anni) initium eius modi fuit ut anniversaria sacra luventatis non committerentur ; nam M. Luculli uxorem Memmius suis sacris initiavit; but Wissowa (Roscher II. 765) uses this passage with reference to the cult on the Capitoline. If he is right, the anniversaria sacra must have been a differ- ent festival from the ludi luventatis vowed by Salinator, which took place in connection with the temple near the Circus. Boot's conception of the ludi and the anniversaria as identical seems far more probable.^^ If it is correct, it follows that the natalis of the temple was January i, which is supported very slightly by the fact that Livy recounts the supplicatio of 218 among events occurring in the winter (ea hieme, xxi. 62. i). It is not unlikely that the dedica- tion of the temple and the coincident festival were made in accord- ance with custom on the day of the previous lectisternium. At all events, I think the anniversaria sacra, a term synonymous with natalis, must be referred to the temple at the Circus Maximus, or there is no point to Cicero's jest. The natalis, therefore, was prob- ably January i. At Vienna in Gaul the cults of luventas and Mars probably stood in close connection, the former having intimate relations with the iuvenes as the fighting force. It enjoyed great prestige, for many of its flamens were men of high official rank in the municipality (cf. CIL. XII. 2613, 1869, 1870, and p. 219). It may also have been closely associated with the cult of luventus Augusta with special regard to the assumption of the toga virilis by Augustus (X. 8375), as Wissowa (op. cit., p. 126 and Roscher II. 766) thinks, but it is surprising that the cognomen is lacking in all the mscriptions pertaining to this cult, although the dedicators were imperial officials. PoLLENTiA. — Livy (xxxix. 7. 8) narrates that in the ludi Romani of the year 187 b. c. a mast fell in the Circus Maximus and knocked down the statue of Pollentia, in place of which two others were set up in accordance with a senatus consul turn — the one gilded, the other the restofed original ( ?). Very likely Plautus alludes to " So Gilbert (op. cit. III. 93) and Hild (in Daremberg and Saglio, see luven- tas) take it, without, however, seeing the connection that Boot makes. Preller (I, p. 261, no. 3) unaccountably refers the ludi to the cult on the Capitol. 28 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE her in Casina 819, ut potior Pollentia sit, and Rudens 530. The connection with the games denotes physical strength. Compare Valentia. The action of the decree of the Senate and the position of. the statue in a pubHc sacred place show that the cult was in charge of the state. Peter (Roscher II. 216) considers Pollentia as probably one of the spirits of the Indigitamenta ; so Preller II, p. 213. PiETAS. — The goddess of dutiful affection had two main temples in the same vicinity — one founded in 181 b. c. in the Forum Holi- torium, the other near the Circus Flaminius some time before 91 (Obsequens 54). Amatucci (Rivista di storia antica VII. i, pp. 25- 32) ingeniously argues that the latter was the older cult and was founded probably between 233 and 215 b. c. His theory rests on Cic. De legg. ii. 28, where Mens, Pietas, Virtus, and Fides, he maintains, are quoted in reverse chronological order. But this is not strictly true, for the cult of Virtus was founded in 205, and even if here Cicero may have been thinking of Honos (233), with whom Virtus was joined, yet, if the other passages in which he mentions these four typical deities of abstraction be examined, it will be seen at once that he keeps no fixed order. Note, for example, De legg. ii. 19, Mentem Virtutem Pietatem Fidem. The supposition that this cult was known as Pietas patria, and that the other in the Forum Holitorium was Pietas Graeca, is absolutely without support, and hence the association and origin from Aeneas, the pater indiges, is not plausible. The origin of the cult, in fact, is unknown, but Wissowa's con- jecture (R.-K., p. 275) of an act of devotion between father and son in battle is certainly attractive. The Greek story of the maid who nursed her father (or mother — the tradition varies) is entirely etiological and rightly rejected. (Cf. the extension of the story by Solinus i. 124, 125.) Plautus probably alludes to the cult in Asina- ria 506 and 508, Pietatem piem, Pietatem colere; Curculio 639, Pietas mea; and Bacchides 1176, mea Pietas; the latter play having been composed as late as 189, two years after the temple was vowed by Glabrio. As to the external features of the cult we have no evidence, except that in Gaul a flamen was attached to the worship of the goddess, if the restoration of the following inscription from various fragments by Chenesseau (in charge of the Thermae Nerioma- genses) be correct: Numinibus Aug. et Ne'rio deo usibusq. r. p. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 29 Bit(urigum) Cub. et. vie. flam (en) Rom(ae) et Aug(usti) itemque flamen Pietatis {CIL. XIII, addenda no. 1376). Felicitas. — This deity is very close in function to Fortuna on ^ the one side and Bonus Eventus on the other. She represents prosperity, whether secured by good luck or by effort, while Bonus Eventus stands for the good issue or success of some definite project. (See Augustine op. cit. iv. 18 for an extensive discussion of the distinction between Fortuna and Felicitas.) The first temple known to us was built in the Velabrum in 151 b. c. The supposition that the primary meaning of Felicitas was fertility is not convin- cingly substantiated (Steuding in Roscher I. 1473; Preller II, p. 356). Her earliest representation on coins of the Lollian gens has no symbols of fertility, and the later attributes of ears of grain only show one feature of the prosperity of the Empire and, like others — the cornucopia, caduceus, lance, etc. — are characteristic of other deities, of Fides for example. Moreover, the Pompeian inscription, - Hie habitat Felicitas (IV. 1454), with the phallus, is most probably explained by J. Blanchet (Daremberg and Saglio, see Felicitas) as a motto accompanying the fascinus to avert the evil eye from the bakery in which it stood. Cf. Uann. epig. 1904, no. 199, or Hiilsen Mitth. des Arch. Inst. 1904, p. 152: invide, qui spectas, hec tibi poena manet. Felicitas occurs on the inscriptions of the equites singulares at Rome directly after Mercury (VI. 31140-45, 48, 49) and on coins she has the caduceus, by which the prosperity of commerce is alluded to. She was one of the most important deities of imperial times, and together with Salus was frequently invoked by the Arval Brothers directly after Jupiter and Juno and Minerva ; in the prayer for Nero and Poppaea in 65-66 a. d. she is the only deified abstract mentioned. Numerous sacrifices were made to her under the indi- vidualizing names Felicitas imperii, Caesarum, ^publica, Aug. The divinity with whom she was usually associated was, of course, Fortuna. In common with Victoria she had a cult at Ame- ria, with priests and flamens of high civil and military rank (CIL. XI. 4367, 4371, 4373, 4395)- It had special relations with the princes of the ruling house, and the lusus iuvenum were a part of the worship.^^ A fragmentary calendar (XL 4346) found in the "Blanchet loc. cit., p. 782 apparently takes the word Caesaris to refer to 30 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE same place, showing the festivals of certain deities and the victims of sacrifice, has Victoria, Felicitas ( ?) , and Fortuna in order. The mention of the Augustales in these inscriptions shows a close rela- tion to the worship of the emperors. The guild names itself after Victoria and Felicitas, and may be compared with the iuvenes Her- culani (X. 5657) and iuvenes Nepessini Dianenses (XL 3210). Bonus Eventus. — We do not know when Bonus Eventus became a public deity, but our earliest evidence is the representation of his head on a coin of L. Scribonius Libb, 54 B.C. (Babelon op. cit. II, p. 427). No temple is mentioned until 375 A. d. (Amm. Marc. xxix. 6. 19), when a porticus in the Campus Martius was said to have taken its name, Eventus Bonus, from the proximity of a temple of this god. But either as a popular or as a public deity he was widely honored in the early stages of the republic, for he is named with Venus, Minerva, Robigus, and others as one of the twelve agricultural gods (Varro De re rust. i. i. 6; but see note, p. 63). Varro defines eventus as successus, and the sphere of the god was extended in course of time so that he became the patron of success in any undertaking and differed little in function from For- tuna and Felicitas. Cf. Lucan Phars. iv. 730, fraudibus eventum Fortuna. In two sepulchral'inscriptions (VI. 26554, 2335) Bonus eventus stands probably as a supposed address to the passer-by equivalent to dyadrj Tvxrj, which is more strictly bona fortuna. Domaszewski (Westdeufsche Zeitschrift XXIV [1905], pp. 76 f.) has shown that he was more especially a god of commerce, and he links this province with that of agriculture through the fact that the word fruges, which in early prayers, like Cato De re rust. 141, 2, utique tu fruges .... grandire beneque evenire siris (cf. Paulus, p. 220, id sacrificium fiebat ob frugum eventum), had the meaning "crops," gained later the meaning ''profit." The primary specification of the god's function was preserved in art and on coins, where wheat-ears are the usual attributes. He is commonly represented on brick-stamps (XV. 1671), gems (XI. 6716), bas-reliefs (VII. 97), as a nude youth with chlamys hang- ing from the left arm and ears of grain in the right hand. Euphra- nor made a statue representing him holding a bowl in the right hand and poppies and grain in the left (Plin. A^. H. xxxiv. yy). A group statue of Bonus Eventus and Bona Fortuna by Praxiteles the emperor. The Corpus is inconsistent in filling out Caesar(um) or Caesar(is) in XI. 4373 and 4395. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 3 1 Stood Upon the Capitoline (Plin. xxxvi. 23; Domaszewski loc. cit., p. 79), and a marble relief representing the same deities is still extant in Great Britain. In the latter, Bonus Eventus is pictured as wearing the toga and the limus, and is pouring out a libation upon an altar ^^ (Domaszewski, p. 74). Bonus Eventus is found with the cognomen Augustus in only- one inscription: 11. 4612, Bono Event(o) Aug(usto) sacr. P. Aemilius Gemellus sevir Aug(ustalis). But this shows an inti- mate connection with the worship of the emperor. Cf. also V. 4203, Bonum Eventum sevir (orum) sociorum Sex. Numisius For- tunatus et L. Lucretius Primianus seviri Aug(ustales). Several inscriptions reveal interesting motives for the worship of this god. In VIII. 18890 a man willed an altar probably to commemorate his successful life; in II. 1471 a priestess set up a tablet on account of the honor of being chosen to hold the ludi circenses. Another, III. 1 128, is very obscure because of its mutilated condition. In it the phrase naturae Boni Eventus occurs, in which the god is generally recognized by scholars. Mommsen thought the deity here presided over the working of a mine. Domaszewski (loc. cit., p. y^j) thinks that behind the name an oriental god was obscured, as also, prob- ably, in III. 8244, Domnae reginae et Domno et Bono Evento. It is also possible that the phrase contains merely common nouns, viz., naturae boni eventus. B. OF THE EMPIRE During the last century of the Republic no new abstract deities appear to have been added to the state religion. With the establish- ment of Felicitas the movement for enshrining the virtues died out. Was this due to a feeling that they had been covered thoroughly, and to opposition on the part of the pontiffs against a further exten- sion of this cycle of deities for fear of going to ridiculous extremes ? Possibly it was due more to the growing skepticism or to the inter- nal dissensions which so racked the city and engrossed the chief \ magistrates that they were more intent on using the religious machinery of the state for political ends than on establishing new deities. At any rate, the generals of this period vowed in battle no temples to qualities of which they stood in special need, but each took some one of the greater gods as his patron — as Sulla took "Aust (Pauly-Wissowa III, p. 716) says Bonus Eventus was represented by a female figure on coins of Septimius Severus (Cohen III. (>z, ^7^, and Julia Domna (ibid. III. 9), but Cohen calls the figure Fides. 32 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Venus Felix, Caesar Venus Genetrix — or else built shrines to deities already existing. But with the final triumph of Caesar and the establishment of complete authority in a single head, and with the consequent adula- tion of the emperor as divine, new life was infused into abstract [deifications, as men saw in them a special means of flattery to the ruler. Hence not only were the old deities specialized and restricted to the performance of this function of flattery (as has been shown above in the treatment of the individual cases), but new deifica- :ions were frequently made as often as any quality of the emperor, V ^ or any desirable condition pertaining to his house or reign, seemed OL t>articularly prominent. So, for example, as early as 44 b. c, the M Senate deified dementia and made this virtue the cult-associate of Caesar, which, as Plutarch saw (Caesar 57), was merely an exag- gerated way of thanking the dictator for his mercy. These deified abstracts, which sprang up in the Empire, I have collected in the following list. For many of them we lack the posi- tive evidence of temples and other circumstances, and the explicit statement of ancient authorities, such as we find for those of the Republic, so that they are included by probability. On account of the lack in most cases of exact chronological data, the order is alphabetical. ^ Aequitas. — Aequitas was probably worshiped as a deity privately, if not by the state, during the republican period, for the bowl found at Vulci, dating between 350 and 200 b. c, inscribed Aecetiai poco- lom, is now generally accepted as a votive offering to her, according to Ritschl's identification (Opuscula IV, p. 283; cf. Bormann ad CIL. XI. 6708). Arnobius IV. i, 2 names her with Victoria and Pax as a typical, deified abstract; but Wissowa (R.-K., p. 276 and n. 3), impugning this testimony without reason, denies the existence of any proof that this divinity ever had a state-cult. Absolute proof, to be sure, is lacking, but enough exists to make it very probable, as follows: I. The bilingual altar-inscription published by S. Frankfurter (Festschrift zu Otto Hirschfeld, p. 440) : T. Pomponius [ ] Protomachus leg. Augg. pr. pr. Aequitati Up^^us €tv€K€] rrjirSe frporeifirideU [d.vi6]rjK^v'^ Upurr6fjMxoi ^wpov EiSiKl-g ffdevap^. This was set up outside the camp in an inclosed room, and was perhaps a tribunal of a propraetor ian legate of the two Augusti DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 33 (circa 216-47 a. d.). The officer had it erected apparently to impress the natives with the purpose of the court. The objection to considering Aequitas a regular deity from the fact that EiSiKirj is an entirely free subjective translation, and that therefore aOevaprj was conceived of as necessary (loc. cit, p. 442), seems to me to have little weight. Some word was necessary to fill out the line metric- ally, and the adjective a-Ocvapvj met this need and characterized the power of the deity, and hence was used. Nor would Nemesis, which Frankfurter considers the likely Greek equivalent for a well- known Latin deity of this nature, fit the case here. Nemesis stands for justice in the sense of ruthless punishment for crime, but that is not the sense of Aequitas at all. EvSiacit; = "Righteous dealing" (see Lidell and Scott) or "Fairness," is a much closer translation. Very likely most of the cases before this propraetor involved financial transactions, of which especially Aequitas was the protecting deity. 2. Compare the herm found at Mitrovizii (II. 6015^.) which was apparently used as a weight representing a woman clad in tunic and wearing fillets, holding in front a horn, the whole inscribed Equetas (= Aequitas). 3. The idea of fair dealing is corroborated by an inscription from Dougga (Nouvelles archives des missions scientifiques XI. [1903], p. 48; L'ann epig. 1904, no. 119) ; Mercurio Aequitati Aug. P. Selicius. The position on the stone would favor the understand- ing of two deities, but if Aequitati is taken as cognomen of Mercury, as Libertas is of Jupiter, yet Aequitas is a divine concept and as such is fused and blended with Mercury. Finally, Aequitas is represented on coins as early as Galba after the type of Moneta with the balance ( Engelhard, p. 50, and Preller II, p. 267). These facts, taken together with Arnobius' explicit assertion, throw the burden of proof upon those denying the cult of Aequitas. \ Aeternitas. — To judge from the figure of a temple with legend Aeternitati Augustae on coins of Octavius and Tiberius, this cult, like many others, began under Augustus in the colonies of Spain, e.g., in Emerita and Tarraco (Cohen I, October-August 585, 586, 72y; Tib. 78-80, 166). It is restricted to the Empire, the emperor, and the city. The idea of eternity seems to have been closely asso- ciated with the sun, and its worship to have come from that of Baalim in Syria. (See article Aeternus, Pauly-Wissowa I, p. 696.) 34 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE The first representations of the goddess (on coins of Vespasian) have the flaming sun and crescent moon as her symbols, and inscrip- tions from Spain illustrate the association and genesis : Orelli 1925, Soli invicto et Lunae aeternae; CIL. II. 259, Soli Aeterno, Lunae pro aeternitate imperii; Orelli 1928, Aeternitati sacr(um), Soli et Lunae. The first occurrence of this worship in Rome is found in the sacrifice of Aeternitas imperii after the suppression of the conspiracy of Piso (66 A. D.) by the Arval Brothers {CIL. VI. 2044. i. 6). For the application of the name directly to emperors in the late Empire see Cumont Revue de Vhistoire religieuse I. (1896), pp. 435 ff- X Annona. — Although strictly a deity of the grain supply, a con- crete idea, Annona in a wider sense was a goddess of plenty. Out- side the coins, however, there are but few signs of her cult. An altar found in Rome on the arx has a bas-relief representing a female figure with right shoulder and arm bare and head decorated with a crescent diadem; with her right hand she drops ears of grain into a jar standing near; with her left she lifts an overflowing cornucopia. Beneath is the legend (CIL. VI. 22) : Annonae sanctae Aelius Vitalio mensor perpetuus dignissimi corporis pistorum siliginariorum d(onum) d(edit). No doubt Annona was the patron deity of this corporation of millers. CIL. VIII. 7960 records the dedication of two statues in Numidia: .... Genium patriae n(os- trae) et Annonae ^® sacrae urbis The dedication day was celebrated with shows and special largesses to the people. Of course, the deity was important to the Numidians, who did a thriv- ing grain trade with Rome. Another inscription (II. 4976^) is on a signet ring representing an altar marked Ann., but the decoration — viz., rams' and goats* heads, and a bird with a garland — does not suggest Annona. It is possible that the letters stand for the owner's name, the altar aflFord- ing a convenient field for the engraving. A cippus (VI. 8470) was set up by a prefect of the grain supply to himself and family. Two figures flank the inscription, one representing a man standing in a ship with a grain-measure near by ; the other, a woman dressed in a double tunic, identified as Annona by the Corpus, but inasmuch "All authorities but the Corpus capitalize Annonae. I confess to a feeling that Wilmanns (ad loc.) may be right in reading and indexing it as a common noun. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS : 35 as no symbols of the deity are described, the figure may be his wife. A square altar in Ostia (XIV. 51 ; see photograph in Notizie 1881, PL II) has the reading on the cornice of the front side, according to Lanciani, | | ram sac .... vAm Avggeni .... sacomar; accord- ing to Dessau in CIL. ad loc, | | ram sac | | | | | | | | | onam, etc. From the photographic reproduction most of the text is doubtful before Genio, and there is scarcely a trace of the letter o in onam and not much more of the n, so that the reading — onam — is very doubtful, or too uncertain to allow us to cite this reading as more than conjectural. Statins Silv. i. 637 personifies the grain supply thus: . . . . et cum tot populos beata pascas hunc, Annona, diem superba nescis. Clementia. — In 44 b. c. the Senate decreed a temple to Caesar and Qementia (Appian B. C. ii. 106), set up statues representing them as standing hand in hand, and placed Antonius as the flamen dialis over the priesthood of the temple (Dio. Cass. xliv. 6. 4), thus emphasizing its importance. This servile personification was the starting-point of the almost numberless deifications that soon fol- lowed. Again in 28 a. d. an altar was erected in honor of Clementia (Tac. Ann. iv. 74), and in 66 the Arvals record a sacrifice to her, both strangely enough in the reigns of vindictive tyrants. \ DisciPLiNA. — This was a cult restricted to the army, as the few extant inscriptions designate it as Disciplina militaris (VIII. 9832, 10657), or it came from camps (VII. 896; VIII. 18058). In all probability, Disciplina was deified by Hadrian in connection with his military reforms (Domaszewski Westd. Zeits. 1895, pp. 44 f.). N Fecunditas. — In 62, a. d. the Senate voted a temple to Fecundi- tas in connection with the birth of a daughter to Poppaea (Tac. Ann, XV. 23). Afterward this made-to-order goddess was figured on coins, but there is no evidence that she was worshiped by the people. V Indulgentia. — Little distinction can be seen between this deity and Clementia, except that the latter has to do with leniency toward error, the former to the granting of favors. Our first trustworthy evidence of Indulgentia's place in state-cults dates from 210 a. d., when a praefectus coloniarum at Cirta, Africa, erected a small shrine with a bronze statue of Indulgentia domini nostri (VIII. 7095-98). Also a statue of Indulgentia novi saeculi Imp. Caes. M. Antoni Gordiani (VIII. 20487, 238-44 A. d.) may have stood at 36 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Castellum Thib. (?). On coins, however, her image was stamped as early as Hadrian's reign. The only sign of a cult is found in the plausible identification of this goddess by Wissowa R.-K., p. 279, with Evepyco-ta, to whom Dio Cassius Ixxi. 34. 3 says Marcus Aurelius built a temple on the Capitoline, using an entirely new name. Juvenal vii. 20, Indulgentia ducis, and Statins Silv. ii. 125 are probably allusions to the cult. \ lusTiTiA. — It has been generally agreed that the cult of lustitia began about the time of Tiberius (Preller II, p. 266; Wissowa, p. 276), but a definite terminus post quem has not been attempted. From Ovid (Epist.) ex Ponto iii. 6. 23-26, we can with great probability fix the date within comparatively narrow limits. Ovid says: Crede mihi, miseris caelestia numina parcunt nee semper laesos et sine fine premunt principe nee nostro deus est moderatior ullus. lustitia vires temperat ille suas. Nuper earn Caesar faeto de marmore templo, iampridem posuit mentis in aede suae. This seems to indicate that Augustus built a temple and estab- lished the cult; for, while the phrase facto de marmore templo is ambiguous in meaning, and may possibly refer to a temple of some deity other than lustitia, and may be a pure locative, yet it more probably refers to a temple of lustitia and is ablative absolute with locative association. For, first, the phrase is too full and complete for the simple meaning "in a marble temple," and, secondly, the , whole feeling of the passage shows that the temple of lustitia is meant. Ovid intended to say that Caesar has emphasized the divin- ity of justice by building an external temple for her abode, but that long before he had enshrined her in the sanctuary of his mind. Much of the force of the contrast would be lost by the interpreta- tion, "he set up a statue of Justice in some other (unknown) temple." The poet was thinking of the founding of the cult in the emperor's mind as prior to its establishment in a public material temple. Now, the poet published his first three books of letters in the latter part of 13 a. d. The letter with which we are concerned was one of the later ones written to some influential Roman from whom he had failed to get permission to use his name in a previous letter. It, therefore, was written not long before the publication of this DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 37 collection of letters together. (See Schanz Romische Litteraturge- schichte 11. i, p. 225 ; Teuffel-Schwabe I, p. 504.) We can therefore infer from nuper, 1. 25, that the temple of lustitia was built by Augustus in the early part of 13 A. d. This fits well with the notice in the Fasti Capitolini for January 8: Signum lustitiae Angus [tae . . . . dedicatum Planco (?) et Silio cos.] (13 a. d.), whose lost part would doubtless mention the temple. At all events it is certain that Augustus personally gave prestige to the worship of this god- dess as a state-cult, or else Ovid's lines lose their point. Only a few inscriptions to lustitia are extant, and the cult is not reflected in literature, though justice personified is frequent, especially in poetry. But here she is the Greek mythical character, identified most commonly with Erigone or Astraea, who left the earth ultima caelestium (Ovid Fasti i. 249; Verg. Geor. ii. 474) with Pudicitia, her sister ; but she is also the same as Themis ( Hor. Carm. ii. 17. 16), or Dike, in character. Quite a different character is given her as equivalent to Nemesis or Adrasteia, which some bilingual inscriptions show (e. g., X. 3812; see Nemesis below). Ammianus Marcellinus (xiv. 11. 25), however, says the "theologi veteres" considered her the mother of Nemesis. Macrobius (Sat. i. 21, 24), as if explaining a statue, gives an almost inexplicable application to the name, viz.: Virgo autem quae manu aristam refert, quid aliud quam Svm/us 17X1010/ quae fructibus curat? et ideo lustitia creditur, quae sola facit nas- centes fructus ad usus hominum pervenire. Aulus Gellius (xiv. 4) describes her features as depicted according to Chrysippus, viz.: a pictoribus rhetoribusque antiquioribus ad hunc f erme modum ; forma atque filo virginali aspectu, vementi et formidabili, luminibus ocu- lorum acribus, neque humilis neque atrocis sed reverendae cuiusdam tristitiae dignitate. Pax. — An altar of Pax Augusta was decreed by the Senate on the return of Augustus from Spain, July 4, 13 b. c, and dedicated January 30, 9 b. c. Both days were kept in the calendars as feriae publicae. On still another day, March 30, 10 a. d., Augustus set up a statue to her, with others to Janus, Salus, and Concordia (Dio Cass. liv. 35. 2). But it is likely that she was worshiped before this time, for a coin of 44 b. c. (Babelon II. 23) shows her face, and we may therefore ascribe her to Caesar. Of course this cult had greatest eclat after wars; hence in the Empire her likeness is especially frequent on coins of Galba, Ves- 38 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE pasian, and others. Cf. CIL. 11. 3732: [Caesari] T. Imp. Ves- pasiano Aug. Vespasiani f(ilio) conser[v2i]tori Pads Aug(ustae). It is not necessary to refer at length to the great temple built by Vespasian and stored with the richest works of Greek art, described by Pliny the Elder (N.H. xii. 94; xxxiv. 84; xxxv. 74). Its destruction by fire in 192 A. d. under Commodus caused a great popular tumult. Since the temple of Janus was closed in times of peace, this deity was often coupled with him; e. g., Ovid Fasti i. 121 : cum libuit (sc. lano) Pacem placidis emittere tectis libera perpetuas ambulat ilia vias. (Cf. Hor. Epist. ii. i. 255, custodem pacis .... lanum; and Stat. Silv. iv. I. 13 fif.) Hence, in 66 a. d., the Arval Brothers include her in their prayers at the closing of the temple of Janus (CIL. VL 2044. i. 12; cf. VI. 32347a). She is also associated with Mars (Brambach CIRh. 484; Wilmanns Exempla 150; aram dicavit sos- piti Concordiae Granno Camenis Martis et Pacis Lari qui[n e]t deorum stirpe genito Caesari). But only once besides this does she occur in military inscriptions (Brambach 55 = Dessau 3094). Her symbol was the well-known olive-branch, and besides this she is adorned often with wheat-ears and poppies, since she brought prosperity to agriculture. (See Tibullus i. 10. 67.) As is the case with one or two other qualities, a presiding spirit or genius is ascribed to her in CIL. VIII. 17832: Genio Pacis. Compare the coin in Cohen V, no. 295, where under the superscription Pacis Event, a genius bears wheat-ears and poppy in the same way that Pax is shown (ibid., no. 296). \ Providentia. — Probably Augustus also established the cult of Providentia Augusta, to whom an altar is mentioned as erected in the acts of the Arvals (which show that this goddess was worshiped \ publicly in the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Nerva, Severus, and Commodus) . Originally the reference was to the fore- sight of the emperor, but in the later period it shifted to the provi- dgpce of the gods over the ruler; e.g., Providentiam deorum (VI. I 2099; III. 18). The extant inscriptions were nearly all set up either by resolution of the Senate (X. 6310), by the Arval Brothers, or by a proconsul (III. 12036) or other officials (e.g., sevir Augustalis, XL 4170). We are warranted from this fact, as well as from the Ismail number of inscriptions, in assuming this cult to be an indirect DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 39 official means of flattering the emperor, and without popular influence. In literature Apuleius Met. vi. 15, nee Providentiae bonae graves oculos anima latuit aerumna, possibly has the deity in mitid. PuDiciTiA, — Although the traditional story of a sanctuary of Pudicitia patricia in the Forum Boarium (Liv. x. 23. 3) has been shown to be legendary (Wissowa Anal. Rom. topog., pp. 5ff. ; R.'K., pp. 207 and 2yy), and the deity identified with the veiled statue in the temple of Fortuna Virgo, and these two names inter- changed for the same cult, yet the chapel of Pudicitia plebeia in the Vicus Longus must have gone back far into antiquity. We cannot determine whether this cult became official in the republican period or not, but in the Empire it was brought into close relation with the worship of the ruling house, since the phrase ara Pudicitiae is found on coins of the period of Trajan, and Pudicitia Aug. is on later mintage (Cohen op. cit.. Index: cf. CIL. VIII. 993). However, before this time Valerius Maximus (vi. praef. i) had connected the cult with Livia as follows: tu Palatii columen augustos Penates sanctissimumque luliae genialem torum adsidua celebras, tuo prae- sidio puerilis aetatis insignia munita sunt, tui numinis respectu sincerus iuventae flos permanet, te custode matronalis stola cense- tur: ades igitur et recognosce quae fieri ipsa voluisti. Propertius too (ii. 6. 25), templa Pudicitiae quid opus statuisse puellis si cuivis nuptae quidlibet esse licet. may possibly be referring to real temples, and not only to the sacel- lum in the Vicus Longus; but of this we cannot be sure, for like others he may have called the temple of Fortuna Virgo in the Forum Boarium (Varro Nonius 189) by the name of Pudicitia.^^ The original cult admitted only matronae univiriae as devotees (Liv. loc. cit), which may have been the regulation enforced throughout. On the other hand, Valerius Maximus (loc. cit.) treats it very broadly as including both sexes and all ages. In mythical lore Pudicitia was commonly associated with lustitia as the last of the virtues to leave the earth after the golden age of Saturn (Juvenal vi. i ff. ; Claudian. i. 294). Inscriptions are rare. ** Rothstein's suggestion (ad loc), that Propertius' words alluded to a restoration of these two cults, is plausible, but the whole matter is obscure. 40 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE In one (III. 141 56) she is joined with Pietas, and in others (X. 6351; VI. 1341) the chastity of married women is commemorated. \ Securitas. — The earliest notice of this deity is in the Acta ArvaHum {CIL. VI. 2051, 1. 30), 60 A. d., but the phrase Securitas Augusti appears on coins of Nero. She was officially identified with the worship of the imperial house ; e. g., XIV. 2899, Securitati Aug. sacrum, decuriones populusque coloniae Praenestinae. In the reign of Trajan a public vow was offered to her (Tac. Agr. 3), and in Caracalla's time a bronze statue of Securitas saeculi was set up in Cirta, Africa (VIII. 7095-98). This is the only public evidence of her worship as a state-cult. Apparently there was a private worship of her as the protectress of the dead. For not only do we meet with the phrases dis securita- tis (VI. 2268), dibus (=dis) securis, and securitati suae (=pro securitate sua) (XIII. 281 1) in place of the usual dis manibus, but also inscriptions such as Securitati sacr(um) Valerius .... fecit (VI. 28047), Securitati perpetuae in memoriam (VI. 25607), Securitati sacrum lulia Phoebe sibi .... (VI. 9016), show that Securitas was vaguely deified and took the place of the di manes. In this way she is often joined with Memoria (see below) ; e.g., VI. i8378;cf. III. 7436- '^ TuTELA. — Definite data of the existence of Tutela among the state-cults are lacking, but numerous inscriptions with and without the cognomen Augusta on altars from all parts of the Empire and on coins as early as Vitellius make her position almost certain. She affords a good illustration of the elevation of a pure appellative to a deification ; for the various steps of the process are seen in numer- ous inscriptions. The starting-point is found in such phrases as tutela lunonis, Neptuni, Minervae on the menologia rus- tica, showing under whose watch-care each month is. (Cf. also tutela Minervae of a ship, Ovid Trist. i. 10. i ; tutela lovis, CIL. V. 4243 and XII. 1837, has probably this sense rather than "J^^pi- ter's protecting deity.") Then, when the exact deity who should be the protector was unknown, a worshiper would erect an altar dec tutelae or deo in cuius tutela domus est (XIII. 246; II. 4092; VI. 573). From this it was an easy step to the next stage in which the protecting spirit of a special place was called "Protection," especially since tutela was sometimes used concretely ("protector" or "guar- dian") ; e.g., Ovid Met. viii. 711, prorae tutela Melanthus; Hor. Carm. iv. 14. 43, O tutela praesens Italiae (i. e., Augustus) ; Hor. ^SdkiLom'^ DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 41 Epist. i. I. 103, rerum tutela mearum Cum sis, with which compare curator a praetore datus used a Hne before with similar meaning. This spirit, "Protection" or "Protectress," had her counterpart j in the Genius, who developed from a spirit of the power of genera- jlk tion attending a man to one of protection guarding both men and places. Accordingly, Tutela and Genius are frequently named together to give a place full protection (III. 4445; VI. 216) and Tutela was introduced among the household deities of every family (Hieron. Comm. in S. Isaiam 672: ipsaque Roma orbis domina in singulis insulis domibusque Tutelae simulacrum cereis venerans ac lucernans quam ad tuitionem aedium isto appellant ut tam intran- tes quam exeuntes domos suas inoliti semper commoneantur erroris ; cf. CIL. II. 4082, Laribus et [Tu]telae, Genio. . . . ). But the 1^ conception of Tutela was more far-reaching than that of Genius; ff^ for she was not confined always to a particular place or person^ \ but was a broader abstraction, like Fortuna and Victoria, and as j such had a temple at Bordeaux, of whose portico remains are still visible (XIII. 583), and at Perigueux (XIII. 939), sacerdos Aren- sia qui templum deae Tutelae et thermas public (as) utraq(ue) ol[im] vestustate collabsa sua pecunia restituit) The above conception of the origin of this goddess, it will be seen, differs from that of Wissowa (R.-K,, p. 156), who considers Tutela an offshoot of Genius, the deus in cuius tutela hie locus est. f But the complete phrase in the reference this scholar cites, viz. (Henzen Acta Arvalium, p. 146), sive deo sive deae in cuius tutela hie lucus locusve est, oves II, compared with the common phrase, sive deo sive deae oves II (Henzen op. cit., p. 144), shows that the Arvals were not thinking expressly of the Genius loci, but of some one of the other gods or goddesses, known or unknown, whose function it was to protect that place. If they had conceived of the Genius alone, there would have been no occasion for using the ambiguous formula, where both a male and a female deity were included. The phrase sive deo sive deae is regularly used with wider reference than to the special Genius (cf. Aul. Gell. ii. 28; Macr. iii. 9. 7; Arnob. iii. 8, and other citations in Wissowa R.-K., p. 33, n. 2), and its use in the acts of the Arvals is simply another example. It is quite true, as Henzen (ibid.) says, that the sive deus sive dea, etc., is practically equivalent in function to a spirit protecting a place (p. 146, "Idem fere est qui Genius luci vel loci"), but that it is not exactly the same is proved by the addition of the 42 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE feminine dea. The phrases deo tutelae Genio and Genio tutelae (II. 3377, 4092, 2991) show nothing more than that the Genius was a deity of protection. But so also was Fortuna, who is so often coupled with Tutela (VI. 177, 179, 216) and is called dea Fortuna tutatrix huius loci in one case (XII. 4183), and has the cognomen ; Tutela (VI. 178; cf. Carter De deor. Rom. cogn., p. 47). In fact, : all the gods were thought of as protectors of certain places ; e. g., ; aedem aramque I. O. M. et Silvano sancto ceterisque diis quorum in tutela aedificium est; VI. 343, Hercules tutator; XL 1549, luppiter tutator; X. 3799, Hercules tutor; XIV. 25, luppiter tutor (cf. Carter loc. cit.). Any deity whose figure was on the stern of a vessel was called its tutela (Ovid Trist. i. 10. i; Petr. 105, 108). Much easier, therefore, is it to derive the deity Tutela from this general conception of protection than from any one god. Neither is she to be looked upon as a female Genius or as about equivalent to a Juno, since both men and women pay vows to her (cf. VI. 31054, Tutele sancte Aurelius Urbanus ex voto; XIII. 411, Tutelae sanc- tiss(imae) Chrysan[thus] ; XIII. 159; VI. 30984). Among the many inscriptions of this cult we may single out a few particularly interesting ones. With Hercules, Fides, and For- tuna she is a patron deity of a statio in Rome (Mitth. des Arch. Inst. 1904, p. 52), and soldiers also honored her {L'ann. epig. 1903, no. 369, Tutelae loci milites legionis eiusdem aedem .... aere collato). A ring found near Lyons bore a gem inscribed: Veneri et Tutelae votum (Boissier Inscr. antiq. de Lyon, p. 11).^^ In Gaul Tutela apparently was a favorite cult ; cf . CIL. XIIL 57, 449, 328, besides the above-named inscriptions. Cognomina formed from city-names were attached to her name ; e. g., Tutela Aug. Ussubia (XIIL 919), Tutela Tiriensis (Eph. Epig. VIII. Iiia), Tutela Tarracon(ensis) (II. 4091). A close connection of Tutela Aug. with the worship of the emperor may possibly be seen in CIL. 11. 4056, Tutelae Aug. sacrum C. Terentius Onesimus ob honorem seviratus sui et in honorem C. Terenti Ursi fili. It is surprising that a cult so well attested by '^ The fact that Venus Anadyomene is possibly alluded to by the representation of a dolphin on a necklace discovered among the same relics with the ring is merely a coincidence and is no sign that Tutela was peculiarly a maritime deity. No other evidence is at hand. Doubtless, however, she was invoked by sailors as by other people. \ DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 43 inscriptions should find such Httle recognition in literature. Petro- nius 57, ita Tutelam huius loci habeam propitiam, is our only reference. n. ABSTRACTS POPULARLY BUT NOT OFFICIALLY WORSHIPED Under this heading are included such unofficial deifications as seem to have had real worship, more or less localized;. The data, however, are in most cases very fragmentary — mere traces which it is difficult to view in their true bearings. CopiA. — Wissowa R.-K., p. 2y6, has well pointed out the lack of convincing proof that the worship of Copia was ever a state- cult. The evidence adduced by Peter in Roscher from the colonies of Copia (191 b. c.) at Thurii (Strabo spells it Copiae) and Lugdunum 43 b. c. is without much weight ; for these colonies were often named from pure qualities never deified ; e. g., Claritas lulia Augusta, Placentia. On the other hand, we cannot slight, as Wissowa does, the inscription found at Avignon: Sex. Veratius Priscae l(ibertus) Pothus Copiae v. s. 1. m. (XII. 1023) ; nor ascribe it to an unknown Gallic deity. The name of the donor is not Gallic, and Copia, it seems to me, is a condition so desired and dear to the average person's heart that it was likely to be deified very early, and it is probable that she had her devotees, as Fortuna and Bonus Eventus had. So Plautus Pseud, y^f^, Di immortales! non Charinus mihi hicquidem sed Copiast, had very likely a real god- dess in mind.' MuNDiTiES. — On the Capitoline basis dating from 136 a. d. in the reign of Trajan {CIL. VP, p. 480), which gives a list of the vici with their respective magistri, occurs the name Vico Mundiciei under Regio XIII, third column, line 41. Now, inasmuch as very many of these vici (almost half of them at least) are named from some prominent topographical feature, such as a public building, city-gate, temple, altar, shrine, or statue, and perhaps a private house — e. g.. Piscinae Publicae, Portae Naeviae, Columnae Ligneae, Honor (is) et Virtut(is), Trium Ararum, Statuae Valerianae — it is probable that Mundiciei also refers to some religious monument, probably a shrine, since many deities with recognized cults are mentioned, as Fortuna Obsequens, F. Respiciens, F. Huiusque Diei, Venus, Apollo, Diana, and others. This goddess, "Cleanli- ness," may well have been a private cult or even encouraged by the state as a means of keeping the city in a sanitary condition. 44 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Perhaps the thirteenth region, which took in the Aventine and lay near the river, had special need to worship this idea, because it contained the grain- and oil-warehouses.^^ In view of this probable cult, it may be that, when Plautus Cas. i. 225 says magis nimio munditiis Munditiam antideo, he had a recognized goddess in mind. The compiler of the spurious book of the fifteenth century on the city regions under the name P. Victor (see Teuffel-Schwabe, §432. 7), copying this stone, recorded Mundities as a deity whose shrine was still to be seen (Hartung Die Religion der Romer II. 264). ■ I Natio. — This was not a Roman deity nor a general abstraction, ' but a special deity of child-birth, honored in Ardea. Cic. De nat. deor. iii. 47 : Quodsi tales dii sunt, ut rebus humanis intersint, Natio quoque dea putanda est: cui cum fana circuimus in agro Ardeati rem divinam f acere solemus ; quae, quia partus matronarum tueatur, a nascentibus Natio nominata est. Nemesis. — This goddess of retribution is a late arrival among Roman deities. Her name was brought over from the Greek with- out translation, and doubtless her cult was one of the sacra pere- grina (Ausonius xviii. 17. 66; cf. x. 379). We have no evidence of a temple in Rome, but in the late Empire at least it is probable that she was worshiped in the city, especially by gladiators, of whom she was a patron deity. (Cf. A. von Premerstein in Philologus LIIL [1894], pp. 407 if.) Pliny the Elder (N.H. xxviii. 22 and xi. 251) mentions a statue standing on the Capitoline, which in all probability was merely decorative. Outside Italy she had temples at Aquincum in Pannonia and Apuli in Dacia (III. 10439; HI- 14474) » and the cult was highly regarded by soldiers located in this vicinity and in western Thrace, where she was closely associated with Diana and blended with her as a cognomen (III. 14076, 10440). In one case she was repre- sented in the form and clothing of Diana. With other deities also she was identified; e.g., Juno (Apul. Met. xi. 5; CIL. III. 11 121), Nortia (Mart. Capella i. 88), Fortuna (CIL. III. 1125) ; cf. Julius Capitolinus in Scriptores Augusti xxi. 8. 6: Nemesis, id est vis quaedam Fortunae. Macrobius (i. 22. i) calls her solis potestas. Ammianus (xiv. 11. 25) says the older theologians conceived her to be the daughter of lustitia. Cf. CIL. X. 3812, lustitiae Nemesi. "That Mundicies = Mundities is agreed. See Stolz und Schmalz Lateinische Grammatik (ed. 1900), p. 24; Lindsay Latin Language, p. 88. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 45 There were a guild of priests called amici Nemesiaci {CIL. II. 5191) and possibly flamens in Spain (11. 2195). For an exhaustive discussion of the phases of this cult see von Premerstein loc. cit. ; Rosbach in Roscher III, pp. 138, 139. QuiES. — To judge from Livy iv, 41. 8, the common people of Latium worshiped Quies as early as 423 b. c, when there was a shrine on the via Labicana; but Augustine {De civ. dei iv. 16) declares that the cult was never adopted officially: Quietem vero appellantes, quae faceret quietum, cum aedem haberet extra portam Collinam, publice illam suscipere noluerunt. The supposition of Wissowa that Augustine was referring to Livy's passage, and so had the same shrine in mind, but carelessly made a mistake in the location, perhaps from memory, is supported by the fact that Varro is probably not Augustine's source for this statement, since none of the other Christian Fathers, depending upon Varro, men- tion Quies in their lists. The location of the chapel on the via Labicana would suggest that the allusion was to rest from journey- ing, without, however, any connotation of quiet. But Ammianus . (xix. II. 6), .... ut diuturno otio involuti et Quietem colentes tamquam salutarem tributariorum onera subirent et nomen, uses the term as almost synonymous with Pax and this may be the mean- ing above. Statins (Theb. x. 89; Silv. i. 6. 91) fancies Quies as "Repose," in the company of "Sleep" and "Laziness." On sepul- chral inscriptions Quies is joined with Securitas ; e. g., VI. 16061 : Quieti et Securitati Compses ; VI. 22337 : Quieti et Securitati Fadius .... Fadia max[ima] In VI. 25565, with Fortuna, Spes, Pietas, and Victoria, Quies is joined as a sepulchral deity. Valentia. — This goddess of strength and vigor was honored at Ocriculum in Umbria (Tertullian ApoL 24). Mommsen (Eph. Epig. II. [1877], p. 86) conjectured that the inscription on the fragment of the Hemerologii Allifani for August 12, Herculi in .... V. V. h. V. V. Felicit, should be restored to Herculi invicto . . . . et Veneri victrici, Honori Virtuti Valentiae Felicitati. To this class of divinities may be added a few of the "specialist deities" ("Sondergottheiten," Usener) springing from the ancient Roman belief in spirits, which represented mental concepts to a cer- tain extent, although restricted to particular spheres: \ MoRTA, goddess of death (Tert. Ad nat. ii. 15). 46 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Paventia or Paventina, who caused fright among children (August, iv. II, • Tert. ii. ii). Pecunia. See below. Praestitia or Praestana, presiding over superiority or excel- lence (Tert. ii. ii, habent [sc. deam] praestantiae, Praestitiam), applied particularly to the superiority of Romulus in throwing the spear (Arnobius iv. 3). Sentinus, who aided the thought of children (August, vii. 2. 3 ; Tert. ibid.). Strenia, quae faceret strenuum (August, iv. 16. 11). A shrine stood on the Via sacra (Varro L.L. v. 47). TuTiLiNA, protectress of the stored harvest (Varro L.L. v. 163). ViCA PoTA. See below, p. 47. VoLETA, VoLUMNA, or VoLUMNUS, the Spirit that fostered the will of children (Tert. ibid.; August, iv. 21; Min. Felix, Oct. 25)- VoLUPiA. — The exact underlying conception in this goddess is uncertain, but according to Augustine (iv. 8. 11) and Tertullian (ii. 11) she presided over contentment and satisfaction in youth. Varro (L.L. v. 164) refers to a chapel, and Macrobius (i. 10. 8) to an altar. Cf. Festus (ed. Egger), fr. 26. The chapel was on the Nova Via on the Palatine. Her festival was December 21. (See Mommsen's restoration of the Fasti Praenestini, CIL. I, p. 319.) The reason for the worship of Angerona in this shrine is obscure, (cf. Roscher I, p. 233). Pecunia. — According to Arnobius iv. 9, quis ad extremum deam Pecuniam esse credet, quam velut maximum numen vestrae indicant litterae donare anulos aureos, loca in ludis atque in spectaculis priora, honorum suggestus summos, amplitudinem magistratus, et quod maxime pigri ament, securum per opulentias otium, Pecunia was a deity of wealth. But Juvenal i. 113 says: etsi, funesta pecu- nia, templo nondum habitas, nullas nummorum ereximus aras; and Seneca prov. 5 §2: non sunt divitiae bonum; itaque habeat illas et Elius leno, ut homines pecuniam, cum in templis consecraverint [i. e., made wealth sacred by storing it in temples] videant et in fornice; which show that there was no cult of Pecunia at least in the historical period. Accordingly, the explanation has been advanced that Arnobius DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 47 here and Augustine op. cit. iv. 21, misunderstanding such jokes and personifications as in Horace Epist. i. 6. 37, ^ Scilicet uxorem cum dote fidemque et amicos et genus et formam regina Pecunia donat ** ac bene nummatum decorat Suadela Venusque, considered them gods. But this overlooks the fact that Augustine was arguing against Varro's explanation of the many gods as cog- nomina of the one god Jupiter. Cf. vii. 6: Dicit ergo idem Varro adhuc de naturali theologia praeloquens deum se arbitrari esse ani- mam mundi et hunc ipsum mundum esse deum. Now, in vii. 11 he says : et inter eius alia cognomina legerem, quod etiam Pecunia voca- retur, quam deam inter eos minuscularios invenimus Sed cum et mares et feminae habeant pecuniam,cur non et Pecunia et Pecunius appellatus sit, sicut Rumina et Ruminus, ipsi viderint ; ch. xii : Quam vero eleganter rationem huius nominis reddiderunt. "Et Pecunia," inquit, "vocatur, quod eius sunt omnia." Clearly, therefore, Augus- tine is quoting Varro, and the latter named two deities, Jupiter Pecunia and Pecunia. Such detailed statements and apparent quotations hardly admit of the supposition that Augustine is errone- ous in referring Pecunia to the list given by Varro (R. Agahd Jahrb. filr Philol. XXIV. [1898], p. 220; cf. also Peter in Roscher II, p. 145). Arnobius is generally held to have depended on Cor- nelius Labeo (Schanz op. cit. VIII. 3, p. 164), who Agahd (p. 123) thinks drew from Verrius Flaccus as his source. In view of these facts, it is easiest to consider Pecunia one of the spirits of the Indigitamenta (possibly named by both Varro and Verrius Flaccus), who had entirely vanished, not only from worship, but from knowledge, in the period of Seneca and Juvenal. Whether Pecunia as a cognomen of Jupiter was a popular usage, or simply Varro's attempt to bring a distinct manifestation into relation with one god, is uncertain (Peter loc. cit. I, p. 173). It is plain, however, from such general phrases as "Pecunia (lupiter) vocatur" that Augustine at any rate understood Varro to be report- ing common custom and not his own theory. ViCA PoTA. — The origin and function of this deity are very uncertain. She was worshiped in Cicero's time, and a sanctuary dedi- cated to her stood at the foot of the Velian hill in the early Empire, when she was completely identified with Victoria (Cic. De legg. ii. 11. 28 ; Asconius ad Cic. in Pisonem 52 ; Liv. ii. 7. 12 ; Plut. Poplicola 48 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE lo) . Almost all ancient and modern scholars derive the name from the verbs vinco and potior (which stand in the passage in Cicero above mentioned, but are probably glosses), and consider her one of the deities of the Indigitamenta, with the same office as the later Victoria. A few, however, seem to have regarded her as the goddess of food and drink, from victus and potus, and to have varied the name to Victua Potua (Arnobius iii. 25; cf. Wissowa R.-K., p. 196) . But the allusion in Seneca Ludus de morte Caesaris 9. 4 to Diespiter Vicae Potae et ipse designatus consul, nummari- olus, has not been satisfactorily explained and has led Charles Hoeing (Amer. Jour, of Philol. XXIV, p. 323) to propose the etymology |/vik from Skr. vie, Lat. vicus and pot, Skr. pati. Accordingly, he translates Vica Pota by "mistress of the people" or "mistress of cities," and identifies her with Cybele, which explains Seneca's allusions. This ingenious explanation, however, lacks sufficiently convincing evidence to be preferred to the traditional identification with Victoria. III. OCCASIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL DEIFICATIONS Besides the public and popular deities that have been enumerated, there are many that cannot be said to have had a cult at all, with shrines and priests. Yet the altars and offerings that have come down to us show a certain degree of worship. These deities consist mainly of certain virtues and desirable conditions brought into such prominence by events that in each case the abstract quality is revered and deified, but only by an individual or individuals, and only with regard to a particular event. They are embryonic cults, which did not spread at all, because they were not of general impor- tance and touched only special things and persons. A fine illustration of the extent to which such manufacture of gods out of occasional appellatives was carried is given us by Tacitus {Ann, i. 14. 3), who, in describing the honors given Tiberius on his accession in 14 a. d., says : aramque Adoptionis et alia huius- cemodi prohibuit. The servile Senate proposed to deify, not a virtue, nor necessarily a desirable action, but merely one of the ordinary acts of the human family. And more than that, not even the idea of adoption in general, simply the particular adoption of Tiberius by Augustus, was thus to be venerated. Editors of Tacitus have quite generally called this altar, as well as those to Clementia and Amicitia (Tac. Ann. iv. 74), simply commemorative, and print the DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 49 words as common nouns. But something more than commemora- tion was the intent of the Senate. The altar denoted worship — sham, hypocritical worship, it is true, and in reality nothing but disguised obsequiousness ; yet it was the form of worship exactly as much in essence as the temple to Fecunditas under Nero showed. Instances of these occasional deifications attested in inscriptions and historical literature which I have collected are as follows: Amicitia. — Tac. Ann. iv. 74: ita . . . . (sc. senatores) aram > Clementiae, aram Amicitiae effigiesque circum Caesaris ac Seiani censuere. This took place in 28 a. d. when, as Tacitus himself says in the preceding sentence, pavor internus occupaverat animos, cui remedium adulatione quaerebatur. >^ CiviTAS. — CIL. VI. 88 : Civitati sacrum A. Aemilius Artema fecit. As Artema is a slave-name of Greek origin from dpTe/irjSf it is . likely that this man, on securing his manumission and becoming a ^ citizen, set up an altar to his patron deity "Citizenship." Dies Bonus. — CIL. VIII. 9323 : Die Bono M. Allecimus Athic- tus dedit libens. Beneath is the figure of a boy, bonus puer Phos- phorus. (Steuding in Roscher.) Perhaps Bonus Dies is another ^ name for Phosphorus. Fama. — This name occurs in two inscriptions in Spain (II. 1435) and Cologne (Orelli 5817), of which the former is reported second hand as reading Famae Aug. The cognomen, however, is probably not official, as Fama is entirely lacking on coins. The depreciating descriptions of Fama, as "Rumor," by Vergil, Horace, and Ovid, do not show the conception contained in these dedica- tions. It is rather the same as the Greek EvkA-cui, who had a temple in Athens. Cf. also the poetical fragment (Bahrens V, pp. 421 f.), where Fama z= Gloria and is mentioned with Venus, Cupid, and the Muses ; Martial i. 25. 5 : Ante fores stantem dubitas admittere Famam Teque piget curae praemia ferre tuae. CIL. XL 15 17: Primisina Severina bone fame fidelisque. A colony \ existed in Spain named Fama Julia (Plin. N.H. iii. 14). Gloria. — CIL. VIII. 6949: Gloriae Aug. sacrum — on altar from Cirta, Africa. Renown here is the sense as in Fama. (Wis- sowa R.-K., p. 280, calls Gloria a pure appellative.) ^ RoBUR. — CIL. XIII. 1112: Deo Robori et Genio loci — Aquita- nia. If this inscription is genuine, and Robori is not the name of a 50 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Celtic god, we may see in Robur a god of firmness against attack, presiding perhaps, over some fortification (cf. Hor. Carm. i. 3. 9, illi robur et aes triplex circa pectus erat) ; or, possibly, of vigor and strength with direct allusion to the picked troops (cf. Cic. Ad jam. X. 33, et robur et suboles militum interiit; Caes. B. C. iii. 87, quod fuit roboris duobus proeliis interiit) ; or of the prison (cf. Liv. xxxviii. 59; Tac. Ann. iv. 29). Tempus Bonum. — CIL. III. 13747: Tempori Bono pro salute dominorum Imp. n. 1. Septimi Severi Pertenacis (sic) et M. Aurel. Antonini Augg. et Septimi | | | | (Tyra, Moesia). This is an occa- sional deity referring, according to Matweew (Acta soc. hist or. et archaeol. Odessit. 1890, August 23), to immunity from taxes granted the people of Tyra by Emperors Severus and Caracalla. Hence Tempus Bonum = "Happy Time" or "Good Fortune." This conclusion is suported by a Greek inscription containing a letter of the emperors to the same people for the same years (III. 781), referring to their generosity and the good fortune of the Tyrenses (ry fJieydX-p avrw Tvxy)' Testimonius or Testimonium. — CIL. VIII. 8246, 8247. Two priests of Saturn in Numidia offer eight various animals each as sacrifices to the d(i) b(oni)(?), including Jupiter, Hercules, Venus, and Mercury, among which is a wether to Testimonius (-um). The motive or meaning cannot be made out. Ultio. — Tac. Ann. iii. 18. 3: atque idem cum Valerius Messa- linus signum aureum in aede Martis Ultoris, Caecina Severus aram Ultioni (so the best manuscripts, not Ultionis) statuendam cen- suissent,prohibuit,ob externas ea victorias sacrari dictitans domes- tica mala tristitia operienda (20 a. d.). The dative case and the word sacrari seem to indicate a degree of worship, and no doubt on this altar sacrifices would have been made. Out of this beginning another imperial cult with a regular temple might have developed, had the emperor not interfered. As Wissowa points out (R.-K., p. 48, n. 3), it is a good example of the separation of an abstract deity from an anthropomorphic god. DOUBTFUL EXAMPLES Under this head I have grouped a numl?er of heterogeneous abstracts for which the evidence is very dubious. They are literary personifications on the border-line of deification, abstractions used DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 5 1 as periphrases for other gods, or singular cases with obscure evi- dence insufficient to establish a probability. Adventus. — CIL. VI. 795: Adventui Aug. feliciter, Victoriis Aug. feliciter. This is not the reading given by the Corpus, which substitutes Eventui for Adventui and in the footnote gives the latter as the traditional reading. The inscription is grouped with the regular sacred tituli. Following this conjecture, writers have considered this an inscription to the god Eventus Augustus (e. g., Wissowa R.-K., p. 216, n. 2) ; Ruggiero Dis, I, p. 927), but it is more probably an acclamatio on the occasion of an emperor's return to Rome, meaning : "Hurrah for the arrival of the emperor ! Hur- rah for the victories of the emperor!" Outside of coins, where it appears as early as the reign of Trajan, the name does not appear, except possibly as a cognomen of Jupiter (HI. 6340; see note). CoNSTANTiA. — Found on coins only. Peter, in Roscher, con- siders this a deification by analogy of others. So apparently do Preller and Wissowa. CupiDO. — Cupido is a literary personification, a translation of the Greek *Epa>s of Hesiod. He never received true worship among the people, and outside of literature is rarely found except in statues and scenes upon mirrors, etc.; e. g. CIL. 1. 58. However, one case exists — a curious inscription from Spain (II. 2407), in which he is grouped with all the main divinities and his name, like theirs, is in the dative. In Plautus and other early literature we find a single Cupid, but the Alexandrine conception of many Cupids occurs often in^ later times. CuRA. — A certain clay cup like those described in Ritschl's Ex- empla, Tab. X., long ago lost, was said to have the legend Coerae pocolo. Mommsen {CIL. I. 45) suspected its genuineness because of the omission of m in pocolo, but this objection was set aside by a parallel omission in the phrase Vestae pocolo on a fragment found at Lanuvium (Notizie 1895, p. 45). Wilmanns (Eph. Epig. I, no. 6) cited a picture of a cup, found by Zangemeister, among the additions to a list of antiquities published in 1708, which was inscribed: COTRA POCOVO. This inscription he identified with ours, and is supported in this identification by Dessau op. cit. II. 2960. But the one inscription reads Cotra and the other Coerae. Great doubt exists as to the meaning, but if it is equivalent to Cura, the meaning is more likely the same as that of Horace's "atra Cura," rather than synonymous with Mens, as Jordan (Ann. Inst. 52 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Arch. 1884, p. 15) understood it. Hyginus (ccxx ed. Schmidt) pre- served a fable in early Latin poetry of Cura and lovis, Tellus and Saturnus, disputing over the name of a man whom Cura had made out of clay. This myth was doubtless Greek. Fatus, Fatum. — Fatum was not a deity among the Romans, but the plural Fata were simply a translation of the Greek Moirae, and became not only a Latin literary concept, but a part of religious belief, and frequently were given inscriptions and statues. (Peter, in Roscher I, p. 1447; Wissowa R.-K., p. 213, n. 4; p. 214, n. i.) As to Fatus, which is common in the carmina sepulchralia, this is much more probably a grammatical variant for fatum, as Wis- sowa holds, than an anthropomorphic conception like a genius, as Jordan {Hermes VIL 197) and Peter (loc. cit.) thought. This is strikingly illustrated by comparing two examples of the same stereotyped epitaph: VL 4379, noli dolere, amica, eventum meum properavit aetas: hoc dedit fatw.y mihi, and VL 8023, nolite dolere eventum meum, properavit aetas ; hoc dedit f atwm mihi. But we meet with Fati and Fatae upon inscriptions from Gaul whose meaning is obscure. They may be provincial and foreign deities translated into the nearest Latin equivalents (Wissowa R.-K., p. 214). HiLARiTAS. — This is found only on coins of a few emperors beginning with Hadrian. Dressel (CIL. XIV. 192-96) identifies a figure on brick stamps of the age of Severus as Hilar itas. But the conjecture by Steuding (Roscher I, p. 2659) that Hilare in CIL. 111. 1680 (=8248) is Hila(ritati) Re(ginae) is very improb- able, because, as 8248 shows, the words in this inscription are widely spaced, but Hilare is run together into one word. Laetitia. — Eckhel (DNU. VH, p. 21) conjectures a public cult from a coin of Commodus reading P. D. S. P. Q. R. Laetitiae C. V. S. C. = Senatus Populusqne Romanus Laetitiae Coronam Vovit, Senatus Consulto ; cf. Drexler in Roscher. Lubentia. — Plant. Asin. 268: Ut ego illos lubentiores faciam quam Lubentiast. Peter, in Roscher H. 201 f ., hazards the guess that Lubentia is the same as Lubentina, just as Paventia and Paventina are synonymous. He, however, wrongly cites Hiibrich De diis Plau- tinis as treating her among deities. On the contrary, Hiibrich dis- tinctly says (p. 55) it is a fictitious deity, "quales saepe poeta finxit deas." He argues simply that Lubentia was not a cognomen of Venus. With him I am inclined to agree. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVmUAL CULTS 53 Maiestas. — In two inscriptions (VI. 254; III. 449) occurs the phrase Genio ac Maiestati with the names of Antoninus Pius and Diocletian. Similarly Numini Maiestatique is used of Constantine (VIII. 12062, 12063). Here it is evident that Maiestas is a circum- locution for the emperor himself. The genealogy of Ovid (Fasti V. 25), which represents Maiestas as the daughter of Honor and Reverentia, is purely poetic. Memoria. — That this conception was ever embodied as a god- dess is very uncertain. There is absolutely no evidence for an official or private cult in Rome, and the name does not appear on coins till the very late Empire (see Cohen VIII, Index). On the other hand, Arnobius (295 a. d.) clearly conceived of her as a deity, including her in the list of characteristic deified abstracts: nihil horum [i. e., abstracts] sentimus et cernimus habere vim numinis neque in aliqua contineri sui generis forma, sed esse virtutem viri, salutem salvi, honorem honorati, victoris victoriam, concordis con- cordiam, pietatem pii, memoriam memoris, feliciter vero viventis ac sine ulHs offensionibus felicitatem (Arn. iv. 2). All these qualities had well-known public cults in Rome, and hence memoria is not introduced merely as a mental concept, but as one that had been deified. But though Arnobius went back through Labeo to Varro or Verrius Flaccus, possibly (cf. Teuflfel-Schwabe, §396, 2; Jahrb. f. Phil. XXIV, p. 123), for his source, it may well be that in this list a Greek deity has crept in, since Arnobius attacked both Latin and Greek religions. In another passage (iii. 37), Musas Mnaseas est auctor filias esse Telluris et Caeli, lovis ceteri praedicant ex Memoria uxore vel Mente, Memoria is the translation of the Greek MvyjfixHrvvrj ; cf. ii. 70; iii. 37. Servius Ad Aen. iii. 607 says: physici dicunt esse consecratas numinibus singulas corporis partes, ut aurem Memoriae . . . . ; frontem Genio, unde venerantes deum tangimus frontem: dextram Fidei .... ; genua Misericordiae : unde haec tangunt rogantes. The commentator is confusing Greek with Roman, as is clear from the mention of Misericordia = "EXeos who had an altar in Athens, but none in Rome. Heron de Villefosse (Comptes-rendus des seances, p. ix; Cagnat L'ann. epig. 1899, no. 47) proposes to restore an inscription from Carthage as follows: S(aturno) A(ugusto) s(acrum) Q. Fabius Sat(urninus) sacer(dos) Martis, tem(enorus) aed(is) Memo- (riae) et Fortunula coiux eius cum filis suis votum solvit. The use 54 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE of temenorus {re/iivovpo^ Kaibel, Epig. Gr., no. 781, 1. 11: rcfie- vwpov, T€fjL€vov^ (f>v>MKa, HcsycHius) as a Latin word is unsupported, and hence is a mere conjecture. In another inscription from Africa near Tunis (Bulletin de la Societe nationale des Antiquaires de France 1903; Uann. epig. 1904, no. 83), dated 161-69 a. d., we read: pro salute Imp. Caes. M. Aureli Antonini .... statuas [me]mo[r]iae temporum quat- tuor decreto decurionum p[osu]it, item dedicationis die epulum decurionibus dedit. The index to Uann. epig. loc. cit. includes Memoria as a deity, but it is not clear whether "memoriae" is dative or genitive. If the former, memoriae = pro memoria; if the latter, it is personified, but this is not conclusive evidence of worship. On the whole, therefore, stronger proof must be adduced before admit- ting the deification of this idea with either public or private cult. However, there is abundant evidence to show that the quality of memory was revered and almost sacred, especially as applied to the memory of deceased friends. Numerous inscriptions have Memoriae sacrum (VI. 23057, 17398), Bonae Memoriae (III. 7436; XL 81), in place of Dis Manibus (and some with it, e. g., XL 1097), followed by the genitive and often by the dative. It may be conjectured that, like the Di Manes, the memory of the departed may have been thought 1 of as a spirit guarding his existence in the minds and hearts of his ! friends. The closeness with which the quality memoria approaches •the deity Memoria is seen in the connection with other deities ; e. g., VI. 10958, Deanae et Memoriae Aeliae Proculae; VI. 15594, For- tunae Spei Veneri et Memoriae Claud (iae) Semnes sacrum. Moles Martis. — Aulus Gellius (xiii. 23. 2) mentions certain peculiar names written in the books of the public priests as fol- lows: Luam Saturni, Salaciam Neptuni, Horam Quirini, Virites Quirini, Maiam Volcani, Heriem lunonis. Moles Martis, Nerienem- que Martis. Mommsen {Hermes XVII, p. 637) suggested that the powers of Mars may be here personified. The Feriale Cumanum {CIL. P. 229) records a supplicatio to them for May 12, the anni- versary of the temple of Mars. Mors. — It is extremely doubtful if the Romans ever worshiped a goddess Mors, for when Servius {Ad A en. xi. 197) says Morti ipsi, deae, he is relying on the poetical lines of Statins {Theb. iv. 528) and Lucan (vi. 600) ; the words of Tertullian {Ad nat. ii. 15), et ipsius mortis dea est, may be referring to the spirit Morta in the Indigitamenta (see above). Moreover, the carmina sepulchralia in DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS INDIVIDUAL CULTS 55 which Mors occurs so frequently (see the complete collection by Peter in Roscher 11. 3220) are very figurative. Of course, it is quite possible that individuals conceived of death itself as a spirit quite distinct from Dis, Orcus, or Pluto. Plautus (Cist. 639; Bacch. II 52; Capt. 692) merely personified death. Letus, too, which occurs in an epitaph (VI. 19007), quam mor- tis acerbus eripuit Letus teneramque ad Tartara duxit, is poetical, the change in gender from the neuter Letum being a part of the vividness of the personification or merely a grammatical variant of vulgar Latin. Cf^ Fatus. Natura. — L'ann. epig. 1899, no. yy: Naturae dei Prudens Primi Antoni Rufi p. p. vil. vie. This is, of course, a periphrasis equivalent to deo. Natura, however, is frequently personified by Statins and Claudianus. BoNUM Negotium. — From the fragmentary inscription (Eph. Epig, V. 916), .... ivii .... egotivm C. Clodius C. f. Surus Diem Bonum, Mommsen conjectured Bonum Negotium and com- pared it with Bonus Eventus. It is more probably an acclamation. Pallor and Pavor. — These personifications were long believed to have had an ancient cult dating from the reign of Tullus Hos- tilius, who, the legend ran, vowed them in the battle against Fidenae (Liv. i. 2y. 7: Tullus in re trepida duodecim vovit Salios fanaque Pallori ac Pavori). This, however, is our only source, for it has long been shown that all references to these deities follow Livy in time, and probably were taken directly from him. The supposed images of the gods on coins of L. Hostilius Sasenna (Babelon I, pp. 52 f.) are more probably figures of a Gallic man and woman. Moreover, the fact that Cicero does not refer to these deities in any of the several passages where he speaks of evil gods has some weight as negative evidence. We are therefore justified in believ- ing that Livy's account was based on a tradition which was perhaps handed down by the annalists and was due to a mere personification in some early poetical account of the battle (written by Ennius, Wissowa suggests) which was misunderstood as an actual deifica- tion. See Wissowa in Roscher for full references. Prosperitas Deorum. — CIL. III. 4557 : Deorum prosperitati G. Mar(cus) Marcianus decurio .... s(olvit) l(ibens) l(aetus) m(erito). Deorum prosperitati=dis pro prosperitate eorum. Rixus. — The letters RIT on a mirror beside the figure of a sit- ting youth to whom Vi(c)toria is speaking together with Venus and 56 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Cupido were conjectured by Mommsen {CIL, I. 58; XIV. -^096) to stand for Ritus = ©e' Tacitus reveals no hint of his personal attitude, but the chron- icle of events he has left us clearly indicates the tendency of feeling toward these gods throughout the imperial period. The creation of divinities so frequent in the third and second centuries B.C. is revived, and goes to ridiculous extremes when the virtues of the I ruling house become the object of flattery. Any mere appellative made prominent by some connection with the emperor or his family was revered and exalted till it becomes extremely difficult to judge whether, even in official circles, it was only praised or really adored. So altars, in the republic a true sign of cult, came to be practically honorary tablets indirectly to flatter the emperor. In the inscriptions those in which the deification was connected with the . emperor as the possessor (in the genitive case) constitute the great : majority, except in those pertaining to Fortuna and Victoria. i Now, Tacitus shows how the servile Senate manufactured these deifications, setting up altars to Clementia and Amicitia (Ann. iv. 74) and voting one for Adoptio (ibid. i. 14). Editors of Tacitus usually imply that no worship was intended for these altars, but "It is a sign of the almost total absence of cults of base qualities in the flourishing period of the Roman state that, after Cicero, no new names are cited as instances. It is probable that the shrines mentioned were founded in the early period when the religion was popular and not official. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 8l that they were commemorative. But certainly worship different in essence from that suggested by these altars was not intended when the temple of Fecunditas was built in 63 a. d. with direct reference to the pregnancy of the empress (Ann. xv. 23). Th^ dif- ference is only in degree, and it is more exact, perhaps, to say that in both cases there was formal worship, but it amounted to not much more than commemoration. The proposed altar to Ultio in the temple of Mars Ultor was doubtless intended to receive sacrifices. Suetonius also has an illustrative passage {V it ell. 15) on the meaningless treatment of these divinities. When Rome was rent with faction and blood was flowing, the emperor took off his pon- iard and quasi in aede Concordiae positurus abscessit. Sed qui- busdam adclamantibus ipsum esse Concordiam rediit nee solum retinere se ferrum affirmavit verum etiam Concordiae recipere cog- nomen. Now, these sycophants surely did not consider him the feminine deity Concordia, but the spirit of concord. Neither they nor he would have given him the designation Juno or Minerva. Turning to poetry, we find little in Lucan outside of personifi- cation, and this statement is also true of the poetical portions of Petronius' Saturae. In the latter occurs a striking picture of Pax, Fides, lustitia, and Concordia (§124, 11. 245, 263, Biicheler), but they are immediately followed by unreal deities like Letum, Insi- diae, and Furor. Petronius also fancies a temple of Amor (§127. 3), and frequently mentions Fortuna. SiLius Italicus was given to excessive rhetoric, and personifi- cation is worn to death in the Bellum Punicum. Mors, Luctus, Planctus, Maeror, Dolor, Metus, Terror, and Furor, and so on ad infinitum, appear everywhere. Deity and quality are combined in confusion merely for vivid effect; e.g.. Virtus and Voluptas (xv. 18), Ebrietas, Luxus, Infamia Honor, Laudes, Gloria Decus ac Victoria (xv. 95 ff.)- In the case of Fides, however, whom he treats frequently and at length in books ii and vi, he has deity clearly in mind. Thus he makes Hercules pro- ceed to her temple in heaven and address her thus: ante lovem generata decus divumque hominumque. Qua sine non tellus pacem, non aequora norunt, lustitiae consors tacitumque in pectore numen, quem maesta virorum ora vocant, etc. (ii. 475 ff.), the longest passage concerning any of the deified virtues in Latin literature. Statius is still more prolific in figments of the brain, but he also has a few references to our deities, e. g., Silv. iii. 3. i. 82 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Summa deum Pietas, cuius gratissima caelo rara profanatas inspectant numina terras hue vittata comam niveoque insignis amictu He styles Virtus "gory" (cruenta, Silv. i. 6. 62), Fides alma (Theb. xi. 98). With him, as with Silius, Concordia is specialized to married life (ibid. i. 240). He also deifies Annona (ibid. i. 6. 38). 50 The satires of Juvenal contain a few allusions, e.g., i. 114: .... nullas nummorum ereximus aras ut colitur Pax atque Fides Victoria Virtus quaeque salutato crepitat Concordia nido .... in which the contrast between a cult of wealth and that of the virtues and utilities shows a respect for the latter. In vi. 307 ff . he severely censures the insult to' the statue of Pudicitia by women. On the other hand, he depreciates Fortuna (x. 365 f., quoted by Lactantius iii. 29. 17) : nullum numen habes, si sit prudentia; nos te nos facimus, Fortuna, deam caeloque locamus. y Upon Martial our cults apparently made little impression, for the few allusions are merely rhetorical, e. g., x. 50. 1-4, Victoria, Favor, Honor, and Gloria; iv. 13. 7, Concordia and Venus in metonymy. Of the other authors in this period we need speak only of Apuleius, Fronto, and Aulus Gellius. The Metamorphoses of |i (y^-sApuLEius are replete with personification and deification, but since the tales are essentially Greek, we learn little regarding Roman practice.^^ Probable references to Roman deities, however, are found in vi. 15: nee Providentiae bonae graves oculos innocentis animae latuit aerumna; ii. 21 : ut ipsos etiam oculos Solis et lustitiae frustrentur, cf. iii. 7, iii. 26: sed pro luppiter hospitalis et Fidei secreta numina; xi. 28: quidni spiritu faventis Eventus. Doubtful is xi. ID, Aequitatis indicium; but as the priests of Isis are repre- sented bearing the symbols of certain gods (potentissimorum deum praeferebant insignis exuvias, quorum primus lucernam .... secundus altaria .... deae, ibat tertius .... Mercuri- ale caduceum, quartus Aequitatis indicium, deformatam manum •* The mock-serious worship of Risus, so frequently referred to in ii. 31; iii. 10, and elsewhere, was an actual Greek cult, TAws, in Thessaly and Sparta. Cf. Plut. Clean. 9 ; Lycurgus 25. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 83 sinistram porrecta palmula), the goddess may have been intended. Besides these, Victoria and Fortuna, with their conventional epi- thets, are often mentioned (e. g., vii. 2; vi. 28; ii. 4), and with the latter goddess it is interesting to observe a conception common in the inscriptions : ii. 20, per Fortunas (vestras) vestrosque Genios — as if the fortunes of a man were comparable to presiding spirits. From the letters of Fronto we have a single passage of inter- est. In expressing his preference for the spontaneous affection of Marcus Aurelius and his dislike of esteem that is won by skilful obsequiousness, he is drawn into a comparison between fortuna and ratio, in which he sees the great superiority of the former, viz. : Quis ignorat rationem humani consili vocabulum esse, Fortunam autem deam dearumque praecipuarum ? templa f ana delubra passim Fortunae dicata : rationi nee simulacrum nee aram usquam conseeratam (p. 8 ed. Naber; cf. p. 157). AuLus Gellius declares that the Romans worshiped Fides above all the other virtues (xx. i. 39). He also describes the appear- ance of lustitia, according to Chrysippus, the Stoic, in art and ora- tory as follows : forma atque filo virginali aspectu vementi et formidabili, luminibus oculorum acribus, neque humilis neque atrocis sed reverendae cuiusdam tristitiae dignitate But his most important note is that which gives a list of gods in libris sacerdotum populi Romani et in antiquis orationibus, showing how certain qualities inherent in the gods are themselves deified and considered the companions of these gods ; e. g., Salacia Neptuni, Virites Quirini, Moles Mortis. (See above, p. 54.) D. LITERATURE OF THE LATE EMPIRE After Gellius we rarely meet with any references to our subject until the fourth and fifth centuries, and here almost no attention to them is given save as mere personifications. Occasionally we find allusions to a cult showing that it still existed ; e. g., Flav. Vopisc. xxviii. 12. 7, Concordia et Romana Victoria; Amm. Marc. xxix. 6. 19, concerning the temple of Bonus Eventus in the Campus Martins. Victoria plays a prominent role in Symmachus and contem- porary writers, but not so much with regard to her cult as to the burning question whether her statue, representing the pagan religion, should remain in the senate house. The early Christian emperors 84 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE had allowed the worship of the abstracts, while they repressed that of the anthropomorphic deities, because they felt that such worship amounted to little else than the commemoration and veneration of qualities which they themselves revered as characteristics of the one God. Their chief struggle was against gods with barbarous mytho- logical association, which squarely opposed Christianicy; not against mere shadowy notions symbolized in plastic art and literary image. Accordingly, until Theodosius officially, and probably after him unofficially, statues were permitted to stand, and the emperors allowed their courtiers to address them by these abstract terms. (Cf. Amm. Marc, xxviii. 6. 7.) And this is the ground that Sym- machus was forced to take in pleading for the retention of the statue of Victoria. His words sound as if pleading for a figure of Justice on a county courthouse; e.g. (x. 3. 3) : quis ita familiaris est barbaris ut aram Victoriae non requirat .... reddatur saltem nomini honor, qui numini denegatus est ... . cunctis potentia ista votiva: nemo colendam neget, quam profitetur optandam. But the very ardor of his eloquence betrayed the fact that he was pleading, not for a mere nomen, but for a niimen which, masked, disguised, and accorded official sanction, would represent to tiie people the old religion and be a power for its preservation and future restoration. Ambrosius, however, foiled this scheme, and Victoria was doomed. Both pagan and Christian writers of this period employ the word deus or dea with some freedom, but only in a perfunctory way, very much as the adjective divinus, applied to something rare or beyond the control of man. This was, of course, the same func- tion that the word had commonly as used by the pagan poets throughout Latin literature, and the Christian poet had no hesitation in following rhetorical custom ; e. g., Ausonius iv. 4. 24, Fortis deae. Of the authors of this period Claudianus alone deserves men- tion in our field. While he personified freely and is rhetorical throughout, yet in a few passages he seems to feel the genuine reality of our deities, as e. g., in his exaltation of Clementia (xxii. 6. II ; xvii. 166 ff.) and Victoria (xxviii. 597; xxiv. 204). Besides the usual deifications, he personifies Prudentia, Temperies, Constan- tia, Patientia, Audacia, Voluptas, Formido, and others. Here we may briefly mention the grammarians and antiquarians, who, as a rule, afford little assistance toward a realization of actual cults, because they only compile the statements of previous authors DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 85 without discrimination. In this way AusoNius fell into a ludicrous mistake, when in his list of some actual deities (xi. 8) he included Fas and Vis (see above, p. 56), making deities out of common nouns. In the list of months he ascribes a possible origin of the name lunius from luventa. Macrobius hands down the interesting theory that the gods are various names for the sun and its powers, citing; lustitia and Nemesis among them. He also names Vitula a deity of exultation on the authority of Hyllus = Hyginus (supra), and collects the numerous cognomina of Salus — Semonia, Seia, Segetiay Tutilina. Servius (Ad. Aen. iii. 607) has the interesting observa^ tion that the philosophers (physici) say that different members of the body were consecrated to various deities: aurem Memoriae, fontem Genio, dextram Fidei, genua Misericordiae (cf. Mytho^. Vaticani 11. 23 f.. Bode); but this is doubtless Greek in origin). The other grammarians have been cited as occasion arose in disi cussing the various gods in Part I. E. THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS In their attack upon the old Roman religion the early Christian writers, Minucius Felix, Tertullian, Arnobius, Lactantius, Jerome, Augustine, and Paulinus, selected the deified abstractions for attack as one of the weak points in the system. All urge the charge that was brought out by Gotta in Gicero's De natura deorum, viz., that these were mental notions without substance or life, masquerading as divine personalities. Arnobius succinctly puts the matter thus (iv. 2) : nihil horum sentimus et cernimus habere vim numinis neque in aliqua contineri sui generis forma sed esse virtutem viri, salutem salvi, honorem honorati, victoris victoriam, concordis concordiam, pietatem pii, memoriam memoris, feliciter vero viventis ac sine ullis offensionibus felicitatem. Lactantius {Inst. i. 20. 18) adds: non enim per se parietes aut aediculas luto factas sed intra pectus collocandae sunt. Paulinus Nolanus (Epist. xvi. c. 4) calls them cassa nomina, as foolishly endowed with divine honor as they were invented. But Augustine was the first to analyze and satirize thoroughly their inconsistencies and imperfections by showing, first, that such deifi- cations were not mutually exclusive ; e. g., Fortuna and Felicitas {De civ. dei iv. 18; there was really no place for Jupiter with Vic- toria a goddess, iv. 14) ; secondly, that they rested upon chance % 86 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE and the impulse of individuals, and hence were arbitrary creations, whereas many concepts not canonized — e. g., regnum, temperantia, fortitudo, and Quies (the latter only a popular cult) — weie as worthy of public worship as Victoria or Virtus (iv. 14, 16, 2c) ; and, lastly, that evils like Febris should no more be considered gods than should discordia (iii. 25). From this view of the direct statements of serious discussions and the indirect evidence of other literature it is clear that the scholarly and literary Romans felt strongly the difference between the deified abstracts and the other gods. They were to them, with certain exceptions, transparent projections of mental concepts with- out saga or personality, and were excluded from the rank of the chief gods, since their presence and potency were not so strongly felt. Their sex, which was in reality no more than the grammatical gender of their names, was often forgotten, and they were degraded to serve in literature as mere personifications, with other personifica- tions that were never made gods, from which character it is always difficult to distinguish them. IPX. THE ABSTRACTS IN THE INSCRIPTIONS In the sacred inscriptions we find quite different and often surer evidence than in literature. They reveal to us the attitude, not of the scholars and poets, but of all classes ; and the altars, shrines, and temples with which they are connected, the use of the term sacrum and other formulae, the records of sacrifices and feasts, of priests and guilds, are quite as positive evidence as the statements of the investigators, and more credible than a poetic allusion. To set up an altar to a deity required and expressed far greater conviction of the potency of that deity than to inscribe its name on a roll of papyrus. How, then, did the Romans popularly look upon our divinities, according to the test of their inscriptions? Did they treat them in the same fashion as the major gods, or were they skeptical of their existence as personalities? The testimony of the stones does not all point in the same direc- tion, nor is it the same foJi-all-the,^fty or more abstractions com- memorated. Moreover, many of the legends are ambiguous because of their brevity. Not infrequently, too, an abstract noun may be interpreted as an appellative or a deification, as was the case so often in literature. This ebb-and-flow between literal meaning and DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 87 pq^nification^this^Pi^-Jekyll-and-Mr.-Hyde existence of our dei- ties^ is apparent even on a superficial examination of the monuments, and^is easily detected sometimes in one and the same inscription. 1^ Let us look first at those showing personality, which make up j about ^ on£=third of the several hundred examples which I have ' noted. We must, of course, exclude from the number those show- ing the name only of a deity — e. g., Concordiae sacrum ; for only the author of such a reading could tell whether the personality of the goddess or the idea of harmony was uppermost in his mind. It may be objected that this is true of all the gods ; that the anthropo- morphic as well as the transparent represented concepts expressed in their names which were the real object of prayer and worship by their devotees. But this is not quite true. Originally Jupiter, Nep- tune, Mercury, and the other major deities were, of course, derived from pure appellatives ; but not only had these names shifted so widely from their original roots that their derivation was a source of speculation even to the learned,^* but they had taken on human forms, attributes, powers, and failings because of the influence of the imaginative literature and plastic art of Greece. And when these sacred names were used to stand for common objects, the user was plainly conscious of the metonymy. If *'sub love" meant "under the clear sky" to the ordinary Roman, he probably had an image of the heaven-dwelling lord without any sense of derivation. So, too, when Terence says (Etin. 732), "sine Cerere et Libero friget Venus," these deities do not lose their per- sonality by the metonymy. The fact that the phrase was a proverb is sufficient proof (Cic. ibid. ii. 60). But the deities we are con- cerned with never lost their transparent meaning and whether they took on personality to any extent or not is the object of our present investigation. The signs of personality are, in general, vocative, epithets and adjectives applicable to a human being, like optimus, stator, con- servator, regina, which are applied to Jupiter and Juno. The deities Bonus Eventus, Concordia, Fides, Fortuna, Pax, Pietas, Salus, Spes, Tutela, Valetudo, Victoria, and Virtus have such designations, and of them Fortuna, Victoria, Salus, and Virtus far more commonly ** Cf. Cicero De nat. deor. iii. 62. In enodandis autem nominibus, quod miserandum sit, laboratis. Saturnus, quia se saturat omnis, Mavors, quia magna vertit, Minerva quia minuit aut quia minatur, Venus, quia venit ad omnia, Ceres a gerendo. Quam periculosa consuetudo ! In multis enim nominibus haerebitis. SS DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE than the others, as was to be expected. Fortuna, indeed, seems almost as anthropomorphic as any of the "twelve gods." F. Primi- genia is styled lovis puer(==puella) (CIL. XIV, 2862, 2863), and once is addressed as follows : Tu, quae Tarpeio coleris vicina Tonanti, Votorumvindex semper Fortuna meorum, Accipe She is commonly called Redux, Obsequens, Respiciens, and Regina. (Cf. also Carter De cogn, deor., p. 61, and Trans. Amer. Phil. Asso. 1900, p. 60.) Victoria is called Virgo (L'ann. epig. 1898, no. 14), Regina (XIII. 4290), Comes Virtutis (VIII. 18240), dominorum {Notizie 1891, p. 251), and Sancta (III. 7687). Twice she is tautologically styled Victrix (VIII. 9017; VII. iii), as if her personality had so overshadowed the meaning of her name that it became unimpressive and the adjective was ascribed to her as it was to Venus! Salus is invoked directly and in the same manner as Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva in the prayers of the Arval Brothers for the safety of the emperor, and Virtus was often called by the soldiers their "dea sancta" (VIII. 9026, 9027; XIII. 6385). One inscription from Africa (L'ann. epig. 1898, no. 61) reads: Deae pedisequae Virtutis Bellonae lecticam cum suis ornamentis et basem C. Avianius Aman- dus augur d(onum) d(edit) et consecravit. The others named, above are vividly personified once or twice, as follows: (Wilmanns Exempla 150) Concordia Sospes. (II. 2412) deo sancto Evento. (IX. 60) Alma Fides tibi ago grates, sanctissima diva. (VI. 17130) Sed te nunc, Pietas, venerorque precorque Ut bene pro meriteis hilares Hilaram. in which latter case the word hilares is strikingly human. (VII. 100) Salus Regina. (XI. 4188, 6433) Spes et Fortuna valete. (XIII. 411, VI. 30984) Tutelae sanctissimae, Tutelae optimae. (VII. 20747) Bonae Valetudini sanct(ae). But by far the great majority of the inscriptions show that mere quality was the predominant element in the author's conception. The indications of this are, first, impersonal adjectives and epithets; second, genitives and modifying phrases. The common epithet perpetua applied to Concordia, Pax, and Salus (VIII. 15447; II. 3349 J X. 4170a) is rarely used of a person, though Martial (vi. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 89 64. 10) writes perpetui scrinia Silii ; and publica, salutaris, casualis, militaris, used of Felicitas, Fortuna, Fides, and Disciplina, are like- wise usually impersonal (11. 4497; III. loio; III. 3315; VIII. 9832, 10657; ^P^' E,pig. III. 580; on the other hand, note lovi salutari, Trebellius Pollio, xxiii. 5. 5). All these are the regular terms applied to the abstracts in inscriptions, and are in great con- trast with the very human names attached to the other gods, as pater, mater, invictus, felix, vilicus, and others. "lupiter publicus" would be an anomaly. In the case of adjectves applicable both to persons and qualities, the personal force is not usually felt when they are attached to the abstracts. Fortuna, dea bona, is, of course, personal, but Bona For- tuna, Bonus Eventus, Bona Mens, Bona Valetudo, are not the good deities, Fortuna, Eventus, Mens, Valetudo, but the good kind of "fortune," "outcome," and so forth ; they are restrictive, not descrip- tive, and the adjective is in reality an integral part of the name, as indeed it actually is written in [Bo]nevento [profec]tionis (IX. 1560). The extent to which such restrictive adjectives were employed is illustrated by the worship of Fortuna Melior at Spoletium, Antium, and Interamna (XIV. 216). But by far the greatest number of dedications which show weak personifications are those wherein genitives or modifying phrases are attached to the deity's name. They consist of the names of towns and townspeople, e.g.: (X. 7192) Concordiae Agrigenti- norum; of guilds, (V. 7555) Concordiae collegii, (V. 4203) Bonum Eventum VI vir(um) sociorum; of soldiers, (XIII. 6670; III. 5123) ; of places of business or public buildings, (XI. 3075) ; of the gods, (VIS pp. 561) ; of the empire, the emperors, the Senate, and private individuals. Now, such modifiers are not characteristic of, but alien to, the anthropomorphic gods. There is no luppiter imperi, no Mars mili- tum, no Neptunus classis. The exceptions to this rule are very few. The most noteworthy is the phrase luno cuiusdam mulieris; but although derived from the goddess' function as a guardian of mar- riage and the female sex, the name Juno in this use came to stand for an entity quite distinct from the celestial wife of Jupiter. A stone from Pannonia (III. 3305) bears the dedication: Herculi Augusti M. Domiti Secundinus.^^ ^ This inscription so far as I can ascertain, has not been quoted oin the question whether Hercules was anciently a form of Genius. It may have been a '\ t 90 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE Another stone reads deae Dianae Augustorum (XIII. 1495), ^^t here Augustorum depends upon dea, whose thought is carried over the appositive, or there is a confusion of two constructions. In Mauretania the dedication Dianae Aug. Maurorum (VIII. 8436) seems parallel to the examples cited of the abstracts. However, the word dea or some appositive, e. g., tutatrix, is to be understood with- out doubt, and a similar substitution seems at first sight a plausible solution also for the cases mentioned above. Concordia Visentium (II. 465) would then be Concordia Visentium dea. But the expla- nation calls forth several objections. First, the use of dea or a similar noun in apposition with an abstract modified by a genitive" is comparatively rare; second, the use of a possessive adjective equivalent to a genitive as in Fidei suae sacrum (X. 5903) could not be explained easily by that substitution; finally, the frequency of such modifying genitives and the close connection they form with the deified abstracts amount almost to a demonstration that an appositive was not only not understood, but was superfluous. It would be almost impossible to supply any substantive in Prosperitati deorum (III. 4557) and Providentiae deorum (VP, p. 560). Con- cordiae Agrigentinorum sacrum (X. 7192) meant "sacred to the concord of the Agrigentines," not to Concord their goddess ; Felici- tati imperi meant "to the happiness of the Empire;" Saluti generis humani (XIII. 1589), "to the welfare of the human race;" Fidei populi Romani (X. 769), "to the public good faith of the Roman people;" and so on. The genitives thus used may belong to different grammatical categories. Disciplinae Augusti (VII. 896) is of course subjective, as is Pietati cuiusdam (XL 4772; VI. 28549) ; Tutelae horreorum (II. 2991) is more probably objective; Honori stat(ionis) (III. 5123) may be either objective or possessive; Providentiae deorum (VP, p. 560) can be subjective only, but Providentiae Imperatoris (cf. XI. 4170; X. 6310) may be either subjective or objective, copyist's mistake. The restoration of III. 5531 given in the index of the Corpus as Herculi Aug(usti) n(ostri) is uncertain. It may be Herculi Aug(usto) n(ostro). The indices of the Corpus show an astonishing inconsistency in the filling-out of the abbreviation Aug. Not only so, but it is even filled out without indication that it was abbreviated on the stone. From the frequency of the genitive on coin-legends and the several cases in the inscriptions, it is by no means certain that Aug.=rAugustus or Augusti, but this question should be left imprejudiced by the index of the Corpus. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 9 1 according to whether we understand the emperor's foresight or the providence of the gods over him. In short, these deified appella- tives thus modified behave precisely as do their less fortunate brethren and sisters who were not canonized. It may be said that the anthropomorphic gods also are restricted in extent and meaning, and that therefore no real difference exists between them and the abstractions. Cognomina, it is true, are given to all the gods to locate them in various places with their special cults, and so we have lupiter Anxurus, Damascenus, Heliopo- litanus, Dolichenus, Mars Buxenus, Rudianus, Ceres An- tiatina, Venus Erycina, and others. Nevertheless, their personality is not diminished, for the cognomina of nationality are applicable to persons. Jupiter is the Heliopolitan, one of the Heliopolitans. Venus is one of the Erycini, just as Italian localities have their special Madonnas : e. g., Santa Maria di Leuca, di Luco, Madonna di Camorana, di Laccargia. Cf. Notre Dame de Lourdes. But very rarely is a genitive of place attached to the name of a god or a singular subjective or possessive genitive like Concordiae ipsius (Acta Arval, VP, p. 482, 1. 17). Indeed, so rare is it, that an appar- ent example, viz., Marti suo Valeri v. s. 1. m. (XII. 2986), evoked a note from Hirschfeld ad locum. This tendency to use depersonify- ing modifiers (to coin a word) cannot be attributed to the looseness of conception of imperial times, when qualities were regularly manu- factured into deities; for we find the ancient names Fides publica populi Romani, Fortuna huiusce diei (Cic. De legg. ii. 28: Fast. Allif. CIL. l\ p. 323 ; cf. Wissowa R.-K,, p. 211). In the examples thus far treated either the element of personality or that of quality was pre-eminent. A few occur also in which both elements are seen, as they are in Horace (Carm. i. 35. 21 ; cf. supra, A p. yy). We read of statues being erected not of a wide ruling 1 deity, but of a deified quality of some particular person or persons — / statues, for example, of Concordia decurionum (II. 3424), Bonus Eventus equitum leg(ionis) xxii (XIII. 6669), FeHcitas Aeclani (IX. II 54), Libertas Restituta (VI. 471), Indulgentia domini nostri (VIII. 7095), Securitas saeculi (ibid.). It is difficult to say in many cases whether Pietas is goddess or virtue, for the word \ \i became specialized to the sphere of death and the burial of the dead \ n (cf. Italian pieta), and burial-guilds were sometimes called collegia pietatis, e.g., XII. add. ad. no. 286: D. M. conlig(ium) (sic) I 92 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE pietatis Festina luliaes Restitutae ancilla ex pecuni que (sic) funere sui f. ; also IX. add. 1930, p. 671 : Pietas Martensum Hispaniae Pompiniae D. f. V. an. XXVII m. X. d. XV M. coniugi incomparabili Pontius Priscus meritus b.m.f. Often in sepulchral inscriptions the phrase pro pietate occurs, which is sometimes varied by the dative pietati ; e. g., VI. 28549 ; cf. Zangemeister, note to XIII. 1 167. It is difficult in such cases to dis- tinguish between deity and quality, for even in an epitaph the deity may be mentioned ; e. g., Orelli 4577 ; cf. CIL. XIV. 1792 : D. M. s. M. Veti Decembris filii piissimi reliquae annorum XVIII consecratae Pietati et Genio inferno ab M. Vetio Trophimo et Vetia Lupula parentibus. Therefore, in XIII. 1167 mentioned above, Lepida Valentis f. Regini uxor Lepida Regini fil. Pietati, we cannot be certain with Zangemeister that the goddess was not meant.^* The legend Securitati sacrum suggests a general conception of divinity, but its position at the beginning of epitaphs (VI. 28047, 9016, 25607) restricts it to the state of safety which the dedicators wished for the dead. Sanctitati lovis et Augusti sacrum (XII. 2981) is abstract noun used for concrete adjective, but it is possible that in the phrase sacrum dis magnis maioribus et sanctissimae Sanctitati the last word may represent an actual deity in the dedica- tor's mind. Confused conceptions are apparent also when a quality is in collocation with a real god ; e. g. (VII. 220), deo Marti et Victoriae p(opuli) R(omani), where the worshiper is thinking of Victoria and of the victory of the Romans over their foes. In the following (XI. 4770), lovi O. M. Fortunaeque Maeliori (sic) Aug. et dis daeabus (sic) quae, the author conceived of Fortuna Melior, but his idea must have been as loose as his spelling. In a prayer of the Arvals (VP, p. 476) we read: O Salus publica populi Romani Quiritium te quaesumus precamurque ut tu Neronem Claudium .... conserves. This immediately follows prayers to Jupiter, "^ From the portrait lying above this inscription of a woman with a little child it does not follow that reference to the deity is excluded. The husband who set up the stone may have intended by a dedication to Pietas to show his own pietas. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 93 Juno, and Minerva — an excellent illustration of the combination of personality and literal content. Many other abstracts are found in juxtaposition with the greater gods, and the frequency of these combinations is to a certain degree a test of their realism. Fortuna is found in the company of nearly all the deities, but most frequently with Hercules in the inscriptions of the equites singulares and close to the Capitoline trinity, in one case even preceding Minerva (XIII. 6728). Victoria and Felicitas follow Mars and Mercury in the military inscriptions; e.g., (VI. 31140) : lovi O. M., lunoni, Minervae, Marti, Victoriae, Herculi, Fortunae, Mercurio, Felicitati .... ; cf. VI. 31138-87." Whenever any considerable number of the gods is mentioned, Felicitas and Salus are included, and in the prayers of the Arval Brothers they are invoked in close connection with Mars and Hercules. The phrase Martis et Pacis Lari (Wilmanns op. cit. 150) shows a closeness of connection and personality not elsewhere paralleled. The meaning of this latter combination is, of course, transparent, as it is in XIII. 6621, lovi O. M., Apollini, Aesculapio, Saluti, Fortunae, in which we have a good example of the successive narrowing of conceptions. But generally the abstracts are associated together, and they often have the same seat of worship, whereas the combination in one cult of a personal and an abstract deity is surely attested in only one case — viz.. Mars and Victoria (III. 14370®.) — besides the famous cult of Aesculapius and Salus. So, besides the cult of Honor and Virtus at Rome, the following pairs were enshrined together in temples or chapels or had one priest or were in some special manner associated: .... aedem Fortunae et Victoriae. — Ficulea (XIV. 4002). .... sacerdoti Spei et Salutis Aug. — Gabii (XIV. 2804). As the priestess of this cult gave largesses and games pro salute Antonini, it was probably very prominent and under the patronage of the imperial house, for the deity Spes had special reference to the sons of the emperor, the "hope" of his house. Cf. Fast. Cum., 1. 5 ; CIL. I, p. 310: Caesar togam virilem sumpsit: supplicatio Spei et Iuve(ntati.) "For Mars and Victoria see also III. 1098, 5790, 5897, 5898; VII. 220; XIII. 6593. They had a temple together in Raetia (III. 14370). 94 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE [h]eisce mag(istrei) Spei Fidei Fortunae murum faciutidum coiravere M. Minucio L. Postumio cos. — lo B.C.; Capua (X. 3775)- If not in one temple, these goddesses were evidently closely asso- ciated in worship. Fortunae et Tutelae huius loci P. Aelius p. p. aedem cum porticu a solo restituit (VI. 177). The fortune and protection of a place are kindred ideas and com- monly united. Cf. VI. 179, 216; CIRh. 628. flamini Victoriae et Felic(itatis) Caesar (is?) perpetuo (XI. 437i)- sacerdoti Victoriae Felicitat(is) (XI. 4367). curatori lusus iuvenum V(ictoriae) F(elicitatis) C(aesaris?) (XI. 4395). .... Vic(toriae) Felic(itatis) (XL 4373)- This cult from Ameria in Umbria is perhaps the most important double cult outside of Rome of which we have evidence, and it was without doubt the most prominent worship in Ameria, for its officers were men who held the highest political, military, and social rank, embracing quattuorviri iure dicundo, aediles, praefecti cohortium, pontifices, seviri Augustales. The cult had special exhibitions cele- brated by the iuvenes in honor of the Caesar (or Caesars?). So well known was it, that three of the four iiiscriptions cited abbreviate the name by omitting the connective and shortening the names, in one case even to the initial letters. We may also see the lack of strong individuality in the use of the abstracts as cognomina of other gods, for in proportion as they become mere qualities transparent in their name they lose their identity and are attached to other more clearly recognized deities, to whom their qualities are suited. This tendency toward amalga- mation is the opposite of that by which one deity springs from another, for this latter process starts with a given deity worshiped in a special phase denoted by an adjective, which as a token of differ- entiation from other phases becomes important, and so overshadows the name of the god to whom it is applied as to become independent, and finally to be supplanted by a noun of similar meaning. The tendency toward amalgamation, on the contrary, starts with two independent ideas, related in general meaning, which are fused to cover completely a given concept, the less important of the two ideas becoming subordinate and expressed as a cognomen of virtually adjective force. One deity is considered merely as an aspect of another. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 95 Such assimilation is seen in its extreme form in the common representation of Fortuna with the attributes of many other gods ; also in the Stoic belief that all the deities were phases of the uni- verse (mundus) which Varro represented by Jupiter. This fusion is a step farther on than the com.bination of which we have just spoken. It is the identification of one god as part or function of another; cf. Phoebus Apollo in Greek. But, unfortunately, in the inscriptions, which are our chief and almost only source of informa- tion in this matter, it is a perplexing task to distinguish between combination and fusion, because of the inconsistent and almost hap- hazard use of the connective et. With combinations of three or more names without the connective there is no doubt that distinct deities are intended, but in the case of two it becomes a problem into which many elements enter. Some inscriptions affect brachylogy and asyndeton, like Cato's De re rusfica. Others employ it to save space, and in a votive inscription, where no more than one divinity can be named on a line, the copula is often omitted, apparently to keep the symmetry of the lines. A priori one would expect et between any two co-ordinate words, but it is omitted in a consider- able number of cases; e.g.: (III. 3158) I. O. M. | Fort. Reduci; (III. 5938) deo Mercu|rio Fortunae Reduci; (VII. iiii) I. O. M.| Victoriae | Victrici| ; (VIII. 6951) Honoris Virtutis Aug. sacr; (XIV. 2856) : Pietati i Fort. Primig. (XL 4367, 4373, 4395)- Vic- toriae Felicitatis. In these cases the space was not small, and no reason appears for the asyndeton ; but in all of them there is no doubt that two deities were intended, and they must show the possibility of supplying a connective in other cases not so certain. However, they do not constitute a large percentage, for while the examples touching all the gods have not been examined for this purpose, yet in the field of abstracts, out of ninety inscriptions, only fifteen showed asyndeton. We are warranted, therefore, in assuming great probability of the use of a cognomen when the connective is lacking; but each case should be weighed by itself. For even in the well- known cults of Jupiter luventas and Jupiter Libertas, generally taken by scholars as single cults with cognomina, there can be rea- sonable doubt, since it has been seen above how Victoria et Felicitas (XL 4371) was shortened to Victoria Felicitas even in official desig- nation. Cf. also Honoris Virtutis Aug The same thing is possible of lupiter Libertas, and the two inscriptions outside Rome cited by Aust (Roscher s. v. lupiter) and Wissowa {R.-K., p. 106, 96 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE n. 2) to corroborate the designation in the Monumentum Ancyra- num prove only that there were similar cults in those places. They may easily have been taken directly from the Roman abbreviated title.3« Despite this uncertainty, however, I venture to give a list of the fairly certain, probable, and doubtful cognomina. An inspection of the stone would perhaps lead one to different conclusions in many cases, so that this list is mainly for the sake of reference. The following seem to me fairly certain : .... basim posuit deae Florae Fortunae Pentheae (VI. 30867). Both the singular deae and basim indicate one goddess. Pantheae is a regular cognomen of Fortuna (Roscher I, p. 1538). lovi luventuti (IX. 5574; XI. 3245). lovi Libertati (Mon. Ancyr. IV. 6; CIL. XIV. 2579; XI. 658). deae Dianae Nemesi Aug. (III. 10440). Cf. III. 4738, where Nemesis is represented with the attributes of Diana. On the other hand, Nemesi Reginae et Deanae (III. 10476). Pantheo Tutelae (II. 4055). Hiibner ad loc. says asyndeton was not the custom of the period of this inscription, the reign of the Antonines. deae Virtuti Bellonae (V. 6507). . . Cf. XIII. 7281; Wissowa R.-K., p. 292, n. 3. The abstract Virtus is here more important than Bellona. Fort(unae) Fehcit(ati) (XIV. 2568). One goddess is represented in the accompanying bas-relief. deae Fortunae Tutelae (VI. 178). lustitiae Nemes(i) (X. 3812). 3'he bilingual form htatrolvxi "^it^tn shows that but one deity was meant. Less certain are : lunoni Nemesi (III. 11 121). Nemesi in smaller letters. lunoni Concordiae Aug. (VIII. 4197). Large space between the two names. Mercurio Aequitati Aug. (L'ann. epig. 1904, no. 119). The following are doubtful : lovis Tutelae C. Hostilius Aemilianus ve(teranus) Aug(ustorum) n(ostrorum) v. s. 1. m. (V. 4243). Possibly the order makes for the construction of Tutelae as a genitive in apposition with lovis, according to Aust's view (Roscher II, p. 752), but the use of a genitive standing alone without its governing word, and the fact "The Greek translation Ze^j 'EXn/tf^pio* in Mon. Ancyr, may have arisen from a misunderstanding of the Latin copy. DEIFIED ABSTRACTS AS A CLASS 97 that one expects an indirect object after votum solvit make the dative seem preferable. In that case lovis is subjective genitive. (So Carter De cogn., p. 58.) I. O. M. Advento et pro salute .... (III. 6340). Mutilated and uncertain; perhaps advento=pro adventu. Concordiae Augustae Pietati (X. 810). The brachylogy of the rest of the inscription suggests et here, but, as one building is referred to, it may mean a single cult. Menti Bonae Saluti (XIV. 3564)- The above evidence is sufficient to show the anomalous position of these deified abstractions in popular thought. Elevated to the rank of divinity and provided with temples, flamens, priests, ahars, and all the wherewithal of a real cult, they are nevertheless practically mere qualities or states restricted to this, that, and the other, a non- descript and shadowy crowd that cannot be classified with the anthropomorphic gods nor the materialistic spirits of the Indigita- menta- Nevertheless, they serve a purpose and perform a function very similar, and indeed in some cases exactly equivalent, to a god whom the Romans worshiped in a highly personal way. It has been noticed long before this that these deities have marked resemblances to the genii. (Cf. Boissieii Inscriptions de Lyon, p. 12; Preller II, p. 178. The latter discusses them in the same chapter with the genii and Indigitamenta.) I wish here, therefore, only to point out that this is the conception of them seen most commonly in the inscrip- tions. The combination of an abstraction with a genius is far and away the most frequent; the same kind of genitives and the same possessive adjectives are attached to both ; e. g. : (XIII. 6127) Genio b(ene)f(iciariorum) (et) Concordi(ae) var(iarum) stat(ionum) ; (VI. 32352) Saluti eius b. m. et Genio ipsius; (XIII. 6690) Genium legioni {sic) XXII. Pr. p. f. Honori Aquilae. Finally, not only the same kind, but the very same genitives in numerous instances modify Genius and an abstract; e.g.: (XII. 181 5) Genio et Honori utri- culariorum (cf. V. 4449; XIII. 6690) ; (OrelH 1718; III. 449; VI. 254) Genio ac maiestati Imp. Antonini Pii Felicis Augusti; (II. 4082) Laribus et Tutelae Genio L(uci) n(ostri) ; (VI. 216; cf. 177- 79) Genio et Fortunae Tutelaeque huius loci. In the last case the genitive is felt with each noun. One or two cases occur where an abstract is pluralized; e. g. : (VI. 182) Fortunab(us) bal(nei) Verul(ani) C. Hostilius Agathopus d(onum) d(edit) ; (VIII. 98 DEIFICATION OF ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ROMAN LITERATURE 20827; cf. VIII. 15259-516) I. O. P. Max. Geniusque diis immor- talibus Victoriisque d(ominorum) n(ostrorum) invictorum. Tutela, as has been noticed before, is a conception that links the abstracts with the genii. On the one side she is viewed as the general deity of protection; on the other, as the protecting spirit of a particular place, practically equivalent to the genius. These deified qualities, therefore, are comparable to the spirits attending a man through life. But whereas a genius was guardian of a wide range of interests, usually material, pertaining to a man or an object, a deified quality protected a special phase of his char- acter or condition, and so in a sense is a specialized genius. Possi- bly the best example of a mere appellative exalted to an external power or personality presiding over the interests of a person is afforded by the following sepulchral inscription: (XIV. 1792) lunoni et Verecundiae Ulpiae Compses q(uae) vixit Vere- cundia, not elsewhere deified, is regarded, like a Juno, as the maiden's tutelary spirit. Also in the dedication by a husband and wife to Fides sua {CIL. X. 5903) there was a dim conception of a tutelary spirit. To conclude, it may be said in general that the Romans them- selves were not clear in their ideas of this class of deities. Only Fortuna, Victoria, and to a far less extent Salus, Felicitas, and Virtus, had personality in any appreciable degree. The others were mere qualities or conditions worthy of praise, with a thin cloak of deification; and when in this guise they were grouped with the personal gods, they amounted to no more than spirits or genii of those ideas represented in their respective names. ,a BOOKS *v «";„';;^^° ,Xc« ;^Ui^^®^^ SEP 26 2003