Roman and European Mythologies 0226064557, 9780226064550

Table of contents :
Preface to the Paperback Edition, by Wendy Doniger
Preface to the English Edition of the Complete Work, by Wendy Doniger
Preface to the French Edition of the Complete Work, by Yves Bonnefoy
Contributors
Part 1 - Introduction: The Interpretation of Mythology
Toward a Definition of Myth
The Interpretation of Myths: Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Theories
Myth and Writing: The Mythographers
Prehistoric Religion
"Nomadic Thought" and Religious Action
Part 2 - Rome
Italy
Religion in Pre-Roman Italy: The Historical Framework
Sacrificial Cults and Rites in Pre-Roman Italy
Conceptions of the Afterlife among the Peoples of Pre-Roman Italy
Etruscan Religion
Etruscan Daemonology
Etruscan and Italic Divination
The Doctrine and Sacred Books of the Disciplina Etrusca
The Religion of the Sabellians and Umbrians, Italics of Central and Southern Italy
The Beliefs and Rites of the Apulians, an Indigenous People of Southeastern Italy
Myths and Cults of the Ancient Veneti, an Indo-European People of Northern Italy
Ver Sacrum: The Italic Rite of the "Sacred Springtime"
The Latins and the Origins of Roman Religion
Greco-Italic Traditions and Legends, from the Bronze Age to Virgil
Roman Religion
Roman Gods
Roman Sacrifice
The Religion of the Roman Republic: A Review of Recent Studies
Roman Festivities
Roman Divination
Roman Religion and Greek Philosophy
The Decline and Survival of Roman Religion
Anna Perenna
Apollo in Rome
The Arval Brethren
Augurs and Augury
The Religious Policies of Augustus
Ceres
Cicero as Theologian
Diana
Faunus
Genius
Hercules
Janus
Juno
Jupiter
The Lares
The Manes
Mars
Mercury
Minerva
Neptune
The Penates
Priapus: The Last of the Gods
Psyche
Quirinus
Silvanus
Venus
Vesta
Virgil’s Religious Vision
Vulcan
Part 3 - Western Civilization in the Christian Era
The Survival of Myths in Early Christianity
Christian Judgments on the Analogies between Christianity and Pagan Mythology
The Euhemerism of the Christian Authors
Christianity and Mythology in the Greek Church
The Naassenes’ Use of Pagan Mythologies
The Gnostics and the Mythologies of Paganism
The Perates and Their Gnostic Interpretation of Paganism
Eros among the Gnostics
Hecate in Greek Esotericism
Justin the Gnostic: A Syncretistic Mythology
The Medieval West and "Mythic Thought"
The Survival of the Ancient Gods in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance
Alchemy and Mythology
Cabala and Mythology
Pan among the Cabalists and Alchemists of the Renaissance
Fables and Symbols from Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Hermeticism
Hercules in Alchemy
Orpheus in the Renaissance
King Arthur, the Romances of the Round Table, and the Legend of the Grail
Tristan and Isolde
Gypsy Myths and Rituals
Fable and Mythology in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Literature and Theoretical Reflection
The Mythology of Ancient Switzerland
Mythic Elements in French Folklore
French Fairy Tales, Folktales, and Myths
Folk Beliefs and Legends about Fairies in France
Popular Customs and Rituals in France
Romanticism and Mythology: The Use of Myths in Literary Works
Romanticism and Myth in Blake, Nerval, and Balzac
The Mythology of European Decadent and Symbolist Literature
The Androgyne
The Androgyne, the Double, and the Reflection: A Few Myths of Romanticism
Romantic Myths of the Rebel and the Victim: Satan, Prometheus, Cain, Job, Faust, Ahasuerus, Don Juan, and Empedocles
Spirits of the Elements in the Romantic Period: Sylphs, Water Sprites, Salamanders, Gnomes, and Elves
Orpheus and the Poetic and Spiritual Quest of Romanticism
The Isis of Romanticism: The Myth of the Wife-Mother—Helen, Sophia, Mary
Julian the Apostate in Romantic Literature
Napoleon as Myth
Modernity’s Challenge to Myth, in the Poetry of Hölderlin, Heine, Baudelaire, Mallarmé, T. S. Eliot, and Rilke
Hölderlin’s Dionysus
Myth in Twentieth-Century English Literature
The Survival of Ancient Myths in Modern Greek Poetic Consciousness
Imagination and Mythology in Contemporary Literature (Tolkien, Lovecraft) and Science Fiction
Myth and Political Theory: Nationalisms and Socialisms
Epilogue: The Contemporary Need for Myths—a Testimonial
Index

Citation preview

Roman and European Mythologies

Roman and European Mythologies Compiled by

YVES B O N N E F O Y

Translated under the direction of WENDY DONIGER by Gerald Honigsblum, Danielle Beauvais, Teresa Lavender Fagan, Dorothy Figuiera, Barry Friedman, Louise Guiney, John Leavitt, Louise Root, Bruce Sullivan, and David White

The University of Chicago Press •Chicago and London

YVES BONNEFOY, a scholar and poet of world renown, is professor of comparative poetics, Collège de France. Among his many works to have appeared in English, two have been published by the University of Chicago Press—a volume of poetry, In the Shadcnv’s Light (1991), and a work of criticism, The Act and Place of Poetry (1989), both translated by John T. Naughton. WENDY D ONI G E R is the Mircea Eliade Professor in the Divinity School, and professor in the Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations, the Committee on Social Thought, and the College, at the University of Chicago. Under the name of Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty she has written, among other books. Women, Androgynes, and Other Mythical Beasts (1980), Dreams, Illusion, and Other Realities (1984), and Tales of Sex and Violence: Folklore, Sacrifice, and Danger in the laiminiya Brâhmana (1985), all published by the University of Chicago Press. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London © 1991, 1992 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved. Published 1992 Printed in the United States of America 01 00 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 5 4 3 2 1 This paperback is drawn from Mythologies, compiled by Yves Bonnefoy, translated under the direction of Wendy Doniger, and published by the University of Chicago Press in 1991. That work was originally published as Dictionnaire des mythologies et des religions des sociétés traditionnelles et du monde antique, sous la direction de Yves Bonnefoy publié avec le concours du Centre National des Lettres, © 1981, Flammarion, Paris. The preparation of the complete English edition was supported by grants from the French Ministry of Culture, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. This book is printed on acid-free paper. Paperback ISBN: 0-226-06455-7 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dictionnaire des mythologies et des religions des sociétés traditionnelles et du monde antique. English. Selections. Roman and European mythologies /compiled by Yves Bonnefoy; translated under the direction of Wendy Doniger by Gerald Honigsblum . . . [et al.], p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Mythology, European—Encyclopedias. 2. Mythology, Roman— Encyclopedias. 3. Mythology, European, in literature— Encyclopedias. I. Bonnefoy, Yves. II. Title. BL689.D5313 1992 291.1 '3'094—dc20 92-15402 CIP

Contents

Preface to the Paperback Edition, by Wendy Doniger vii Preface to the English Edition of the Complete Work, by Wendy Doniger Preface to the French Edition of the Complete Work, by Yves Bonnefoy Contributors xxi

ix xv

PARTI INTRODUCTION: T H E I N T E R P R E T A T I O N OF M Y T H O L O G Y Toward a Definition of Myth 3 The Interpretation of Myths: Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Theories Myth and Writing: The Mythographers 10 Prehistoric Religion 11 "Nomadic Thought" and Religious Action 21

PART 2 Italy 25 Religion in Pre-Roman Italy: The Historical Framework 25 Sacrificial Cults and Rites in Pre-Roman Italy 32 Conceptions of the Afterlife among the Peoples of Pre-Roman Italy 34 Etruscan Religion 36 Etruscan Daemonology 40 Etruscan and Italic Divination 42 The Doctrine and Sacred Books of the D isciplina Etrusca 43 The Religion of the Sabellians and Umbrians, Italics of Central and Southern Italy 46 The Beliefs and Rites of the Apulians, an Indigenous People of Southeastern Italy 50 Myths and Cults of the Ancient Veneti, an IndoEuropean People of Northern Italy 51 Ver Sacrum : The Italic Rite of the "Sacred Spring­ time" 52 The Latins and the Origins of Roman Religion 54

5

ROME Greco-Italic Traditions and Legends, from the Bronze Age to Virgil 55 Roman Religion 58 Roman Gods 68 Roman Sacrifice 77 The Religion of the Roman Republic: A Review of Recent Studies 81 Roman Festivals 92 Roman Divination 94 Roman Religion and Greek Philosophy 107 The Decline and Survival of Roman Religion 110 Anna Perenna 112 Apollo in Rome 112 The Arval Brethren 113 Augurs and Augury 115 The Religious Policies of Augustus 116 Ceres 121 Cicero as Theologian 123 Diana 125 Faunus 126

C O N T E N T S

Genius 127 Hercules 128 Janus 129 Juno 130 Jupiter 131 The Lares 132 The Manes 133 Mars 134 Mercury 135 Minerva 137

Neptune 137 The Penates 138 Priapus: The Last of the Gods Psyche 142 Quirinus 144 Silvanus 146 Venus 146 Vesta 148 Virgil's Religious Vision 149 Vulcan 155

PA WESTERN CI VI LI ZATI O! The Survival of Myths in Early Christianity 159 Christian Judgments on the Analogies between Christianity and Pagan Mythology 165 The Euhemerism of the Christian Authors 176 Christianity and Mythology in the Greek Church 181 The Naassenes' Use of Pagan Mythologies 185 The Gnostics and the Mythologies of Paganism 187 The Perates and Their Gnostic Interpretation of Paganism 190 Eros among the Gnostics 192 Hecate in Greek Esotericism 195 Justin the Gnostic: A Syncretistic Mythology 196 The Medieval West and "Mythic Thought" 198 The Survival of the Ancient Gods in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance 202 Alchemy and Mythology 211 Cabala and Mythology 214 Pan among the Cabalists and Alchemists of the Renaissance 215 Fables and Symbols from Sixteenth- and SeventeenthCentury Hermeticism 216 Hercules in Alchemy 221 Orpheus in the Renaissance 222 King Arthur, the Romances of the Round Table, and the Legend of the Grail 223 Tristan and Isolde 227 Gypsy Myths and Rituals 228 Fable and Mythology in Seventeenth- and EighteenthCentury Literature and Theoretical Reflection 232 The Mythology of Ancient Switzerland 243 Mythic Elements in French Folklore 244 French Fairy Tales, Folktales, and Myths 248 Folk Beliefs and Legends about Fairies in France 253

T

3

IN THE C H R I S T I A N ERA Popular Customs and Rituals in France 256 Romanticism and Mythology: The Use of Myths in Literary Works 262 Romanticism and Myth in Blake, Nerval, and Balzac 266 The Mythology of European Decadent and Symbolist Literature 268 The Androgyne 274 The Androgyne, the Double, and the Reflection: A Few Myths of Romanticism 275 Romantic Myths of the Rebel and the Victim: Satan, Prometheus, Cain, Job, Faust, Ahasuerus, Don Juan, and Empedocles 277 Spirits of the Elements in the Romantic Period: Sylphs, Water Sprites, Salamanders, Gnomes, and Elves 281 Orpheus and the Poetic and Spiritual Quest of Romanticism 282 The Isis of Romanticism: The Myth of the WifeMother— Helen, Sophia, Mary 284 Julian the Apostate in Romantic Literature 285 Napoleon as Myth 287 Modernity's Challenge to Myth, in the Poetry of Hölderlin, Heine, Baudelaire, Mallarmé, T. S. Eliot, and Rilke 288 Hölderlin's Dionysus 291 Myth in Twentieth-Century English Literature 293 The Survival of Ancient Myths in Modern Greek Poetic Consciousness 297 Imagination and Mythology in Contemporary Literature (Tolkien, Lovecraft) and Science Fiction 300 Myth and Political Theory: Nationalisms and Socialisms 303

Epilogue: The Contemporary Need for Myths— a Testimonial Index

139

313

307

Preface to the Paperback Edition

This is one of four paperback volumes drawn from the full, clothbound, two-volume English-language edition of Yves Bonnefoy's Mythologies. These paperbacks are not an after­ thought, but were part of the publication plan from the very beginning. Indeed, one of the reasons why we restructured the original French edition as we did was in order ultimately to make these separate volumes available. For though there is of course a sweep and majesty in the full editions, both French and English, a breathtaking scope that is the true raison d'être of the work as a whole, there is also, in the English version, a pattern that allows readers to focus on one culture at a time. And it is with such readers in mind that the University of Chicago Press is issuing these paperbacks, which will include (in addition to the present volume) Greek and Egyptian Mythologies, Asian Mythologies, and African and American Mythologies. Each book draws from the full work not only the culturally specific material but also the two prefaces and the general introductory essays, which deal with methodological issues pertaining to all the cultures discussed. Since each culture poses different problems, and each sec­ tion of essays embodies the work of a different group of French scholars, each has its own methodological flavor and its own contribution to make to the more culturally specific study of mythology. The present volume begins with Roman mythologies and goes on to trace the ways in which Greek and Roman myths (known primarily in their Roman form) continued to inform and animate early Christian and later European literature. The particular innovation in these es­ says lies, I think, in the ways in which they apply the meth­ ods of mythologists to works that have previously been treated primarily by theologians and literary critics. This ap­ proach brings into focus an entirely new line of development in the great literary classics of the West and encourages us to take a fresh look at the problems of cultural and historical diffusion.

For example, there is one theme that several of the authors chose to select out of thousands of possibilities— the theme of the ways in which other cultures saw the links between their myths and those of others, and in particular the ways in which the dominant culture of the West, European Christi­ anity, looked at the mythologies of the world. Thus, in the essay entitled "Christian Judgments on the Analogies be­ tween Christianity and Pagan Mythology," the author ex­ plains how the early Christian fathers came to terms with the striking resemblances between their own religion and the pagan myths of the dying and rising god. My favorite argu­ ment is this one: In [Justin's] eyes, demons find a choice ground for their manipulations in particular pages of the Scriptures: in the Messianic prophecies, inspired visionaries mysteriously described the Savior long before his coming. So the de­ mons, in order to deceive and mislead the human race, took the offensive and suggested to the poets who created myths that they give Zeus many sons and attribute mon­ strous adventures to them, in the hope that this would make the story of Christ appear to be a fable of the same sort, when it came. From these humble beginnings, European theologians con­ tinued to lock horns with Roman deities, even as European peasants continued, blissfully unaware of these theological battles raging over their heads, to incorporate ancient myths into their living folk traditions. And, on a rather different track, European poets continued to draw upon, and rein­ terpret, the great Greek and Roman myths to express their individual geniuses. We should hardly be astonished to find that French folklore and literature hold a central place in these essays, but almost equal time is given to the great En­ glish Romantic traditions up to the present. And the volume concludes with an argument for the relevance of these myths in our own lives and thoughts today. Wendy Doniger

vii

Preface to the English Edition of the Complete Work

a quirky and idiosyncratic set of essays, long and short, by a particular group of mythologists, most or whom are French and all of whom participate in the French school of mythol­ ogy in its broadest sense. The patent omissions and biases have prompted a certain amount of criticism leveled at the French edition,1 criticism of imbalances, of inconsistencies (in the selection of topics, in the manner of their treatment, in the style, in the methodologies, etc.), and of the choice of illustrations, as well as more substantive criticisms of the interpretations. Some of these criticisms are just; some are not. The arguments about what is there (what is said about the mythologies that are discussed) are interesting; the argu­ ments about what is not there are, I think, beside the point. Many of the scholars involved in the project chose not to write about what other people (including certain reviewers) regarded as "central" or "basic" themes of the mythologies they treated; they wrote long essays on the subjects they cared about personally, and gave short shrift to subjects to which other scholars might have given pride of place. The reader who continues perversely to look for ways in which the glass is half empty rather than half full will notice immediately, for instance, that there is almost nothing about Islam or Judaism in the book. This is primarily because Yves Bonnefoy had originally intended to save this material for another volume, on the mythologies of monotheistic religions—a volume that has not yet materialized. It might be argued that this justification is disingenuous, for some of the very best material in the extant volume is on Christianity, which is by most standards monotheistic. But on closer inspection it is quite clear that while the book does treat the appropriation of classical mythology by Christianity, and the incorporation of "pagan mythologies" into what might be called "rural Catholicism," it rightly does not treat main­ stream, monotheistic Christianity as a mythology. Moreover, to have dealt with the central traditions of Islam and Judaism in this way would certainly have been tantamount to a betrayal of what the adherents of those religions regard as their basic tenets. Yet this Jewish and Islamic silence is also in part accounted for by the simple fact that the authors who were assembled to prepare this book did not choose to write articles on these subjects. Similarly, the African articles deal almost exclusively (though hardly surprisingly) with Franco­

Yves Bonnefoy in his preface (which follows this preface) explains why he organized his book—and after all, this is his book—as he did. He had good reasons, and he is eloquent in their defense. But it remains for me to explain the ways in which the English edition differs from the French in more than the language in which it is expressed, since some of what M. Bonnefoy will say does not in fact apply to this edition at all, particularly in what concerns the arrangement of the articles. M. Bonnefoy graciously if reluctantly allowed me to re­ structure his work. As he put it, "O f course I will miss the formula of the dictionary, for the reasons that I indicate in my preface (the rupture with all the apriority of classification, the possibility of surprising juxtapositions, in short, the irony), but I absolutely do not oppose your choice, which is in response to very good reasons, and which is better adapted to the English-speaking world in which your edition will appear. I therefore give you carte blanche, with the understanding that you will publish my preface as is. For it is a good idea to point out that the book was originally what I indicate in that preface—this will bring in a supplementary point for reflection."1 On another occasion,2 he remarked that there was another consideration (one that, I must confess, had not occurred to me) that had persuaded him to organize his original version of the book in what he termed "the random way," while we might be able to rearrange our version in "the more organized way": French students, he pointed out, have only limited access to open stacks in the French libraries (since there is not enough room to accommodate them) and few of the bookstores are quiet enough to read in. French students therefore have apparently not formed the habit of browsing—except in a dictionary. Without denying the validity of his arguments, let me state my reasons for the reorganization. And in order to justify the changes, I shall first state my conception of the strengths and weaknesses of the French work itself. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the French Edition To begin with, even in its French form, with all the articles arranged alphabetically, it is not a dictionary, nor even an encyclopedia, nor a dispassionate fact-book even for those topics that it covers (and many major items are omitted). It is ix

P R E F A C E

TO

THE

E N G L I S H

E D I T I O N

phone Africa; yet these articles constitute superb paradigms for the study of other African mythologies. So, too, there are only two articles on Buddhism per se, and there is virtually nothing about Buddhism (or Islam, for that matter) in Southeast Asia (though there is a great deal of wonderful material about indigenous Southeast Asian religions, and those two articles on Buddhism are fascinating). On the other hand, there is extensive coverage of the Turks and Mongols, whose mythologies are relatively unknown to Western readers. This sort of imbalance might be regarded as a kind of mythological affirmative action. This is, therefore, certainly not an encyclopedia. In a famous painting by the surrealist René Magritte, a caption in his neat script, under a painting of what is clearly a pipe, declares, "This is not a pipe." I would have liked to write on the cover of this book, "This is not a dictionary of mytholo­ gies." Rather like the ugly duckling that turned out to be a terrific swan, as a dictionary this book leaves much to be desired, but as a book of mythologies it is superb, indeed peerless. If it is not a dictionary, what is it, then? It is a most exciting ( far more exciting than an encyclopedia ought to be) collection of essays on some aspects of some mythologies, written by a group of brilliant and philosophically complex French scholars. It is highly opinionated and original, and should inspire hot, not cold, reactions. Like all multiauthored works, it is a mixed bag; there is some jargon, some wild theorizing, some boring surveys, some overclever inter­ pretation, and some of what I would regard as simple errors of fact, but there is also an overwhelming proportion of very sound and/or brilliant articles about mythology in general and about a number of mythologies in particular. This is not primarily a book, for instance, to consult for all the stories about Apollo; one has Robert Graves for that (though this is a far better book with which to begin to formulate some ideas about the meaning of Apollo). It is, however, a book in which to discover the delightful and useful fact that in the ritual celebration of the Brazilian god Omolu, who is of Yoruba origin but came to be syncretized with Saint Lazarus, people dance to a beat called "he kills someone and eats him." I was thrilled to come upon a hauntingly sad and beautiful Inuit myth about the cycle of transmigration of a mistreated woman, a myth that agrees, in astonishing detail, with certain complex myths of transmigration that I know from medieval Sanskrit philosophical texts. Other readers will undoubtedly stumble upon strange stories that are curiously familiar to them—stumble upon them quite by chance, just as Yves Bonnefoy intended them to do. But if the selection is not as complete as a dictionary should ideally be, neither is it as arbitrary as a nondictionary can be. Most of the great mythological traditions are covered, and within those areas most of the important myths are treated. But this is not the point. What is treated very thoroughly indeed is the problem of how to understand a mythology, what questions to ask, what patterns to look for. More precisely, this is a book that demonstrates what hap­ pens when a combination of two particular methodologies, those of Georges Dumézil and Claude Lévi-Strauss, is ap­ plied to any mythology. It is, as its title claims (in English as in French), not so much a book about myths (sacred narra­ tives) as a book about mythologies (whole systems of myths, or even systems of ideas about myths). It is that rare and wonderful fusion, a book about methodology that simulta­ neously puts the methodology to work and shows you just what it can and cannot do. It is a mythodology. Many of these articles tell the reader how to study mythology in general and, more important, how to study each

particular body of mythology, how to solve (or, more often, to approach) the particular problems that each mythology presents. Some tell the reader why it is not possible to write an article about that particular mythology at all (a consider­ ation that does not, however, prevent the author from writing the article in which this assertion is made). The most hilarious example of this (I will leave the reader to decide which article it is) is almost an unconscious satire on the pusillanimity of scholars in certain fields; in it, the author goes on for pages and pages (it is one of the longest articles in the book) telling us, over and over, why there are insufficient data, why the data that we have are skewed, why the extant interpretations of the data are skewed, why all hypotheses and generalizations about the data are worth­ less, why in fact it is impossible to make any valid statement about the mythology at all. This is in its way a masterpiece, a kind of Zen nonarticle on a nonsubject, a surreal piece of nonscholarship worthy of Samuel Beckett. And yet even this article has its value here as a striking example of one particular methodology, one approach to the subject, that argues in great detail, and rightly, the obstacles that oppose any truly responsible survey of the subject. But this is the exception, not the rule. The book teems with marvelous primary material, both myths and rituals (with which many myths are inextricably linked), using the mate­ rials and the methodological considerations to animate one another, the soul of data within the body of theory, and the soul of theory within the body of data. Sometimes the methodology is in the foreground, sometimes the data; usually they are in a fine balance. In the Greek and European sections, for instance, there are startling reinterpretations of well-known stories, or new emphases on previously over­ looked details in well-known stories; many of the articles on the Greeks demonstrate the cutting edge of French structur­ alism. As Arthur Adkins has remarked, "The dictionary in its French version is a truly remarkable work. The Greek section in particular is quite unlike any other dictionary known to me. (It] for the most part presents the views of the Paris school, and the writers come out fighting. The Paris school is undoubtedly producing the most interesting work in the field at present. . . . [The work] represents more of a parti pris than the title 'Dictionary' may suggest."4 The Vietnamese section, by contrast, abundantly documents a fascinating mythology that is virtually unknown to the English-speaking world, and presents it, moreover, in the context of an enlightened political awareness that is almost unprecedented in scholarly treatments of mythology anywhere (but that is also a notable virtue of the articles in this volume that deal with the Americas and Oceania). If this is a book as much about method as it is about myths, what is the method? It is a masterpiece of what might be called trifunctional structuralism, a joint festschrift for Claude Lévi-Strauss and Georges Dumézil, a vision of the world of mythology seen through their eyes, la vie en Lévi-Strauss and Dumézil. To combine the methodologies of these two scholars is in itself a most extraordinary and fruitful achievement. If I may oversimplify both approaches for a moment, Lévi-Strauss's basic method, a variant of Hegelian dialectic, is to seek the intellectual or logical frame­ work of the myth in binary oppositions that are mediated by a third term; the Dumézilian approach is to gloss the main figures of a myth in terms of three functions that have social referents: religion and government, defense, and material production. These two theories are in no way contradictory, especially if one resolves the potential conflict between Dumézilian tripartition and Lévi-Straussian bipolarization by

P R E F A C E

taking into account the mediating third term and thus making Lévi-Strauss, too, tripartite. In this sense, both of them operate with triads, though very different triads. Furthermore, they complement rather than contradict one another because they focus on different levels (Lévi-Strauss on abstract intellectual concepts, Dumézil on social func­ tions). Combined as they are in this volume, they. are startlingly innovative. Indeed, the beauty of the book is that it is not doctrinaire in its application of the theories of these two great scholars, but rather creative and imaginative. Dumézil's trifunctional analysis of Indo-European mythology is applied, quite loosely to be sure, even beyond the bounds of the IndoEuropean world (where it is, properly speaking, no longer trifunctional but tripartite), and a general way of thinking in terms of oppositions and inversions forms the armature of many analyses in which the name of Lévi-Strauss is not actually invoked. The search for tripartitions of both sorts is the driving force behind many of the analyses in this book. The book is so very French that I thought seriously of putting the word "French” in the title of the English edition: Mythologies According to the Contemporary French School, or The View from France, or Essays in the French Style, A French Collection, A Paris Collection, The French Connection, and so forth. Yves Bonnefoy's remarks, in his preface, explaining why he chose primarily French scholars are delightfully, if unconsciously, Francophile. He has maintained elsewhere that the preponderance of French scholars was simply a natural outcome of choosing to organize the scholarship from the geographical center of the project, Paris, rather than to range over the world at random. But as anyone who has ever had the privilege of working at the Sorbonne will immediately realize, most French scholars think that the only people who know anything are other French scholars. In this instance, at least, they would be right: such is the hegemony of French scholarship in the field of mythology right now that a well-read American or British mythologist would probably draw on precisely these same "French" ap­ proaches. This is one of the great values of the book: it represents, as few other works in any field do, the achievements of the crème de la crème of an entire generation of French scholarship in a large and important field. Yves Bonnefoy himself has remarked that he loves the book because it freezes a moment in time, in history, and in space; it is the embodiment of the beauty of the Ecole Pratique. But in a way, the guiding spirit of the book is not just that of the twin gods, Dumézil and Lévi-Strauss. It is the spirit of Yves Bonnefoy himself. This is, after all, a book put together by a poet, not by a philologist. The editor of this nondic­ tionary is also, let me hasten to say, a scholar of the first rank, but he is at heart a poet. The reader who keeps this in mind is more likely to get from the book what it has to give than the reader who picks it up hoping that it will be a kind of mythological Guinness book of records. The Restructuring of the English Edition We decided to restructure the book in order to minimize its weaknesses, emphasize its sometimes hidden strengths, and make it useful to the English-speaking reader in new ways. Its primary weakness is, as I have admitted, that it is not a true encyclopedia. If the English edition were arranged alphabetically, as the French edition is, readers might look for things and not find them and get mad, as some of the French reviewers did; and, on the other hand, readers might

TO

THE

E N G L I S H

E D I T I O N

overlook a lot of strange and beautiful essays that no one would ever dream of looking up on purpose at all. Bonnefoy in his preface explains why he wanted to use a dictionary format: to avoid all prearranged categories, to let the reader find things by chance, to allow accidental juxta­ positions to give rise to unexpected ideas. But to some extent this argues for a false naïveté on the part of the reader and even, perhaps, on the part of the editor, for both of them are looking for something. In choosing the arbitrariness of alpha­ betical order, Bonnefoy is indeed shuffling the deck; but he does still have a deck, which, like all decks, is highly structured. The alphabetical shuffle conceals the true order but does not destroy it. Thus, for instance, all the articles on a certain subject are written by a single author, an expert on that subject. Clearly the articles were originally commis­ sioned in this way, and they are still listed this way in the front of the French edition. And each author does have his methodological presuppositions, which the reader encoun­ ters every time he or she wanders (arbitrarily, accidentally) into that territory. Bonnefoy chose to conceal the patterns that he saw in the material in order to let readers discover them by chance; I have chosen to set out in the open the patterns that I see, and to let readers decide whether or not they want to follow those patterns. The difference lies in what sort of browsing is encouraged, cross-cultural (through the French edition's physical juxtaposition of the major articles on creation or on sacrifice) or intracultural (through the English edition's grouping of all the Siberian or Celtic articles). Several of the translators, the Honigsblums in particular, arranged the work according to geographic areas or cultures, which made it easier to check the consistent use of technical terms. Gradually it occurred to us that this arrangement would also be useful to readers. Bonnefoy chose to mix the cultures together to encourage cross-cultural aperçus; I chose to separate out each culture to encourage consecutive read­ ing in each tradition. (Another, related advantage of the present arrangement lies in the fact that this arrangement will make it possible in the future to publish sections of the work as individual books, making them available to special­ ists in particular cultural fields.) For the overall structure I decided to use a kind of geographical swing: beginning with Africa, then traveling up through the Near East, the ancient Mediterranean, the Indo-European world; remaining in place geographically but moving forward in time to later European culture, then back in time to South Asia; on in both space and time to Southeast Asia, East Asia, Inner Asia; across the Bering Strait to North America, South America; and fin­ ishing the journey paradisiacally in the South Pacific. Within each category of culture (Greek, Celtic, etc.), I have put the long, meditative, general essays first, and the shorter, more straightforward dictionary entries second. Several pathbreak­ ing essays that are not tied to a particular culture, and that immediately establish the Dumézilian and structuralist stance of the book, form an introductory sequence. Of course, since both the French and the English editions have detailed indexes, and the French edition has an outline listing the articles according to cultures, it comes down to a matter of emphasis, for in either edition the reader can find materials that are arranged alphabetically (both in the index and in the body of the work in the French edition, and in the index in the English edition) as well as materials that are grouped according to the culture (in the outline of the French edition, and in the body of the work in the English edition). In the restructured English edition, the reader can still use the index as Bonnefoy suggests the French index might be

P R E F A C E

TO

THE

E N G L I S H

E D I T I O N

used, to find his or her favorite Naiad or Norse god, and also group of professional translators (Danielle Beauvais, Teresa to find all the articles on, say, creation, or sacrifice, which cut Lavender Fagan, Louise Guiney, Louise Root, Michael Sells) across methodological lines. This is, after all, the same book, and another group consisting of some of my students in the and can ultimately be used in all the same ways. history of religions (Dorothy Figueira, Barry Friedman, New problems arise out of this rearrangement, however, Daniel Gold, John Leavitt, and David White). Their initials for some cultures don't really fit into any of the large follow those of the original authors of the French articles. Bruce Sullivan did the bibliographies. categories—Turks and Mongols, Armenians and Albanians, Ossets and Georgians, Siberians, Malagasy, Maghreb—and The translated articles were then checked for accuracy (in so I had to settle for putting them where they seemed least the transliteration of names, technical terms, and so forth) by out of place. Another disadvantage of my rearrangement ir specialists in each of the particular fields. Arthur Adkins did the fact that it exposes repetitions, necessary in an encyclo­ by far the most difficult task, working painstakingly and pedia (where the author of any one article, who cannot courageously through the enormous and often very tricky assume that the reader will have read any other article, may articles on the Greeks and Romans. Lawrence Sullivan vetted therefore have to resupply a certain amount of basic mate­ Africa and the Americas for us; Robert Ritner, Egypt; Walter rial), but rather jarring in a book such as this (where the Färber, Mesopotamia; Dennis Pardee, Semites; Richard Beal, reader may well find it annoying to read the same story, or Hittites; Laurie Patton, Celts; Ann Hoffman, Norse; Zbig­ the same theory, almost verbatim in consecutive articles). A niew Golab, Slavs; Frank Paul Bowman, Richard Luman, and good example of this recycling is provided by the very first David Tracy, early Christianity; Anthony Grafton, medieval part, on West Africa, with its recurrent motifs of twinning and renaissance Europe; Françoise Meitzer, modern Europe; Charles Keyes, Southeast Asia; Anthony Yu and Jane and sexual mutilation; another occurs in the South Asian Geaney, China; Gary Ebersole, Japan; Bruce Cummings, section, which pivots around the sacrificial pole and the Korea; Matthew Kapstein and Per Kvaerne, Tibet; Robert avatar. I decided not to cut any of these repetitions, however, for Dankoff, Turks and Mongols. I did the South Asian and Indo-Iranian sections. several reasons. First of all, I decided not to abridge or revise There are thus several levels at which inconsistencies— in (a decision I will attempt to justify below). Second, some style, in format (citations of texts, abbreviations), in translit­ readers may only pick up isolated articles and will therefore eration, in ways of dealing with specific untranslatable need the basic information that also appears in other articles. concepts— could have slipped in: differences between the And, finally, these repetitions demonstrate how certain technical languages (not to say jargons) and the methodolo­ scholars always think in terms of a limited number of gies employed by the various academic guilds that regard particular myths, dragging them into whatever other subject themselves as the proprietors of each culture (anthropolo­ they are supposed to be discussing. For scholars, like their gists in Africa, Sanskritists in India, archaeologists in Sumer, native informants, do just what Lévi-Strauss says they do: and so forth); differences between the approaches of individ­ they continually rework the same themes in a kind of ual French authors, between our several translators, between academic bricolage, and no two variants are ever quite alike. our experts; and, over the long haul, differences in my own For the most part, I think the rearrangement is a positive decisions at particular stages of the final supervision, and in move. For one thing, it makes it possible to read the book, the decisions of our copyeditors at the Press. We have tried to instead of merely browsing in it or looking things up in it minimize the inconsistencies, but we know that many re­ (though, as 1 have said, readers can still engage in both of main. these activities in the English edition). For another, it may We left the bibliographies basically in their original form, prove more useful in this form not only to mythophiles and with the following exceptions: in some cases we have sub­ area specialists, but to people interested in French anthro­ stituted English editions for French editions, or extended the pology and philosophy. dates of continuing series, and in several cases we have The book is therefore restructured, because of course it was added supplementary bibliographies (clearly designated as originally highly structured, ideologically if not organization­ such and distinguished from the original French text). But ally. Its English title, Mythologies, to me echoes the wonderful many bibliographies and articles still cite the French editions books by Roland Barthes and William Butler Yeats, both with of texts that have subsequently appeared in English. the same title, and further resonates with the French title of We did not follow the usual practice of citing standard the great Lévi-Strauss trilogy, Mythologiques (treacherously English translations of Greek or Latin or Sanskrit works that translated in one English edition as A Science of Mythology). the French, naturally enough, cited in French. Instead, we Mythologies has, finally, the advantage of being simulta­ translated the French translation of the classical text into neously an English and a French word, a last attempt at English. At first glance this procedure may seem unwise, but bilinguality before the Fall into the English version. we found it necessary because the French version of the classical text (and the subsequent analysis, which depended The English Translation upon that version) often differed so dramatically from any extant English translation that the sense of the discussion This edition was prepared "under my direction" in not would be totally obscured by the introduction of such a nearly so important a sense as the original was "sous la translation. We made an occasional exception, using a stan­ direction de Yves Bonnefoy." Certain parallel procedures dard English translation where there were long quotations probably exacerbated rather than minimized the inevitable not directly analyzed in the French text, or where the slip twixt French cup and English lip, and one of these was available English translation was very close to what the the employment of a team of English scholars to translate the French author had made of the original. (We were also, text that was originally composed by a team of French unfortunately, forced to translate back into English a few scholars. citations from English primary and secondary sources that Gerald Honigsblum translated the entire second volume of time and other constraints prevented us from obtaining in the French edition, with the editorial assistance of Bonnie the original form, and to retranslate several entire French Birtwistle Honigsblum. The first volume was translated by a xii

P R E F A C E

articles that we know were originally written in English, because the English originals were for one reason or another no longer available to us.) We decided to give Greek and Roman names, wherever possible, in the form used by the Oxford Classical Dictionary, which unfortunately is inherently inconsistent. The OCD has the advantage of avoiding pedantry by spelling most names in the way that people in English-speaking countries are used to seeing them. This means Latinizing most of the fa­ miliar Greek names (not, of course, substituting Roman names: thus we have Heracles, not Herakles, for the Greek god, but Hercules only for the Roman god), but not Latiniz­ ing the unfamiliar Greek names, and not Romanizing any of the Greek words when they are not names. All words, in­ cluding proper names, that are printed in the Greek alphabet in the French edition have here been transliterated. No ac­ cents are indicated, and macrons are used not to distinguish long and short a, i, and u, but only on e and o, to distinguish epsilon from eta and omicron from omega.' We also sought to standardize the transliteration of nonGreek names and terms, such as GilgameS (vs. Gilgamesh) and éiva (vs. Shiva), and we used the Pinyin system for most Chinese names.'’ But this general policy was sometimes over­ ruled by the demands of a particular article. We strove for consistency within each article— using English titles for Greek works where the meaning was needed and traditional Latinized titles where it was not, full citations or abbrevia­ tions as appropriate, and so forth. Assuming, perhaps snob­ bishly, that anyone who couldn't read French couldn't read Greek or Latin, 1 have translated many titles and quotations that my sanguine French colleague, Yves Bonnefoy. had left in their classical splendor. Except for the titles of certain works generally known to English speakers in their original form, and terms that either are familiar to readers or have no English equivalent, I have translated everything, even terms like polis (for the most part), and savoir faire, and, sometimes, par excellence. I fear that this may insult some readers, but 1 suspect that it will be a welcome (and in any case probably invisible) crutch to hoi polloi. Despite everything, the book remains idiosyncratic, but the idiosyncrasies are in large part a true reflection of the original French edition. In general, we have not corrected the original text at all, since, as I noted above, the work is valu­ able not only for the information and ideas that it contains but for being what it is,' a moment frozen in time, a fly in amber, an incarnation of the École Pratique as it was in 1981, warts and all. The warts include matters of style and politics, such as sexist and occasionally racist language in the original text. These problems were sometimes ameliorated and some­ times exacerbated by the transition from French to English. Thus, to ameliorate, we often chose to translate homme as "hum an" rather than "m an"; but the English "savage" (often more apt than "w ild" or "primitive") exacerbates the nega­ tive connotations of sauvage, which the French often use in a positive sense. Our respect for the integrity of the French text made us resist the temptation to correct what we regarded as errors in that text. (Of course, we made our own errors, and unfortu­ nately the reader who does not have the French edition will not know, if he or she finds a mistake, which side of the

TO

T H E

E N G L I S H

E D I T I O N

Atlantic it originated on.) We certainly made no attempt to correct such major problems as wrongheaded (in my opin­ ion) opinions, nor to decipher the impenetrable semioticisms in one or two articles or to excise the unreadable lists in others. At the other end of the spectrum, however, we did correct typographic errors and a few outright howlers (such as a reference to the Iliad when the Odyssey was clearly intended). It was trickier to decide what to do about the middle ground: infelicities of expression, repetitions, and so forth. Of course we tried to clarify unclear thoughts, though we certainly did not always succeed. But for the most part, we respected our French colleagues' right to live with their own sins. At first we made no attempt to smooth out the English, striving only to make the French thought accessible in En­ glish, leaving it awkward when it was awkward. We did try, however, to say well in English what was well said in French. In the end, however, our collective gorge rising again and again in response to such massive proportions of translatorese and the fatal attraction of the cliché juste, we did try to relax the translation a bit. By and large, I opted for fidelity over beauty. This is rather a shame, for the original French text is, on the whole, very beautiful. Not for the first time I take comfort in Claude LéviStrauss's famous dictum that, whereas poetry may be lost in translation, "the mythical value of myth remains preserved through the worst translation."7 I fear that we have lost much of Yves Bonnefoy's poetry; I can only hope that we have found, for the English reader, most of Yves Bonnefoy's mythology. Wendy Doniger

NOTES 1. Yves Bonnefoy, personal communication, 28 June 1984.

2. Notes on a meeting with Yves Bonnefoy, 6 June 1988. 3. As, for example, by Robert T urcan , in "Mythologies et reli­ gions: Notes Critiques, à propos du Dictionnaire des Mythologies. . . in Revue de l’Histoire des Religions 200, no. 2 (April-June 1983): 189-98. 4. A rthur A dkins, personal communication, 2 March 1988. 5. Our attempt to follow, consistently, the above rule resulted in the following apparent inconsistencies. A distinction is made be­ tween the treatment of two forms of the same word when it is used both as a name and as a noun: thus we have Eros (the god) and ews (the emotion), Cyclops (plural: Cyclopes) for the individual and kuklops for the class pf creature. Exceptions to the general Latinization occur in certain familiar spellings particularly with regard to elk (Clytemnestra, following the regular policy, but Kronos, following general usage); to -osl-us (Pontus, following the rule, but Helios, fol­ lowing general usage); and to certain plurals (Kronides, but Oceanids and Atreidae; Melissae, but Moirai). In general, upsilon is translite­ rated as y in Latinized names, such as Polyphemus, but as u in nouns, such as polumêlis. And so forth. 6. For the Yoruba names, we chose to follow the French edition in using a simplified transliteration, for the system that is technically, and politically, correct is extremely cumbersome and incompatible with the methods used in other parts of the work. 7. C laude L évi-Strauss , Structural Anthropology (New York 1963), 210.

xiii

Preface to the French Edition of the Complete Work

ent on which all scholarship thrives, will have lost its seminal value. The advantage of a dictionary, which allows free rein to a greater number of authors, and which facilitates the juxtaposition of both detailed analysis and broad synthesis, is that it can more comfortably, or more immediately, accom­ modate a living science whose very contradictions and even lapses into confusion serve as a lesson that can inspire, and on which we can reflect. We might say that a dictionary can aspire to a totalization which, because it is still only potential, is less subject to the perils of dogmatic deviation. Within a dictionary's open-ended structure, every aspect of scientific research— classification or comparison, hypothesis or explana­ tion, discovery of a law or conjecture as to its significance— will be allowed to reveal its specificity and find its own level. We may, therefore, regard the dictionary format as the most adequate expression of today's scholarship, which is suspicious of all systems, instinctively realizing the complexity and plural­ ities inherent in its objects of study as well as the interaction between these objects and its own methods. There is, in short, a kind of spirit or "genius" in what might simply appear to be the way the subject matter is arranged; and in direct consequence of this conception came the following decision: that in making the choices rendered necessary by the limited space, preference would be given to the process of discovery rather than to what has already been discovered; to new challenges, new departures, and new divergences rather than to the syntheses of the past, even those still found acceptable today. In deciding what to include in the dictionary, our preference has been, in other words, for new problems rather than old (and hence overfa­ miliar) solutions, even major ones. Research, the only en­ deavor, today, to which we habitually apply the word "pure," has been our true objective. In this book the reader will find what are at this very moment the pivotal points being debated in regard to this or that myth or religious festival, and not a mere enumeration— the comprehensive­ ness of which would in any case be difficult to establish—of points already settled in the past. And let us remark in passing that, by so doing, we are merely making public, for the sake of a more general reflection, a practice that has already proved itself in certain scientific circles, but only to a privileged few. The introduction to the Annuaire of the École des Hautes Études (section V, religions), states that the

I A few words of introduction, not in justification of the enterprise, but in order to clarify certain of its intentions and various points of method. One of our primary convictions was of the need to adopt the dictionary format. Encyclopedias, invariably too lengthy to be read in a single sitting, are usually approached through the index, thereby functioning like dictionaries but with certain disadvantages that dictionaries do not have. For one thing, readers of encyclopedias are deprived of those sudden juxtapositions that alphabetical order can effect between two topics that may have something in common but occur in different contexts: chance encounters from which fresh in­ sights can emerge. And for another thing, an encyclopedia, no matter how rationally intended the order of its contents, cannot but reflect the preconceptions of the time when it was written; it thus rapidly becomes dated and, even, from the very moment of its conception, imposes certain constraints on its readers. We have only‘to think of the treatises of the not very distant past and their way of drawing distinctions between the Mediterranean world and what is loosely re­ ferred to as the Orient, as if western Europeans lived at the center of the world! Progress has been made in this respect, but potentially dangerous prejudices are undeniably still at work in our thinking today. "Any classification of religions . . . will always in some way be factitious or one-sided; none is susceptible to proof," wrote Henri-Charles Puech.1 Only alphabetical order, arbitrary by definition, can eliminate hidden dogmatism or prevent the consolidation of an error as yet unperceived as such. Furthermore, and as a corollary to its primary task of rational organization, an encyclopedia also tends toward a kind of unity— if not homogeneity—of discourse; and be­ cause any work of this kind attempts to say the most in the least possible number of pages, there will be—in order to achieve coherent exposition of the most important material—an attenuation of what, in a monograph, would remain undiminished or would even be enhanced: diversity of viewpoint, the clash of ideas and methods, to say nothing of the irreconcilability of different scholars' feelings, aspira­ tions, and temperaments. Even when there is consensus on some point, we cannot believe that this disparity, the nutri­ xv

P R E F A C E

TO

THE

F R E N C H

E D I T I O N

teaching dispensed by the professors of this institution is a science "in process" and that "those responsible for teaching others will find no better way to exercise their function as the initiating and motivating force behind their students' re­ search than by sharing . . . the results of their own, even if this means admitting to failures." In this dictionary we have not always been quite so radical as these admirable words advise, but we, too, have attempted not to "transmit what is already known, but to demonstrate as concretely as possible how knowledge is acquired, and how it grows."2 It should therefore come as no surprise to the reader that some of the assignments normally charged to works on mythology were eliminated from our project at the outset, notably those detailed accounts of demigods, nymphs, de­ mons, genies, and heroes that occupy the forefront of less recent or more conventional studies. Insofar as these figures do not appear prominently among those chosen by contem­ porary scholars for réévaluation, merely to have listed them and added a few perfunctory remarks about each one— which, as there are thousands of them, is the best we could have done—would have been once again, and once too often, to present only the chaff instead of getting at the grain deep within, to rethrash the oversimplifications of yesteryear with an outward show of scientific objectivity. Apart from a few minor protagonists of Greek myth— retained because of their artistic or literary importance, through centuries of survival or revival or nostalgia for the gods of antiquity—we have chosen to deal, rather, with the innumerable minor characters in the drama of creation and the cosmos within the context of broader-based articles concerned primarily with structures: creation, cosmos, sacrifice, the divinity of the waters, divine animals or ancestors, etc.—the structures that modern science has taught us better to discern beneath the apparent disorder of myths. For only through these more active concepts, these more all-encompassing frameworks, can we realize the ultimate meaning of something that has always been only an element in the symbolic totality arising from man's desire to know; only in this way will we be able to perceive the differences, similarities, resonances, and, what is more, the perhaps hidden truth, the quality of mys­ tery, even the power to terrify, that underlies figures who became, in the mirror of classical paintings or in the Mythol­ ogies of our grandparents, elegant Marsyas or lovable Flora. The reader will, however, be able to find the information that our articles do dispense about many of these tiny sparks from the larger fire, by referring to the index, where many names that he may have regretted not finding more prominently displayed in the columns of the text have been assembled. We have, on the other hand, been generous in allotting space—and sometimes a great deal of space— to what at first glance might appear to be an excessively specific or technical development on a minor point in a remote religion, or an almost unknown tribe. We have done so because some important aspect of the most recent research in the field is thereby revealed, is therein at work, and the essay is therefore being offered, indirectly, as a concrete example of today's practical methods. In a situation of overwhelming possibility, the guiding principle presiding over the choices we did in fact make was consistently to prefer the illuminat­ ing example over the supposedly exhaustive enumeration; except on those occasions when a truly extensive, minutely scrupulous coverage of a field narrow enough to be included in the book in its entirety could also be made to serve as one of our major exemplary cases. This dictionary is in large measure a network of examples, each with some bearing on a particular level or category of religious experience or scien­ xvi

tific method; if we have included a study of sacrifice in a religion in which sacrifice is especially important, we have deliberately omitted an article on sacrifice for another region of the world in which, by the same token, animals or the presence of the dead have been selected from a mythic narrative in which they are felt to be essential. The advantage of this principle is that it allows us to plumb the depths, which is one way to achieve universality and thus to speak of everything, despite the occasional appearance of superfici­ ality. The reader will note that our articles are seldom very short; allowing for the stylistic terseness characteristic of dictionaries, we strove for an average length that would permit us to publish what are actually brief monographs; I am pleased to note that the present enterprise has served as the occasion for much research, some of it completely new, either in subject matter or in approach. The reader will thus be a witness to the creative process in action. And if he should be annoyed because he cannot find in our table of contents or even our index some name or subject to which several lines have been devoted in the Oxford Classical Dictionary or the Real-Encyclopédie, he should also bear in mind the intellectual character of our endeavor, and should listen in the depths of our pages for the stirrings of research in process, that catalyst through which, from the womb of needs as yet unsatisfied, hypotheses as yet unproved, oppo­ sitions and even conflicts, are bom the research projects, innovations, and ideas that tomorrow will provide the ma­ terial for new articles in the still open dictionary and, later, for a whole new volume. Any dictionary worthy of the name must affirm, with real fervor, that it will continue thus; that is, that it will turn into a serial appearing twelve times a century, an institution whose past becomes future, a rallying ground that will help keep a discipline alive. II What is this discipline, exactly, in our own case? And how did we define or, rather, how were we able to recognize the subjects appropriate to our dictionary? It is entitled Dictionary of Mythologies and Religions in Traditional Societies and in the Ancient World—thus, apparently, introducing two distinct subjects. What really is the subject, and what, in terms of specific content, will the reader find in the book? Let us state at the outset that what our French publisher wanted was a "Dictionary of Mythologies," explanation enough in itself, because it refers to a specific area and one abundantly rich in problems of great scientific interest today. To quote again from section V of the Annuaire: the current tendency for the science of religion to assume a central place in anthropological studies is due to "the increasing impor­ tance being accorded to 'myth' for the interpretation and comprehension of the human phenomenon. On this point, the most diametrically opposed schools of contemporary thought are undivided. Religious myths have attained high­ est priority as objects of study by the most disparate scientific disciplines and schools of philosophy, whether they are regarded as images or projections of a system of communi­ cations among men; as manifestations of archetypes of the psyche; or as the special objects of a phenomenology of human consciousness . . ."3 Certainly we no longer believe, as did the Socrates of Plato's Phaedrus, that there is no need to study myth because the important thing is to know ourselves— rather the reverse. Mythology appears to us ever more clearly as one of the great aspects of our relationship with ourselves, as well as being a conception of the world

P R E F A C E

and the terrestrial environment that has been undoubtedly useful; we therefore ought to draw up a balance sheet— however provisional—of the discoveries made by the present century in the various chapters of man's reflection onjnyth. That there is still not complete agreement among scholars as to how myth should be defined matters little; that the problem of definition may even be premature also matters little, precisely because the plurality inherent in the enter­ prise of a dictionary as defined above actually makes the juxtaposition of contradictory propositions seem natural and allows them to be compared with one another. Neither in this introduction nor in the body of the book, where the actual choices have been made, will the reader find a definition of myth decreed as law, as if the die were cast. Our only methodological limitation, one that in our view safe­ guards the rights both of the study of myths as archetypes and of the methods appropriate to myths approached as systems of communication, is to apprehend myth on the level of collective representations, where, as one of our contributors writes, myth is “the form in which the essential truths of a particular society are articulated and communi­ cated." Despite what may be the apparent freedom of the narrative, our task must be to seek within it a body of collective knowledge in contradistinction to the ephemeral creations of the individual consciousness, no matter how impressive these may be in great novels or poems. Apart from a few fleeting insights, included solely that we might better understand and recognize the limitations we have set for ourselves, there are in our dictionary none of the "per­ sonal myths" that come from art and the free play of imagination and that perhaps belong to a dialectic entirely different from those that unite human beings under the sign of their communications in the real world, of their confron­ tation with real necessities, and that are accompanied and made possible by rituals and beliefs. We have similarly omitted from the book what are sometimes referred to as "modem myths," representations that are circulated by popular literature or the media, myths that do indeed touch many spirits but that differ from the great majority of mythic narratives in that they are not so much the expressions of a society as they are the expressions of a yearning for a different society, or of the fear of forces that the structures of our societies have not integrated. In our view, the place for the study of these is, rather, in a dictionary devoted to the basic categories of religious experience as such, in particular, transcendence, eschatology, and salvation. In short, the myths in this book have been culled only from the mouths of societies or groups. This does not indicate a refusal to study the connection between myth and the deep structures of the human psyche; it merely delimits, in order to avoid any confusion, an object of thought that could then be connected with others, or analyzed in other ways than has been done here. The one form of individual creativity we did consider appropriate to include, at least through a few major examples, is the reflection of those who, although they may have relied on highly subjective spiritual or philosophical preconceptions, nevertheless attempted—as did Plato, for example, or Cicero—to understand myths as society pro­ duces them or assumes them. Objective as contemporary scholarship aspires to be, there are a few preconceptions similar to theirs still at work today, perhaps; so who can tell if in these ancient interpretations of myth there is not some lesson that could be of use to future investigations either of myth as the expression of social relationships, or of mytho­ logical figures as spearheads cutting through local custom and belief toward more universal spiritual forms?

TO

T HE

F R E N C H

E D I T I O N

But assuming nothing about the essence or function of myth except its relationship to a society does not necessarily mean that erecting the boundaries for a dictionary of mythol­ ogies presents no further problems. For no myth exists in isolation; none is a narrative drawing only on itself for its terms and its conventions. We still had to decide what, precisely, from a given society or culture, and from among all its conscious or unconscious communal acts, ought to be included in the book so that none of the discussion or information would be elliptical or too allusive. In other words, what complementary studies must be integrated into a dictionary of mythologies to ensure that the overall state­ ment that it makes will not be hobbled, giving only an impoverished and therefore dangerous idea of the field? Here is where we can justify the ambiguous precision of our title, in which the word "religion" appears next to the word "mythology." Proceeding empirically, at no great philo­ sophical risk, we may hold as evident that in every human society mythical narrative and religious practice are closely related; and thus, that everywhere, or almost everywhere, it is the historian or analyst of religions who also studies mythologies. As a corollary to this, surely we can affirm that it makes little sense to classify and analyze myths without reference to those aspects of religion that have determined them and will certainly clarify them. And, further, if we do so, in order to make room for this additional material we should also be prepared to sacrifice some of the data about myths properly speaking: what is lost in comprehensiveness will largely be regained in the comprehension of the place and the meaning of myth. This book deals with religions as well as with myths; or, rather, it stands at the intersection where the two roads meet—always with the proviso, how­ ever, that each of our contributors has been left free to decide for himself how to apportion the two concerns in practice, taking account of the vastly different forms that the same scientific goal can assume in areas as diverse as Indonesia, for example— that huge complex of societies, languages, and religious influences, where current research is still at the stage of amassing data that must subsequently be put in order—or Vedic India, or Greece, which we know plenty about. We do not mean that all things religious are therefore in a relationship of complicity, or even of continuity, with the production of myths and the sometimes evanescent, some­ times enduring, figures of myth; there is a dividing point at which one must take sides; the consequences are bound to be great and it is important to justify them. It may come as a surprise to the reader that the religions of Sumeria, Egypt, and Persia are included in the book, while Judaism, Christi­ anity, and Islam are not; that the divinities— if that is the right word—of Buddhism are included, but that no reference is made to the spiritual essence of this major religious experience as it occurs in China, Japan, or elsewhere. It may also cause surprise that, more specifically, the studies of the religions which have been included do not mention what has often made them forms of transcendental experience, mys­ teries, quests for the Absolute, arenas of soteriological am­ bition for the yearnings or the nostalgia of individuals or of sects. This is because, during such phases in a religion's development, the religious principle— in its essence, per­ haps, a contradictory one— turns against the mythic narra­ tive by which it is at other times nourished. When this happens, the spirit is no longer content to rest at the level of the gods but aspires to a transcendence that it senses as amounting to something more than the representations of it provided by myth; it rejects myth or creates in place of it a xvii

P R E F A C E

TO

THE

F R E N C H

E D I T I O N

gnostic system to uncover its secret meaning. And the effort thus made by the religious spirit to reach the divine within mythical manifestations that it regards as paradoxical or imperfect consequently determines that this aspect of the religious experience has no place in a dictionary of myth and of the rituals and beliefs associated with myth. We have not taken into consideration here the aspect of religion that fights the gods, the mediating powers, that holds them to be paganisms; this aspect in itself is so complex and so rich that it would take another book at least the size of this one to do it justice. The reader will therefore not find among thr religions introduced in this volume those whose essential vocation is— let us try to be succinct— the direct experience of transcendent divinity; nor those which tend to have a universal message, addressed to all people everywhere, no matter what their culture or where they live; not even those religions whose moorings in the history of a specific society ora specific people have enabled them, through a founder, a theophany, a prophet, or their reform of a previous pagan­ ism, to attach to themselves legends or histories closely resembling myths. In practice, we have excluded from this book the great religions of a Word, a Promise; and especially the mystery religions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Gnosti­ cism, Taoism, and the legacies of the Buddha. The one exception to this rule consists of certain incursions justified by the "pagan" nature of some of their minor aspects, such as the cult of the saints in our own churches or the gods and demons of Buddhism. Let us hope that these religions will one day form the subject of another dictionary, one dealing, as it were, with divinity, as opposed to gods; with universal theologies and experiences of unity, in contrast to the rivulets of myths, rituals, and holy places. Upon further reflection, we ought also to reserve for another volume certain problems of boundaries, such as the way in which past and present evangelistic missionaries have regarded the myths of societ­ ies they set out to convert, not without repercussions on Christian doctrine; or— to come closer to home— the way in which at certain moments Christianity itself has played the role of a myth: a myth of truth, or progress, even at the price of relinquishing a good part of its aptitude for genuine communion. As one of our authors writes, myths are never recognized for what they are except when they belong to others; it is therefore our duty to apply to our own behavior as people of the Western world the same methods that our science reserved only yesterday for so-called primitive soci­ eties. But a great religious experience must first be described before we can go beyond it and begin the task of distinguish­ ing its ambiguities. And yet certain religions which might be said to represent a quest for the Absolute as obvious as any other— those of India, for instance, and perhaps also of Egypt—have been included; but this is because in their search for unity they involve myth in a very intimate, almost ultimate, manner, if only in an initial stage and as one more form of illusion. We have not used the word "polytheism" to designate the religions whose myths are dealt with in this dictionary, despite its apparent reference to the differentiation, the polymorphy, of the divine. For although there are resolutely polytheistic religions, such as those of ancient Greece or Rome, in other cultures and other lands there are religions based on more complex intuitions, in which the multiplicity of representations at once clear-cut and diffuse exist in a sort of breathing of the spirit that seems to refute our own exaggerated distinctions between entity and nonentity, be­ tween the one and the many. Might we not, perhaps, call xviii

these religions "poetic" or "figurative," since an artist knows well the imaginary nature of the figures that, nevertheless, alone can express, in the artist's vision, the essential reality? In any case, such religions belong in this dictionary by virtue of their massive and continuing recourse to the logic of myth.

Ill And now for a few words of clarification concerning the geographical and historical area covered by our enterprise. Or rather—since this dictionary by definition covers all terrestrial space and every era of terrestrial history— concerning the relative proportions we decided upon for the various parts of our inquiry. First, one remark that may be useful: if we have designated and defined myth in the context of an inquiry that by rights extends to the farthermost regions of the globe, this in no way means that we wish to affirm, by emphasizing the most powerful of these mythologies—whose links with the lan­ guages in which they are expressed are obviously close—that there is any uniformity on earth in this mode of conscious­ ness. As has frequently been pointed out, the word myth itself comes from the Greek, and the concept that we project into this word, although adjusted to accommodate overlap­ pings and overflowings, also has a logic, a coherence, and still bears the mark of its origin; there is therefore no foundation for believing that what some other ethnic group has experienced under the forms that we call myth corre­ sponds to the same laws with which we are familiar. Perhaps there are societies that do not tend to integrate their myths into some meaningful whole but leave them as fragments that flare up and then are extinguished without, in passing, casting any light on what we ourselves are tempted to look for or to find everywhere: the outline, if only a rough one, of the vault of a universe. If in these cases we can often see nothing but an incoherent babble opening the way to higher forms of consciousness, might it not also be possible for us to sense in them an entirely different mode of consciousness, one in which the discontinuous, the partial, the forever incomplete would themselves be perceived as the very being of human meaning? Could we not see them as an ontology of the superficiality of our inscription on the world—an ontol­ ogy that the planet's recent history would tend rather to confirm than to deny—somewhere beyond the ruin of our own aspirations? The representation of the divine can obey laws as diverse as those of artistic representation, which extends from the controlled irrationality of a Poussin, who was, in fact, an heir to the Greeks, to the fugitive traces on the gray wall of some works of art of our time. This should remind us if need be that a dictionary like ours, if it is to fulfill its task of describing the variety of mythologies, must supplement its descriptions of the reli­ gious data with additional material on the cultures, mental structures, languages, and functionings of the social collec­ tivity. To the extent that myth is one of the forms of asking questions about mystery, it represents a relationship be­ tween the human consciousness— in its cognitive functions, its praxis, its historical memory, or its exploration of the outside environment—and the culture as a whole. Recent research has clearly demonstrated that myth's manifest com­ plexity makes it one of the most useful tools for an archae­ ology of the imagination, of philosophy, or of science. It was therefore essential to the present undertaking that myth appear not only as an act of speech about the divine, but as a text in which the divine is infinitely embedded in signifiers; and it is the task of the ethnologist, the sociologist, and the

I’ R E F A C E

linguist to decipher and analyze these signifiers. A back­ ground in the social sciences is much more than an impera­ tive for this book; it is its natural and inevitable locus, and one from which many of our contributors, either explicitly or implicitly, have strayed but little. But this consideration even further restricts the space available for the purely mytholog­ ical material within the finite number of pages at our dis­ posal. When the whole world demands to be heard, the time for each part to speak must be allotted sparingly. How to mitigate this disadvantage? It would have been tempting to reverse ethnocentric custom and to eliminate at a stroke every trace of exclusiveness, every hierarchy; to relinquish forever the specious charm of the old GrecoRoman monopoly, and its belated acceptance of Egypt and the Near East; and thus to have offered to each separate part of the world an equal number of pages. But rational and fair as this was in principle, we knew that in practice it could never be other than a utopian ideal, at least for the foresee­ able future. The first and major reason is that the analysis of myths that is most familiar to us is the work of scholars who write or read in French, English, Italian, German, and more rarely in other languages, still mostly Western ones. With all of its virtues and all of its limitations, this linguistic given constitutes an intangible fact that we must first examine before our own consciousness can be raised, before it can be made to apprehend from within how to circumscribe its own difference so as to be more receptive to categories other than its own. If the mythology of Africa or of ancient Japan is an object of study for our language, the myths and divinities of Greece and Rome, not to mention those of the Celtic and Germanic worlds, survive through hidden symbolisms, overt conditionings, artistic or philosophical references, even—and above all— through concepts, in the most inti­ mate being of mythology, that operate on the very level on which our language apprehends and analyzes the object. And these components, all too familiar but never sufficiently explored, never sufficiently distanced, therefore demand an almost excessive attention if we in the West are ever to achieve a valid understanding of the other civilizations of the world. This invaluable opportunity to psychoanalyze our meth­ ods, we felt, should not be sacrificed by unduly abbreviating that portion of the book dealing with our own origins; so, an important place, even though in a most attenuated manner, should once again be given to the cults and mythologies of more or less classical antiquity and to their later effects on the religious, artistic, and intellectual life of Europe, of which we, of course, are a product. And because for other parts of the world we have also had to take into account the very variable degree of progress in the field, so that it would have been unfortunate to weigh each contribution equally, we have resigned ourselves without compunction to being bi­ ased in our allocation of space, believing that to define where we stand does not— or at least so we may hope—imply a valorization of what lies nearest to us or any dogmatism. We have reserved almost half the work for the Mediterranean world, the Near and Far East, and for the historical relations between their mythologies and the European consciousness, as demonstrated by such phenomena as the survival of the classical gods or the fascination with Egypt after the Italian Renaissance. The other half of the book is for the rest of the world, here again, however, taking into account the actual importance that one region or another may have today assumed in a field that naturally is not static and that will have fresh insights to contribute to future supplements to the present volume. It is unfortunately only too true that the vast

T O

T H F

\ R K N C II

I! I) I I I O \'

societies of Africa and Asia have in our columns once again been given less space than the tiny population of Greece. Bui a particular problem concerning a particular, vanishing soci­ ety in Vietnam has, on the other hand, merited more of our attention than many perhaps expected aspects of our classi­ cal world. We can only hope that the reader will not find our distribution of the materials too misinformed. IV Here now is some practical information to help the reader find his way through the labyrinth of the dictionary. (The rearrangement of articles in the English-language edition obviates the problems discussed in this paragraph, which we have therefore abridged.] Certain religions or cultures to which, regretfully, we could only allot a few pages are represented by a single article that can easily be found under the name of the country or geographical area, thus, Albania or Crete. Generally speaking, however, our contributors had more space at their disposal and were able to address various questions that they considered not only basic but exemplary, in articles spread throughout the book. A list of the names of all the authors, in alphabetical order of their initials, allows the reader to go from the initials at the end of each article to the complete name of the author. This same list also indicates the academic affiliations of the hundred or so scholars who were willing to contribute to the dictionary; it will be noted that most of them teach at the Collège de France, the École Pratique des Hautes Études, or in French universities. Why this preference for the French, in a century when intellectual exchange is so abundant, be­ tween some countries at least, and in which we see so many publications—of, for example, papers delivered at colloquia— that mix together in their abstracts the names of professors from Tübingen or Yale with those from Tokyo or Nairobi? It may at once be pointed out that contributions to this type of publication are usually printed in the language in which the original paper was delivered, obviously requiring of the reader that he be made aware of the linguistic and conceptual appa­ ratus presiding at their conception. French scholars know that, in dealing with ideas originally conceived in German, or in English, they must undertake the task of recognizing schools of thought, cultural or religious conditionings or customs, the influence exerted by the words themselves—since every language has its own semantic nodes, as complex as they are uncompromising; and they also know this task may take a long time, demanding further reading or travel abroad. They further understand that it is only in connection with these vast extratextual areas that they will be able to identify and appreciate the meaning of the text itself. It is of course always possible to translate, and to read a translation. But we must not forget that it takes more than a mere rendering of sentences into a new language for these backgrounds to be revealed and for the underlying meaning to be made clear. This is precisely the risk that prevails when an enterprise such as ours is opened to authors who think and write in different languages—which would have to be many in num­ ber for all the major trends in international scholarship to be represented as they deserve. We believed that scholars who thus had to express themselves through translation would find their work deprived of a part of its significance at the very moment when we would seem to be listening to it. Moreover, the converse is also true: problems can best be differentiated, and even antagonistic methods best be re­ vealed, through the widest possible deployment of the unity and diversity—the cluster of potentialities simultaneously xix

P R E F A C E

TO

THE

F R E N C H

E D I T I O N

contiguous and concurrent— that is embodied in a single language at a precise moment in its history. We therefore deemed it preferable to call primarily on French scholars and, since those responding to our call number among the most eminent and the most representative, thus to offer to the reader, as an adjunct to our panorama of mythologies and religions, a matching panorama of the contemporary French schools of history, sociology, and religious studies, all of which are of the first rank and deserve to be known as such. To sum up: while a few of the original contributions to the Dictionary of Mythologies were translated from languages other than French, for the most part the material can be viewed as a whole, produced by a single society—an ever evolving one, to be sure, and one not inattentive to other cultures—at a crucial juncture in the development of a scientific discipline that is still young. This dictionary is French, the expression of a group of scholars all working within reach of one another, as sensitive to their areas of disagreement as they are gratified by their points of conver­ gence. It is our hope that, if it should be translated, the translator will find it vast enough to allow for the emergence, here and there within its mass, of the unstated concept of implied bias not readily discernible in briefer texts; and that these underlying elements will be revealed in a translation offering the reader, and serving as the basis for future debate, an intellectual effort seen whole: not just the visible tip of the iceberg, but its hidden, submerged bulk as well. V Such were the guiding principles determining how our work should be organized. It is only proper to add, however, that despite the great trust which it was the present editor's pleasure to encounter in his authors— who sometimes pro­ duced material for him equivalent in volume to a small book—the above principles are primarily the expression of his own concept of what scholarship is, and what it is that scholars are attempting to do. Only he can be held directly responsible for them. I have just used the word "trust." Going back to the source from which all trust springs, however, I should rather have said "generosity," because this word, glossing "trust," better characterizes both the reception that I as editor was given by specialists in their fields who could so easily have refused to credit any but one of their own, and the quality of their contributions, which to me seems patent. I see this now that the enterprise has been achieved. Most of these scholars, all of them with many tasks competing for their time, have been with our project from the beginning, when, responding to my appeal, they consented to represent their respective disciplines in a dictionary that was still just an idea—an idea to which they themselves had to give meaning. Most of them also agreed to oversee the illustration of their articles, thereby enriching the text with a variety of often rare, sometimes previously unpublished, documents directly rel­

xx

evant to the text. Whenever minor vicissitudes befell the project thereafter, decisions were always made in a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation. I am extremely grateful to all the authors of this book, and to those eminent individuals who were kind enough to advise me when initial decisions had to be made. Indeed, my only great regret is that I am unable to express this gratitude today to two men who are no longer with us, two men who possessed con­ summate wisdom, foresight, and discipline, and whose example will stand as an enduring one. Historian Eugène Vinaver's masterly command of Arthurian Romance, a bor­ derline topic standing between myth and literature, is well known. So, too, is Pierre Clastres's intense involvement with the Indian civilizations of South America; the articles by him that we are publishing here were the last pages he ever wrote. I now have the pleasure of thanking Henri Flammarion and Charles-Henri Flammarion, who wanted this dictionary to exist, and who showed such keen interest in the questions with which it deals. My thanks also to those who trans­ formed typescripts, photographs, and graphics into the reality of the present book. First on the list of these is Francis Bouvet, a man attached to the project from the moment of its inception and now, regrettably, only a memory, but a cher­ ished one. My thanks to Adam Biro, who took over the same functions and brought to them the same understanding and the same invaluable support. Thanks to Claire Lagarde, who from start to finish, and with intuitive devotion and unfailing good humor, sent out requests, acknowledged receipts, sent out requests again, read, filed, saved, and expedited con­ tracts, typescripts, documents, and proofs, even at times when her other duties were pressing. And, finally, thanks to Pierre Deligny, who, simply because he was asked, since we had no legitimate claim to his assistance, unhesitatingly accepted in his own name as well as in that of Denise Deligny and Danielle Bornazzini the crushing responsibility for correcting three successive sets of proofs, with their intricate web of unfamiliar names, cross-references, rearrangements, accent marks, and emendations, and who brought the job to a successful conclusion, with Mesdames Deligny and Bor­ nazzini specifically undertaking responsibility for compiling the index. Yes, to these other authors of the Dictionary of Mythologies, many thanks, in the name of the authors of the text. Yves Bonnefoy/l.g.

NOTES 1. Preface, Histoire des religions, vol. 1 (Paris 1970) (Encyclopédie de la Pléiade). 2. Annuaire of the École des Hautes Études, Paris, vol. 83, no. 1 (1975-76), p. 4. 3. Ibid., p. 3.

Contributors

A . L.-G André Leroi-G ourhan , professor, Collège de France.

J.S t. Jean S tarobinski, professor, Faculty of Letters, Uni­ versity of Geneva.

B . B, Bernard Böschenstein , professeur ordinaire, Uni­ versity of Geneva.

M .D. Marcel D etienne , directeur d'études, École pratique des hautes études, Ve section (sciences religieuses).

C . Me.

M.Ed. Michael E dwards , professor of English and com­ parative literature, University of Warwick.

Claude M ettra , producer, France-Culture.

E.P.

Evelyne Patlagean, professor, University of Paris X.

E. V.

Eugène V inaver, professor, Manchester University.

F.C. Françoise C ozannet, cultural attachée, Ministère de la Recherche et de la Technologie. F.F1. François Flahault, chargé de recherche, Centre na­ tionale de la recherche scientifique. F.S. François S ecret, directeur d'études, École pratique des hautes études, Ve section (sciences religieuses).

M.E1. Mircea Eliade , professor in the Divinity School, University of Chicago. M .O. Maurice Ö lender, attaché. Centre de recherches comparées sur les sociétés anciennes. M.P. Massimo Pallottino , member of the Institut de France and the Accademia dei Lincei; president, Institute of Etruscan and Italic Studies; professor emeritus, Uni­ versity of Rome.

J.C . Jeannie C arlier , chef de travaux, École des hautes études en sciences sociales.

M. T. Michel T ardieu , directeur d'études, École pratique des hautes études, Ve section (sciences religieuses).

J.-C .S. Jean-Claude S chmitt , maître assistant, École des hautes études en sciences sociales.

N.B. Nicole Belmont, directeur d'études, hautes études en sciences sociales.

J.E .J. John E. J ackson, professor of French literature, Uni­ versity of Bern.

P.Br.

J.M . Jean Molino , professeur ordinaire, University of Lausanne. J.P.

Jean P épin , directeur de recherche, Centre national de la recherche scientifique.

J.R i.

École des

Pierre B runel , professor, University of Paris I.

R.C. Raymond C hristincer , professor. University of Geneva. R.R.

Renée R icher , professor. University of Nice.

R.S. Robert S chilling , professor emeritus, École pratique des hautes études and University II of Strasbourg.

Jean R icher , professor emeritus, University of Nice.

J.Se. Jean S eznec, member of the British Academy; formerly professor, Oxford University and Harvard University.

xxi

P A R T

Introduction: The Interpretation of Mythology

c u l t u r e if o n e i g n o r e s t h e c o s m o g o n i c m y t h s a n d t h e m y t h s

T ow ard

D

a

efin it io n o f

M

yth

o f o r i g i n t h a t a r e p r e s e r v e d in t h e

Enûma Liis

o r in t h e e p i c o f

G ilg a m e s . I n d e e d , a t th e b e g in n in g o f e a c h fa b u lo u s e v e n ts From

P la to

and

F o n te n e lle

to

S c h e llin g

and

B u ltm a n n ,

p h ilo s o p h e rs a n d th e o lo g ia n s h a v e p r o p o s e d n u m e r o u s d e f ­ in itio n s o f m y th .

B u t a ll t h e d e f i n i t i o n s h a v e o n e

t h i n g in

re co u n te d

in

th e

new

Enûma Elii

y e a r , th e

w ere

ritu a lly

re e n a c te d ; a t e a c h n e w y e a r th e w o rld h a d to b e r e -c r e a te d — a n d th is r e q u ir e m e n t r e v e a ls to u s a p r o f o u n d d im e n s io n o f M e s o p o ta m ia n

th o u g h t.

The

m y th

of

th e

o r ig in

of

m an

c o m m o n : th e y a r e b a se d o n G re e k m y th o lo g y . F o r a h isto ria n

e x p l a i n s , a t l e a s t in p a r t , t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c v i s i o n a n d p e s s i ­

o f r e l i g i o n s , t h i s c h o i c e is n o t t h e h a p p i e s t o n e . It i s t r u e t h a t

m ism o f M e s o p o ta m ia n c u ltu r e : M a rd u k d r e w m a n o u t o f th e

m y t h , in G r e e c e , i n s p i r e d e p i c p o e t r y a n d t h e a t e r a s w e ll a s

e a rth ,

t h e p l a s t i c a r t s ; y e t it w a s o n l y in G r e e k c u l t u r e t h a t m y t h

T ia m a t, a n d o u t o f th e b lo o d o f th e a r c h d e m o n K in g u . A n d

w a s su b je cte d

t h e t e x t s p e c i f i e s t h a t m a n w a s c r e a t e d b y M a r d u k in o r d e r t o

w h ic h

to p ro lo n g e d a n d

it e m e r g e d

ra d ic a lly

" m y t h , ” in a ll E u r o p e a n

p e n e tr a tin g a n a ly s is , fro m

" d e m y th o lo g i z e d ."

If t h e w o r d

l a n g u a g e s , d e n o t e s " f i c t i o n , " it is

th a t is, o u t o f th e

fle sh

o f th e

p rim o rd ia l

m o n ste r

w o r k th e la n d a n d to e n s u r e th e s u s t e n a n c e o f th e g o d s . T h e e p ic o f G ilg a m e s p r e s e n ts a n

e q u a lly p e s s im is tic v is io n b y

b e c a u s e t h e G r e e k s d e c l a r e d it t o b e s o t w e n t y - f i v e c e n t u r i e s

e x p la in in g w h y m a n d o e s n o t (a n d m u s t n o t) h a v e a c c e s s to

ago.

im m o r ta lity .

A n e v e n m o r e s e r i o u s m i s t a k e in t h e e y e s o f t h e h i s t o r i a n

H is to ria n s

of

r e lig io n s

th e re fo re

p refer

to

w o rk

on

all

o f r e l i g i o n s is t h a t t h e m y t h o l o g y t h a t H o m e r , H e s i o d , a n d

categories

th e

itiv e s " a n d th o s e o f h isto ric p e o p le s . N o r d o th e d iv e r g e n c e s

tra g ic

p o e ts

te ll

us

about

is

th e

re s u lt

of a

s e le c tiv e

o f m y th o lo g ic a l c re a tio n s , b o th th o s e o f th e " p r i m ­

p ro c e s s a n d r e p r e s e n ts a n in te rp re ta tio n o f a n a r c h a ic s u b je ct

th a t r e s u lt fro m

w h ic h h a s a t tim e s b e c o m e u n in te llig ib le . O u r b e s t c h a n c e o f

o n ly o b s ta c le to th e d ia lo g u e b e tw e e n h is to r ia n s o f re lig io n s

u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e o f m y t h i c a l t h o u g h t is t o s t u d y

a n d t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s in o t h e r d i s c i p l i n e s . It is t h e a p p r o a c h

to o n a rro w

a d o c u m e n ta tio n c o n s titu te th e

c u l t u r e s in w h i c h m y t h is a " l i v i n g t h i n g , " c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e

its e lf th a t s e p a r a t e s t h e m f r o m , f o r e x a m p l e , a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s

v e r y s u p p o r t o f r e l i g i o u s l if e — c u l t u r e s in w h i c h

a n d p s y c h o lo g i s ts . H is to r ia n s o f re lig io n s a r e to o c o n s c i o u s

fro m

p o r tr a y in g

fiction,

e x p r e s s e s th e

m y th , far

supreme truth,

s i n c e it

s p e a k s o n ly o f r e a litie s .

o f t h e a x i o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s in t h e i r d o c u m e n t s t o p u t t h e m a ll o n t h e s a m e l e v e l . A t t e n t i v e t o n u a n c e s a n d d i s t i n c t i o n s ,

T h i s is h o w a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s h a v e p r o c e e d e d f o r m o r e t h a n

th e y c a n n o t b e u n a w a r e th a t th e re a r e im p o r ta n t m y th s a n d

h a lf a c e n tu r y , c o n c e n t r a t in g o n " p r i m i ti v e " s o c ie tie s . R e a c t­

m y th s o f le s s e r im p o r ta n c e , m y th s th a t d o m in a te a n d c h a r ­

in g ,

a c te r iz e

h o w ev er,

a g a in s t

an

im p ro p e r

c o m p a r a tiv e

a n a ly s is ,

a

r e lig io n ,

and

Enûma Elis,

seco n d ary ,

r e p e titiv e ,

or

m o s t a u t h o r s h a v e n e g le c te d to c o m p l e m e n t th e ir a n t h r o p o ­

m y th s . T h e

lo g ic a l r e s e a r c h w ith a r i g o r o u s s tu d y o f o t h e r m y th o lo g i e s ,

th e

n o ta b ly t h o s e o f th e a n c ie n t N e a r E a s t, p rim a r ily M e s o p o t a ­

L a m a sh tu ;

m ia a n d E g y p t; t h o s e o f th e I n d o - E u r o p e a n s , e s p e c ia lly th e

p le te ly

g r a n d io s e a n d e x u b e r a n t m y th o lo g y o f a n c ie n t a n d m e d ie v a l

p la n t,

In d ia ; a n d

d i f f e r e n c e s in v a l u e d o n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o m m a n d

fin a lly th a t o f th e T u r c o - M o n g o l s , th e T i b e t a n s ,

a n d t h e H i n d u i z e d o r B u d d h i s t p e o p l e s o f S o u t h e a s t A s i a . In

tio n

sam e

lev el th e

as

th e

s in c e

of

th e

m y th o lo g y

P o ly n e s ia n

d iffe re n t w e ig h t it p r e c e d e s

p a r a s itic

fo r e x a m p le , c o u ld n o t b e p la ce d o n co s m o g o n ic

fro m

th e

it a n d

a n th ro p o lo g ist

of

or

m y th

se rv e s th e

th e

fe m a le

m y th

has

o f th e as

its

dem on a

com ­

o r ig in

m o d e l.

p s y c h o lo g is t.

of a S u ch

th e a t te n ­ T hus,

a

lim itin g r e s e a r c h to p r im itiv e m y th o lo g i e s , o n e ris k s g i v in g

s o c io lo g ic a l s tu d y o f th e n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y F r e n c h n o v e l o r

t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t t h e r e is a g a p b e t w e e n a r c h a i c t h o u g h t

a p s y c h o lo g y o f th e lit e r a r y i m a g i n a ti o n c a n m a k e e q u a l u s e

a n d t h a t o f p e o p l e s c o n s i d e r e d " o f h i s t o r y ." T h i s g a p d o e s n 't

o f B a lz a c a n d E u g è n e S u e , S te n d h a l a n d Ju le s S a n d e a u . B u t

e x is t; in d e e d , b y r e s tr ic tin g i n v e s tig a tio n to p rim itiv e s o c ie t­

fo r th e h is to r ia n o f th e F r e n c h n o v e l o r fo r th e lite r a r y c ritic ,

i e s , o n e is d e p r i v e d o f t h e m e a n s o f m e a s u r i n g t h e r o l e o f

s u c h m i x i n g is u n t h i n k a b l e , f o r it d e s t r o y s t h e i r o w n h e r m e ­

m y t h in c o m p l e x r e l i g i o n s , s u c h a s t h o s e o f t h e a n c i e n t N e a r E a s t o r o f I n d i a . F o r e x a m p l e , it is i m p o s s i b l e t o u n d e r s t a n d th e re lig io n a n d , m o r e g e n e r a l l y , th e s ty le o f M e s o p o t a m i a n

n e u tic p rin c ip le s . In t h e n e x t g e n e r a t i o n o r t w o , p e r h a p s e a r l i e r , w h e n

we

h a v e h is to r ia n s o f r e lig io n s b o rn o f A u s tr a lia n o r M e la n e s ia n

3

I N T R O D U C T I O N

tribal societies, I have no doubt that they, among other critics, will reproach Western scholars for their indifference to the scales of indigenous values. Let us imagine a history of Greek culture in which Homer, the tragic poets, and Plato were passed over in silence, while the Interpretation of Dreams by Artemidorus of Ephesus and the novel by Heliodorus of Emesa were laboriously analyzed under the pretext that they better clarified the specific characteristics of the Greek spirit, or helped us understand its destiny. To return to our subject, I do not believe it possible to understand the structure and function of mythic thought in a society in which myth still serves as a foundation without taking into account both the body of mythology of that culture and the scale of values that it implies or declares. Indeed, wherever we have access to a still living tradition that is neither strongly acculturated nor in danger of disap­ pearing, one thing immediately strikes us: not only does mythology constitute a kind of "sacred history" of the tribe in question, not only does it explain the totality of reality and justify its contradictions, but it also reveals a hierarchy in the sequence of the fabulous events it relates. Every myth tells how something came into existence—the world, man, an animal species, a social institution, etc. Because the creation of the world precedes all others, cosmogony enjoys particu­ lar prestige. As I have tried to show elsewhere (see, for example, The Myth of the Eternal Return, New York, 1954; Aspects du mythe, Paris 1963), the cosmogonic myth serves as a model for all myths of origin. The creation of animals, plants, or man presupposes the existence of a world. Of course, the myth of the origin of the world is not always cosmogonic in the technical application of the term, like Indian and Polynesian myths, or the myth told in the Enùma Elis. In a large part of Australia, for example, the cosmogonic myth in a strict sense is unknown. But there is still a central myth which tells of the beginnings of the world, of what happened before the world became as it is today. Thus one always finds a primordial history, and this history has a beginning—the cosmogonic myth properly so called, or a myth that introduces the first, larval, or germinal state of the world. This beginning is always implicit in the series of myths that tell of fabulous events that took place after the creation or the appearance of the world, myths of the origin of plants, animals, and man, or of death, marriage, and the family. Together these myths of origin form a coherent his­ tory, for they reveal how the world has been transformed, how man became what he is today— mortal, sexual, and obliged to work to sustain himself. They also reveal what the Supernatural Beings, the enculturating Heroes, the mythical Ancestors, did and how and why they moved away from the Earth, or disappeared. All the mythology that is accessible to us in a sufficient state of conservation contains not only a beginning but also an end, bounded by the final manifesta­ tions of the Supernatural Beings, the Heroes or the Ancestors. So this primordial sacred history, formed by the body of significant myths, is fundamental, for it explains and justifies at the same time the existence of the world, of man, and of society. This is why myth is considered both a true story— because it tells how real things have come to be—and the exemplary model of and justification for the activities of man. One understands what one is— mortal and sexual—and one assumes this condition because myths tell how death and sexuality made their appearance in the world. One engages in a certain type of hunting or agriculture because myths tell how the enculturating Heroes revealed these techniques to one's ancestors. When the ethnologist Strehlow asked the Australian 4

Arunta why they celebrated certain ceremonies, they invari­ ably replied: "Because the [mythical] Ancestors prescribed it." The Kai of New Guinea refused to modify their way of living and working and explained themselves thus: "This is how the Nemu [the mythical Ancestors] did it, and we do it the same way." Questioned about the reason for a certain ritual detail, a Navajo shaman replied: "Because the Sacred People did it this way the first time." We find exactly the same justification in the prayer that accompanies an ancient Tibetan ritual: "As has been passed down since the begin­ ning of the creation of the earth, thus we must sacrifice. . . . As our ancestors did in ancient times, so we do today" (cf. Aspects du mythe, pp 16ff.). This is also the justification invoked by Hindu ritualists: "We must do what the gods did in the beginning" (èatapatha Brâhmana, 8.2.1.4). "Thus did the gods; thus do men" (Taittiriya Brâhmana, 1.5.9.4). In sum, the governing function of myth is to reveal exemplary models for all rites and all meaningful human activities: no less for food production and marriage than for work, educa­ tion, art, or wisdom. In societies where myth is still living, the natives carefully distinguish myths— "true stories"—from fables or tales, which they call "false stories." This is why myths cannot be told indiscriminately; they are not told in front of women or children, that is, before the uninitiated. Whereas "false stories" may be told anytime and anywhere, myths must be told only during a span of sacred time (generally during autumn or winter, and only at night). The distinction made between "true stories" and "false stories" is significant. For all that is told in myths concerns the listeners directly, whereas tales and fables refer to events which, even when they have caused changes in the world (for example, anatomical or physiological peculiarities in certain animals), have not modified the human condition as such. Indeed, myths relate not only the origin of the world and that of animals, plants, and humans, but also all the primordial events that have resulted in humans becoming what they are today, i.e., mortal, sexual, and societal beings, obliged to work fora living, and working according to certain rules. To recall only one example: humans are mortal because something happened in the beginning; if this event hadn't occurred, humans wouldn't be mortal, they could have existed indefinitely, like rocks, or could have changed their skin periodically, like snakes, and consequently would have been able to renew their life, that is, begin it again. But the myth of the origin of death tells what happened in illo tempore, and in recounting this incident it explains why humans are mortal. In archaic societies, the knowledge of myths has an existential function. Not only because myths offer people an explanation of the world and of their own way of existing in the world, but above all because in remembering myths, in reenacting them, humans are able to repeat what the Gods, the Heroes, or the Ancestors did ab origine. To know myths is to learn not only how things have come into existence, but also where to find them and how to make them reappear when they disappear. One manages to capture certain beasts because one knows the secret of their creation. One is able to hold a red-hot iron in one's hand, or to pick up venomous snakes, provided one knows the origin of fire and of snakes. In Timor, when a rice field is growing, someone goes to the field at night and recites the myth of the origin of rice. This ritual recitation forces the rice to grow beautiful, vigorous, and dense, just as it was when it appeared for the first time. It is magically forced to return to its origins, to repeat its exemplary creation. Knowing the myth of origin is often not enough; it

THE

must be recited; knowledge of it is proclaimed, it is shown. By reciting myths, one reintegrates the fabulous time of origins, becomes in a certain way "contemporary” with the events that are evoked, shares in the presence of the Gods or Heroes. In general one may say: — that myth, such as it is lived by archaic societies, constitutes the story of the deeds of Supernatural Beings; —that the story is considered absolutely true (because it refers to realities) and sacred (because it is the work of Supernatural Beings); —that myth always concerns a "creation"; it tells how something has come into existence, or how a way of behav­ ing, an institution, a way of working, were established; this is why myths constitute paradigms for every meaningful human act; — that in knowing the myth one knows the "origin" of things and is thus able to master things and manipulate them at will; this is not an "external," "abstract" knowledge, but a knowledge that one "lives" ritually, either by reciting the myth ceremonially, or by carrying out the ritual for which it serves as justification; — that in one way or another one "lives" the myth, gripped by the sacred, exalting power of the events one is rememorializing and reactualizing. To "live" myths thus implies a truly "religious" experi­ ence, for it is distinct from the ordinary experience of daily life. This experience is "religious" because it is a reenactment of fabulous, exalting, meaningful events; one is present once again at the creative works of the Supernatural Beings. Mythical events are not commemorated; they are repeated, reiterated. The characters in myth are brought forth and made present; one becomes their contemporary. One no longer lives in chronological time but in primordial Time, the Time when the event took place for the first time. This is why we can speak of the "strong time" of myth: it is the prodigious, "sacred" Time, when something new, something strong, and something meaningful was made fully manifest. To relive that time, to reintegrate it as often as possible, to be present once again at the spectacle of divine works, to rediscover the Supernatural Beings and relearn their lesson of creation—such is the desire that can be read implicitly in all ritual repetitions of myths. In sum, myths reveal that the world, man, and life have a supernatural origin and history, and that this history is meaningful, precious, and exemplary. M.El./t.l.f.

T he I nterpretation of M yths : N ineteenth and T wentieth - C entury T heories If we fail to trace its outline clearly at the outset, the subject we discuss here risks either being merely a collection of rather curious interpretations accepted in their own periods, or else getting lost in the underbrush of the most varied hermeneutic enterprises. There are two indispensable points of reference. We must, first of all, distinguish interpretation from exegesis. We will define the latter as a culture's inces­ sant but immediate commentary on its own symbolism and practices, its most familiar stories. There is no living tradition without the accompanying murmur of its exegesis of itself. Interpretation, on the other hand, begins when there is some distance and perspective on the discourse of a tradition

I N T E K T R E I A T ION

OE

M Y TH S

based on memory. Its starting point is probably, as Todorov suggests, the inadequacy of the immediate meaning, but there is also the discrepancy between one text and another, from which the strangeness of the first can become evident. For, in the work of interpretation, it is the prefix inter of the Latin word interpretatio that designates the space of deploy­ ment of hermeneutic activity. In the Western tradition, from the Greeks to ourselves by way of the Romans and the Renaissance, the first hermeneutics appears in the gap opened up by what a new form of thought decided to call muthos, thus inaugurating a new form of otherness which makes one text the mythologist of the next. But this inter­ pretive path required one more marker to give it its definitive orientation. From Xenophanes and Theagenes in the sixth century n.c. to Philo and Augustine, hermeneutics took as its privileged object the body of histories that a society entrusts to its memory, what today we call a mythology. But the play of allegory often based itself on nothing more than a name, a word, or a fragment of a text, on which it could graft the bourgeoning symbolism whose discourse became all the more triumphant when, with the affirmation of Christian doctrine, the certainty of possessing the truth unleashed the audacities of a hermeneutics like that of the City of Cod. It is only with Spinoza—as Todorov has recently stated— that a theory of interpretation takes shape on which our modern readings still largely depend. It was he who formulated rules whose mere application was enough to uncover the truth of a meaning, inside the text and within the bounds of a work. But before it could become philology in the nineteenth century, this theory of interpretation, which Spinoza applied to Scripture, still needed the presence of a cultural object with a clearly defined shape—mythology— understood as a discourse that is other, with its own distinctive traits. Within these limits and for both of these reasons, an archaeology of theories of the interpretation of myth can restrict itself to the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Travel accounts since Jean de Léry have traced an axis of otherness whose two poles are the savage and the civilized, between which the Greeks serve as mediator. It is the exemplary values of Greece that are evoked, in good Renais­ sance style, and Lafitau (1724)— while orienting it toward a deciphering of the present by the past—was merely to systematize the path already beaten, throughout the seven­ teenth century, by Yves d'Évreaux, Du Tertre, Lescarbot, and Brébeuf. One of the best understood differences—the impor­ tance of which has been shown by Michel de Certeau— is that between nakedness and clothing. The detour via the Greeks allows the naked body, which a purely and simply Christian education leads one to reject as belonging to paganism and noncivilization, to be made an object of pleasure, and it may also allow the surprise of a return to oneself. Savages are so handsome that they can only be virtuous. And men's stature, the proportion of their limbs, their nakedness in the midst of the forests, in the beauty of a nature not yet offended by civilization, remind most of these voyagers of the lineaments of Greek statues and the natural privilege which distinguished, in their eyes, the heroes of Homer and Plutarch. As a Jesuit father wrote in 1694, "We see in savages the beautiful remains of a human nature that is completely corrupted in civilized peoples." Nothing could be more like an American savage than a Greek of Homeric times. But this splendid animal, whose develop­ ment has known no obstacles, whose body is not deformed by labor, evokes the citizen of Sparta or the contemporary of the Trojan war only on the moral and physical level. There is no meeting on an intellectual level; all that the travelers of

5

I N T R O D U C T I O N

the seventeenth century expected from savages was that they bear witness to a natural religion of which they were the last trustees. Never, it seems, is the mythology of Homer or Plutarch compared with the stories of these first peoples of nature. One reason is probably that classical mythology, thoroughly moralized, had by then been integrated into a culture dominated by belles lettres. Myths would remain masked as long as they were not assigned their own space. The nineteenth century saw the discovery of language as the object of a comparative grammar and a renewed philology. In this linguistic space, which is to the highest degree that of the sounds of language, mythical discourse suddenly appeared. It did so in the modality of scandal, which would feed the passionate discussions and theories of two rival schools of the second half of the nineteenth century: the school of comparative mythology, and the anthropological school. As the Sanskritist and comparative grammarian Max Müller wrote, “The Greeks attribute to their gods things that would make the most savage of the Redskins shudder.” Comparison defines the nature of the scandal. It is as if it were suddenly discovered that the mythology of Homer and Plutarch was full of adultery, incest, murder, cruelty, and even cannibalism. The violence of these stories, which seemed to reveal themselves brutally as "savage and absurd,” appeared all the more unbearable since they were being read at the same time as the stories of distant lands, lands that colonial ethnography was both inventorying and beginning to exploit. The scandal was not that the people of nature told savage stories, but rather that the Greeks could have spoken this same savage language. For in the nineteenth century all that was Greek was privileged. The romantics and then Hegel affirmed this enthusiastically. It was in Greece, they said, that Man began to be himself; it was Greek thought that opened up the path leading from natural consciousness to philosophical con­ sciousness; the Greek people were believed to have been the first to have attained "the uttermost limits of civiliza­ tion," in the words of a contemporary of Max Müller, the anthropologist Andrew Lang. From the moment that the mythology of Greece could resemble the language spoken by "a mind struck temporarily insane" (Lang), neither our reason nor our thought is definitively safe from an unfore­ seeable return of the irrational element which, the voice of the savages teaches us, is buried at the very heart of those stories that once seemed so familiar. The mythology that is subjected to the trial of interpreta­ tion is, primarily, nothing but an absurd, crazy form of speech which must be gotten rid of as quickly as possible by assigning it an origin or finding an explanation to justify its oddness. On this point. Max Müller and Andrew Lang are in full agreement. Their divergence appears from the time when the presence of those insane statements at the heart of language and in mythic discourse has to be justified. For Max Müller, a contemporary of the discovery of comparative grammar, the only possible explanation was a linguistic one. And his Science of Language argues that a stratigraphy of human speech reveals a mythopoeic phase in the history of language. Since 1816, when Franz Bopp published the first comparative grammar, language had been understood as a set of sounds independent of the letters that allow them to be transcribed; a system of sonorities, animated with its own life, endowed with continual activity and traversed by the dynamism of inflection. In the history of language, after what is called a thematic stage, in which terms expressing the most necessary ideas are forged, and what is called a dialectal stage, in which grammar definitively receives its specific 6

traits, an age begins that Max Müller designates as mytho­ poeic, in which myths make their appearance in very specific circumstances. At the beginning of its history, humanity possessed the faculty of uttering words directly expressing part of the substance of objects perceived by the senses. In other words, things awakened sounds in humans which became roots and engendered phonetic types. Humans "resonated" at the world, and thus had the privilege of "giving articulated expression to the conceptions of reason." As soon as the individual lost the privilege of emitting sounds at the spec­ tacle of the world, a strange disease fell upon language: words like "night, day, morning, evening" produced strange illusions to which the human mind immediately fell victim. For as long as humans remain sensitive to the meanings of words, these first sonic beings are conceived of as powers, endowed with will, and marked by sexual traits, though the physical character of the natural phenomena designated by the words is not forgotten. As soon as the double meaning becomes confused, the names of the forces of nature break free: they become proper names, and from a spontaneous expression like "the sky rains," a myth abruptly emerges based on "Zeus makes the rain fall." There is an excess of meaning at the source of mythopoeic creation, an uncon­ trolled surplus of signification, which tricks the speaker, prey to the illusions of a language within which the play of these "substantive verbs" produces, in a burgeoning of images, the strange and often scandalous discourse of myths. To this theory, which based the metaphors of language on natural phenomena and declared that a good mythologist should possess a "deep feeling for nature," without which linguistic knowledge is futile, the anthropological school immediately objected that comparative grammarians seemed to have forgotten somewhere along the way that "the Redskins, the Australians, and the lower races of South America" continued even today, in the forests and savannas, to tell the same savage tales, which can hardly be explained as the unwonted result of a few misunderstood phrases. The road the anthropological school would follow led in the opposite direction from that of the grammarians. It was no longer the past or origins that were to explain the present, but rather the mythology of contemporary savages that could account for the "savage" stories of the past. And Lang attempted to show that what shocks us in the mythology of civilized peoples is the residue of a state of thought once prevailing in all humanity. In contemporary primitives we can see the power of this state of thought as well as its coherence. At the same time, anthropologists began to investigate these gross products of the primitive human mind and to discover that things which to our eyes seem monstrous and irrational were accepted as ordinary events in everyday life. They soon came to the conclusion that whatever seems irrational in civilized mythologies (the Greco-Roman world, or India) forms part of an order of things that is accepted and considered rational by contem­ porary savages. This position led to two orientations, which anthropology attempted to explore in parallel. For the first, which leads from Frazer to Lévy-Bruhl, mythology remains the discourse of madness or mental deficiency. In 1909, before he pub­ lished the thousands of pages of The Golden Bough, the prolegomena to a history of the tragic errors of a humanity led astray by magic, James George Frazer wrote a small book {Psyche's Task) in which he asked how folly could turn to wisdom, how a false opinion could lead to "good conduct." And at the center of his reflection Frazer places a paradox:

THE

p rim itiv e seem s

s u p e r s titio n s

d e sira b le

to

w e re

us

in

th e

fo u n d a tio n

s o c ie ty :

o rd er,

of w hat

p ro p e rty ,

now

fa m ily ,

r e s p e c t f o r l if e . P r e j u d i c e a n d s u p e r s t i t i o n in f a c t s e r v e d

to

s tr e n g th e n re s p e c t fo r a u th o r ity a n d th u s c o n tr ib u te d to th e r u l e o f o r d e r , t h e c o n d i t i o n o f a ll s o c i a l p r o g r e s s . F r a z e r h a d

I N T E R P R E T A T I O N

OF

MY TH S

e t h n o g r a p h e r , o n c e in tr o d u c e d i n to th is p o l y s y m b o l ic w o r l d , is i n s e r i o u s d a n g e r o f " h a v i n g n o t h i n g m o r e t o s a y a b o u t D ogon

s o c ie ty

th a n

th e

D ogon

say

th e m se lv e s "

(P ie rre

S m ith , 1 9 7 3 ). ' In

1903,

b e fo re

F razer an d

L é v y -B ru h l

had

begun

th e ir

g i v e n h u n d r e d s o f e x a m p l e s in h i s a l r e a d y p u b l i s h e d w o r k s ,

in v e s ti g a t i o n s , M a rc e l M a u s s , fo llo w in g th e F r e n c h s o c io lo g ­

a n d in t h i s s l i m v o l u m e h e is n o l e s s e n t h u s i a s t i c a n a d m i r e r

ical s c h o o l,

o f th e c o n d u c t o f th e s o n -in -la w

G e o rg e s

in a p r i m i t i v e s o c i e t y w h o

a v o i d s s p e a k i n g to o r b e i n g a l o n e w ith s u rro u n d in g

h e r w ith

ta b o o s ,

as

h is m o th e r-in -la w ,

if t h e s e

p e o p le ,

not yet

set

fo rth

D u m é z il

in a

w o u ld

fe w one

pages a day

p ro g ram

p ro v e

to

be

o f w h ic h th e

m a s te r

c r a f t s m a n . T h r e e p o i n t s s e e m e s s e n t ia l . 1. T o d e t e r m i n e th e m e c h a n is m o f th e fo rm a tio n o f m y th s m e a n s to s e e k s o m e o f

c a p a b l e o f e l a b o r a t i n g a t h o u g h t - o u t s e t o f l a w s , s ti ll h a d a

t h e l a w s o f t h e m e n t a l a c t i v i t y o f m a n in s o c i e t y . 2 . M y t h o l ­

sense

og y can be red u ced

th a t

an

in tim a te

c o n v e r s a tio n

b e tw e e n

th e se

tw o

to a s m a ll n u m b e r o f m y th s , a n d e a c h

p e o p le c o u ld e a s ily d e g e n e r a t e in to s o m e t h in g w o r s e , a n d

t y p e is m a d e u p o f a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f c o m b i n a t i o n s . 3 . T h e

th a t th e b e s t w a y to p r e v e n t th is fro m h a p p e n i n g w a s to r a is e

a p p a r e n t i l l o g i c a l i t y o f a m y t h i c n a r r a t i v e is i t s e l f t h e s i g n o f

a s o l i d w a ll o f e t i q u e t t e b e t w e e n t h e m . W i t h o u t k n o w i n g i t ,

its d i s t in c ti v e

a n d a lm o s t re lu c ta n tly , p rim itiv e t h o u g h t , e v e n

c o lla b o r a to r , m y th s a r e s o c ia l i n s titu tio n s , th a t is, w a y s o f

o b s tin a te

e rro rs,

p re p a re d

th e

w ay

fo r

th e

in i t s m o s t

tr iu m p h s

of

m o ra lity a n d c iv iliz a tio n . F o r L u cie n

Les fonctions men­

L é v y -B r u h l, w h o p u b lis h e d

tales dans les sociétés inférieures

in

d iffe re d

m e n ta l

fro m

o u rs

in

th e ir

1910,

p rim itiv e

s o c ie tie s

o r g a n iz a tio n :

th e ir

a c tin g

and

lis h e d

and,

o rg a n iz e d

lo g ic .

For M au ss,

th in k in g as

w h ic h

it w e r e ,

p a tte r n

of

D u r k h e i m 's

in d iv id u a ls

read y

id e a s

to

hand;

and

nephew

fin d

a lre a d y

th e y

b e h a v io rs

fo rm

w h ic h

and

e s ta b ­ a

f u l ly

im p o s e s

i t s e l f m o r e o r l e s s f o r c e f u l l y o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l s i n s c r i b e d in a s o c i e t y . M y t h is a b o v e a ll

obligatory

in n a t u r e ; it d o e s n o t e x i s t

t h o u g h t , c o n s t i t u t e d d i f f e r e n t l y f r o m o u r o w n , is m y s t i c a l in

u n l e s s t h e r e is a s o r t o f n e c e s s i t y t o r e a c h a g r e e m e n t o n t h e

n a t u r e ; it is r u l e d b y a " l a w

t h e m e s th a t a r e its r a w m a t e r i a l a n d o n th e w a y t h e s e t h e m e s

o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n " t h a t m a k e s it

in d iffe re n t to th e lo g ic o f n o n c o n tr a d ic tio n o n w h ic h o u r o w n

a re

s y s t e m o f t h o u g h t is b a s e d . L é v y - B r u h l f i n d s t h e c h a r a c t e r ­

gro u p

is tic s o f p r im itiv e t h o u g h t , w h ic h s u r r e n d e r s its e lf to a ff e c -

t o t a l e x p r e s s i o n i n it.

tiv ity a n d to w h a t h e c a lls " m y s t i c i s m ," a m o n g b o th s c h i z o ­ p h re n ic s a n d and

c h i l d r e n , w h o a l s o t h i n k in a n a f f e c t i v e w a y

e s ta b lis h

c o m m o n a litie s

b e tw e e n

th in g s

and

b e in g s

p a tte rn e d .

But

th e

its e lf , w h ic h

co n stra in t

com es

s o le ly

fro m

th e

t e l l s t h e m y t h b e c a u s e it f i n d s i t s o w n

A s y m b o l t h r o u g h w h ic h s o c ie t y t h in k s its e lf , m y th o lo g y i n f o r m s e x p e r i e n c e , o r d e r s r itu a l a n d th e e c o n o m y , a n d g i v e s a r c h a ic

s o c ie tie s

th e ir

c a te g o r ie s

and

c la s sifica to rv

fra m e ­

w h o s e m u t u a l d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s is o b v i o u s t o t h e i n t e l l i g e n c e o f

w o rk s . F o r th e D u rk h e im ia n s c h o o l, m y th s — w h ic h , in c id e n ­

a c iv iliz e d a d u lt . L é v y -B r u h l w o u l d i n c r e a s in g ly i d e n tif y th is

t a ll y , a r e h a r d l y m e n t i o n e d

" p re lo g ic a l"

th e

s ta g e

w ith

L e e u w , w h o e x te n d e d

" m y s t i c e x p e r i e n c e ,"

and

V an d e r

h is a n a ly s is , w o u ld try to s h o w

th a t

p r i m i t i v e t h o u g h t s u r v i v e s in e v e r y h u m a n m i n d , t h a t it is a

sam e

ord er

as

Année sociologique—

in t h e

lan g u ag e,

"a

p ro p e rty

of

a re of

w h ic h

p r o p r i e t o r is u n c o n s c i o u s " ; a n d , i n s e p a r a b l e fr o m

th e

th is , ju s t

a s a la n g u a g e c o n tin u e s to b e a r c e n tu r ie s -o ld v o c a b u la ry a n d

c o m p o n e n t o f a ll f o r m s o f r e a s o n , a n i n d i s p e n s a b l e e l e m e n t

s y n t a x , m y th o lo g y im p lie s a c e r ta in tra d itio n a l w a y o f p e r ­

w h ose

c e i v i n g , a n a l y z i n g , c o o r d i n a t i n g . T h e a n a l o g y is e v e n m o r e

s y m b o lic

lo a d

and

im a g e -m a k in g

pow er

h e lp

to

b a l a n c e th e c o n c e p t u a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f o u r t h o u g h t . In th e

p r e c i s e : l ik e l a n g u a g e , m y t h o l o g y is t r a d i t i o n i t s e l f , it is t h e

Notebooks,

w h ic h w e r e p u b lis h e d a f t e r h is d e a t h , L é v y -B r u h l

s y m b o lic s y s te m th a t p e rm its c o m m u n ic a tio n b e y o n d w o rd s ;

f o u n d it n e c e s s a r y t o r e v i s e h i s p o s i t i o n o n t h e m e n t a l a n d

it is t h e h i s t o r i c a l u n c o n s c i o u s o f t h e s o c i e t y . In t h i s p e r s p e c ­

in te lle c tu a l g a p

b e tw e e n

o u rse lv e s a n d

w o r k , in p r o f o u n d a c c o r d

w ith

" s a v a g e s ."

(la pensée

t o d a y to b e p a r t o f a f e n c in g in o f s a v a g e t h o u g h t

savage),

B u t h is

th a t o f F r a z e r, s e e m s to u s

c o n f i n i n g it i n t h e p r e l o g i c a l a n d t h u s a v o i d i n g a n y

c o n ta m in a tio n w h ic h m ig h t th r e a te n o u r o w n r e a s o n . w e r e in te r n in g p r im itiv e th o u g h t , o t h e r s w e r e s e tt in g o u t o n to

A fric a a n d

O ce a n ia , a n d

th e

im p o rta n ce

th a t

lin k s

o f m y th s

th e m

to

so w e re

d i s c o v e r in g , a liv e a n d f u n c tio n in g , th e ra tio n a lity o f a fo rm o f t h o u g h t t h a t o p e r a t e s th r o u g h a n d in m y th — a r a t io n a li t y

som e

of

th e

fu n d a m e n ta l

d e fe n d e d

th e

th e s is

m e n ta lity a re

th a t

i n d i s p e n s a b l e f u n c t i o n in t h e s e s i m p l e r c u l t u r e s . R e v e a l i n g a

L o u is

G e r n e t,

m e n ta l

w ith

w ho its

d e v e lo p e d

le g e n d s

a

and

fra m e s o f th o u g h t,

th e

m in e

m y th ic

of

d a ily

l if e .

W hen

c o s m o lo g y ,

M arcel

w ith

its

m i n d 's

G ria u le

a s to n is h in g

th e re c o u ld

no

p a rts

a c tiv ity

of

la rg e

of in

our

ow n

nu m b er of

m a te ria l

ta le s

in

w ere

w h ic h

r itu a l

th e

e m o tio n s B e h in d

d an ces

im a g in a tiv e s c h e m a s e m e r g e d

For

a n a ly s is

th e

of

S in o lo g is t

l a n g u a g e to th e fu n d a ­

m y th o lo g y

p ro v id e d

a n c ie n t f e s tiv a ls w e r e r e c o r d e d .

D ogon

com m on

e le m e n t

s o c io lo g ic a l

m y th s . fro m

m y th s c o d ify th e b e lie fs , fo u n d th e m o r a l r u le s , a n d d e t e r ­ th e

th e

th o s e o f a

d i s t in c ti v e r e a lity , g u a r a n t e e i n g th e e f f e c ti v e n e s s o f w o r s h ip , p r a c tic e

of

c o n sid e ra b le

s ti ll i d e n t i c a l t o

re lig io n

b ack

th e

s o c i e t i e s c a l l e d p r i m i t i v e . B u t it w a s f i r s t M a r c e l G r a n e t , t h e n

G r a n e t, a t te m p t i n g to p r o c e e d

ev ery

a r c h a ic

It w a s M a u s s o n c e a g a i n w h o , a g a i n s t L é v y - B r u h l , i n 1 9 2 3

g r e a t l i v i n g m y t h o l o g i e s o f t h e P a c i f i c o r t h e S u d a n fu lfill a n

a r c h ite c tu r e s o f s y m b o lic c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s ,

fro m

m o st

la w s

d iffe re n t fro m o u r o w n , b u t n o le s s i m p r e s s iv e fo r th a t. T h e

b ro u g h t

d e riv e s

th e

l a n g u a g e , in t h a t d o m a i n w h e r e s o c i o l o g y h o p e d t o d i s c o v e r s o c ie ty .

A t th e v e r y m o m e n t w h e n th e s e a r m c h a ir a n th r o p o lo g is ts v o y a g e s o f d isco v e ry

tiv e ,

n a tu re

and

o f th e

C h in e s e

c h a ra c te ris tic o f

th e le g e n d a r y a n d

d ra m a s

th a t im p o s e d

fro m

w h ic h

th e m se lv e s on

th e m in d a n d o n a c ti o n . F a r th e r a l o n g , s o c ia l c o n t e x ts a n d

lo n g e r b e a n y d o u b t th a t m y th o lo g y w a s in d e e d th e k e y s to n e

g r e a t te c h n ic a l fe a ts th a t c r y s ta lliz e

o f a r c h a i c s o c i e t i e s , t h e i n d i s p e n s a b l e h o r i z o n o f a ll c u l t u r a l

im a g in a r y o r d e r c o u ld b e g l im p s e d . F o r th e H e lle n is t G e r n e t,

phenom ena

in a b r e a k w i t h

and

o f th e

w h o le

p a tte r n

in

w h ic h

s o c ie ty

is

th e e s ta b lis h e d

th e p r o d u c tio n s o f th e

p o s itiv is t h is to r y

th a t w a s

o r g a n i z e d . M y th s n o t o n ly c o n s t i tu t e th e s p iritu a l a r m a t u r e

c o n te n t to n o te th e g r a tu ito u s p la y o f th e im a g in a ry , m y th s

of

re v e a l a s o c ia l u n c o n s c io u s . J u s t a s s e m a n ti c a n a ly s is g iv e s

hum an

liv e s ;

m e t a p h y s ic s ."

th e y

F o r th e

a re

b earers

first tim e ,

of

th e n ,

a

re a l

"th e o re tica l

m y th s c a m e

to

be

access

to

th e

g reat

s o c ia l

fact

of

la n g u a g e ,

th e

s tu d y

of

s tu d i e d in t h e ir e n t ir e t y , a s t u d y in w h ic h e v e r y d e t a il , e v e n

le g e n d s a n d o f c e rta in m y th ic th e m e s a llo w s o n e to g o b a ck

t h e m o s t i n s i g n i f i c a n t , f o u n d i t s p l a c e in a h o l i s t i c i n t e r p r e ­

to tr a n s p a r e n t o r e x p lic it s o c ia l p r a c ti c e s . T h e m y th ic i m a g e

ta tio n ,

th u s o ffe rs th e m o st c o n v e n ie n t m e a n s o f a c c e s s ,

an

in te rp re ta tio n

so

rich ,

so

e x h a u stiv e ,

th a t

th e

n o t to a

7

I N T R O D U C T I O N t im e le s s m e m o r y , b u t to a r c h a ic b e h a v i o r s a n d s o c ia l a c ti o n s

r e t u r n t o m y t h a n d t h e r e l i g i o u s ; b u t in s e e i n g b o t h o f t h e s e

a n d — g o i n g fa r b e y o n d th e s o c ia l d a t a th a t h a v e , a s G e r n e t

a s m e r e l y th e v is ib le tip o f th e ic e b e r g o f th e " U n c o n s c i o u s ,"

p u t s i t,

f o r g e t t i n g t h a t a n a l y t i c a l s p a c e i s t h a t o f f r e e a s s o c i a t i o n , it

"a

d ire c t re la tio n

to m y th ” — to f u n d a m e n ta l p h e ­

n o m e n a o f m e n t a l l if e , t h o s e t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h e m o s t g e n e r a l

has con d em n ed

fo rm s o f th o u g h t.

b o lic a n d o b s e s s iv e re p e titio n o f a fe w u n c o n s c io u s r e p r e s e n ­

T h e s p e c i f i c i t y o f t h e G r e e k s p o i n t e d G e r n e t in y e t a n o t h e r d i r e c t i o n . M y t h s , in t h e i r f r a g m e n t s , s h i n i n g s p l i n t e r s , o f f e r

m y th o lo g y

to b e in g n o th in g b u t th e s y m ­

ta tio n s c e n t e r e d o n s e x u a lity . It w a s in t h e d i r e c t i o n o p e n e d u p b y M a u s s i a n s o c i o l o g y

n o t o n ly th e p r e h is to r ic b e h a v io r s th a t w e r e th e ir r e a s o n fo r

t h a t t h e o r e t i c a l w o r k o n m y t h b e c a m e i n v o l v e d in t h e f i r s t

b e in g ; th e y

s tru c tu ra l

th in k in g ,

a r e a t th e s a m e

w hose

tim e

c a te g o r ie s ,

p a rt o f a g lo b a l w a y o f

c la s s i f i c a t io n s ,

p re co n ce p tu a '

a n a ly s e s .

m y th o lo g y

R e su m in g

th a t h a d b e e n

th e

w reck ed

p ro je c t

o f c o m p a r a tiv e

b y th e e x c e s s e s o f M a x

m o d e l s e x e r t a m a j o r i n f l u e n c e o n p o s i t i v e t h o u g h t a n d i ts

M ü lle r

v a r io u s

d e c is iv e d is c o v e r y , f o u n d e d th e c o m p a r a t iv e s tu d y o f In d o -

ad van ces.

Thus

G e rn e t,

s ta r tin g

fro m

a

s e rie s

of

and

h is

d is c ip le s ,

tr a d itio n s a b o u t t y p e s o f p r e c io u s o b je c ts , a t te m p t s to s h o w

E u ro p e a n

h o w m o n e y a n d th e e c o n o m y e m e r g e fro m a s e t o f b e h a v io rs

c o n c o rd a n c e s b e tw e e n

G eo rg es

r e lig io n s b y c e a s in g

D u m é z il,

to re ly

on

th an k s

p u re ly

to

a

l in g u is tic

d iv in e n a m e s a n d a d o p tin g in ste a d

lin k e d to th e m y th ic a l n o tio n o f v a l u e — a n o tio n th a t in v o lv e s

th e m o r e s o lid b a s e o f a r t ic u la t e d s e ts o f c o n c e p t s . A fa c tu a l

d o m a in s w h ic h , th o u g h s e p a r a te n o w a d a y s , u s e d to o v e rla p

d i s c o v e r y — in R o m e , t h e t h r e e

flamines majores c o r r e s p o n d i n g

o r m e r g e t o g e th e r : th e r e lig io u s , th e p o litic a l, t h e a e s th e t ic ,

to th e J u p i te r - M a r s -Q u ir i n u s tr ia d ; in I r a n , th e t r ip a r titio n o f

th e j u r id ic a l.

s o c ia l c la s s e s — o p e n e d

s y s te m

M y th o lo g y

is t h u s

p a rt o f a

g lo b a l re lig io u s

t h a t is s y m b o l i c in c h a r a c t e r , w i t h a w e b o f m u l t i c o r ­

resp o n d en ces p o litic a l

fro m

th o u g h t

w h ic h

w ill

la w ,

e m erg e

p h ilo s o p h y , and

h isto ry ,

b ecom e

th e w a y to s tr u c tu r a l a n a ly s is o f th e

I n d o -E u r o p e a n w o r ld : th e tr ip a r tite s c h e m a w a s a n e s s e n tia l

and

s t r u c t u r e in t h e t h o u g h t o f t h e I n d o - E u r o p e a n s . E v e r y o r g a ­

p ro g re s siv e ly

n i z e d s o c i e t y is b a s e d o n t h e c o l l a b o r a t i o n o f t h r e e d i s t i n c t

d is tin c t. B u t s in c e G e r n e t t h o u g h t o f m y th s a s ra w m a te ria l

b u t c o m p le m e n ta ry

fu n ctio n s : s o v e r e ig n ty ,

m a rtia l p o w e r,

f o r t h e t h o u g h t t h a t a r o s e w i t h a n d in t h e G r e e k c i t y , in t h e

fe c u n d ity .

s p a c e o f t h e p o l i s , h e e x a m i n e d t h e m y t h i c e l e m e n t o n l y in

w e ig h te d tria d , w ith in w h ic h th e S o v e r e ig n , th e W a rrio r, a n d

t e r m s o f w h a t w a s b e y o n d i t, in a b r e a k w i t h i ts o w n n a t u r e

th e g r o u p o f d iv in itie s w h o p r e s id e o v e r fe c u n d ity m u tu a lly

a n d its f u n c t i o n i n g . B y f a i l i n g t o s e p a r a t e m y t h o l o g y e i t h e r

d e fin e o n e a n o th e r. S in c e th e re w a s n e v e r a n y q u e stio n o f

P a ra lle l

th is ,

th e

fo rm

f u n c tio n a lly

rep ro d u cin g

D u m é z il h a d to u s e p r e c is e a n d s y s te m a tic c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s

lo s in g s ig h t o f th e v e r y o b je c t th a t s e e m e d

to t r a c e a g r o u n d p la n o f th e c h o s e n m y th o r r itu a l, i n d ic a t­

M ore tw e e n

s e rio u s ,

c e rta in ly ,

F re u d ia n

p ro b le m a tic , w h ic h

seem s

in

h is le tte r to

m is u n d e r s ta n d in g

and

th e

to g iv e a c c e s s

in m y t h .

b e­

a n th ro p o lo g ica l to a

fo rm

o f th e

In h i s s e l f - a n a l y s i s , a s r e ­

F lie ss o f O c to b e r

15,

1897,

Freud

d i s c o v e r s t h a t h i s l ib i d o a w o k e b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f t w o a n d tw o a n d a h a lf, a n d tu rn e d to w a r d

matrem

(c o n f e s s o r s ' L a tin

fo r th e n a m e o f th e m o th e r ) . F r e u d r e f e r s th is d e s i r e fo r th e m o th e r to a G re e k tra g e d y , c u ltu ra l a n d

Oedipus the King,

p a ra d ig m a tic . T h e

m y th

or

r itu a l,

i n g i ts a r t i c u l a t i o n s , i ts i n t e n t i o n s , i ts l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a t i o n s , th e

p s y c h o a n a ly s is

u n c o n s c io u s in s c rib e d c o u n te d

w as

In d o -E u ro p e a n

a

fro m l a n g u a g e o r fro m th e in s titu tio n a l s y s te m , th e s o c io lo g ­

b e e n r e c o g n iz e d a n d le g itim a te d .

d e fin ite ly

gods

ic a l m o d e l o f m y t h c u l m i n a t e d in t h e p a r a d o x o f s o m e t i m e s f i n a ll y t o h a v e

a

to

first t h in g

a re fe re n c e b o th th a t S o p h o c le s '

a n d t h e n , o n th e b a s is o f th is s c h e m a t ic fig u r e , p r o j e c te d in to p re h isto ry ,

try

p la c e s : In d ia n

to c h a r a c te r iz e

m y th , R o m a n

V e d i c r i t u a l in r e l a t i o n g io n s a re

w h o le

th e d iv e rg e n t e v o lu tio n s

m y th , S c a n d in a v ia n

m y th , o r

to th e L a tin r ite . F o r D u m é z il, re li­

p a t t e r n s in w h i c h

a c tio n s a r e a rtic u la te d a n d

c o n ce p ts,

im a g e s , a n d

w h o s e in te rc o n n e c tio n s m a k e a

s o r t o f n e t in w h i c h , b y r i g h t s , t h e e n t i r e m a t e r i a l o f h u m a n e x p e r i e n c e s h o u ld fin d its d is tr ib u tio n . B y f o c u s in g h is e x a m in a tio n o n th e c o n c e p t a n d o n o r g a ­

O e d i p u s g i v e s F r e u d is a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h i m s e l f —

n iz e d

b u t th e c h o ic e o f a G re e k p a ra d ig m

h isto ry

a lre a d y a n n o u n c e s th e

to

w h i c h h a v e l e d t o a n a l o g o u s a n d d i v e r s e r e s u l t s in d i f f e r e n t

p a tte rn s ,

D u m é z il

o f re lig io n s

ra d ic a lly

th a t

th o u g h t

p a rts in

com p an y

te rm s

w ith

a

o f g e n e s is an d

u n iv e rs a l c h a r a c t e r o f F r e u d 's d is c o v e r y o f th e h e a r t o f th e

a f f e c t i v i t y . F o r h i s t o r i a n s l ik e H . J . R o s e a n d H . W a g e n v o o r t ,

like

a ll r e l i g i o n i s r o o t e d in t h e s e n s e o f t h e " n u m i n o u s " t h a t t h e

m a tte r .

The

e a rly

Oedipus,

sh ifts

m a rry in g

h is

h y p o th e s is ,

to w a rd

m o th e r

th e

th a t

l i t t le

F re u d ia n

S ig m u n d

th e sis

th a t

is

O e d ip u s

must have been the same as ourselves.

W h i l e F r e u d ' s e n t e r p r i s e , b y s h o w i n g t h a t t h e r e is n o e s s e n ­ t ia l

d iffe re n ce

b e tw e e n

th e

m e n ta lly

ill

p e rso n

and

th e

hum an

race

e x p e rie n ce s

s p o n ta n e o u s ly

w hen

c o n fro n tin g

t h e p h e n o m e n a o f n a t u r e : t h e r e is n o d i v i n e p o w e r w h o w a s not

first

fo rce ,

one

of

d iffu se d

numina,

th e se

in

th e

n a tu ra l

in

w h ic h

w o rld ,

m a g ic o -r e lig io u s

is c o n c e n t r a t e d .

For

D u m é z il, b y c o n t r a s t ,

th e o b s e r v e r n e v e r r e a c h e s iso la te d

L é v y - B r u h l , it d o e s a s s u m e , f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g , a s e g r e g a ­

fa c ts ,

not

tio n o f G r e e k m y th s fr o m t h o s e o f o t h e r p e o p l e s . F o r F r e u d ,

e m o t i o n a l i t y . It is in t h e i r m u t u a l r e l a t i o n s t h a t t h e v a r i o u s

Oedipus the King

e le m e n ts c a n

h e a lth y p e r s o n , s e e m s to in v e r t th e s e p a r a tio n

m ark ed

by

s till e x c i t e s u s a n d e x e r t s a p r o f o u n d e f f e c t

o n u s b e c a u s e e v e r y m a n , a lw a y s a n d e v e r y w h e r e , fe e ls lo v e fo r h is m o th e r a n d je a lo u s y o f h is fa th e r; a n d fro m

th e d a y

F r e u d first a d o p t e d th is v ie w , th e G r e e k m y th w a s i n v e s te d

and

r e lig io n

is

hum an

fo rm

be a p p re h e n d e d , an d

v i r tu a lly o r in a c ti o n , a a c tio n

p a rtic u la r

a

th a t

ty p e

th o u g h t

on

le v e l.

re lig io u s

e v e r y o n e h a s e x p e r i e n c e d i t .”

s o m e t i m e s a l m o s t u n c o n s c i o u s , p r o v i d i n g t h e fi e ld o f f o r c e s

t u r n in h i s q u e s t f o r s u c c e s s i v e p r o o f s o f t h e r e a l i t y o f t h e

o r ie n te d ;

s tru c tu re ,

e v e r y th in g

th e n

in

m y th s ,

com es

w h ic h

is a l w a y s to

be

re p re se n t

o r le ss

p re se n t,

arran g ed and

if

and

d ra m a tiz e

u n c o n s c io u s , c o m p a rin g th e d is c o u rs e o f d r e a m s a n d fa n ta ­

th e se

s ie s w ith

t u r n , in r itu a ls , w h ic h a c tu a l iz e , m o b iliz e , a n d u s e th e s a m e

th e

le g e n d s o f O ly m p u s,

w h ic h

h is s u c c e s s o r s ,

s t u b b o r n l y b u t n o t w i t h o u t f i d e li t y , w e r e t o p r o c l a i m a s t h e

f u n d a m e n ta l

e lse

w h ic h

m o re

of a

hum an

e x p lic it c o n c e p tu a l w h ic h

" f i r s t o f a ll in a

o r of

under a

s y s te m

" a n in s tin c tu a l a ttr a c tio n w h ic h e v e r y o n e r e c o g n iz e s b e c a u s e

upon

is e x p r e s s e d

o f th e w o rld

d iffe re n t le v e ls,

The

in

th e re a lw a y s re m a in s,

r e p re s e n ta tio n

fu n ctio n s each

soak ed

w ith a n e w p riv ile g e : th a t o f t r a n s l a ti n g b e t te r th a n a n y o t h e r

It w a s t o G r e e k m y t h o l o g y t h a t F r e u d w o u l d c o n t i n u e t o

g ro u p

on

of

r e la tio n s ."

in te lle c tu a l r e la tio n s h ip s ; a n d

In d e p e n d e n tly

of

th e se

g a in s

in

th e n ,

th e

in

In d o -

l a n g u a g e in w h i c h w e c a n m o s t e a s i l y r e a d t h e d r i v e s a n d

E u r o p e a n d o m a i n , D u m é z i l 's m e t h o d a f f i r m e d t h e v i r t u e s o f

w o r k s o f d e s i r e . In a s k in g fo r a n a d m i s s io n o f g u ilt w ith in

th e c o n c e p t th a t c a n

th e O e d ip a l c o n f ig u r a tio n , p s y c h o a n a ly s is in d e e d

r i t u a l . F r o m t h i s p o i n t o n , " t h e s u r e s t d e f i n i t i o n o f a g o d is

m ark s a

e q u a lly in fo rm

a m y th

o r u n d e r lie a

T H E

d iffe re n tia l,

d a s s i f ic a to r y ,"

and

th e

o b je c t

o f a n a ly s is

b e­

I N T E R P R E T A T I O N

s e n te n ce

r e la tio n s ,

th e n , a re

OF

d is tr ib u te d

on

M Y TH S

tw o a x e s: o n e

c o m e s th e a rtic u la tio n s , th e b a la n c e s , th e ty p e s o f o p p o s i­

h o r iz o n ta l, fo llo w in g th e th r e a d

tio n s

of

v e r t i c a l , in c o l u m n s , g r o u p i n g t o g e t h e r r e l a t i o n s b e l o n g i n g

g e n e s i s , D u m é z il a f firm s th e p r i m a c y o f s tr u c tu r e : th e e s s e n ­

t o t h e s a m e " b u n d l e . " It i s o n t h e l e v e l o f t h e s e b u n d l e s o f

th a t

th e

tia l p r o b l e m

god

re p re s e n ts .

A g a in s t

is n o t t o d e t e r m i n e

th e

th e

h isto ria n s

p re rise

o r ig in

o f th e

v a r io u s e l e m e n ts t h a t h a v e b e e n f itte d t o g e t h e r b u t t o a c c e p t th e

fact

of

d e cla re s,

th e

is

to

s ig n ific a tio n . th e re ,

s tru c tu re . b rin g

The

th e

It w o u l d

s tr u c tu r e

seem

t h a t it i s e n o u g h

im p o rta n t

to

th in g ,

its e lf to

f o llo w

lig h t,

th a t

to b e a tte n tiv e

to

D u m é z il w ith

i ts

s tru c tu re s th e m ,

are

to a v o id

f o r c i n g t h e m , a n d t o s h o w a l i t t l e s k ill i n d i s e n g a g i n g t h e m . T h u s it is n o t n e c e s s a r y t o c o n s t r u c t s t r u c t u r e s a s o n e w o u l d

re la tio n s th a t th e

o f th e n a r r a tiv e , th e o th e r

re a l m y th e m e s a re

lo c a te d .

A t th e s a m e

tim e , s tr u c tu r a l a n a ly s is p o s e s t w o p r in c ip le s a s e s s e n tia l to its p r a c ti c e : t h e r e is n o a u t h e n t i c v e r s i o n o f a m y th in r e la tio n to o th e r s d e fin e d shape

th a t a re

fa lse ; c o rre la tiv e ly , e v e r y

m y th

m u st be

b y th e w h o l e s e t o f its v e r s i o n s . T h e r e t h u s ta k e s

th e

p ro je c t o f o rd e rin g

a ll t h e

know n

v a r ia n ts o f a

m y th in a s e r ie s f o r m i n g a g r o u p o f p e r m u t a t i o n s . T h e n e x t s ta g e o f h is in v e s tig a tio n

( " T h e S to ry o f A s d i-

e la b o ra te a m o d e l o f th e s e t o f p r o p e r tie s a c c o u n tin g fo r a

w a l , " 1 9 5 8 ) l e d L é v i - S t r a u s s t o p r o p o s e t h a t m y t h m a k e s fu ll

g r o u p o f o b j e c t s . In a s e n s e , s t r u c t u r a l i s m is s ti ll i n t h e a g e o f

u se

h u n tin g a n d g a t h e r i n g . M y th s , fo r D u m é z il, a r e th e p riv i­

m e a n in g fu l

le g e d

co n ce p tu a l

t h a n t h a t r e q u i r e d b y n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e . In o t h e r w o r d s , m y t h

r e l a t i o n s . B u t in t h e s p i r i t o f M a u s s ' s s o c i o l o g y , t o w h i c h h e

is a m e t a l a n g u a g e a n d , m o r e p r e c is e ly , a lin k e d s e q u e n c e o f

th e a te r

th a t

m akes

v is ib le

fu n d a m e n ta l

o w e s a c u r i o s i t y f o r ''t o t a l s o c ia l f a c t s '' t h a t c a u s e s h i m e x p l o r e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a ll t h e w o r k s p r o d u c e d

to

b y th e h u ­

of

d isc o u rs e ,

but

at

o p p o s itio n s

th e

sam e

a

h ig h e r

at

tim e

s itu a te s

d eg ree

its

ow n

o f c o m p le x ity

c o n c e p t s . A t t e n t i o n w il l b e t u r n e d , t h e r e f o r e , t o r e g i s t e r i n g th e v a r io u s le v e ls o n

w h ic h

m y th

can

b e d is trib u te d . T h e

m a n m i n d , m y th s c a n n o t b e d e c i p h e r e d u n til t h e y h a v e b e e n

c u t t i n g u p o f t h e m y th i c n a r r a t iv e w h ic h in th e fir s t p h a s e

p u t b a c k in to th e to ta lity o f th e re lig io u s , s o c ia l, a n d p h ilo ­

(1 9 5 5 ) s e e m e d

s o p h i c a l life o f t h e p e o p l e s w h o h a v e p r a c t i c e d

th e m o d e l - b u il d e r , is n o w

th e m . T h e

to b e e n tr u s te d

to th e w h im

o r in g e n u ity o f

s u b je c t to te s tin g — in d is p e n s a b le

referent:

m y th o lo g y p o s ite d b y th e e a r lie r c o m p a r a t iv i s m o f F r a z e r ia n

to a ll f o r m a l a n a l y s is — in t e r m s o f t h e

in s p ir a tio n

g r a p h i c c o n t e x t ," w h ic h

th e la te r tr a n s fo rm a tio n a l o r ie n ta ­

Mythologiques

w o u ld c e a s e to p u rs u e . T h e s u r v e y ­

as

s e p a r a te

fro m

la n g u a g e ,

as

a

m o re

or

le ss

"th e e th n o ­

a u t o n o m o u s o b je c t, e n d o w e d w ith p e r m a n e n c e a n d c h o s e n

t io n o f t h e

to

i n g o f p e r t i n e n t o p p o s i t i o n s in a m y t h i c s e q u e n c e t h u s f i n d s

lo c a te

th e

com m on

th em es

E u ro p e a n s , w as referred

b ack

fo rm e d a p a rt a n d , th ro u g h

e la b o ra te d

by

th e

In d o -

to th e l a n g u a g e o f w h ic h

it

th is l a n g u a g e , to th e i d e o l o g y

The

s tru c tu ra l

a n a ly s is

d e v e lo p e d

th e

f u n d a m e n ta l

g u a ra n te e

of

its

le g itim a c y

in

p re v io u s

k n o w le d g e o f a n o r g a n iz e d s e m a n tic c o n te x t, w ith o u t w h ic h t h e m y t h is in p r i n c i p l e i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . R i t u a l p r a c t i c e s ,

t h a t g r o u n d s it a n d r u n s t h r o u g h i t. by

L é v i-S tr a u s s

w as

e s ta b lis h e d u n d e r th e s a m e k in d o f c o n d itio n s a s th e c o m ­

r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s , k i n s h i p s t r u c t u r e s : t h e w h o l e o f s o c i a l life and

s o c ia l

th o u g h t

is

c a lle d

upon

to

d e fin e

th e

l o g ic a l

p a r a tiv e a n d p h ilo lo g ic a l a n a ly s is o f th e n i n e t e e n t h c e n tu r y .

re la tio n s fu n c tio n in g w ith in a m y th , a n d a t th e s a m e tim e to

T h e g r a tu ito u s a n d in s a n e c h a r a c te r o f m y th ic d is c o u r s e w a s

e s ta b lis h th e d if f e r e n t t y p e s o f lia is o n b e t w e e n t w o o r m o r e

a g a in

th e

p o in t

of

d e p a rtu re .

For

M ax

M ü lle r

th is

w as

m y th s .

In

th e

p ro g re ssiv e

a n a ly s is

m v th s ,

s o c ia l

afte r

he

had

sh o w n

th a t

k in s h ip

r e la tio n s ,

in

a p p e a r a n c e c o n tin g e n t a n d in c o h e r e n t, c a n b e r e d u c e d to a

th e

Mythologiques

f o u r -v o lu m e

s h o c k i n g ; f o r L é v i - S t r a u s s it w a s a c h a l l e n g e . H e t o o k u p t h e c h a lle n g e

c o n tin u e s

lif e

of

to

th o s e

show w ho

(1 9 6 4 -1 9 7 1 ), r e la tio n s

te ll

th e m ,

th e

b e tw e e n and

th e

g e o g r a p h i c a l a n d t e c h n o l o g i c a l i n f r a s t r u c t u r e , b u t it d o e s n o t

s m a l l n u m b e r o f s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o s i t i o n s . If m y t h o l o g y i s t h e

r e s tr i c t its e lf to th is b a c k - a n d -f o r t h b e t w e e n l e v e ls o f s ig n ifi­

d o m a i n in w h ic h t h e m in d s e e m s to h a v e t h e m o s t f r e e d o m

c a tio n a n d a n e th n o g r a p h ic c o n te x t th a t re v e a ls th e p h ilo s o ­

to a b a n d o n its e lf to its o w n c r e a ti v e s p o n ta n e i t y , t h e n , s a y s

phy

L é v i-S tr a u s s , to p r o v e th a t, o n

i n s c r i b e d in i ts s t r u c t u r e s ' r e f e r e n c e t o a s o c i a l i n f r a s t r u c t u r e ;

th e c o n t r a r y , in m y th o lo g y

t h e m i n d i s f i x e d a n d d e t e r m i n e d in a l l o f i t s o p e r a t i o n s is t o

of

a

s o c ie ty .

The

r a th e r , th e p o s itio n

m e a n in g

th e m y th

of

a

m y th

is

no

o c c u p i e s in r e l a ti o n

lo n g e r

to o th e r

p r o v e t h a t it m u s t b e s o e v e r y w h e r e . T h e s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s

m y t h s w i t h i n a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n g r o u p is h e n c e f o r t h t h e v e c t o r

o f m y th s t h u s fin d s its p l a c e in a w id e r p r o j e c t, w h ic h a i m s

o f a n a n a ly s is th a t re v e a ls th e a u t o n o m y o f a m y th ic th o u g h t

at

a

in w h ic h e v e r y n a r r a t iv e r e f e r s b a c k in t h e first i n s t a n c e to

s tr u c tu r a l a n a l o g y b e tw e e n v a r io u s o r d e r s o f s o c ia l f a c ts a n d

a n o t h e r , p i c k i n g u p a n d o r g a n i z i n g i t s e l e m e n t s in a d i f f e r e n t

an

in v e n to ry

of

m e n ta l

c o n s tra in ts

and

p o stu la te s

w a y . J u s t a s e a c h t e r m , its e lf w it h o u t in tr i n s i c s ig n if i c a t i o n ,

la n g u a g e . T h is w h o le a p p r o a c h to m y th a p p lie s to a n e w d o m a in th e

h a s n o m e a n i n g o t h e r t h a n a p o s i t i o n a l o n e i n t h e c o n t e x t in

m e t h o d s o f a n a ly s is a n d p r in c ip le s o f d iv is io n d e v e l o p e d fo r

w h i c h it a p p e a r s t o u s , i n t h e s a m e w a y e a c h m y t h a c q u i r e s

lin g u is tic m a t e r i a ls in th e m e t h o d s t h e o r i z e d b y th e P r a g u e

a s i g n i f y i n g f u n c t i o n t h r o u g h t h e c o m b i n a t i o n s in w h i c h it is

s c h o o l a n d m o r e p a r tic u la r ly b y R o m a n Ja k o b s o n . B u t w h ile

c a l l e d u p o n b o t h t o f i g u r e a n d t o b e t r a n s f o r m e d . It i s t h e s e

m y th is a s s i m il a t e d to a l a n g u a g e f r o m

t h e o u t s e t , it is n o t

id e n tic a l e i th e r to th e w o r d s o f a te x t o r to th e s e n t e n c e o f

t r a n s f o r m a t io n s w h ic h , in t h e l a s t a n a l y s is , d e f i n e th e n a t u r e o f m y th ic th o u g h t. It

c o m m u n i c a t i v e d i s c o u r s e . M y t h o l o g y is a u s e o f l a n g u a g e in

has

b een

o b je c te d

th a t

th is

p r a c tic e

of

m y th o lo g ic a l

t h e s e c o n d d e g r e e ; it is n o t o n l y a n a r r a t i v e w i t h a n o r d i n a r y

a n a ly s is m a k e s a c h o ic e fo r s y n ta x a g a in s t s e m a n tic s ; a n d ,

lin g u is tic m e a n i n g : m y th is in l a n g u a g e a n d a t t h e s a m e tim e

l i k e w i s e , t h a t w h i l e it h a s b e e n p o s s i b l e t o a p p l y t h e p r a c t i c e

beyond

n a tu ra l la n g u a g e .

In t h e firs t s ta g e o f a n

o n g o in g

s u c c e s s f u lly to th e m y th o lo g ie s o f s o -c a lle d to te m ic s o c ie tie s ,

in v e s tig a tio n ( “ T h e S tr u c tu r a l S t u d y o f M y t h ," 1 9 5 5 ), L é v i-

s in c e th e s e a re rich

S tra u ss

in

S e m i t i c , H e l l e n i c , a n d I n d o - E u r o p e a n s o c i e t i e s f r o m i t s fi e ld

re la tio n to t h o s e o f s tr u c tu r a l lin g u is tic s . M y t h e m e s a r e b o th

o f i n te r e s t, s o r i e ti e s w h o s e m y th o lo g i c a l t h o u g h t is m a r k e d

in

th e

trie s

to

s e n te n ce

d e fin e and

th e

c o n s titu e n t

beyond

it.

In

u n its

th is

of

m y th

p e r s p e c tiv e ,

th e

by

in d a s s i f i c a t o r y

r e n e w a ls o f m e a n in g

and

by a

s t r u c t u r e s , it e x c l u d e s

s e m a n tic

ric h n e s s

th a t

c o n s t i tu e n t u n it is a v e r y s h o r t s e n t e n c e , w h ic h s u m m a r iz e s

e x c e e d s th e p o w e r s o f s tr u c tu r a l a n a ly s is . O n e c a n re p ly , o n

th e e s s e n tia l p a rt o f a s e q u e n c e a n d

th e o n e h a n d , th a t fo r th is t y p e o f a n a l y s is , w h ic h g e t s a t th e

d e n o te s a re la tio n : “ a

p r e d i c a t e a s s i g n e d t o a s u b j e c t ." B u t th is s e n t e n c e is n o t p a r t

m e a n in g s o f m y th s b y m u ltip ly in g th e fo rm a l o p e r a tio n s th a t

o f t h e e x p l i c i t n a r r a t i v e ; it i s a l r e a d y o n

a llo w u s to u n c o v e r t h e lo g ic a l f r a m e w o r k o f s e v e r a l n a r r a ­

p r e ta tio n ,

th e

p ro d u ct

of

an

a n a ly tic a l

th e o r d e r o f in te r ­ te ch n iq u e .

These

t iv e s , th e s e m a n t i c s o f m y t h s is n e c e s s a r il y e n r i c h e d t h r o u g h

9

I N T R O D U C T I O N th e

in v e n to ry in g

of

th e

s y n ta x .

On

th e

o th e r

hand,

th e

p r a c t i c e o f s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s is h a r d l y a l i e n t o o u r f a m i l i a r m y th o lo g ie s , s u c h a s th a t o f th e G r e e k s ; o n e m a y , i n d e e d , b e s u r p r is e d a t th e re m a r k a b l e s im ila r itie s b e t w e e n th e w a y th e G re e k s th e m s e lv e s th o u g h t th e ir m y th o lo g y a n d th e m e th o d u s e d b y e t h n o l o g i s t s in a p p r o a c h i n g m y t h s t o l d b y n o n l i t e r ­ a te

p e o p le s.

M ore

p e rtin e n t

a n th ro p o lo g is ts su c h

as D an

o b je c tio n s

have

com e

fro m

S p erb er, w h o d e n o u n ce s

th e

s e m i o l o g i c a l i l l u s i o n o f s t r u c t u r a l i s m a s w e ll a s t h e d i s t a n c e b e tw e e n

th e

l in g u is tic

m o d e ls

in v o k e d

and

an

in tu itiv e

p r a c t i c e w h o s e s p e c i f i c p r o c e d u r e s , u n l i m i t e d in n u m b e r a n d n a tu r e , o f fe r k n o w le d g e o f th e in te lle c tu a l o p e r a tio n s fro m w h i c h t h e s t o r i e s w e c a ll “ m y t h s " a r e w o v e n . M .D ./j .l .

BIBLIOGRAPHY The titles listed are in the order and within the limits of the problems formulated by this article. I. louoRov, Symbolisme et interpretation (Paris 1978). m . ot certeau , "Ethno graphie: L'oralité, ou l'espace de l'autre," in Léry, L'écriture de l'histoire (Paris 1975), 215-48. c,. chinard , L'Amérique et le réiv exotique dans la littérature française du X VIT au XVIII' siècle (Paris 1934). m. ni iiiwi , "Mito e Linguaggio: Da Max Müller a Claude LéviStrauss," in II Mito: Guida stonea ecrihca (2d ed., Bari and Rome 1976),

3-21 and 229-31, with bibliography, h . pinard de la boullaye , L'étude comparée des religions, 1 and 2 (Paris 1925). |. de vries , Forschungsgeschichte der Mythologie. Orbis Academicus, 1, 7 (Munich 1961). K. k Erenyi, Die Eröffnung des Zugangs zum Mythos (Darmstadt 1967). g . van der ieelvv , L'homme primitif et la religion, Étude anthropologique (Paris 1940). p. smith, "L’analyse des mythes," Diogène 82 (1973): 91-108. m . mauss. Œ uvres. V. Karady, ed., 3 vols. (Paris 1968-69). l . g ernet . Anthropologie de la Grèce antique (Paris 1968). s. c. Humphreys , "The Work of Louis Gernet," History and Theory 10, 2 (1971). |. starobinski, "Hamlet et Freud," preface to French trans, by E. Jones, Hamlet et Œdipe (Paris 1967), IX-XL. s. viderman , La construction de l'espace analytique (Paris 1970). s. hreud, "Zur Gewinnung des Feuers," in Gesammelte Werke (London 1932-39), also in English, g . deleuze and F. g ua it a ri , L anti-Œdipe (Paris 1972), "Psychanalyse et familiarisme: La sainte famille," 60-162. h . fu gier , "Quarante ans de recherches dans l'idéologie indo-européenne: La méthode de Georges Dumézil," Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuse 45 (1965): 358-74. m . MESi iN, Pour une science des religions (Paris 1973), "Psycha­ nalyse et religion," 113-38. p. smith and d . spf.rber, "Mythologiques de Georges Dumézil," Annales E .S .C ., 1971, 559-86. i .-p . vernant, "Raisons du mythe," in Mythe et société en Grèce ancienne (Paris 1974), 195-250. p. RictEUR, s.v. "Mythe (3. L'interprétation philosophique)," in Encyclopaedia Universalis (Paris 1968), 11:530-37. c l . lêvi-strauss. Structural Antlirofwlogy. 2 vols. (New York 1963, 1976), originals in French; Mythologiques. 4 vols. (Paris 1964-71), = Introduction to a Science of Mythology, 4 vols., entitled The Raw and the Cooked (New York 1969), From Honey to Ashes (London 1973), The Origin of Table Manners (New York 1978), and The Naked Man (New York 1981).

s y s te m

M yth and W riting : T he M ythographers

o f t h o u g h t f o r g o o d , a l l o w i n g o n l y f ra il r e m a i n s t o

s u r v iv e a s w itn e s s e s o f a lo s t s ta te to w h ic h o n ly tw o p o s sib le ro a d s

of access

s ti ll

re m a in :

one

is

th e

d isc o v e ry ,

by

an

a n c i e n t t r a v e l e r in a f o r g o t t e n v i l l a g e , o f a t a l e s a v e d f r o m t h e T h e w o rd

niytho-logy is

b u t o n e i n s t a n c e o f m a n y in w h i c h t h e

c o n ta m in a tio n o f w ritin g t h a n k s to a fe w n a tiv e s u n a w a r e o f

p r o x i m i t y o f m y t h a n d w r i t i n g i n e v i t a b l y r e s u l t s in a k i n d o f

t h e p r o g r e s s o f c u l t u r e ; t h e o t h e r is t h e l e s s h a z a r d o u s r o a d

v i o l e n c e , i ts v i c t i m

o f h isto rica l a n d g e o g r a p h ic a l in v e s tig a tio n

con d em n ed

a n o r ig in a l w o r d , s a c r e d

in n a t u r e a n d

t o f i x it y b y a p r o f a n e o r d e r . B e y o n d t h e w o r d s

w h ic h b y t h e ir v e r y t e x tu r e b e a r w it n e s s to th is p h e n o m e n o n (su c h a s

niythography),

G r e e k p r iv ile g e h a s h e ld f a s t. W h e n

th ro u g h

w h ic h

o n e g a in s a c c e s s to a l o n g -d e f e r r e d v is io n o f a la n d s c a p e th a t a u t h e n t i c a t e s th e n a r r a tiv e o r th e m y th s o f w h ic h

it is t h e

g u a r a n to r , th e r e c o v e re d w itn e s s .

s tr a n g e a n d u n f o r g e tta b le s to r ie s , w h ic h s o u n d e d v e r y in d e ­

W i t h i n t h i s f r a m e w o r k , t h e t r u t h o f t h e m y t h is e n c l o s e d in

p e n d e n t a n d y e t b o re o b v io u s re s e m b la n c e s to th e m y th o l­

a s p e e c h lik e n a tu r e , w h ic h w ritin g m o r e o r le s s o b lite r a te s , a t

o g y o f a n t i q u i t y , w e r e b r o u g h t t o u s f r o m a ll c o n t i n e n t s , e a r l y

tim e s b y s h a c k lin g th e fr e e d o m o f a s e lf -e x p r e s s iv e m e m o r y

a n th r o p o lo g is ts tu r n e d in s tin c tiv e ly to G r e e c e , w h e r e a few

w ith th e c o n s t r a i n ts o f a n

c e n tu r ie s e a rlie r g r e a t m in d s fro m

r u le s ; a n d a t o t h e r tim e s , m o r e o f te n th a n n o t, b y r e d u c in g

X e n o p h a n e s to A ris to tle

h a d fa c e d th e p ro b le m o f lim itin g th e d o m in io n o f m y th s a n d had

re s o lv e d

it

w ith in

th e ir

ow n

in te lle c tu a l

a c tiv ity

by

t h e m y t h 's o w n b e h a lf a n d

speech

in te rp re ta tio n

s u b je c t to fo re ig n

to s ile n c e in o r d e r to s p e a k o n its

to c o n d e m n

it t o a n

a b so lu te o th e rn e s s .

In a n

d r a w in g a b o u n d a r y a t w h ic h m y th ic a l t h o u g h t f a d e s a w a y

a t te m p t to re c tify th is d iv is io n , s tr u c tu r a l a n a ly s is i n tr o d u c e d

b e fo r e th e ra tio n a lity o f s c ie n tis ts a n d p h ilo s o p h e r s . T h e sp lit

a s u m m a r y s e p a r a tio n b e tw e e n c o ld a n d w a r m s o c ie tie s , th e

b e tw e e n th e la n d o f m y th a n d th e k in g d o m o f

logos

serv ed as

f o r m e r d e p r iv e d o f a te m p o r a l d im e n s io n , th e la tte r o p e n to

a p r e c e d e n t fo r th e d e c is io n m a d e b y T y lo r a n d h is d is c ip le s

h isto ry

t o i m p o s e a h i s t o r i c a l l im i t o n t h e r e i g n o f m y t h o l o g y o v e r

w r i t i n g f a c i l i t a t e s . T h e b o r d e r t h u s d r a w n a p p e a r e d a ll t h e

th e

m o r e d e f i n i t e a s it s e e m e d

hum an

m in d .

T h is o p p o s itio n

b e tw e e n

tw o

fo rm s o f

and

to

th e

c o n tin u a l to

re n e w a ls r e ite r a te

of

m e a n in g

th a t

th e d is tin c tio n

be­

la tte r

t w e e n o r a l a n d w r i t t e n l i t e r a t u r e , a d i s t i n c t i o n r e i n f o r c e d , if

c o n tra st

n o t ju s tifie d , b y th e d e c is io n m a d e b y th is ty p e o f a n a ly s is to

b e t w e e n r e a s o n , w h i c h u s e d a ll t h e r e s o u r c e s o f t h e w r i t t e n ,

l o o k f o r t h e e s s e n t i a l o f t h e " m y t h " n o t in t h e n a r r a t i o n b u t

an d

in t h e s t o r y t r a n s m i t t e d b y m e m o r y , a s t o r y w h o s e n a r r a t i v e

th o u g h t a n d c a n c e lin g a

th e

tw o

s ta g e s

fo rm er,

m y th o lo g ic a l

of hum an

to o k

a c tiv ity

th e

in te llig e n c e ,

fo rm

tu n e d

of to

a

th e

sh arp

th e

fa n ta sy

of

an

fo rm w a s le ft to th e d is c r e ti o n a n d t a le n t o f e a c h n a r r a t o r .

in c e s s a n t b a b b lin g . H e n c e f o r th , n e v e r th e tw a in sh a ll m e e t. F o r t h o s e p r a c tic ­

Yet

a n o th e r

issu e

a rise s ,

fo r

w h ic h

th e

G reek

m odel

tra ce s , o ra l d is ­

in s p ire s a fo rm u la tio n th a t s u g g e s ts th e p r o g r e s s iv e e m e r ­

c o u r s e h a s b e c o m e s o t o t a l l y i n a u d i b l e t h a t it is q u i t e i l l e g i b l e

g e n c e o f w r itin g in a tr a d itio n a l s o c ie ty . S in c e th e tim e E . A .

in g h is to ria n s

w ho

te n d

to

f a v o r w ritte n

w h e n e v e r it m a n i f e s t s i t s e l f a s w r i t i n g — a c o n t r i v e d w r i t i n g ,

H a v e lo c k

w h ic h m a s k s th e in c o h e r e n c e o f tr a d itio n s s u s ta in e d th r o u g h

w h ic h

m e m o ry

p r a c ti c e , c a n n o l o n g e r b e c o n s i d e r e d a n e n c l a v e o f a liv in g

b y im p o s in g a fa c titio u s o r d e r o f m y th o g r a p h ic a l

c la s s ific a tio n s . F o r o th e r s , th e G r e e k s s o t h o r o u g h ly e n s u r e d th e triu m p h o f re a s o n a n d

10

logos

th a t th e y ru in e d th e ir f o r m e r

first

M ilm a n

p u b lis h e d

h is

P arry

re c o g n iz e d

h ad

tr a d itio n th a t m a d e ro o m

s tu d ie s ,

th e

H o m e ric

a s b e lo n g in g

e p ic,

to o ra l

fo r a c u ltu re o f th e w ritte n . T h e

in tr o d u c tio n o f a n a lp h a b e tic a l w ritin g t e c h n iq u e c a u s e d n o

P R E H I S T O R I C

im m e d ia te c h a n g e s , n o r d id

it p r o d u c e a n y

p ro fo u n d

up­

R E L I G I O N

o n e a t t r i b u t e s t o it a m e a n i n g s e t a p a r t f r o m o t h e r p o s s i b l e m e a n i n g s . In th e c o n t in u i ty o f in te r p r e t a t io n

th u s o p e n e d

ra th e r , a s lo w m o v e m e n t w ith u n e v e n a d v a n c e s d e p e n d i n g

up,

th e

o n th e a r e a s o f a c tiv ity ; b y th e tu rn o f th e fo u r th c e n tu ry ,

a c c o u n t s o f I s r a e l c l a i m e d a p r i v i l e g e d p l a c e , w h i c h m a d e it

w r it i n g p r e v a i l e d m e n t a ll y a n d s o c ia lly . U n til t h e e n d o f th e

m o r e s e n s itiv e

fi f t h c e n t u r y , G r e e k c u l t u r e h a d b e e n e s s e n t i a l l y o f t h e o r a l

e n d l e s s l y r e v i v e d a n d r e e v a l u a t e d , b u t a l s o f o r c e d it t o b e t h e

t y p e . It e n t r u s t e d

in fin ite e x e g e s i s , f o r e v e r i n te r n e d

h e a v a l. G re e c e e x p e r ie n c e d n o t a re v o lu tio n o f w ritin g b u t,

to its m e m o r y a ll t r a d itio n a l i n f o r m a t i o n

a n d k n o w l e d g e , a s d o a ll s o c ie t ie s u n a c q u a i n t e d w it h w r it t e n

th e

h e rm e n e u tic s to

th e

th a t

w as

fo cu sed

p erm an en ce

on

w ith in

its o w n

w ith

w h ic h

th e

G reek s

e n cu m b ered

c o n s e q u e n c e o f th e ir e n t a n g l e m e n t w ith c o n c e p t " m y t h ," w h ic h

logos.

us

as

M .D ./g .h .

a

F o r th e u n if ie d

n o w h e r e s e e m s to b e d e fin e d a s a

BIBLIOGRAPHY

d i s c r e te lit e r a r y g e n r e , m u s t f a d e a w a y in f a v o r o f a s e t o f in te lle c tu a l o p e r a t i o n s

fu n d a m e n ta l

to

th e

m e m o r iz in g

of

n a rra tiv e s th a t to g e th e r m a k e u p a tra d itio n . C la u d e L é v iS tra u s s s u g g e s ts th e te rm

mythism

fo r th e p r o c e s s b y w h ic h a

s to r y , in itia lly p e r s o n a l a n d e n t r u s t e d

to th e o ra l tra d itio n ,

b e c o m e s a d o p t e d b y t h e c o l l e c t i v e m o d e , w h i c h w il l d i s t i n ­ g u is h b e tw e e n th e c r y s ta l d e a r p a r ts o f th e n a r r a tiv e — th a t is, th e le v e ls th a t a r e s tr u c tu r e d a n d s ta b le b e c a u s e t h e y r e s t o n c o m m o n f o u n d a tio n s — a n d th e c o n je c tu r a l p a r ts — d e ta ils o r e p i s o d e s a m p lifie d o r n e g le c te d a t e a c h te llin g , b e f o r e b e in g d o o m e d to o b liv io n a n d f a llin g o u t s id e th e b o u n d s o f m e m ­ o r y . E v e r y tra d itio n a l s o c ie ty d e v e l o p s , w ith v a r y i n g s u c c e s s , a

w id e ly

sh ared

c r e a tiv e

m e m o ry ,

w h ic h

is

n e ith e r

th e

m e m o r y o f s p e c ia lis ts n o r t h a t o f t e c h n ic ia n s . T h e n a r r a tiv e s w e a g r e e t o c a ll m y t h s a r e

th e p ro d u c ts o f a n

in te lle c tu a l

a c ti v i t y t h a t i n v e n t s w h a t is m e m o r a b le . W hen

w ritin g

a p p ears,

it

n e ith e r

b a n is h e s

tr a d itio n a l

m e m o r y t o a s t a t e o f d e c a y n o r s u s t a i n s a n o r a l p r a c t i c e in im m in e n t

danger

of

d iffe re n t le v e ls a n d

b e c o m in g

e x tin c t.

W ritin g

occu rs

at

in d if f e r e n t o r d e r s , b u t a l w a y s a t th e

e n c o u n te r b e tw e e n

th e m e s

sy m b o lic

w e a lth .

a r c h i v e s . A n d it i s h e r e t h a t w e m u s t r e v i s e t h e n o t i o n o f

mythology,

m y th ic a l

o f f u n d a m e n ta l

a n a ct o f re m e m b e rin g a n d

th e w o rk s

th a t m e m o r )' c re a te s . W ritin g w a s to in tr o d u c e a n e w m e m ­ o r y , w o r d -f o r -w o r d m e m o r y , w h ic h c o m e s w ith t h e b o o k a n d w ith e d u c a t i o n th r o u g h th e s tu d y o f w r itte n t e x ts . C o m p e t ­

R. finnegan . Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance and Social Context (Cambridge 1977). ). goody and |. watt, "The Consequences of Literacy," Comparative Studies in Society and History, 1963, 304 -45. |. g oo dy , "Mémoire et apprentissage dans les sociétés avec et sans écriture: La transmission du Bagre," L'homme, 1977, 29-52. e . a . Havelo ck , Preface to Plato (Cambridge, MA, 1963). R. koenig ,

"L'activité herméneutique des scribes dans la transmission du texte de l'Ancien Testament," Revue de l’Histoire des Religions, 1962, 141 — 74. CL. LÉVI-STRAUSS, Mythologiques 4 (Paris 1971): 560 (translated as Introduction to a Science of Mythology. New York 1969-). l . sebag . L'invention du monde chez les Indiens Pueblos (Paris 1971), 472-85. |. VANSiNA, De la tradition orale: Essai de méthode historique. Musée royal de l’Afrique centrale (Tervuren 1961). Some mythographic texts of ancient Greece: apollodorus . The Library, J. G. Frazer, ed. (London 1921). dio dorls of sicily . The Library, vol. 4, C. H. Oldfather, ed. (London 1935). antoninus liberalis , Metamorphoses, hyginls , Astronomica. B. Bunte, ed. (Leipzig 1875). hygin ls . Fabulae. H. I. Rose, ed. (Leiden 1933). Mythographi graeci, 5 vols., R. Wagner, Martini, A. Olivier, and N. Festo, eds., Bibl. Script, graec. Teubneriana (Leipzig 1896-1926). Mythographi Vaticani. G. H. Bode, ed., vols. 1 -2 (1834; reprinted Olms 1968). a c ls ila u s o f argos , pherecydes of athens , and HELLAMKOS of LFSBOs, in Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, F. Jacoby, ed., I: Genealogie und Mythographie (Leiden 1922; 2d ed., 1957).

in g e v e r s o s lo w ly w ith t h e f o r m e r k in d o f m e m o r y , m e c h a n ­ ical

m e m o ry

a lo n e

is

c a p a b le

correct

fa m ilia r to u s , o f th e

of

e n g e n d e rin g

th e

id e a ,

v e r s io n , a v e r s io n w h ic h m u s t b e

c o p ie d o r l e a r n e d e x a c tly , w o r d fo r w o r d . In G r e e c e b e t w e e n

P rehistoric R eligion

t h e s i x t h a n d fif th c e n t u r i e s , t h e f i r s t h i s t o r i a n s , t h o s e w h o m t h e G r e e k s c a ll " l o g o g r a p h e r s , " s e l e c t e d s tru m e n t o f a n e w

w r itin g a s th e in ­

k in d o f m e m o r y th a t w o u ld b e c o m e a n

T o s p e a k o f " p r e h i s t o r i c r e lig io n " w ith o u t s p e c ify in g

tim e

in te g ra l p a r t o f th o u g h t a n d p o litic a l a c ti o n . T h is n e w w a y o f

and

re m e m b e rin g w a s c o n s tru c te d

th o u g h t f a c ts a n d c o n t e x ts t h a t c a m e to lig h t a t v e r y d iffe re n t

on

th e b o u n d a ry b e tw e e n a

p la ce

is

ta n ta m o u n t

to

a s s im ila tin g

under

m o d ern

t y p e o f o r a l tr a d it i o n w ith its r e m e m b r a n c e s , s p o k e n n a r r a ­

t im e s a n d p la c e s , ta n ta m o u n t to c r e a ti n g a k in d o f a v e r a g e

tiv e s , a n d s to r ie s c ir c u la tin g b y w o r d o f m o u t h , a n d , o n th e

im a g e th a t c a n o n ly b e v a lid a te d b y th e ju d g m e n t o f o u r o w n

o th e r s id e , th e d o m in a n t o b s e s s io n o f th e n e w in v e s tig a to r s ,

w a y o f th in k in g p r o j e c te d o n t o s o m e a r b itr a r ily c h o s e n f a c ts .

w h o re s p e c te d a s k n o w le d g e o n ly w h a t h a d b e e n s e e n , a n d

P r e h is to r ic r e lig io n

n o l o n g e r o c c a s i o n s a d e b a te in w h ic h

w h o w o u ld u ltim a te ly c o n d e m n , w ith o u t a p p e a l, th o s e w h o

e ith e r p r o - o r a n tic le ric a l c o n v ic tio n s a r e a t s ta k e . T h e s c ie n c e

a c c e p t e d tr a d itio n s o f th e p a s t th a t w e r e t r a n s m i t te d w ith o u t

o f p re h is to ry h a s b e e n e n ric h e d b y m u c h n e w d a ta a n d m a jo r

p r e c is e te r m in o lo g y o r r i g o r o u s p r o o f . T h is w a s th e b a ttle ­

c h a n g e s in m e th o d o lo g ic a l a p p r o a c h e s . R a th e r th a n a r g u i n g

g r o u n d , th e w id e o p e n s p a c e o f w r itin g , fo r th e c o n f r o n t a ­

a b o u t w h e th e r th e a th e is t b ru te e v o lv e d first in to th e m a g i­

t io n b e t w e e n v a r ia n t s t h a t b e c a m e d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n s o f th e

c ia n a n d th e n in to th e p r ie s t, s c ie n tis ts h a v e g iv e n p r io r ity to

s a m e m y th , u s u a lly e x a m i n e d fro m w ith in th e c o n f in e s o f a

in q u irie s th a t b r in g o u t th e d e e p c o n n e c t i o n s a m o n g p la y ,

c ity in q u e s t o f s e lf - i m a g e o r p o litic a l i d e n tity .

a e s th e t ic s , s o c ia l b e h a v io r , e c o n o m i c re a litie s , a n d p r a c tic e s

E l s e w h e r e , o t h e r r o u t e s w e r e t a k e n t h a t l in k e d w r it i n g to th e p ro d u c tio n in s e p a ra b le

o f m y th s w h o s e s u c c e s s iv e v a r ia tio n s w e r e

fro m

th e

in te rp re te rs d e v o te d

h e r m e n e u tic

a c tiv ity

of

to te x tu a l e x e g e s is . F r o m

scrib e s

and

th a t r e s t o n a m e ta p h y s ic a l fr a m e w o r k . T h e p ro o fs th a t c a n b e p r o lif e r a te d f ro m a s o -c a lle d re lig io u s a p p r o a c h a r e la rg e ly d e riv e d

fro m

th e

re a lm

of

th e

u n p re ce d e n te d ,

fro m

th e

th e m o m e n t

p r e s e n c e o f p e c u lia r f a c ts f o u n d in a c o n t e x t w h e r e t h e y a r e

th e tra d itio n a l n a r r a tiv e s o f th e B ib le , th e B o o k o f th e H e b r a ic

l e a s t e x p e c t e d , s u c h a s t h e d i s c o v e r y , o n a M o u s t e r ia n s ite

w o rld , w e r e c o m m itte d to w r itin g , th e y w e r e s w e p t a w a y b y

in h a b ite d

by

th e in n e r w o rk in g s o f a s y s te m

c o lle c te d

and

in itia lly

c o n s o n a n ta l,

in

its

o f w ritin g w h ic h ,

h o llo w s

c a lle d

fo r

a

th o u g h v o ca lic

c o m p l e m e n t t o b e a r its m e a n i n g , s in c e o n e c a n n o t r e a d

a

c o n s o n a n ta l te x t u n le s s o n e u n d e r s t a n d s it, th a t is, u n le s s

d isc o v e ry T hese

N e a n d e r th a l b ro u g h t

m an,

b ack

th a t h e g a th e re d

d iv e rs e

e le m e n ts

N e a n d e rth a l m a n .

Yet

do how

to re d not

o f fo s s il s h e l l s , h is

d w e llin g

fit

c o u ld

in

w ith

th e re

w h ic h

p la c e ,

o c h e r o r b u rie d our

or

he th e

h is d e a d . v is io n

not be a

of

s tr ik in g

11

I N T R O D U C T I O N c o n tra s t

b e tw e e n

th is

p rim a l

b ru te

w ith

h is

b u lk y

b ro w

or

m e re ly

th e

s k u ll).

A lth o u g h

th e

id ea

of

"g ra v e s"

of

rid g e s a n d th e s u b tle q u a lity o f a re lig io s ity p o lis h e d b y tw o

a n i m a l s h a s b e e n a d v a n c e d r e p e a t e d l y , it s e e m s t h a t n a t u r a l

m ille n n ia

phenom ena

of

C h ris tia n ity

and

a ll

of

a n c ie n t

p h ilo s o p h y ?

N e a n d e r th a l m a n w a s n o t , in t h e fin a l a n a l y s is , a s s h o r t o f g r a y m a t te r a s w a s lo n g b e lie v e d , t h o u g h th e m e ta p h y s ic a l

w ere

m o re

o f te n

at

is s u e

th a n

m an

h im se lf,

e s p e c i a l l y in t h e c a s e o f t h e r e m a i n s o f c a v e b e a r s .

Homo sapiens a r e

T h e b u ria l g r a v e s o f fo ss il

ra r e , a n d h a rd ly

le v e l o f h is c u ltic a c tiv itie s w a s c e r ta in ly v e r y d iffe re n t fro m

a s in g le g r a v e d a t in g fr o m th e U p p e r P a le o lith ic A g e ( 3 0 , 0 0 0 -

o u r s (a t le a s t, a s w e im a g in e o u r s to b e ).

9000) has been

W h a t m a t te r s is th e e x i s t e n c e o f p r a c ti c e s w ith in a p s y c h o ­ lo g ic a l r e a lm

e x ca v a te d

e ith e r w ith

te c h n ica l m e a n s th a t w o u ld

ca re

h ave a ssu red

o r w ith

a ll t h e

its d o c u m e n ta r y

n o t d i r e c t ly tie d to t e c h n i q u e s o f a c q u is itio n ,

v a lu e . W e d o , h o w e v e r , h a v e a c e r ta in n u m b e r o f fa c ts a t o u r

m a n u f a c t u r e , o r c o n s u m p t i o n , e v e n if t h e s e p r a c t i c e s d o f l o w

d is p o s a l ( g r a v e s ; b o d ie s , e ith e r c u r le d u p o r s tr e t c h e d o u t ; a

b a c k i n t o m a t e r i a l l if e . M a n a c q u i r e d r e l i g i o u s b e h a v i o r w h e n

h ead

p r o te c te d

by

a

s to n e ;

ocher

w o rn

o u t a n e tw o r k o f s y m b o ls th a t p r e s e n t a c o u n te r im a g e o f th e

d o u b l e c h i l d r e n 's t o m b a t S u n g i r , n o r t h o f M o s c o w , w h e r e

o u ts id e

h u n d r e d s o f o r n a m e n ta l e le m e n ts a d o r n th e b o d ie s a n d la rg e

That

N e a n d e r th a ls

had

a lre a d y

d e v e lo p e d

t h i s n e t w o r k o f s y m b o l s is b e y o n d d o u b t , b u t w h e t h e r o n e

th e

dead

s p e a rs m a d e o f m a m m o th

th e

le a s t,

fu n ereal

o b je c ts ,

o rn a m e n ts

by

at

and

h o u s e h o ld

c a n n o t b e s e p a r a t e d f r o m l a n g u a g e a n d g e s t u r e a s it w o r k s w o rld .

in c lu d in g ,

d u stin g ;

h e d e v e lo p e d th e w h o le s y s te m o f s y m b o lic th o u g h t , w h ic h

p e rso n ).

In

c lo th in g

and

a d d itio n ,

th e

iv o ry w e re fo u n d

in t h e g r a v e ,

c a n g o o n to d is tin g u is h e v id e n c e o f a p r im o rd ia l re lig io n o r

b e a r s w itn e s s to th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f th e c o n c e r n to e q u ip th e

an

re m a in s q u e s tio n ­

d e a d , a d e v e l o p m e n t th a t o c c u r r e d a t a r e m o te p h a s e o f th e

a b le . T h e g a th e r in g o f m a g ic a l s h e lls a n d o c h e r s u p p o r ts th e

U p p e r P a l e o l i t h i c A g e . O b v i o u s l y , g r a v e s d o n o t a ll r e f l e c t

v ie w th a t th e p u m p h a d b e e n p rim e d fo r th e s im u lta n e o u s

id e n tic a l r e lig io u s in te n tio n s ,

e v o l u t i o n o f th e fie ld s o f a r t , p la y , a n d r e lig io n , t h r e e fie ld s

k in d o f s e n t i m e n ts le d to th e s e e m o tio n a l d is p la y s . M o r tu a r y

w h ic h to th is d a y c a n n o t b e s e p a r a te d .

f u r n i t u r e i s o r d i n a r i l y l e s s s u m p t u o u s . In s e v e r a l c a s e s w e

e x tre m e ly

d iffu se

Homo sapiens w ith

re g a rd

p ic k e d u p w h e r e N e a n d e r th a l m a n le ft o ff,

to

c ry s ta ls , iro n

s y m b o lic c o m p le x

th e

g a th e rin g

of

“ c u r i o s ''

(s h e lls ,

fo ss ils,

p y rite s , s ta la c tite fr a g m e n ts , e t c .) s o m e tim e s

m ig h t e v e n of

w e b e c e rta in

w hat

s p e c u la te th a t th e p r e s e n c e o f c e rta in v e s tig e s

w as c o n n e cte d f i ll i n g

n or can

w ith a c c id e n ta l c o n d itio n s s u r r o u n d in g th e

th e

g rav e.

But

a

o f o c h e r , w h ic h

ra th e r

v a r ie d

co n sta n t

a c c o r d in g

fa c to r

to

th e

is

th e

f o u n d t o g e t h e r in t h e s a m e p i l e . O c h e r b e c a m e m u c h m o r e

p re se n ce

p le n tifu l. T h e first u s e o f m a n g a n e s e d i o x i d e , a b la c k d y e ,

t i o n 's w e a lt h in d y e s . O c h e r g a v e t h e s o il a n d t h e s k e l e t o n

p o p u la ­

c o in c id e d w ith th e p r o d u c tio n o f a g r e a te r n u m b e r o f d r a w ­

t h a t it c o v e r e d a r e d d i s h c o l o r a t i o n . T h i s p r a c t i c e , c o m m o n

in g s e n g r a v e d o n b o n e o r s to n e s u r fa c e s . B y th e A u rig n a c ia n

d u r i n g t h e U p p e r P a l e o l i t h i c A g e , is t h e i n d i s p u t a b l e s i g n o f

p e r io d , th e s e d r a w in g s to o k th e fo rm o f r h y th m ic in c is io n s

a c ts w h o s e m e a n in g g o e s b e y o n d a s im p le n a tu r a l e m o tio n .

and

fig u ra tiv e

d e v e lo p e d

tra cin g s .

By

b . c .,

3 0 ,0 0 0

fig u ra tiv e

art

had

to th e p o in t a t w h ic h s u b je c ts c o u ld b e d iv id e d

If t h e u s e o f o c h e r s u p p o r t s v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a c c o r d i n g to h a b it a t , th e s h e e r fa c t o f its b e in g b r o u g h t i n to a g r a v e

in to th e fo llo w in g g r o u p s : f e m a le s e x u a l s y m b o ls (s o m e tim e s

w h ere a b od y

a ls o m a le ), fig u re s o f a n im a ls , a n d r e g u la r ly s p a c e d in c is io n s

f e a t u r e o f t h e b e l i e f in a n a f t e r l i f e , s i n c e t h e d e a d p e r s o n w a s

o r p u n c tu a tio n s .

c o n s i d e r e d s till c a p a b l e o f u s i n g w h a t h e w a s o f f e r e d .

These

th e m e s

p re d o m in a te d

th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f P a le o lith ic a r t , a

th ro u g h o u t

s u b je c t to

w h ic h

had

b een

l a id

c o n s titu te s th e m o s t d is tin c t

we

s h a ll r e tu r n .

P e rs o n a l A d o r n m e n ts J e w e l r y a p p e a r e d i n t h e W e s t a r o u n d 3 5 , 0 0 0 b .c . I t s p r i o r

B u ria l G r o u n d s a n d th e C u lt o f B o n e R e m a in s

o r ig in

N e a n d e r th a ls b u rie d th e ir d e a d . T h e p r a c tic e o f i n h u m a ­

is

unknow n.

T h ro u g h o u t

E u ro p e,

its

a p p earan ce

c o in c id e d w ith th e first m a n if e s ta tio n s o f th e U p p e r P a le o ­

t i o n is a t t e s t e d b y s e v e r a l o b v i o u s t o m b s a n d , s t a t i s t i c a l l y , b y

lith ic

t h e n u m e r o u s f i n d s o f s k e l e t o n f r a g m e n t s . S h a n i d a r i n I r a q is

3 0 , 0 0 0 ) , it a p p e a r s a l r e a d y q u i t e d i v e r s i f i e d : a t t h a t s a m e t i m e

t h e s i t e o f t h e o n l y d i s c o v e r y o f a N e a n d e r t h a l l a id o u t o n a

w e f i n d a n n u l a r p e n d a n t s c a r v e d o u t o f b o n e , a s w e ll a s t e e t h

bed

o f flo w e rs ,

fro m

w h ic h

a

great

n u m b e r o f f o s s iliz e d

fro m

A ge.

D u r in g

th e

C h â te lp e rro n ia n

ep och

( 3 5 ,0 0 0 -

v a r io u s a n im a l s p e c ie s ( f o x , w o lf, m a rm o t, a u r o c h s ,

p o l l e n s w e r e f o u n d . In M o n t e C i r c e o ( I t a l y ) , in a s i m i l a r l y

e t c .) ,

c o n v i n c i n g f i n d , a s k u l l w a s p l a c e d in t h e c e n t e r o f a c a v e

p e r f o r a t i o n o f t h e r o o t o r a s l i t . F o s s i l s h e l l s w e r e t r e a t e d in

c h a m b e r . In t h e f a c e o f s u c h s t r i k i n g t e s t i m o n y , it i s d i f f i c u l t

th e s a m e w a y . It m a y s e e m fa r -f e tc h e d to r e g a r d o r n a m e n ta l

m ade

so

th a t

th e y

n o t to a s crib e to th e im m e d ia te p r e d e c e s s o r s o f h u m a n k in d

p e n d a n ts a s a n y th in g

as

and,

we

know

re g a rd in g w h ic h

it

th e

to d ay

a fte rlife

m ay h ave been

s e n tim e n ts in

a

a n a lo g o u s

p a r a lle l

to

u n iv e rs e ,

a

our

ow n

u n iv e rs e

a s in e x p licit a s th a t o f th e a v e r a g e

in

f a c t,

som e

q u ir e d f ro m p a tio n

u n a m b ig u o u s ly

to

d e sc rib e

N e a n d e r th a l

o th e r th a n

m ay

have

hung

by

m eans

of

a

p u r e ly a e s th e tic o b je c ts ,

h ad

e x c lu s iv e ly

d e c o ra tiv e

w ith

E u r o p e a n s ite s , th e m a jo rity re v e a l a p r e o c c u ­

b e , g iv e n

a v a ila b le e v i d e n c e ,

be

fu n c tio n s . H o w e v e r, a m o n g th e h u n d r e d s o f p e n d a n ts a c ­

s u b j e c t o f a n y o f t o d a y ' s m a j o r r e l i g i o n s . D if f i c u l t a s it m a y th e

c o u ld

m a g ic

at

one

re p re se n t

lev el

m a le

or

and

a n o th e r. fe m a le

T h o se

th a t

sexual o rg an s

m o re

m u s t s u r e l y h a v e h a d s o m e s o r t o f s y m b o l i c v a l u e ( f i g . 1 ).

d i f f i c u l t t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e m e a n i n g o f w h a t f a l ls i n t o t h e

T h e c y lin d ric a l f r a g m e n ts o f s ta la c tite a n d p o in ts o f b e le m -

m a n 's

a ttitu d e

to w a rd

th e

su p e rn a tu ra l,

it

is e v e n

c a te g o r y o f th e " c u l t o f b o n e r e m a i n s ." B e c a u s e b o n e is th e

n ite s d e s ig n e d

o n ly

o r d e r . T h is s y m b o lic fu n ctio n

p h y s ic a l

e le m e n t

(h u m a n

or

a n im a l)

th a t

s u rv iv e s

o r to

Homo sapiens,

we

h ave

f ra g m e n ts

o f s h a tte re d

have

s p e a r s th a t w e re p e rfo ra te d b u t o th e rw is e u n tr e a te d (s e e th e

m an

in clu d e

o f s e x u a l im a g e s m a y

s itu a tio n c o u ld h a v e p l a y e d a p a r t in a c u l t . W h e t h e r w ith N e a n d e r th a l

to

h a v e a m e a n in g o f th e s a m e

been

re s p e ct to

e x te n d e d

to h a n g m a y

d e c o m p o s i ti o n , a n y b o n e s f o u n d a s e v i d e n c e in a n u n u s u a l

asseg ai

s y m b o lis m o f th e a s s e g a i b e lo w ). T h e ro le o f te e th d e s ig n e d

s o m e e v i d e n c e t h a t c a n b e e x p l a in e d in t e r m s t h a t a r e n o t a t

t o h a n g m u s t h a v e b e e n r a t h e r c o m p l e x , a t l e a s t in th e e a r l y

v a r ia n c e w ith a n i n te r p r e t a t io n b a s e d o n t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l .

s ta g e s ,

S e p a r a te d b y s e v e ra l s c o r e s o f m ille n n ia , th e s k u lls o f M o n te

e x a m p le , d o n o t s e e m to h a v e th e c h a r a c te r is tic s o f a tro p h y

C i r c e o ( M o u s te r i a n ) a n d th e s k u ll f r o m M a s - d 'A z i l ( M a g d a l e -

o r a t a l i s m a n . T h i s is n o t t r u e o f t h e a t r o p h i e d c a n i n e s o f

n ia n ) a tte s t th e sp e c ia l c h a r a c te r o f th e h e a d (th e w h o le h e a d

re in d e e r , w h ic h e v e n to d a y a r e s y m b o ls o f m a s c u lin ity a n d

12

fo r

th e

te e th

of

som e

a n im a ls ,

th e

m arm o t

fo r

[’ K I: I I I S T O K I C

Pendants with genital designs. Lett: series of female symbols; right: phalloid symbol. 7.5 cm Isturitz (Pyrénées district). (Fig. I)

were imitated in bone or soft stone when pendants first appeared. The same applies to shells. For the most part they seem to have a purely aesthetic function, but the rather frequent discovery of porcelain (Cyprea), universally attested in pre­ historic and historic times as a protective female symbol, makes it highly probable that the collection of shells served as talismans. In short, having gone beyond a strictly decora­ tive function, long and oval pendants encompassed both the aesthetic and the religious realms, and probably the social realm as well, although we still have too little data to clarify the matter. T h e O c c u r r e n c e o f W a ll P a i n t i n g

The development of personal adornments does not dimin­ ish the importance of the collections of natural curiosities; rather, it was an added feature that prevailed until the end of the Upper Paleolithic Age, ca. 9000. Adornments evolved throughout this period. But in the Aurignacian and the Perigordian Ages, the main event was the spread of pictorial

R I- I. I t, I () \

works. Between 30,000 and 20,000, certain forms began to appear in engravings. These first forms were executed on blocks and probably on the walls of rock shelters as well. Despite their crudeness, they shed light on the concerns of their creators. The repertoire of these works is very limited; representation of the female genitalia, highly stylized, is the most widespread. A few representations of the male genita­ lia can be found, but they were apparently replaced quite early by abstract symbolic figures: dotted lines or bar lines that seem to accompany explicitly female figures. There are also highly geometrical figures of animals, parallel to one another and often juxtaposed or superimposed on one another. The Aurignacian-Gravettian bestiary includes the horse, the bison, the ibex, and other imprecise figures indicating that from the very beginning art made use of two clearly defined registers: human figures symbolically ren­ dered, starting with the representation of the entire body and progressing, by way of genital figures and animals, to geometric figures. During the ensuing 20,000 years, the details may have varied but the basic figures, human and animal, remained in the same relationships. These relation­ ships cannot easily be established on the basis of the en­ graved blocks alone; displacement in the course of time and, especially, following excavations has destroyed the spatial ties that might have guided us to their meaning. But some­ thing happened, perhaps by the Gravettian Age but certainly around 15,000: penetration deep into caves and the execution of paintings or engravings, sometimes more than a kilometer from the opening. This boldness on the part of Paleolithic men is of immediate interest to us because the works produced at such locations preserved their positions with respect to one another and with respect to the wall itself. We can therefore raise questions about the possible religious ideology of the creators of these figures. What motives could have inspired the Magdalenians of Niaux or Pech-Merle to their speleological adventure? It is hard to believe that it was just a matter of curiosity, and one is inclined to think that in their eyes the cave must have seemed a mysterious amalgam of female forms. Direct evidence is furnished by the numer­ ous oval cavities or cleft lips painted on the inside in red ocher (Gargas, Font-de-Gaume, Niaux). The execution of numerous genital symbols in deep side passages indirectly reinforces the hypothesis of the woman-cave. To date, ex­ plicit male symbols are rare but one may find, on Aurigna­ cian blocks, for instance, signs made up of series of dots or rods accompanying oval or triangular figures depicted with different degrees of realism. All stages of development come together, with regional nuances, from the whole female figure to the pubic triangle rendered as an empty rectangle. This tendency of male and female signs to conceal them­ selves behind abstract graphics may well have been a re­ sponse to taboos of a socioreligious character. This hypoth­ esis becomes all the more plausible as other figurative anomalies give evidence of the same meaning. Not only is there no known instance of human or animal mating any­ where in Paleolithic art, but sexual organs are explicitly represented on relatively few figures. At Lascaux (where, however, the bulls have obvious sexual characteristics), two figures appear (fig. 6): the “jumping cow" in the Axial Diverticulum and an engraved horse in the Passage, both of which have their hooves turned in such a way that the underbelly on both animals is visible and completely empty. This strange mannerism in figure drawing is not easily explained, but it does show the complexity of Paleolithic thought. Curiously, secondary sexual characteristics (the antlers of the cervidae, the thick withers of the bovidae, and 13

I N T R O D U C T I O N

Middle part of the first great panel of the Cave of Pindal (Asturias). Animals A and B (horse and bison) are reduced to the minimal identifiable size: dorsal line and horns for the bison, which also bears a scar from a wound in the shape of an inverted V; central portion of the head and the neck and withers for the horse. Above the bison and the horse, S2 line of the so-called claviform type (see fig. 5). The photograph includes only the right side of a series of red and black paintings. Between group A-B and the doe (C), there are several groups of S1 and S3 signs. The doe is 85 cm long. (Fig. 2)

the horns of the ibex) are rendered very exactly; and, moreover, the animals are frequently depicted in couples, the female in front and the male behind. It is certain that the figures basically connote what might be thought of as a "fertility cult," a generally banal statement that takes on a subtlety in the present instance by virtue of the apparent contradiction of the representation. Animals Paleolithic materials yield other peculiar data. The hun­ dreds of figures that cover the walls of caves seem at first glance to defy any kind of order. Even though the idea of a coherent whole emerges from the way the figures are ar­ ranged, few prehistorians have used this possible organiza­ tion to delve further into the ideology of the artists. One rather surprising fact stands out: the fauna that are repre­ sented display variations that seem to reflect the environ­ ment. In some caves the bison, together with the horse, is the principal subject ( Font-de-Gaume, Niaux, Altamira), whereas in others the aurochs plays the main role (Lascaux, Ebbon). But in all the cases cited above, the complementary bovid (bison or aurochs depending on the site) is represented by one or more figures separated from the rest. Another point should also be mentioned: the reindeer that figure in 14

great numbers among the food wastes of the hunters at the time of these works occupy little space in the iconography of certain grottoes such as Lascaux, Niaux, or Altamira. At Lascaux, rather paradoxically, though the bony remains of reindeer make up almost all the animal wastes, only one figure can be attributed to the reindeer, and even that is somewhat doubtful. Thus the fauna depicted do not always correspond to what Paleolithic man hunted. This fact is important because, if it were confirmed, it would lead us to conclude that at least some of the animals represented played a role unconnected with the food that people then lived on. The number of sites for which it was possible to draw up a list of the animals depicted and a parallel list of the animals consumed as meat is unfortunately too limited to verify this hypothesis.

Groupings We referred above to groupings of animal figures and signs, starting with the Aurignacian Age (30,000). The most frequent, almost exclusive animal grouping is of horses (100%) and of bison (56%) (or of aurochs, 39%, in other words, 95% for bovidae). This initial dyad, moreover, occu­ pies the center of all surfaces used, and may be repeated

P R E H I S T O R I C

several times in the same cave. The groupings in wall paintings have a complexity that derives from the diversity of the caves in which the decorations appear. So, too, geo­ graphical location and chronological evolution are reflected in various applications of the initial figurative formula and in the more or less pronounced use of natural forms. In any case, it is likely that the cave or the surface of the shelter wall was the object of a deliberate choice, and that the figures were not piled one on top of another haphazardly. The horse(A)-bovid(B) twosome appears at all sites (fig. 7.1). Although we must allow for the possibility of caves or shelters that might not fit the basic AB formula, practically speaking the AB group is always present and dominates the groupings both numerically and topographically. But rarely does the AB group appear alone. Another category of animals intervenes, namely, group C (stag, mammoth, and occasionally chamois and reindeer). Among the wall paint­ ing groups, the ibex is most often the accompanying animal, but the stag, hind, mammoth, and reindeer also play the same role, most often on the sidelines, on the outer perim­ eter of the central panel groupings, or in the intermediary sections. The most frequent formula is thus AB -I- C, making up a triad with one interchangeable element: the ibex at Niaux, the mammoth at Rouffignac, the stag at Las Chimeneas. In the same cave, we can also see "moving” animals, or the following: at Niaux, the stag marks the deepest part of

R E L I G I O N

the large painted surface, the rather numerous ibexes fram­ ing the AB figures; at Lascaux, the situation is similar— ibexes appear three or four times immediately to the side of a group of animals, stags being equal in number but farther to the side. In a cave like the Combarelles, in which the figures number into the hundreds, the "third animal" is represented by the reindeer, the ibex, and the mammoth, which are concentrated in the general area of the side panel of each decorated gallery. Finally, there is also a D category to which fierce animals belong: the rhinoceros, the bear, and the big cats. The bear is a relatively rare animal in Paleolithic iconography and has no clearly defined place, but the rhinoceros and the big cats are marginal animals, most often situated in the deepest or most peripheral parts of the figured group. At Lascaux, Font-deGaume, the Combarelles, to cite only a few, the big cats are in this position. In these three places, the rhinoceros occu­ pies an analogous position: at Lascaux, at the bottom of the Well; at Font-de-Gaume, at the end of the main gallery next to the big cat; and at the Combarelles, superimposed over the "lioness" from the end of the second gallery. The complete formula for the grouping is C + AB + C ( + D) in the case of a cave with a single composition, one that forms part of a series. In extreme cases, as in Lascaux or Combarelles, one may encounter a series of groupings with the basic formula repeated time and again.

Cave of Pech-Merle (Lot). Middle and left of the great frieze painted in black. Two groups of animals can be seen: the group on the left and the group on the right each include a horse (A) and two bison on the right, two aurochs on the left. The mammoths present in both groupings make up group C. Between the two groupings, there are also three animals marked by signs: (1) a bull (B2) bearing a sign (S1) with a male connotation on his side (see fig. 5); (2) a cow (B2) marked by wounds (S2); (3) diagonally across from both animals, a mammoth bearing three rows of thick red dashes. The figures are between 60 and 120 cm long. (Fig. 3)

15

I N T R O D U C T I O N

Signs Signs seem to follow the same general patterns as animal figures. They fall into three categories (fig. 5). The first is made up of male symbols (S1) ranging from the human body depicted in its entirety to a simple little stick. In between are sometimes very abstract transitions (lines branching out with two extensions at the base, as in Lascaux). The signs of the second group (S2) correspond to female symbols. Like the signs of the first group, they range from a complete female representation to an empty or partitioned rectangle. Tne third group (S3), in comparison with the other two, is homologous to the animals of group C or CD. It is made up of aligned dots or a series of little sticks aligned or clustered. In several cases, the S3 signs are repeated at the beginning and the end of the figurative series. This phenomenon is quite evident at Lascaux, where the aligned dots are found at the entrance and at the far end of the Axial Diverticulum, between the Passage and the Nave, at the bottom of the Well, and at the end of the Diverticulum of the Big Cats. The signs of the third group, therefore, occupy a position rather set back, most often in the background, as at Font-de-Gaume, Pech-Merle, and El Castillo. The relationship between signs and animals corresponds to the following broad lines: the S 'S 2 group is found juxta­ posed with the animals of groups A and B (fig. 2), as in the case of the Diverticulum of the Big Cats at Lascaux (fig. 6), in which the S’S2 signs are in the central panel, right across from an AB group (horse-bison). But the signs may be independent of the animal figures, grouped in a separate diverticulum. Good examples can be found at Niaux (Black Room), at El Castillo, at La Pasiega, and, notably, at Cougnac. The relationship between animals and signs may thus be defined by the following formula: C + AB + C + D S3 + S ^ 2 + S3

C + AB + C + D/S'S2, S3 S3 Both formulas can even be found in the same cave (La Pasiega). This complex arrangement must have encompassed an ideology whose elaborate character may be perceived through the arrangement. The situation is further compli­ cated, however, by the role played by the cave itself. Natural caves have many accidental features that evoked, for Paleo­ lithic man, sexual forms, generally female. These natural structures, fissures or stalagmitic formations, sometimes underscored in red (Gargas, Niaux), are also frequently completed with an S 1 sign (little sticks or dots: Gargas, Combel de Pech-Merle, Niaux), proving that the natural phenomenon was considered equivalent to S2. This is par­ ticularly clear in Niaux, where two fissures in the inner gallery were marked at the entrance by a sign of male connotation (branching sign) accompanied in one of the two cases by a horse with its head extended in the direction of the fissure. In the course of millennia and in a territory as vast as that of Paleolithic cave art, figurative traditions must have under­ gone numerous variations, and it is remarkable that we should come across an ideographic system that is so well constructed. Yet two rather important questions, concerning the role of wounds on animals and the role of hands, remain largely unresolved. 16

Cave of Gargas (Hautes-Pyrénées). Panel showing "negative" hands with "m utilated" fingers. Most such hands, colored red or black, are grouped in twos by subject, and appear to have been executed by folding in the fingers or by applying a stencil. (Fig. 4)

Wounds In art objects as well as mural art, we find animals with wounds. Ever since research on prehistoric religion began, this detail has been thought to reveal the practice of magic spells. This explanation is not altogether impossible, but certain elements lead us to believe that it does not resolve the problem entirely. In fact, 96% of the animal figures on file (between 2,500 and 3,000) show no wounds. We might ask ourselves if the two series, animal and sign, really belong to the same symbolic system, or if two lines of symbols might have existed without any organic ties between them. Signs do seem to have played their role at the same times and in the same places as animals. What is more, both evolved synchronically, and both underwent parallel stylistic trans­ formations. It is very unlikely that signs were slipped in among animals, with no connection to them, in the course of various rituals; too many signs are connected to animals by their position for the relationship not to be a close one, as the Pech-Merle paintings show (fig. 3). This does not preclude the claim that signs are sometimes independent, as at Altamira, where the signs and the animals of the Great Ceiling make up two distinct clusters; or as at El Castillo or La Pasiega, where, for one important portion, the painted

P R E H I S T O R I C

R E L I G I O N

Geometrization of male and female symbols. S ’: phalloid deriva­ tives. S2: principal series of vulvar derivatives. S3: rows of punctua­ tion (dotted lines) and barred lines. Below, from left to right: S'-S2 groupings. El Castillo (Santander): triangle derivatives and branch­ ing sign. Lascaux (Dordogne): maximal geometrization and abstrac­ tions (empty rectangle and bar). Lascaux: crooked bar (S') and seven aligned wounds (S2). S', S2, S3 groupings. Niaux (Ariège): bar (S’), claviform (see same S2 figure), cloud of dots (S3). Pech-Merle (Lot): at the entrance of a deep side passage, three figures that appear to correspond in value to S ’: dotted line with four lateral dots (see same S3 figure). The negative hand probably corresponds to S2, and the cloud of dots, farther into the passage, probably corresponds to S ’. (Fig. 5). Lascaux (Dordogne): (1) Engraved horse with rump turned such that the perineal region is exposed but devoid of primary sexual charac­ teristics. 60 cm. (2) Paintings from the axial gallery, central part of the righthand wall. Aurochs in the same posture as the horse in front. Secondary sexual characteristics (general profile) are attributable to a cow, but primary characteristics, notably the udder, are invisible. This figure is included in the grouping formula A-B S'-S2 (horseaurochs, bars, gridlike sign; see fig. 5). 1.70 m. (Fig. 6) Gourdan (Haute-Garonne). The principle of association of animals A and B may also be applied to portable objects. This engraving on bone plaquette represents the aurochs-horse twosome with the heads of both animals assembled like the faces on playing cards. About 6 cm from nose to nose. (2) Raymonden (Dordogne). Partial pendant (or fish spatula). A scene of a religious nature seems to be unfolding: six or seven persons (perhaps more) are lined up on either side of a line resembling barbed wire at the end of which is the severed head of a bison and two paws with ill-defined hooves. Near the knee, one of these legs bears a "chestnut," a horny growth that is the vestige of the multifingered hoof of the ancestors of the equidae. It may indeed be a horse leg, and this grouping with its sacrificial look may refer to the A-B model. (3) Torre (Guipuzcoa). Roll of fine engravings around a bone tube. From left to right: stag, man, horse, chamois, two small ibex with frontal horns, and aurochs. This series of animals referring to A-B model + C is of more than purely artistic interest: between the subjects are abstract tracings (parallel or crossed strokes, beginnings of spherical figures, clouds made of fine dots, etc.) which must have ensured that Magdalenians could "read" this mythogram. (4) Mas-d'Azil (Ariège). Bone plaquette engraved with horses and fish, already strongly geometrized. Mythographic theme bom out by several examples. (5) El Valle (Santander). Bone tube with engraved bird. Subject related to preceding one: two horses, one behind the other, a stag facing forward, numerous features with no apparent meaning, perhaps a snake, and some oval figures, probably fish. (6) El Pendo (Santander). Bone tube engravings, like the preceding ones, but virtually uninterpretable. There remains a part of the head and neck of a horse and a herbivore with visible horns (or antlers) and ears borne by a very long neck. Note that these two figures occupy the same situation as those of the El Valle tube. (Fig. 7)

17

I N T R O D U C T I O N s ig n s a r e c o lle c te d

in a s i d e p a s s a g e ; o r a t C o u g n a c ( L o t ) ,

w h e r e S ' a n d S 2 s i g n s a r e l o c a t e d in a s i d e a l c o v e a w a y f r o m t h e a n i m a l f i g u r e s , w h i l e t h e S 3 s e r i e s o c c u r s in t h e f i g u r e d p a n e ls .

h a n d s in a g r o u p i n g th a t i n c l u d e s a n a u r o c h s , t w o h o r s e s , a n d o n e b i g c a t , a ll t r e a t e d in a v e r y p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e . T h e re a r e s e v e ra l ty p e s o f n e g a tiv e h a n d s , p ro b a b ly c o r r e ­ s p o n d i n g t o s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t t r a d i t i o n s . T h e f i r s t c a t e g o r y is

W h e t h e r th e s e a r e tw o s e r ie s o f s y m b o ls e x e c u t e d s im u l­

m a d e u p o f h a n d s in te g ra te d

in a g r o u p i n g t h a t i n c l u d e s ,

ta n e o u s ly a n d e x p e r ie n c e d a s fo r m in g th e fra m e o f a s in g le

n o t a b l y , d o t t i n g s ; t h i s is t h e c a s e i n P e c h - M e r l e , w h e r e in s ix

i d e o lo g ic a l b lo c k , o r w h e th e r th e y a r e t w o s e p a r a te s e r ie s

in sta n ce s

h a n d s a re

a s s o c ia te d

w ith

d o tte d

l i n e s in

c lo s e

w ith e le m e n ts th a t w e r e to e n t e r o n e a n o t h e r o n s y n c h r o n ic

p ro x im ity

b u t d is tin c t le v e ls — e ith e r c a s e p r e s u p p o s e s a h ig h ly c o m p le x

e le v e n

in te lle c tu a l c o n t e n t ,

p a s s a g e (fig . 5 ) . T h e s a m e a r r a n g e m e n t o f a n im a l fig u r e s a n d

s y s te m . C o u ld m ans

and

in tim a te ly

tie d

to

an

e la b o ra te

s o c ia l

th e y b e s y m b o ls o f th e p ro p a g a tio n

a n im a ls ,

a

cosm ogon y

th a t c a lls

in to

of hu­

p la y

th e

to

th e

d o tte d

tw o

c ris s c r o s s e d

lin e s a b o v e

d o t t i n g s is f o u n d

in

h a n d s a p p e a r in

El C a s tillo .

is o la tio n

h o rses

and

on ce

th e o p e n in g o f a v e r y In

th e

w ith

lo w

s id e

P é rig o rd , n e g a tiv e

(o n e a t F o n t-d e -G a u m e , o n e

at

c o m p l e m e n t a r y f o r c e s o f m a l e a n d f e m a l e ? It is d i f f i c u l t t o

C o m b a re lie s , s e v e ra l g r o u p e d a t B e rn ifa l, e t c .) . A t R o u c a d o u r

r e a c h a c o n c lu s io n w ith o u t g o in g b e y o n d th e a v a ila b le d a ta ,

(L o t), th e h a n d s a r e s u p e r p o s e d o v e r th e a n im a ls , a n d th e y

b u t c e r ta in ly

we

a re

in

th e

p resen ce

o f s o m e th in g

q u ite

h a v e lo n g p o in te d

fin g e rs in cise d

on

a b la ck b a c k g r o u n d .

d if f e r e n t fr o m w h a t w a s l o n g i m a g in e d a b o u t “ th e P a le o lith ic

T h e P e c h -M e rle h a n d s g iv e th e im p re s s io n o f b e in g in se rte d

s a v a g e s .”

in a n a r r a n g e m e n t w h e r e t h e y p l a y a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e , s u r e l y

O f th e 4 % th e

o f a n i m a l s s h o w i n g w o u n d s in t h e t h o r a c i c o r

n e ig h b o rin g

a b d o m in a l

areas,

if w e

do

a

p e rc e n ta g e

a s i m p o r t a n t a s th e S 2 s ig n s w ith t h e ir f e m a le c o n n o t a t io n . T h e h a n d s i n t h e c a v e o f G a r g a s ( H a u t e s - P y r é n é e s ) , l ik e

c o u n t b y s p e c ie s , th e g r e a te s t n u m b e r g o e s to th e b iso n (8 % ),

t h o s e in t h e n e i g h b o r i n g g r o t t o a t T i b i r a n , a r e v e r y d i f f e r e n t

th e n to th e h o r s e ( 2 .5 % ) , w ith z e r o o r le s s th a n

in n a t u r e ( f i g . 4 ) . R e p e a t e d s c o r e s o f t i m e s in d i f f e r e n t p a n e l s

1%

f o r a ll

o t h e r s p e c i e s . T h e r e is y e t a n o t h e r s t r i k i n g f a c t . A l t h o u g h

and

w o u n d e d a n im a ls a r e e n c o u n te r e d

h o llo w s o f th e c a v e ,

th e y

have

th e sp e c ia l fe a tu re o f

th r o u g h o u t th e F r a n c o -

c u t - o f f o r , m o r e l ik e l y , b e n t - i n f i n g e r s . T h e v a r i o u s c o m b i n a ­

C a n t a b r i a n r e g i o n , m o s t c a s e s o c c u r in t h e A r i è g e s e c t o r o f

tio n s o f f in g e rs m ig h t h a v e b e e n p a r t o f a k in d o f s y m b o lic

th e P y r e n e e s , w ith th e g r e a te s t n u m b e r r e p r e s e n te d a t N ia u x

c o d e o f th e a n i m a ls m o s t c o m m o n ly r e p r e s e n te d in fig u r a tiv e

(2 5 %

a r t ( h o r s e , b is o n , ib e x , e t c .) . T h e s a m e d ig ita l f o rm u la a p p e a r s

of

fig u re d

te s tim o n y

to

a n im a ls ).

m a g ic

sp e lls

The

v a lu e

fo r g a m e

of

th e

m ig h t

w ound be

as

m e re ly

a an

a g a i n in s i d e - b y - s i d e h a n d s r e p e a t e d

tw ice a n d a lte rn a tin g

a c c e s s o r y p h e n o m e n o n , b u t th e h u n tin g s y m b o lis m to w h ic h

b e t w e e n re d a n d b la ck (fig . 4 ) . E x a m p l e s c a n a l s o b e fo u n d a t

it r e f e r s is c e r t a i n . T h e f a c t t h a t w o u n d s a p p e a r e s s e n t i a l l y

t h e o p e n i n g s o f n i c h e s o r f i s s u r e s , in t h e p o s i t i o n n o r m a l l y

o n ly

o c c u p ie d b y a n im a ls o r s ig n s o f C D a n d S 1 g r o u p s . A s s tra n g e

on

th e b o d ie s o f th e b a s ic t w o s o m e

n e c te d w ith th e A B

=

is p e r h a p s c o n ­

S 'S 2 e q u a tio n , th e w o u n d s b e in g th e

a s it m a y

seem ,

th e

"m u tila te d

h an d s"

o f G a r g a s , w h ic h

e q u i v a l e n t o f S 2 , t h a t is , t h e f e m a l e c o n n o t a t i o n . T h r e e p i e c e s

i n c l u d e m a n y c h i l d r e n ' s h a n d s , a r e n o t m i s s i n g a ll f i v e f i n ­

of e v id e n ce

to s u p p o r t th is c o n t e n t i o n : a

g e r s . T h e y s e e m to c o r r e s p o n d to a fa irly ra tio n a l a p p lic a tio n

h o r s e a t L a s c a u x b e a r i n g s e v e n w o u n d s o n i ts b o d y a n d a n S 2

o f s ig n a ls in v o lv in g v a r ia b ly b e n t f in g e rs , g e s t u r e s th a t c a n

s i g n ( f ig . 5 ) o n i ts n e c k a n d w i t h e r s ; a b i s o n a t B e r n i f a l w h o s e

s ti ll b e o b s e r v e d

s h o u l d e r h a s a n o v a l w o u n d f l a n k e d b y t w o l it t le s t i c k s ; a n d

n o ta b ly th e B u s h m e n . A s id e fro m th e m o n u m e n ta l a s p e c t o f

a b is o n a t N ia u x e n g r a v e d o n c la y , w h ic h h a s t h r e e w o u n d s

th e c o n n e c t i o n s b e tw e e n th e g r o u p s o f h a n d s a n d th e ir n a t­

m a y b e in v o k e d

a n d t w o l it t le s t i c k s o n i ts s i d e . T h e s e p a r a l l e l s t i c k s b e l o n g t o

to d ay

am ong

c e rta in

g r o u p s o f h u n te rs ,

u r a l s u p p o r t , t h e i d e o g r a p h i c a s p e c t is e x t r e m e l y i m p r e s s i v e .

th e h ig h ly v a r ie d p o rtio n o f m a s c u lin e s y m b o ls . O n e o f th e

A n im a l a n d h u m a n f ig u re s m a k e u p th e g r o u n d o n w h ic h

b e st e x a m p le s o f th e re la tio n s h ip b e tw e e n s ig n s a n d a n im a ls

o u r t e n t a t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n o f w a ll p a i n t i n g r e s t s . T h i s e x p l a ­

is t h a t o f t h e g r e a t p a n e l o f P e c h - M e r l e ( f i g . 3 ) m a d e u p o f

n a t i o n c a l l s o n d a t a w h i c h , in t h e w a y t h e y a r e a s s e m b l e d ,

tw o g r o u p in g s th a t s h a r e th e s a m e C a n im a l (C 2 m a m m o th ).

s u g g e s t a c o m p le x id e o lo g ic a l c o n s t r u c t. T o w h a t e x t e n t c a n

O ne

o b je c ts th a t a r e

is t h e a u r o c h s - h o r s e ( A B 2 ), a n d

th e o t h e r th e h o r s e -

b i s o n ( A B 1). B e t w e e n t h e t w o g r o u p i n g s o f f i g u r e s a r e t h r e e

fo u n d

not on

w a lls b u t o n

s ite s o f liv in g

q u a r t e r s c o r r o b o r a t e th is c la im ?

a n im a ls : a b u ll, a c o w , a n d a m a m m o t h . E a c h b e a r s d if f e r e n t s i g n s . T h e b u ll b e a r s a d o u b l e

lin e o f d a s h e s w ith

e x t e n s i o n s ( S ', o f m a le c h a r a c t e r ). T h e c o w

la te ra l

Objects

is r i d d l e d w i t h

w o u n d s th a t s e e m to p la y th e ro le o f S 2 s ig n s . T h e m a m m o th

C a v e s c o n t a i n p a r t i c u l a r l y p r e c i o u s d a t a , if o n l y b e c a u s e

is c o v e r e d w i t h r e d s p o t s a l i g n e d t o f o r m t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f

th e i m a g e s h a v e p r e s e r v e d th e ir lo c a tio n o n w a lls. A n o le ss

th e S 3 s ig n .

p re c io u s s o u rc e o f in fo rm a tio n , h o w e v e r , m a y b e fo u n d o n

From

th is e v i d e n c e

w e can

h y p o th e s iz e

th a t

" w o u n d s " h a v e th e v a lu e o f a fe m a le s y m b o l. E s ta b lis h in g th is s y m b o lis m

w o u ld o p e n a v a s t r e a lm o f p o s s ib ilitie s fo r

th e s y m b o lic s y s te m o f P a le o lith ic a r t , o n e th a t i n v o lv e s th e

th e s u r f a c e s o f P a le o lith ic flo o r s s tr e w n w ith o b j e c ts th a t b e a r h u m a n a n d a n im a l f ig u r e s . S o m e o f t h e s e o b je c ts a r e fa irly so ft can

W h ile th e p ro b le m h in t a t s o m e

o f m e ta p h y s ic a l

s o lu tio n ,

positive

h a n d i m p r i n t s ( in w h i c h a h a n d is s m e a r e d w i t h c o l o r a n d p r e s s e d f la t a g a i n s t t h e w a l l ) a n d w h ic h a h a n d c o lo r)

ra ise

is l a id

q u e stio n s

negative

h a n d i m p r i n t s ( in

s to n e to

or

th e m ,

f ra g m e n ts and

we

of bone a re

s tr u c k

on by

w h ic h th e ir

re s is ta n t

to

P o s itiv e h a n d s a r e s u b s ta n tia lly r a r e r th a n

c le a r

ro le in l iv in g q u a r t e r s a s t h e fig u r e s p l a y e d in th e c a v e , a n d w h e th e r th e y

w e re u sed

to re p r o d u c e th e s a m e c o m b in a ­

t io n s . T h e s e q u e s t i o n s a r e d iffic u lt to a n s w e r d e c is iv e ly , fo r th e p o s s ib ilitie s o f i c o n o g r a p h i e c o m b i n a ti o n s a r e e x t r e m e l y

in

v a r ie d . T h e fig u re s (s t a tu e t t e s , p la q u e tte s o r b lo c k s , w e a p ­

an sw ers.

o n s o r to o ls , p e r s o n a l a d o r n m e n t s ) m a y h a v e b e e n a s s e m ­

flat a g a i n s t th e w a ll a n d o u t l in e d e q u a lly

of

a ttrib u te d

c o n te n t, w e a s k w h e th e r th e y c o u ld h a v e p la y e d th e s a m e

o f w o u n d s a llo w s u s to d o n o m o r e

k in d

be

r e s e m b la n c e to th e f ig u re s o n w a lls. G iv e n th e ir ic o n o g r a p h ie

H ands

th a n

fra g m e n ts

f ig u re s h a v e b e e n in c is e d o r s c u lp te d . N o p ra c tic a l f u n ctio n

a l t e r n a t i o n o f s y m b o l s o f lif e a n d d e a t h .

n e g a tiv e h a n d s

b le d in a m e a n in g f u l w a y ( a c c o r d i n g to th e C -A -B -C

+

D

a n d s h o w u p i n f r e q u e n t l y in g r o u p i n g s , b u t t h e B a y o l c a v e in

m o d e l), a c o n f ig u r a tio n th a t m a y p r e s u p p o s e , fo r e x a m p le ,

t h e A r d è c h e r e g i o n h a s a g o o d e x a m p l e . It s h o w s s i x p o s i t i v e

e ith e r s e v e ra l p la q u e tte s e a c h b e a rin g o n e fig u re , o r s e v e ra l

18

PRE HI ST O RI C p la q u e tte s

each

b e a rin g

sev eral

a n im a l

fig u re s .

U n f o r tu ­

tw o a n im a ls A -B , o f te n a s s o c ia te d

REL IG ION

w ith o n e o r tw o a n im a ls

n a t e l y r a r e a r e t h e c a s e s w h e r e p o r t a b l e o b j e c t s a r e f o u n d in

fro m g r o u p C . H u m a n fig u re s a n d m a le a n d fe m a le s y m b o ls

th e ir f u n c tio n a l p la c e s , a n d

ra r e r a r e s ite s w h e r e th e

a r e a l s o p r e s e n t , a s t h e y a r e in w a l l p a i n t i n g s . T h e s p e c i a l ­

e x c a v a t o r s to o k th e tro u b le to r e c o r d th e e x a c t p o s itio n o f th e

iz e d u s e o f c e r ta in o b je c ts m a y h a v e in f lu e n c e d th e c h o ic e o f

re lic s. Y e t w e c a n b e g in b y a s s u m i n g t h a t, s in c e c a v e s e x is te d

th e f ig u re s th a t w e r e d r a w n o n th e m . T h e r e w e r e r e la tiv e ly

even

o n l y in a l i m i t e d n u m b e r o f a r e a s w h i l e v a s t t e r r i t o r i e s l e n t

fe w

d e co ra te d

o b je c ts

d u rin g

th e

first

m ille n n ia ;

re a lis tic

th e m se lv e s o n ly

to o p e n -a ir s e ttle m e n ts , th e p la q u e tte s o f

f i g u r e s , a t l e a s t , w e r e r a r e . It is n o t u n t i l t h e m i d d l e a n d l a t e

s to n e ,

bone

M a g d a le n ia n A g e , fro m

iv o ry ,

abound

at

or

such

s ite s

or

th e

s ta tu e tte s

f u l f il l e d

th e

w h ic h

ro le

s o m e tim e s

th a t o th e r w is e

de­

re in d e e r h o rn P r o p e llin g

v o lv e d u p o n c a v e w a lls .

and

1 2 ,0 0 0 to 9 0 0 0 , th a t o b je c ts m a d e o f

b o n e b e g in

d e v ice s— h o o k ed

to b e c o v e r e d

p ie ce s

w ith

p ro b a b ly

fig u re s.

d e s ig n e d

to

h u rl a s s e g a is a t g a m e — m o s t o f te n

d e p ic t a s in g le a n im a l,

r e f l e c t , in w h o l e o r in p a r t , t h e s a m e i d e o l o g i c a l s c h e m e t h a t

c lo s e

th is

is d i s p l a y e d b y t h e g r o u p i n g o f t h e f i g u r e s o n t h e w a l l s .

e c le c tic a s s o r tm e n t c a n

We

m ay

a lso

assu m e

th a t

th e

o th e r

d e co ra te d

o b je c ts

to

ib e x ,

hook.

re in d e e r,

(th e ir

Statuettes

th e

real

On

o b je c ts

in

th e

m o st

b e fo u n d : h o rs e , b iso n , m a m m o th ,

b ig

c a t,

fish ,

is

s ti ll

unknow n)

u se

c a te g o ry

b ird .

The

p ro p e llin g

th u s

fa ll

in

d e v ic e s

th e

sam e

ico n o g ra p h ie c a te g o ry a s p la q u e tte s a n d s ta tu e tte s .

S t a t u e t t e s o f a n i m a l s a r e r e l a t i v e l y r a r e in t h e P a l e o l i t h i c a r t o f w e s te rn

E u r o p e . T h e c a v e o f I s tu ritz

(B a s s e s -P y ré n é e s )

Perforated Sticks

s ta n d s o u t a s a n e x c e p t i o n w ith its n u m e r o u s a n i m a ls (b is o n , h o r s e s , b e a r s ) i n c is e d in s o f t r o c k . T h e t r u e d o m a i n o f a n im a l f i g u r e s in r o u n d

r e l i e f is c e n t r a l a n d

e a s te rn

E u ro p e. T h e

p ic to r ia l r e p e r t o r y o f E u r o p e e a s t o f t h e R h in e is m o s t ly m a d e u p o f s t a t u e t t e s m o l d e d in c l a y m i x e d w i t h p o w d e r e d b o n e ( M o r a v i a ) , i n c i s e d in b o n e o r i n m a m m o t h

iv o ry ; a n d fig u ­

rin e s o f m a m m o t h , h o r s e , b is o n , a n d b ig c a ts . T h e f u n c tio n s o f th e s e s ta tu e tte s a r e a s y e t u n c le a r, b u t s in c e th e y m u s t h a v e a s s u m e d th e s a m e r o le a s th a t p la y e d b y th e e n g r a v i n g s a n d p a i n t i n g s in t h e c a v e s , t h e y m u s t h a v e t h e s a m e s y m ­ b o lic r a n g e s . O n e c a t e g o r y o f f i g u r e s is m a d e u p o f f e m a l e s t a t u e t t e s , in a c c u r a te ly c a lle d

" V e n u s ” f i g u r e s , t h a t a p p e a r in v a r i o u s

fo r m s d e p e n d i n g o n th e s ta g e s o f th e P a le o lith ic e p o c h a n d th e r e g io n s in w h ic h t h e y w e r e e x e c u t e d . T h e i te m s d i s c o v ­ e r e d a t K o stie n k i (o n th e D o n R iv e r), o n U k r a n ia n s ite s , a t P r e d m o s t in M o r a v i a , W i l l e n d o r f in A u s t r i a , a n d a t B r a s s e m pouy

and

d e ta ils

of

L esp u g u e th e ir

in

s o u th w e s te rn

e x e cu tio n

th a t

p icto ria l tra d itio n s . W e re th e

th e y

F ran ce b e lo n g

show to

in

th e

th e

sam e

r e lig io u s t r a d itio n s th a t

th e y

w e r e s u p p o s e d t o i l l u s t r a t e o f t h e s a m e n a t u r e ? T h a t is h a r d to a n s w e r , fo r th e g o o d re a s o n th a t fe m a le s ta tu e tte s c a n o n ly s y m b o l i z e a lim ite d n u m b e r o f f u n c t i o n s , g e n e r a l l y r e l a ti n g to

fe rtility .

B ased

on

w hat

we

know

to d ay ,

it

w o u ld

be

d iffic u lt to s a y a n y m o r e a b o u t t h e m , e x c e p t p e r h a p s t h a t th e s t a t u e tt e s d i s c o v e r e d in liv in g q u a r t e r s m a y h a v e p l a y e d a n i d e n t i c a l r o l e t o t h a t o f t h e s i g n s in t h e g r o u p i n g s o f f i g u r e s o n th e w a lls . M a le f ig u re s b y th e ir v e r y s c a r c ity s e e m to h a v e o c c u p ie d a m u c h m o re m o d e s t p la ce . In b r i e f , p l a q u e t t e s , w h i c h a r e f a r m o r e n u m e r o u s in t h e W e s t th a n s ta t u e tt e s , a n d s ta t u e tt e s , w h ic h a r e m o r e n u m e r ­ o u s th a n p l a q u e t t e s in c e n t r a l a n d e a s t e r n E u r o p e , s e e m have had

th e s a m e fu n c tio n s . G iv e n

to

th e re s e m b la n c e s b e ­

tw e e n p o rta b le a r t (o n p la q u e tte s a n d s ta tu e tte s ) a n d m u ra l a r t, w e c a n a s c rib e id e n tica l fu n c tio n s to th e m a n d a s s im ila te th e m to th e s a m e re lig io u s p r o c e s s . U n f o r tu n a te ly , th is d o e s

P e r f o r a te d s tic k s a r e a d if f e r e n t s to r y . A k in d o f le v e r m a d e o f r e in d e e r h o r n s , th e s tic k c o n s i s ts o f a c y lin d r ic a l h a n d le w ith a b if u r c a t io n a t o n e e n d in w h ic h a h o l e t h r e e c e n t i m e ­ t e r s in d i a m e t e r h a s b e e n p i e r c e d a t th e t h ic k e s t p o i n t . Its re a l u s e w a s to s tr a i g h t e n o u t , w h ile h o t o r c o ld , th e lo n g a s s e g a i s p e a r s th a t h a d k e p t th e c u r v a t u r e o f th e h o r n s fro m w h ic h th e y h a d b e e n m a d e . T h e c la s s o f p e r f o r a te d s tic k s in c lu d e s a l a r g e n u m b e r o f c a r e f u l l y d e c o r a t e d o b j e c t s . In a s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e m , t h e h a n d l e is s c u l p t e d in t h e s h a p e o f a p h a llu s . S o m e tim e s b o th e x te n s io n s o f th e h e a d o f th e o b je c t h a v e th is d e c o r a t io n . T h e r e a r e a l s o m a n y p e r f o r a te d s tic k s th a t b e a r th e A -B g r o u p in g (h o r s e -b i s o n ) o r th e th ird a n im a l, in t h e f o r m o f a s t a g , a r e i n d e e r , o r a n i b e x . A w h o l e s e r i e s o f p e r f o r a te d w ith

s tic k s a r e

tw o

heads

of

d e co ra te d b iso n ,

on

h ig h ly

th e ir la te ra l e x t e n s i o n s g e o m e triz e d

and

o f te n

r e d u c e d to tw o s e ts o f p a ra lle l b a r s . T h is d e c o r a t iv e e le m e n t c a n b e fo u n d fro m th e A s tu ria s to S w itz e rla n d . S o m e p e r f o ­ ra te d

s tic k s

D o rd o g n e

fe a tu re

in

r e a lis tic

L a u g e rie -B a sse ,

scen es, w h ic h

such on

as

one

th e

s id e

one

at

show s a

m a n k n o c k e d o v e r b y a b is o n a n d o n th e o t h e r s id e a h o r s e ; o r t h e o n e in L a M a d e l e i n e , w h i c h h a s a m a n , a s n a k e , a n d tw o

h o rse s

C e rta in ly

on

th e se

one

s id e ,

a n im a ls

m a n n e r : th e H -B

and

w ere

tw o

b iso n

n ot g ro u p ed

on

th e

in a

+ A fo r m u la ( H u m a n - b is o n

o th e r.

f o rtu ito u s

+ h o r s e ) is t h e

s a m e f o r m u l a a s in t h e f a m o u s s c e n e o n t h e W e l l a t L a s c a u x (a m a n k n o c k e d o v e r b y a b is o n , w ith a h o r s e o n th e o p p o s i t e w a ll).

The

seco n d

m y th ic c o n te n t, h o rse

scen e,

h ow ever,

f o r its f o r m u la , H -A

m u st +

re fe r

B ( +

to

a n o th e r

S) (H u m a n -

+ b i s o n [ a n d s n a k e ] ) , h a s n o k n o w n e q u i v a l e n t , b u t it

d o e s h ig h lig h t th e i m p e r a tiv e c h a r a c t e r o f th e r e p r e s e n ta t io n o f t h e c o m p l e m e n t a r y a n i m a l : in t h e f i r s t c a s e , t h e h o r s e ; in th e

seco n d ,

th e

b iso n .

We

s h o u ld

a lso

n o te

th a t,

as

at

L a s c a u x , t h e s e c o n d a n i m a l is o n t h e s i d e o p p o s i t e t o t h e o n e w ith th e s c e n e .

n o t e n t ir e l y c la r if y th e d e t a il s o f t h e p r o c e s s t h a t w e k n o w to have

b o rro w e d

th e

sam e

b a sic s y m b o ls

t h r o u g h o u t a ll o f

Assegais

E u r o p e fo r t w e n ty t h o u s a n d y e a r s . T h e fo rm u la A -B , C , D + S ',

S2,

S 1 d id

not

n e c e s s a r ily

have

th e

sam e

id e o lo g ic a l

A s s e g a is

m ake

up

a

c a te g o ry

of

p a rtic u la rly

e x p re s siv e

i m p l i c a t i o n s in t h e U r a l s a s it d i d o n t h e b a n k s o f t h e V é z è r e .

d e c o r a te d ite m s . T h e o r n a m e n ta tio n o n th e s e s p e a r s a p p e a r s

The

r e la tiv e ly

e a rly ,

G ö n n e r s d o r f (d a tin g f ro m th e M a g d a le n ia n e p o c h c a . 1 0 ,0 0 0 )

p a tte rn s ,

s o m e tim e s

le ft ly in g o n th e g r o u n d m a y n o t h a v e h a d th e s a m e fu n c tio n

T h e s e m a r k i n g s m a y c o r r e s p o n d t o d i f f e r e n t h u n t e r s in t h e

as

s a m e g r o u p . B u t a s tim e w e n t b y , th e a n im a l f ig u re s m u lti­

h u n d red s

th e

heavy

of

p la q u e tte s

e n g ra v e d

b lo c k s

of

of

e n g ra v e d

th e

sch ist

A u rig n a c ia n

fro m

epoch

a r o u n d 3 0 ,0 0 0 .

a ro u n d

2 0 ,0 0 0 ,

of a

h ig h ly

and

c o n s is ts

s im p lif ie d

of g e o m e tric

a n im a l

fig u re .

p lie d o n s o m e o f t h e s e a s s e g a is . D u r in g t h e l a te M a g d a l e n i a n

It s e e m s p o s s i b l e n e v e r t h e l e s s t o d i s c e r n in t h e g r o u p i n g s

e r a , s o m e w e r e c o v e r e d w ith r o w s o f h o r s e s o n a r a i s e d fie ld ,

o f a r t o b je c ts a n d m u r a l a r t a lik e th e s y s te m a t i c p r e s e n c e o f

w h ic h s u g g e s ts th a t th e y s e r v e d a s i n s tr u m e n ts fo r p a r a d e s

19

I N T R O D U C T I O N or

r itu a ls

ra th e r

th a n

as

e f fe c tiv e

a s s e g a is a r e o f te n p e r f o r a te d

w eap on s.

to m a k e th e m

The

ends

of

in to p e n d a n ts .

s e e m to b e p a r a d i n g in f r o n t o f a b is o n , o r a n o t h e r ite m f ro m C h a n c e la d e

(fig .

7 .2 )

on

w h ic h

sev en

hum an

s ilh o u e tte s

S u ch p ie ce s m a y h a v e b e e n p a rt o f a p a rtic u la r a s s e g a i th a t

a p p e a r to s u r r o u n d a b i s o n 's h e a d a n d s e v e r e d fr o n t h o o v e s .

w a s l u c k y in i ts h u n t i n g a n d t h e r e b y s e r v e d a s a “ t a l i s m a n . "

T h e s e tw o e x a m p le s , p ro b a b ly v a r ia n ts o f th e s a m e th e m e ,

T h e n u m e r o u s p e n d a n t s f o u n d in t h e U p p e r P a l e o l i t h i c A g e

show

a r e la rg e ly in sp ire d b y s e x u a l s y m b o lism (c o w rie s h e ll, o v a l

d e c ip h e r a n

p e n d a n t s , s t a g c a n i n e s , e t c . ) . It is t h u s l ik e l y t h a t t h e a s s e g a i

m essag e.

p la y e d a d u a l s y m b o lic ro le . A fe w in d ic e s s e e m

w ith

th e

w ound.

M any

th e a s s e g a i a n d d e ta ils

fro m

th e

w a lls , s u c h a s o v a l n ic h e s p a in te d re d a n d

f e m a l e s y m b t Is n a tu ra l

re lie f o f

th e w o u n d s o n

th e d is c o v e ry o f n e w in c r e a s in g ly

v e r s io n s m ig h t h e lp u s to

im p o rta n t

p a rt o f th e

P a le o lith ic

A s ig n ific a n t n u m b e r o f s p e c im e n s (fig s . 7 .4 , 7 .5 , 7 .6 ) b e a r

to s u p p o rt

t h i s c o n t e n t i o n , n a m e l y , t h e p r o b a b l e a s s i m i l a t i o n in m u r a l a r t o f m a le s y m b o ls w ith

how

a n o r n a m e n ta tio n

t h a t is v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o i d e n t i f y : a r o w o f

c u r v e s a n d o v o id fig u re s in c lu d in g a r e c o g n iz a b le h o r s e h e r e and

t h e r e o r a h ig h ly s im p lif ie d s ta g , o r s o m e t im e s a fish .

G iv e n

th e c o n s ta n c y

w ith

w h ic h

g e o m e tr ic m o tifs r e p la c e

c e r t a i n a n i m a l s , s u p p o r t s u c h a h y p o t h e s i s . B u t it is d i f f i c u l t

e x p lic it f ig u re s , w e c o u ld a lm o s t s p e a k o f id e o g r a m s , th o u g h

to c o n s o l id a t e th e id e o lo g ic a l a s p e c t s o f th is s y m b o lic f r a m e

w e n e e d n o t s e e in t h e s e s e m i g e o m e t r i c f i g u r e s t h e e l e m e n t s

of referen ce.

o f " w r i ti n g ." W e c a n a s s u m e th a t th e g e o m e tr iz e d s y m b o ls th e

p r e s e r v e d t h e i r m e a n i n g , s o t h a t a g r o u p i n g l ik e " c h e v r o n s -

m o re

b ro k e n lin e s " c o u ld b e e q u iv a le n t to , fo r i n s ta n c e , " h o r s e -

s e n s itiv e in te r p r e ta tio n . H a r p o o n p o in ts w ith r e a lis tic d e c o ­

s n a k e , " c h e v r o n s b e i n g t h e ta il e n d o f a r o w o f h o r s e s , a n d

O th e r

d e co ra te d

o b je c ts

th a t

m ig h t

re lig io u s th o u g h t o f P a le o lith ic m a n

shed

lig h t

on

re q u ire a n e v e n

ra tio n a r e e x tr e m e ly r a r e . C o n v e r s e ly , w e d o h a v e a c o n s i d ­

t h e b r o k e n l in e b e i n g t h e g e o m e t r i z a t i o n o f th e s n a k e 's b o d y :

e r a b l e n u m b e r o f s p a t u l a s in t h e s h a p e o f f i s h , o f t e n h i g h l y

b o t h c a s e s e x i s t in a n e x p l i c i t f o r m . It

g e o m e triz e d . T h e y m a y b e a r s y m b o lic m e a n in g , b u t a t w h a t

m ig h t

seem

s u r p r is in g

to

hear

so

l it t le

s a id

ab ou t

le v e l? T h e s c a le o f v a lu e s m a y r a n g e fro m a r e p r e s e n ta tio n o f

" p r e h i s t o r i c r e l ig i o n ." A s f a r a s p r a c ti c e s a r e c o n c e r n e d , o u r

a p rim a rily a e s th e tic c h a r a c t e r to a n i n s tr u m e n t in d is p e n s ­

k n o w le d g e c o n s is ts m a in ly o f g a p s . W e m a y im a g in e th a t th e

a b le fo r th e e x e c u tio n o f a ritu a l. T h e s a m e m a y b e s a id o f th e

caves

w e re

s h r i n e s in

have

w h ic h

h ig h ly

e la b o ra te

ritu a ls

to o k

r i n g s o f b o n e , t h r e e o r f o u r c e n t i m e t e r s in d i a m e t e r , w i t h a

p l a c e , b u t a ll w e

v e r y e c le c tic r a n g e o f a n im a l e n g r a v i n g s o n b o th s id e s . T h e

d e a d w e r e b u r i e d w i t h o c h e r a n d , a t l e a s t in s o m e c a s e s , w i t h

fi s h s p a t u l a w i t h i ts i n e v i t a b l e i c o n o g r a p h i e b a s e ( u s u a l l y a

fu n e ra ry

Salmonidac),

sp e c ie s o f

and

th e rin g s o f b o n e o n

w h ic h

a ll

p erso n al

P a le o lith ic m a n

s p e c ie s a r e r e p r e s e n te d (in c lu d in g th e h u m a n s p e c ie s ) p r o ­

n o th in g a b o u t

v id e u s o n l y w ith a b a s ic a s s u m p t io n a n d c e r ta i n ly n o t w ith

e n g rav ed

i s w a ll d e c o r a t i o n s . T h e f a c t t h a t t h e

e f f e c ts ,

som e i ts

b lo c k s

le a d s

n o tio n

m o d a litie s te ll

us

of an in

us about

to

a scrib e

to

U pper

a fte rlife , b u t w e k n o w

any

d e ta il.

The

ico n o g ra p h ie

ta b le ts o r

a c tiv itie s

th a t

e v i d e n c e f o r a n e n t i r e s u p e r s t r u c t u r e o f b e l i e f s . It is t h e r e f o r e

m u s t h a v e h a d a r e lig io u s p u r p o s e , b u t w e a r e fa r fro m b e in g

b y r e f e r e n c e to th e fig u r e s o n w a lls a n d p l a q u e t t e s th a t th e

a b l e t o a s s e r t w h a t k i n d o f p u r p o s e it w a s . T h e s a m e a p p l i e s

ic o n o g r a p h y o f p o r ta b le o b je c ts c a n

b e a n a ly z e d .

W e m ay

to d e c o r a te d

o b je c ts ( p e r f o r a te d

s tic k s , p ro p e llin g d e v ic e s ,

a l s o w a n t t o v i e w in t h e s a m e s p i r i t t h e s o - c a l l e d s i l h o u e t t e

s p a t u l a s , e t c .) o f w h ic h w e c a n n o t e v e n c la im

to k n o w

o u tlin e s ,

e xact u sag e.

ic o n o g r a p h y

w h ic h

s m a ll

p e n d a n ts

ca rv e d

th e re a re m a n y k n o w n

out

of a

h y o id

bone,

of

e x a m p le s s h o w in g h e a d s o f

h o r s e s a s w e ll a s a g r o u p o f e i g h t e e n

ib ex h e a d s a n d

one

an d

N e v e r th e le s s ,

th e

th e c o n s ta n c y o f c e rta in

w e a lth

o f th e

re la tio n s h ip s b e tw e e n

th e

fig u re s

a n d b e tw e e n fig u re s a n d th e s u r f a c e s o n w h ic h th e y a p p e a r

b is o n h e a d , w h ic h m a y r e m in d u s o f th e tria d h o r s e - b is o n -

m a k e it p o s s i b l e f o r u s t o s k e t c h t h e b a r e o u t l i n e s o f a s y s t e m

i b e x , t h e m o d e l o f w a ll d e p i c t i o n .

of

O n e l a s t c a t e g o r y o f m a t e r i a l s is m a d e u p o f g r o u p i n g s o f

r e lig io u s

th o u g h t,

p r e s s fe e lin g s (w ith

b o n e , a s s e g a i s h a f ts , e t c .) , s im ila r to

re fle ct

th e p e r f o r a te d

s tic k s

re fe rr e d to a b o v e . S o m e o f th e s e o b je c ts b e a r e x p lic it fig u re s , l ik e t h e b o n e t u b e o f T o r r e ( S p a i n ) , w h i c h

th o u g h

its

b ack g ro u n d

is

s ti ll

very

m u rk y . T h e c o m p le x ity a n d q u a lity o f th e s e g r o u p in g s e x ­

fig u re s e n g r a v e d m o s tly o n c y lin d ric a l o b je c ts (tu b e s o f b ird

n u a n c e s tie d to p l a c e s a n d

s im u lta n e o u s ly

th e

a e s th e tic

and

tim e s ) th a t

re lig io u s

life

of

P a le o lith ic m a n . A .L .- G ./g .h .

in t h e s p a c e o f

fifte e n c e n tim e te r s d e p ic ts a s e r ie s o f b u s ts in c lu d in g a s ta g , m an,

h o rse ,

c h a m o is ,

g r o u p in g , w h ic h

ib ex,

and

a u ro ch s

(fig .

7 .1 ) .

T h is

m a y a l s o i n c o r p o r a t e s ig n s in p a ra lle l o r

c o n v e r g i n g l i n e s c r o s s - h a t c h e d i n s i d e w i t h l a d d e r s , is n o t f a r rem o ved

fro m

c e r ta i n w a ll g r o u p in g s , s u c h a s th e d i v e r o f

P o r t e l ( A r i è g e ) , w h o s e m i d d l e p a r t is o c c u p i e d b y a h o r s e , a b iso n , a n d

m a le a n d

fe m a le s ig n s , w h ile th e

p e rip h e ry

is

o c c u p i e d b y th e th ird s ig n (S 3), a n ib e x , a n d a s ta g . It w o u ld b e h a rd n o t to re g a rd th e s e v a r io u s a s s e m b le d a n im a ls a s th e p r o ta g o n is ts o f a m y th ic a l s to ry , a m y th o g r a m c a ta lo g u e

of

th e

p resu m ed

v ic tim s

of a

r a th e r th a n a

s p e ll

of

h u n tin g

m a g ic . B u t w h a te v e r th e f ig u re s m a y d e s i g n a t e p re c is e ly , w e c a n n o t y e t a ffo rd to g o o u ts id e th e re a lm o f fa ct to v e n t u r e a n e x p la n a tio n . T h u s w e h a v e a w h o le s e rie s o f g r o u p in g s o n c y lin d e r s o r p la q u e tte s , g r a p h ic a lly e x p lic it b u t ju s t a s m y s ­ t e r io u s a s e v e r , s u c h a s th e s tr a n g e o b je c t f o u n d in L e s E y z ie s o n w h ic h e ig h t h u n te r s c a r r y in g a s s e g a is o n th e ir s h o u ld e r s

20

BIBLIOGRAPHY H. br eu il , Quatre cents siècles d'art pariétal (Montignac 1952). r. gra z io si , L'arte dell’antica eta della pietra ( Florence 1956). a . i. am in c -em pera ir e , La signification de Varl rupestre paléolithique (Paris 1962). andrê i.eroig o u rh an . Préhistoire de Part occidental (Paris 1965); Les religions de la préhistoire (Paris 1971); "Les signes pariétaux de Paléolithique’su­ périeur franco-cantabrique," Simposio intern, de arte rupestre (Barce­

lona 1968), 67-77, fig.; "Considérations sur l'organisation spatiale des figures animales dans l'art pariétal paléolithique," Actes del Symposium intern, de arte preliis. (Santander 1972), 281-308; "Iconog­ raphie et interprétation," Val Camonica symposium 72 (Capo di Ponte 1975), 49-55. a r let te le ro i -c o u r iia n , "The Flowers Found with Shanidar IV, a Neanderthal Burial in Iraq," Science 190 (1975): 562-64. L. m eroc , "Informations archéologiques, Circonscription de Toulouse, Mas d'Azil," Gallia Préhistoire 4 (1961):256-57.

" N O M A D I C

T H O U G H T "

A N D

R E L I G I O U S

A C T I O N

T h e m y th o lo g y o f h u n te r -g a th e r e r s o c ie tie s p r e s e n ts n o ta ­

" N omadic T hought " and R eligious A ction

b le s im ila ritie s . T h e m y th s th a t r e t r a c e th e o r ig in s o f a s o c ie ty a r e a p p a r e n t l y u n i v e r s a l a n d c o m e o u t o f t h e s a m e m o l d . In

W h e n th e ra in y s e a s o n c o m e s , th e m e n d ic a n t m o n k s to p s w a n d e r in g a n d h e a d s b a ck to h is m o n a s t e r y .1 For

som e

s tro n g

years

and

now ,

re n e w e d

n o m a d ic in te re s t

s o c ie tie s

am ong

th e se

m y th s ,

have

aw akened

e th n o lo g is ts .

On

an

to b e m u tu a lly c o m p a r a b l e , a n d a t te m p t s h a v e b e e n m a d e to

a re

h ero

c re a te s

m a n k in d

and

i ts

c r a f ts , a n d

not

g o d s:

th e

s tr o n g ly

These

h e ro e s

or

c re a to r

h a v e to d o w ith

s p ir its

no

lo n g e r

e x is te n tia l id e o lo g y a n d

n o t w i t h n o r m a t i v e i d e o l o g y . J u s t a s t h e a c c e n t is p l a c e d o n

e m p iric a l d iv e r s ity

to o v e r c o m e .

cu ltu re

i n t e r v e n e in t h e a f f a i r s o f m e n , a n d t h a t i s w h y t h e y a r e n o t w o rs h ip e d . T h e y

c o n s tr u c t m o d e ls o f s u c h s o c ie tie s , th a t is, to g o b e y o n d th e seeks

c u ltu re

s h a p e s t h e l a n d s c a p e a n d a n i m a l s . In t h e c o s m o l o g y , s p i r i t s

in tu itiv e le v e l, th e s e s o c ie tie s s c a t te r e d o v e r th e g lo b e s e e m

th a t s c ie n c e

th e

c u s to m s ; h e d o m e s tic a te s fire , te a c h e s a r ts a n d

p erso n

in

n o m a d ic

s o c ie ty ,

so

th e

in d iv id u a liz e d ; e g a lita r ia n is m

w o rld w ith in

o f s p ir its

is

th e g r o u p

is

a t te m p t s a t s y n t h e s i s , n o ta b ly th e c o lle c tiv e w o r k p u b lis h e d

r e f l e c t e d in t h e a b s e n c e o f a n y h i e r a r c h y a m o n g t h e s p i r i t s .

u n d e r th e d ire c tio n o f L e e a n d D e V o re 2 o n h u n te r -g a th e r e r s ,

T h e in d iv id u a l d e a ls d ir e c tly w ith th e w o r ld o f th e s u p e r n a t ­

and

th e

w o rk s

of

B.

S p o o n e r1 on

e v i d e n c e o f th e s p e c ia l p o s itio n

p a sto ra l

nom ad s,

a re

th a t n o m a d ic s o c ie tie s o c ­

T h e te rm

u ra l.

E xcep t

fo r

th e

s h a m a n /d o c to r,

th e re

is

no

r e lia b le

m e d ia tio n b y s p e c ia liz e d in d i v id u a l s .7 T h e c u l t u r e h e r o w h o o f f e r s t h e w o r l d t o h u m a n s a f t e r h e h a s c r e a t e d t h e m is n o t

c u p y t o d a y in e t h n o l o g y . " n o m a d i s m ” c o v e r s q u ite d iv e r s e p h e n o m e n a :

to ta lly

ab sen t

fro m

m ake

u se

o f w ild

o b je c ts , a n d

p a sto ra l w ith

nom ads

d o m e s tic

th e n a tu r a l e n v ir o n ­

o f a u th o r ita r ia n c lu d e s c e rta in

s o c ie tie s

c h ie fs a n d

is

but

th e

p ro b a b ly

s tr o n g ly

m o re

a s p e c t o f th e i d e o l o g y a s w e ll a s e g a l i ta r ia n i s m . T h e a b s e n c e

o b je c ts , to m e d ia te th e ir re la tio n

su ch

s o c ie tie s ;

c h a r a c te r is tic

m o r e o r le s s f r e q u e n tly ; h u n te r - g a th e r e r s

of

n o m a d ic

h u n te r-g a th e re rs a n d p a sto ra l n o m a d s m o v e o v e r g r e a te r o r le ss e r d is ta n c e s ,

o f a c e r ta in

ty p e s o f d iv in e

e x is te n tia l

ty p e o f p o w e r e x ­

fig u re s .

M o re o v e r,

n o m a d ic

m e n t. A lth o u g h n o m a d ic s o c ie tie s d iffe r a m o n g th e m s e lv e s

h u n te r s p a y little a t te n t io n

to w h a t d o e s n o t in v o lv e th e m

in t h e i r t y p e o f e c o n o m y a n d in t h e b r e a d t h a n d f r e q u e n c y o f

d ir e c tly . A c c o r d in g ly , th e M b u ti a r e m o r e c o n c e r n e d w ith th e

th e ir m o v e m e n t s , a s a g r o u p th e y c o n t r a s t w ith s o c ie tie s th a t

p r e s e n t th a n w ith th e p a s t o r th e f u tu r e . T h e y a r e p ra c tic a l

d o n o t m o v e , s e t t l e d s o c i e t i e s , a n d it is in t h i s l i g h t t h a t w e

p e o p l e . T h e y e s c h e w a ll s p e c u l a t i o n a b o u t t h e f u t u r e o r t h e

s h a ll c o n s i d e r th e m

h e r e a f te r o n th e g r o u n d s th a t n o t h a v in g b e e n th e re th e y d o

a s id e

th e

w ays

in

fo r th e p u r p o s e s o f th is s tu d y , s e tt in g w h ic h

th e

grou p

D i s s i m i l a r in m a n y w a y s , b o t h s o c ie tie s s h a r e n o t o n ly

co u ld

be

su b d iv id e d .

s o c ia l a n d e c o n o m i c ,

th e se

iti n e r a n t b e h a v i o r b u t a l s o c e r ta i n

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , w h i c h w e w ill e x a m i n e in o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e

n o t k n o w w h a t it is l ik e a n d n o t k n o w i n g w h a t it i s l ik e t h e y c a n n o t p r e d i c t w h a t t h e i r b e h a v i o r w il l b e . T h e y s a y t h a t t o t r y t o l o o k i n t o t h e f u t u r e is t o " w a l k b l i n d l y . " 8 k n o w l e d g e is co n sid e re d

a

w ay

of

liv in g

ra th e r

th a n

a

ru le .

And

it is

an d

p r e c i s e l y in t h e i r b e h a v i o r in t h e f a c e o f — r a t h e r t h a n b y t h e

w o r l d v i e w . S t a r ti n g w ith a lim ite d a m o u n t o f w o r k d o n e o n

c o n te n t o f— m y th o r th e s u p e r n a tu r a l th a t th e c le a r o u tlin e s

th is s u b je c t, w e c a n b u t s u g g e s t a d ir e c tio n o f s tu d y a n d p o s it

o f a w a y o f th in k in g p e c u lia r to n o m a d s b e g in to e m e r g e . W e

s o m e h y p o t h e s e s fo r r e s e a r c h . T o fin d p a n t h e o n s c o m m o n to

s e e in h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r s c e r t a i n f e a t u r e s a l r e a d y o b s e r v e d in

w h e th e r

th e y

n om ad s,

a re

if s u c h

a

re fle cte d

th in g

at

th e

w ere

le v e l

p o s sib le ,

of

th o u g h t

w o u ld

re q u ire

fa r

th e

p a sto ra l

nom ad s,

and

m o r e c o n c e r t e d a n d e x h a u s t i v e s t u d i e s . B u t it m a y a l r e a d y b e

re lig io u s a t ti t u d e s

o f s e ttle d

p o s s ib le to i s o la te fr o m its v a r io u s c o n t e x t s a n a t ti t u d e to th e

n o m a d ic

as

s o c ie tie s

s u p e r n a t u r a l w o r l d a n d r e l i g i o n t h a t is c o m m o n t o n o m a d s ,

m ig h t

and

co n ce p tio n

to d e fin e a

fram ew o rk

w ith in

w h ic h

we

m ig h t s tu d y

th e ir m y th o lo g y . su ch

ask

w h e th e r

o f ritu a l

and

d iffe re n t

s o c ie tie s . or

B e fo re h a rd ly

e th n o lo g is ts s y m b o lic

h o ld

b e h a v io r,

fro m

we

th e

d e sc rib e

re lig io u s , to o

we

n arro w

and

a

w h e th e r

t h e ir a n a l y t ic to o ls m a y b e t o o c lo s e l y tie d to th e c a t e g o r i e s o f

" F r e e , in d iv id u a lis tic , s u b je c t to n o s ta t e n o r to a n y a n n y ,"

first

p r o f o u n d ly

n o n re lig io u s

is t h e " t r a d i t i o n a l s t e r e o t y p e "

o f th e

ty r­

p a sto ra l

n o m a d . B u t it is a l s o a n o b j e c t i v e p i e c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t it is d e r i v e d f r o m t h e i m a g e t h a t t h e n o m a d h a s o f

s e ttle d

s o c ie tie s ,

w h ic h

w o u ld

h a m p e r th e ir p e r c e p tio n

of

r e lig io u s p h e n o m e n a a m o n g n o m a d s . A m o n g th e B a s s e r i, p a s to r a l n o m a d s o f I ra n , th e p a u c ity o f r i t u a l a c t i v i t y is s t r i k i n g ; 9 t h e y a r e i n d i f f e r e n t t o m e t a p h y s i c a l

h im s e lf . W h e n th is s e lf - i m a g e c o m e s i n to c lo s e c o n t a c t w ith

p r o b l e m s a n d t o r e l i g i o n . B u t is t h i s r e a l l y a l a c k , o r a r e t h e

s e ttle d

d e s c r ip tiv e c a te g o r ie s th a t a r e b e in g u s e d

s o c ie tie s ,

it m a y

even

be

m o re

p ro n o u n ce d ,

th u s

in c a p a b le o f d e ­

a f f i r m i n g in a d e l i b e r a t e w a y t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n n o m a d i c

s c r i b in g th e r e a l it y o f th e s it u a ti o n ? T h e c e n t r a l r ite o f th e

an d

s o c i e t y is m i g r a t i o n i t s e l f . F o r t h e B a s s e r i , m i g r a t i o n is l a d e n

s e ttle d

id e o lo g ie s .

P a sto ra l

n om ads

have

a

re a lis tic

v i s i o n o f t h e w o r l d a n d a r a t h e r m e a g e r c e r e m o n i a l l if e . T h e y

w ith m e a n i n g , t h o u g h n o t e x p r e s s e d b y m e a n s o f te c h n ic a lly

p r a c t i c e a g r e a t d e a l o f d i v i n a t i o n b u t l i t t l e w i t c h c r a f t . R e li ­

u n n e c e s s a r y s y m b o lic a c ts o r e x o tic p a r a p h e r n a lia . T h e B a s ­

g i o n is c e n t e r e d o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l r a t h e r t h a n o n t h e g r o u p ;

s e ri r e s p o n d n o t to th e u tilita ria n a s p e c t s o f a c tiv itie s b u t to

in d e e d , a

m o v e m e n t a n d its d r a m a t i c f o r m s , t o th e m e a n i n g s im p lic it

p a n th e o n

co m p risin g

a great

n u m b e r o f d iv in e

f i g u r e s s e e m s t o b e m o r e c o m m o n a m o n g f a r m e r s . If n o m a d s show

l it t le i n t e r e s t in r e l i g i o n , a n d if t h e y r e f e r t o m a n i f e s ­

t a t i o n s o f t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l in m ean

th a t

grou p .

th e y

The

a re

any

co sm o lo g y

" s t o i c t e r m s ,"

m o re

" s e c u l a r " ’’ t h a n

o f p a sto ra l

n om ads

E a s t, fo r e x a m p le , te n d s to b e e x p r e s s e d T h ro u g h

th is

f i lt e r ,

as

Spooner

th is d o e s n o t

p o in ts

in

any th e

o th e r

M id d le

in I s l a m i c t e r m s . o u t,

p o s sib le to s e e th o s e e le m e n ts o f c o s m o lo g y

it

s h o u ld

be

th a t a n te d a te

I s l a m o r a r e n o t i n t e g r a l t o i t. W h e n t h e s e a r e c o m p a r e d w i t h o th e r

c o s m o lo g ie s

la c k in g

such

a

fro m

c u ltu ra lly

n o m a d ic

p o p u la tio n s

d o m in a n t

id e o lo g y ,

in it

r e g io n s m ay

be

in t h e s e q u e n c e o f t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s . 10 Is it n o t r a t h e r e t h n o c e n ­ tric

to

assu m e

th a t a n

e c o n o m ic

p o in t o f v ie w

r itu a lis tic

or

n o m ad s a re ritu a lly

sy m b o lic m o re

th a n

m o tiv a te d

o b s e rv a tio n

and

seem

a c tiv ity

th a t

ca n n o t a lso p o in t

of

m ere

is i m p o r t a n t be

v ie w ?

b u s in e s s

d e te rm in e d ,

fro m

im p o rta n t The

tr ip s ; th e y

and

a of

a re a lso

o u r d iffic u ltie s

to b e d u e to o u r c o n f la tio n

an

fro m

m ig ra tio n s

in

o f th e s e tw o

d o m a in s. In

th is d is c u s s io n

a ttitu d e

(ta k e n

in

a

o f th e

re la tio n s h ip

ra th e r

b ro a d

b e tw e e n

sense)

s o c ie tie s w ith s e a s o n a l v a r ia tio n s a r e b o th

and

r e lig io u s

n o m a d ism ,

e x c e p tio n a l a n d

p o s s ib le to is o la te th e e l e m e n ts th a t d e r iv e fro m th e n o m a d ic

ty p ic a l b e c a u s e th e y a r e a l te r n a t e l y n o m a d i c a n d s e ttle d . T h e

a d a p ta t i o n .6

g a th e re d

h a b ita t

of

th e

w in te r

seaso n

c o n tra sts

w ith

th e

21

I N T R O D U C T I O N is c o n t r o l l e d b y o b j e c t s a n d a w o r l d t h a t a r e

wild,

t h e s p l i n t e r i n g o f t h e g r o u p i n t o f a m i l i e s in t h e n a r r o w e s t

d ire ct

a n im a ls

th ro u g h

s e n s e o f th e w o rd . T h e re a r e tw o w a y s o f o c c u p y in g la n d ,

w h ose

o b je c ts ,

if h e

but

c o n tra s t

p a s to r a l, s e r v e o n ly to m e d ia te th is r e la tio n s h ip w ith n a tu r e .

b e t w e e n lif e in w i n t e r a n d life in s u m m e r is r e f l e c t e d n o t o n l y

W h e t h e r h e is a h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r o r a s h e p h e r d , h e d o e s n o t

s c a t t e r e d h a b i t a t o f t h e s u m m e r s e a s o n , w i t h i ts m o b i l i t y a n d

th e re

a re

a lso

tw o

w ays

of

th in k in g :

“ T h is

to u ch

w ith

n a tu re .

in te rv e n tio n

he

The

d o m e s tic

e x p lo its

th e

w ild

a n d h e i s in is

in r i t u a l s , f e s t i v a l s , a n d r e l i g i o u s c e r e m o n i e s o f a ll s o r t s . It

im p o s e h is C u lt u r e o n N a tu r e a s d o s e tt le d p e o p l e s . M o b ility

a l s o p r o f o u n d l y a f f e c t s i d e a s , c o l l e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , in a

and

w o r d , t h e w h o l e m e n t a l i t y o f t h e g r o u p . 11 . . . In s u m m e r , life

s o c ie tie s , o r r a th e r s o c ie tie s w ith m u ltip le c e n t e r s ; e g a lita r i­

is

a n is m ; d ir e c t c o n t a c t w ith n a t u r e — s u c h

som ew hat

s e c u l a r i z e d . " 12 T h e

e c o lo g ic a l

c o n s tr a in ts

w h i c h t h e g r o u p is s u b j e c t m a k e n o m a d i s m

to

n ecessary , an 1

t h e g r o u p 's r e q u i r e m e n t s c o m e t o r e s tr i c t r e l ig i o u s t h o u g h t and

p ra c tic e .

But

ju s t

as

we

m u st

th e

en v iro n m e n t,

c o n s id e r

th e

ro le

of

f lu id ity

of

g rou p s

and

w ith in

g ro u p s;

d e c e n tra liz e d

a r e th e p o le s th a t

m a y a ffe c t th e id e o lo g y o f n o m a d s a n d th a t m a y b e re fle cte d i n c o l l e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a n d in r i t u a l s . W ith a fe w e x a m p l e s , w e h a v e s o u g h t to c o m e to te r m s

our

w ith

n o m a d is m

c a te g o r ie s o f a n a ly s is , a n d w h e n a p p e a r a n c e s e v o k e s e c u la r ­

ty p e

of

i z a tio n , w e m u s t u n d e r s ta n d th a t th e f o u n d a tio n h a s y e t to

p r o d u c tio n o r a s a v a r ia b le d e te r m in e d b y e n v i r o n m e n t . T h is

be

p a r t ic u la r a t ti t u d e , in th e f a c e o f th e s u p e r n a t u r a l a n d

a d a p ta tio n

to

d e cip h e re d .

The

m o b ility

we

th a t

m u st

a lso

re fin e

c h a r a c te r iz e s

n o m a d ic

s o c i e t i e s is i n d e e d t h e c e n t r a l f e a t u r e o f t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n ,

s y m b o lic

b u t it is a l s o t h e m a i n o b s t a c l e t o o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g .

n o m a d ic

"W e

m u st

p e rm a n e n t

b ew are

tie s

n o rm a l, a n d

of

lin k in g

lo o se ,

any

te n d e n c y

to g e th e r

to

tre a t

a g g re g a te s

of

fix e d

and

p e o p le

as

im p e rm a n e n t b o n d s a s ab n o rm al an d

and

its u n d e r ly i n g

b e h a v i o r , " 16 r a t h e r

w o rld , w ay

is

go vern ed

o f th in k in g

tivelw'M/sauvage"

th a n

w ay

id e o lo g y a s a

as

by

a

m ode

w hat

we

th a t p a rtic ip a te s

o f th in k in g

but

"c e rta in

o f e c o n o m ic

m ig h t in

th e

p reserv es

th e

c a ll

a

"p rim ii ts

ow n

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h i n i t. T h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e m y th s o f v a r io u s n o m a d ic s o c ie tie s m a y in d e e d h ig h lig h t th e

r e q u i r i n g s p e c i a l e x p l a n a t i o n . " 11 T h e m i g r a t i o n s o f h u n t e r s

lin e s o f f o r c e a r o u n d w h ic h " n o m a d i c t h o u g h t " is o r g a n i z e d ,

or

be

a n d w il l f i n a l l y a l l o w u s t o s p e l l o u t t h e s p e c i f i c i t y o f a w a y

re q u ire d b y th e d e m a n d s o f th e n a tu ra l e n v ir o n m e n t a n d o f

o f t h i n k i n g i n w h i c h w h a t i s n o r m a l is n o t w h a t is f i x e d , a n d

access

t h e f l u id a n d t h e m o v i n g a r e o r d e r a n d n o t c h a o s .

p a sto ra l

nom ads

by

far

to n a tu r a l re s o u r c e s .

exceed The

th o s e

th a t

flu id ity a n d

w o u ld

th e c o n s ta n t

F .- R .P ./g .h .

c o m i n g a n d g o i n g , b o th o f g r o u p s a n d o f in d iv id u a ls w ith in t h e g r o u p s , h a v e a p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i o n : t h e y m a k e it p o s s i b l e t o e n s u r e o r d e r , th e re s o lu tio n o f c o n flic ts , a n d , p a ra d o x ic a lly , c o h e s i o n , b e c a u s e th e lin e s o f fu s io n a n d fis s io n o f g r o u p s and

in d iv id u a ls d o n o t n e c e s s a r ily

s h ip .

A m ong

th ro u g h

n om ads,

chan ges

of

s o c ia l

p la ce :

fo llo w

re la tio n s

p ro x im ity

th e lin e s o f k in ­ b eco m e

or

a c tiv a te d

d is ta n c e

a re

not

r e l e v a n t , a n d s p a c e is in a s e n s e n e g a t e d . F i n a l l y — a n d , in o u r v i e w , t h i s is a n

e s s e n tia l p o in t— th e c h a n g e s o f p la c e

h a v e a re lig io u s f u n c tio n : th e y a r e h ig h ly v a lu e d , s o h ig h ly t h a t B a r t h s e e s t h e m a s t h e c e n t r a l r i t e a m o n g t h e B a s s e r i . It is m o v e m e n t t h a t l e a d s n o m a d s " i n t o c l o s e r r e c o g n i t i o n o f th e

one

c o n s ta n t

in

l ife -g iv in g q u a litie s .

th e ir

l iv e s ,

U n d er such

th e

en v iro n m e n t

and

i ts

c o n d it i o n s o f flu x w h e r e

b a n d a n d e v e n fa m ily r e l a ti o n s a r e o f te n b r ittle a n d f r a g m e n ­ t a r y , t h e e n v i r o n m e n t in g e n e r a l , a n d te rrito ry

in p a r t i c u l a r , b e c o m e

o n e 's o w n

fo r e a c h

h u n tin g

in d iv id u a l th e o n e

re lia b le a n d r e w a r d in g f o c u s o f h is a t te n t io n , h is lo y a lty , a n d h i s d e v o t i o n . " M In o t h e r w o r d s , t h e n o m a d " d o e s n o t h a v e th e im p r e s s io n o f in h a b itin g a m a n - m a d e w o r ld . . . . c o n tro lle d

by

o b je c ts ,

not

p erso n s.

.

.

. T h e re

is

H e is not

an

a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c c o s m o s . H e n c e t h e r e is n o c a ll f o r a r t i c u ­ la te f o r m s o f s o c ia l i n te r c o u r s e w ith n o n h u m a n b e in g s a n d n o n e e d fo r a s e t o f s y m b o l s w ith w h ic h to s e n d a n d r e c e iv e s p e c ia l

c o m m u n i c a t i o n . " 11 T h e

nom ad

does

not

seek

to

i m p r o v e t h e e n v i r o n m e n t in w h i c h h e l i v e s . In t h i s s e n s e , h e

22

NOTES 1. M. Mauss, "Étude de morphologie sociale," in Sociologie et anthrofiologie (Paris 1966), 472. 2. R.-b. lee and i. dévoré, eds., Man the Hunter (Chicago 1968). 3. b . Spooner , "Towards a Generative Model of Nomadism," Anthropological Quarterly 44, no. 3 (1971): 198-210; "The Cultural Ecology of Pastoral Nomads," in Addison-Wesley Module in Anthropol­ ogy, no. 45 (Reading, MA, 1973). 4. b. Spooner , "Cultural Ecology of Pastoral Nomads," 35. 5. Ibid., 39. 6. Ibid. 7. e . R. service . The Hunters (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1966). 8. c. M. turnbull, Wayward Servants (Garden City, NY, 1965), 247. 9. F. Barth , Nomads of South Persia (Boston 1961), 135. 10. Ibid. 11. m . Mauss, "Étude de morphologie sociale," 447-48. 12. Ibid., 444. 13. |. wooDBURN, "Stability and Flexibility in Hadza Residential Groupings," in Man the Hunter, Lee and DeVore, eds., 107. 14. c. M. turnbull , "The Importance of Flux in Two Hunting Societies," in Man the Hunter, Lee and DeVore, eds., 137. 15. m . Douglas , Natural Symbols (London 1970), 60-61; cited in Spooner, "Cultural Ecology of Pastoral Nomads," 40. 16. c l . l Evi-strauss, "Hunting and Human Evolution: Discussion," in Man the Hunter, Lee and DeVore, eds., 344.

P A R T

Rome

e n t i a t e s it f r o m G r e e c e a t t h e s a m e p e r i o d . I t a l y c a n b e s e e n

I ta ly

as

a

m o s a ic

of

p e o p le

d is tin c t

in

o r ig in ,

la n g u a g e ,

and

c u ltu r e , a n d o f s o c ia l g r o u p s a t d if f e r e n t s ta g e s o f d e v e l o p ­ m e n t. It is i m p o s s i b l e t o s p e a k o f a “ r e l i g i o n o f a n c i e n t I t a l y " i n t h e s a m e w a y t h a t o n e m i g h t s p e a k o f " t h e G r e e k r e l i g i o n . " In th e t r a d itio n a l f r a m e w o r k o f t h e c la s s ic a l w o r l d , b u ilt o n th e tw o g r e a t c iv iliz a tio n s o f G r e e c e a n d

R o m e , I ta ly d o e s n o t

r e p r e s e n t a u n ite d a n d c o n t in u o u s h is to ric a l re a lity a s G r e e c e b .c

d o e s . I n i ti a l ly , d u r i n g t h e f i r s t m i l l e n n i u m to ry w a s d iv id e d in to z o n e s in h a b ite d

., I t a l y ' s t e r r i ­

b y d iv e rse p e o p le s,

e a c h h a v i n g t h e ir o w n b e lie fs a n d c u s t o m s — z o n e s to w h ic h w ere ad d e d

th e b a n d o f G r e e k c o lo n ie s a l o n g th e s o u t h e r n

c o a s t s o f t h e p e n i n s u l a a n d in S i c i ly . L a t e r , b e g i n n i n g a t t h e tim e o f th e R o m a n c o n q u e s t a n d

c o n tin u in g to th e e n d

of

a n tiq u ity , th e re lig io n o f a n c i e n t Ita ly b e c a m e id e n tifie d w ith R om an

r e lig io n . T h e r e f o r e

se v e ra l

a rtic le s

s h o u ld

be con ­

s u l t e d o n t h i s t o p i c : t h e f o l l o w i n g a r t i c l e o n p r e - R o m a n I t a ly , a l o n g w i t h t h e a r t i c l e s t o w h i c h it r e f e r s , a n d t h o s e a r t i c l e s th a t d e a l w ith R o m a n r e lig io n .

We

know

g r o u p s w h ic h

th e

h is to ric a l

e x iste d

nam es

of

th e

m a in

e th n ic

a t th e b e g in n in g o f th e R o m a n

con ­

q u e s t (L a tin i, C a m p a n i, A p u li, C a la b r i, L u c a n i, B ru ttii, S a m ­ n iti, S a b in i,

P ic e n i,

U m b ri,

E tr u s c i,

L ig u ri,

V e n e ti,

H is tr i,

G a lli); t h e s e n a m e s r e a p p e a r in t h e n a m e s o f t h e r e g io n s o f u n if ie d Ita ly a t t h e t im e o f th e e m p e r o r A u g u s t u s (I. L a t iu m and

C a m p a n ia ;

II.

A p u lia

B r u t t i i ; IV . S a b i n i a n d V II.

E tru ria ;

V III.

L ig u r ia ; X . V e n e tia a n d and

som e

o f th e se ,

d isp la ce m e n ts, m in d

and

C a la b ria ;

I II.

L u ca n ia

S a m n i u m ; V. P ic e n u m ; V I.

[G a llia ]

C is p a d a n a ,

H is tr ia ; X I.

s o m e tim e s

s u rv iv e

to

th is

th a t th is s u b d iv is io n

d ay.

and

U m b ria ;

A e m ilia ;

IX .

[G a llia ] T r a n s p a d a n a ) ,

w ith

o n ly

th e n

som e

a lte r a tio n s a n d

But w e

p a rtly

m ust

k eep

co rresp o n d s

to

in th e

o r ig in a l e t h n o g r a p h i c a n d h is to r ic a l c o n d it i o n s a s t h e s e a r e r e v e a le d to u s b y l in g u is tic s a n d a r c h a e o l o g y . In f a c t, e x c e p t fo r s o m e m in o r a n d

h e te ro g e n e o u s g ro u p s h a rd

to c la s s ify

( s u c h a s t h e L i g u r i a n d t h e A l p i n e p o p u l a t i o n s ) , w e c a n lis t M .P ./ d .b .

th e fo llo w in g f o r m a tio n s o n

Ita lia n

te rrito ry : (a ) th e E tr u s ­

c a n s , w ith t h e ir o w n l a n g u a g e , w h ic h is n o t I n d o - E u r o p e a n ; (b ) th e Ita lic p e o p l e s w h o s p o k e I n d o - E u r o p e a n l a n g u a g e s , b u t d iffe re n t o n e s fro m th e L a tin s , th e A p u lia n s , th e U m b ro -

R e l ig io n in P re - R o m a n I t a l y : T h e H is to r ic a l F r a m e w o r k

S a b e ll i a n s , a n d t h e V e n e ti; ( c ) t h e G r e e k c o l o n i e s a l o n g th e c o a s t s o f s o u t h e r n I t a l y ( M a g n a G r a e c a ) a n d S i c i ly . T o w a r d th e e n d o f th e a r c h a ic p e r i o d , th e d o u b le r o le o f c o h e s io n a n d d iffu sio n

P re -R o m a n

I ta ly

o ccu p ie s

a

s p e c ia l

p la ce

in

th e

g en eral

th a t th e c itie s p la y e d

is s u p e r i m p o s e d

on

e th n ic

f a c t o r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e z o n e s o f t h e G r e e k c o l o n i e s a n d in

d e v e l o p m e n t o f th e r e lig io u s c o n c e p t i o n s o f th e M e d i te r r a ­

T y r r h e n ia n

n ean

a n d s i x t h c e n t u r i e s b . c ., t h e f a c e o f p r e - R o m a n I t a l y w o u l d b e

p e o p le s o f a n tiq u ity , e v e n

im p o rta n t th a n g r e a tly

if i t s r o l e

th a t o f th e G re e k

in flu e n c e d .

The

term

w o rld ,

w as

m u ch

b y w h ic h

"p re -R o m a n "

u su a lly

le s s

it w a s d e sig ­

p ro f o u n d ly U m b ria n

I ta ly

(E tr u r ia ,

chan ged

p e o p le s

by

(th a t

L a tiu m , th e

is,

C a m p a n ia ).

e x p a n sio n

of

S a b in e s ,

th e

th e

In

th e

th e

fifth

S a b e llia n -

S a m n ite s ,

th e

tim e s

C a m p a n ia n s o r O s c i, th e L u c a n i , th e B ru ttii, th e P ic e n i, th e

a r o u n d t h e e i g h t h c e n t u r y b .c . t o t h e p o l i t i c a l , l i n g u i s t i c , a n d

U m b r ia n s , e t c .) o v e r a la rg e p a rt o f th e p e n in s u la , a n d b y th e

n a te s

th e

cu ltu ra l

p e rio d

u n if ic a tio n

fro m of

th e I ta ly

b e g in n in g under

of

R om an

h isto rica l

d o m in a tio n

be­

t w e e n t h e t h i r d a n d f i r s t c e n t u r i e s b .c . ( o b v i o u s l y w e m u s t n o t f o r g e t th e e x i s t e n c e o f R o m e , th e n a t th e v e r y b e g in n in g

p e n e tr a tio n o f th e C e lts (G a u ls ) v ia th e A lp s in to n o r th e r n a n d c e n t r a l I t a ly . It w a s n e c e s s a r y t o p a u s e f o r t h e s e h i s t o r i c a l p r e l i m i n a r i e s

o f its d e v e l o p m e n t — w h ic h to o k p l a c e in p a r a lle l w ith t h a t o f

in o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d

th e o t h e r c e n t e r s o f c u l t u r e o f t h e Ita lic w o r l d ).

g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e in s u c h a c o m p o s i t e w o r l d . I t is e v i d e n t t h a t

T h e a b s e n c e o f u n it y a n d c o h e r e n t p r o g r e s s is th e e s s e n t ia l c h a r a c t e r is t ic o f p r e - R o m a n Ita ly , a n d o n e t h a t c le a r l y d if f e r ­

each

of

th e

p rin cip a l

th e c o m p le x ity a n d cu ltu re s

s h o u ld

be

v a r ie t y o f re li­ th e

o b je c t

of

a

s e p a r a t e s tu d y , s u i t e d t o its o w n s p e c i f ic c h a r a c t e r : t h u s w e

25

ROME

and records—the remains of sanctuaries and necropolises, images and pictorial scenes, coins, furnishings, etc. The most important general facts can be summarized as follows;

should deal with Hellenic Italy in terms of Greek religion, and with Rome from its origins in terms of Roman religion; for Etruria and the various Italic populations, we must refer to the most characteristic aspects that can be glimpsed behind what is known of their religions, and for the Gauls, to Celtic religion. At the same time, we must not neglect the insular territories (Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica), which, while not part of Italy in the ancient sense of the word, that of con­ tinental Italy, had close historical and cultural relations with the mainland, while at the same time local cultures spread and Phoenician and Carthaginian colonies were established. Yet from a more general, historical point of view, we must get the religions of all of Pre-Roman Italy into perspective in order to attempt to determine their place, functions, and consequences. If we set aside the Roman sources, what is known on this subject is relatively restricted, fragmentary, and heteroge­ neous. The absence of an indigenous literature among the Italic peoples, or its loss (where it did exist, as it certainly did in Etruria) following the disappearance of the local languages and their replacement by Latin, constitutes a fundamental negative factor in comparison with other ancient civiliza­ tions. The data recorded by classical Greek and Latin writers are indirect, fortuitous, and often uncertain, especially when the sources are relatively late. Even for the Greek colonies, the literary accounts are full of gaps due to the loss of a large part of the works of local authors. Outside the Greek colonies, the few remaining documents, mainly epigraphs written in Etruscan, Umbrian, Oscan, Messapian, and Vene­ tian, give us some useful data on beliefs and cults. But for the rest we only have the evidence of archaeological monuments 26

1. The persistence of prehistoric traditions and primitive concep­ tions. The transition to the historical period is not clearly marked. The innovations that characterize this transition (the formation and definition of the main ethnocultural units at the beginning of Greek colonization, the opening to the forms and ideas of the great civilizations of the eastern Mediterranean, evolution to urban structures, development of political and religious institutions, the adoption of writing, etc.) are gradual. At first they are limited—outside the Greek colonies, of course— to the Tyrrhenian coast and particularly to Etruria and the Etruscan sphere of influence; in most of the rest of Italy, that is, in the interior of the peninsula, on the Adriatic slope, and in the north, their penetration was very slow and remained marginal. These latter territories pre­ served, almost until the time of the Roman conquest, certain essential aspects of the way of life and organization charac­ teristic of Iron Age cultures, as well as survivals of prehistoric ritual customs such as the celebration of cults in grottoes or rock sanctuaries, and the practice of pictorial engravings (characteristic of the Alpine valleys), anthropomorphic ste­ lae, the proximity of houses and tombs, etc. But even in the more advanced cultural centers, except for the Greek colo­ nies, traces survived of primitive conceptions and practices so distant from the rationality of the classical world that they sometimes provoked the astonishment and incomprehen­ sion of writers in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Most striking are the suggestions of an animistic conception of the supernatural; the omnipresent importance of divine signs and divination; the high social and religious status of women (in Etruria and even in early Rome), which have been interpreted as survivals of matriarchy; and the tenacious belief in the material survival of the dead in their place of burial, and all the rites implied in such a belief (house­ shaped urns and tombs, portrait images, rich funerary appa­ ratus, funeral games, etc.). 2. External influences, especially from Greece. In addition to the conditions that it inherited from prehistory and protohistory, Italic religiosity was profoundly interwoven with Oriental and Greek themes that, in certain respects, marked it decisively. During the “Orientalizing'' period between the eighth and sixth centuries b. c ., along with a great number of objects and pictorial themes imported from the Aegean world and the Near East (Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, Urartu, Anatolia) via the great currents of Phoenician and Greek maritime traffic, prob­ ably echoes of the beliefs of the ancient Oriental civilizations and archaic Greece at the beginning of its development pene­ trated widely in Italy. Evidence of this is provided by certain divine or monstrous beings and their iconography (“mistress of animals," sphinx, griffin, centaurs, etc.), the legendary traditions that integrate the elements of the newly emerging Greek mythology, and symbolism in general. Certain characteristic phenomena, which were not manifested clearly until later, seem directly linked to the Asiatic world—for instance, Etruscan haruspicy used little models of animal livers, as in Mesopotamia and Anatolia. As for the influence of the Semitic religions, aside from their diffusion in the Phoenician and Carthaginian colonial domain of Sicily and Sardinia (dis­ cussed above), we can cite the unusual case of the consecration of a sacellum to the goddess Astarte, assimilated to the Etruscan goddess Uni, in the sanctuary of Pyrgi on the Tyrrhenian coast. But it was mostly Greek religion, directly transplanted to the

R E L I G I O N

IN

PRE - R O M A N

ch a ra cte r a n d

c e n t u r y b .c ., t h a t g a v e t h e I ta lic c e n t e r s i ts d i v i n e m o d e l s w i t h

w o r ld , fo r e x a m p l e , th e e a r ly r is e o f a d o m i n a n t s o c ia l c la s s

th e ir r e s p e c tiv e a ttr ib u te s ( th e lo ca l p a n th e o n t h u s c a m e to b e

th a t d r e w its e x t r a o r d i n a r y e c o n o m i c p o w e r l a r g e ly fr o m th e

id e n tifie d w ith th e G r e e k p a n th e o n — th e E tr u s c a n g o d T in ia

e x p lo ita tio n o f c o n s id e ra b le m in e ra l r e s o u r c e s , th a t e m p h a ­

a n d th e L a tin o -Ita lic [D ]io v e , fo r e x a m p l e , w e r e a s s im ila te d to

s iz e d

th e

te n d e n c ie s o f e a c h

I T A L Y

c o l o n i e s o f s o u t h e r n I t a ly a n d S i c i ly b e g i n n i n g in t h e e i g h t h

p r e s tig e

of

its

fu n e ra ry

n o b le

o f t h e m . In t h e

o r ig in s , w ith

and

th a t

O rie n ta l

b le n d e d

Z e u s ; th e E t r u s c a n a n d L a tin g o d d e s s U n i [Ju n o ] to H e r a ; th e

p r o to h is to r ic

g o d M a r s , r e c o g n i z e d b y a ll t h e I t a li c p e o p l e s , t o A r e s ; a n d s o

c e r ta i n ly f a v o r e d th e id e o l o g ic a l a n d r itu a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f a

f o r t h ) , its m y t h s , a n d t h e s p e c i f i c t r a i t s o f i ts c u l t ( f o r m s o f a l t a r s

c u lt o f th e

d ead,

m a k in g

a llo w a n c e s ,

e s t i n g , f in a lly , t o s e e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a n i m p r e s s i v e s t o r e o f

M e d i te r r a n e a n w o r l d , in C h in a . L a t e r in E t r u r ia , a f t e r b o th

l e g e n d a r y n a r r a t i v e s a n d m y t h o g r a p h i c c o n s t r u c t i o n s l in k i n g

E t r u s c a n d e c lin e a n d R o m a n s u p r e m a c y b e c a m e e v i d e n t , th e

th e h e ro ic w o rld

d o m i n a n t o l i g a r c h i e s , h a v i n g l o s t a ll e c o n o m i c a n d p o l i t i c a l

o f t h e G r e e k s w i t h l o c a l I t a li a n

t ra d itio n s ,

Definitions of the different cultural environments.

s ity o f p o p u l a ti o n s a n d c u l t u r e s in p r e - R o m a n

T h e d iv e r­

Ita ly c o n s t i ­

t u t e s t h e f u n d a m e n t a l h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e ; it i s m a n i f e s t e d e s p e c ia lly

in

th e d o m a in

o f th e s a c r e d ,

w h ic h

b y its v e r y

n a t u r e p a r t ic ip a t e s in t h e d e e p e s t h e r i ta g e o f e v e r y p e o p l e a n d e v e r y c o m m u n ity . R eal a n d p ro f o u n d d iffe re n c e s s e p a ­ r a t e th e r e lig io n o f th e E t r u s c a n s f r o m t h a t o f t h e L a t in s a n d of

p rim itiv e

R om e,

as

w e ll

as

fro m

except

in

is n o t

Egypt

to b e

and,

fo u n d ,

o u ts id e

th e

in itia tiv e , s h ifte d th e ir in te r e s ts to th e ritu a l a n d s p e c u la tiv e

e ith e r b y m ix in g th e m o r b y lin k in g t h e m . 3.

e q u a l o f w h ic h

in f lu e n c e s

a n d t e m p l e s , s a c r i f i c i a l r i t e s , v o t i v e o f f e r i n g s ) . It is v e r y i n t e r ­

a ll

th e

tra d itio n s

E tru sc a n

th a t

of

th e

c o lo n ia l

G r e e k s ; t h e s a m e is t r u e f o r t h e r e l i g i o n s o f t h e o t h e r I t a l i c p e o p le s s u c h a s th e S a b in e s , th e S a m n ite s , th e U m b r ia n s — in d e e d , e a c h o f th e s e d e s e r v e s to b e tre a te d

s e p a r a te ly , a s

n o te d a b o v e . T h e d iffe re n c e s c a n b e e x p la in e d

n o t o n ly b y

t h e d i v e r s i t y o f o r i g i n s o f a ll t h e r e l i g i o n s , b u t a l s o b y t h e p r e c is e h is to ric a l c ir c u m s t a n c e s th a t e m p h a s i z e d th e s p e c ific

tra d itio n

of

th e ir

p rie s tly

c la s s ,

th u s

c re a tin g

fa v o ra b le c o n d itio n s fo r th e e la b o ra tio n a n d th e s e t o f d o c t r in e s a n d n o r m s c a lle d th e

p a rtic u la rly

c o d if ic a tio n o f

disciplina,

w h ic h fo r

th e a n c ie n ts a n d fo r u s r e p r e s e n ts th e m o s t p e c u lia r e x p r e s ­ s io n

of

E tru sca n

re lig io s ity .

The

O s c o -U m b ria n -s p e a k in g

Ita lic p o p u l a ti o n s p r o b a b l y i n h e r it e d

s o m e o f th e e s s e n tia l

tra its o f th e ir r e lig io u s c o n c e p t i o n s a n d

c u s to m s fro m

p re ­

h is to r y a n d fro m th e p a s to r a l a n d w a rlik e n o m a d i s m o f th e ir a n c e s t o r s : t h u s t h e r e a r e t r a c e s o f a trib a l t o t e m i s m a n d th e rite ,

w h ic h

is a l s o a

m y th ,

ver sacrum,

o f th e

th e

"sa cre d

s p r in g ti m e ," th a t is, th e m ig r a tio n o f y o u n g m e n o f th e a g e to b e a r a r m s — a r ite th a t w a s s u b s titu te d f o r a p r im itiv e s a c r if ic e o f a ll l i v i n g b e i n g s b o r n in a c e r t a i n y e a r . B u t it is a l s o c l e a r th a t th e g r e a t e x p a n s io n o f th e s e p e o p le s d u r in g th e h is to r ­ ica l p e r i o d

and

th e ir in c re a s in g ly

freq u en t e m p lo y m e n t as

m e r c e n a r ie s c o n tr ib u te d to th e w a rlik e c h a r a c t e r o f th e ir r e ­ lig io n , a n d n o ta b ly to th e c u lt o f th e g o d M a r s o r M a m e r s ,

Hercules and Mlacuch. Mirror from Atri. London, British Museum.

fro m w h o m

th e m ilita r y s ta t e o f th e M a m e r tin i, fo u n d e d b y

C a m p a n ia n

m e r c e n a r i e s in S i c i l y i n t h e t h i r d

d rew

c e n tu ry

i ts n a m e d i r e c t l y . F i n a l l y , t h e r e w a s t h e

b . c .,

w e ll-k n o w n

c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e p o l i ti c a l h i s t o r y o f R o m e a n d t h e p r e ­ d o m i n a n c e o f j u r i d i c a l a n d p u b l i c v a l u e s in R o m a n r e l i g i o n .

Common aspects and unitary tendencies.

4.

H o w e v e r d iffe re n t

t h e y m a y b e , t h e r e l i g i o n s o f p r e - R o m a n I t a l y h a v e p o i n t s in c o m m o n . A n d if t h e s e r e s e m b l a n c e s d o n o t d e f i n e a d i s t i n c ­ tiv e g lo b a l c h a r a c t e r t h a t w o u l d a llo w u s to o p p o s e th e Ita lic w o rld a s a w h o le to o t h e r c u ltu r e a r e a s , th e y n e v e r th e le s s d e s e r v e to b e e x a m i n e d c a r e f u ll y , e s p e c i a ll y s in c e th e y u lti­ m a te ly c o n v e r g e t o w a r d th e R o m a n re lig io n . A n e le m e n ta r y g e o g ra p h ica l re a s o n ,

th e

c o n tig u ity

o f th e

la n d s

ly in g

be­

t w e e n th e s e a s a n d t h e A l p s , m a d e I ta ly n e c e s s a r il y a p l a c e o f co n ta cts

and

exch an g es.

p ro to h is to ry — a n d

In

th e

p a rtic u la rly

co u rse

at

th e

of

tim e

p re h isto ry of

th e

and

"P ro to -

V illa n o v ia n " c u ltu r e , th a t is, b e tw e e n th e tw e lv e a n d n in th c e n t u r i e s b . c ., a t t h e e n d o f t h e B r o n z e A g e — I t a l y p r e s e n t s , fro m

an

a r c h a e o lo g ic a l

p o in t

of

v ie w ,

a

u n if o rm ity

th a t

s u g g e s t s a n u n d e r ly in g u n ity , e v e n o n th e le v e l o f s o c io c u l ­ tu ra l s tr u c tu r e s , i d e a s , a n d c u s t o m s . F o r e x a m p l e , th e f u n e r ­ a r y e q u ip m e n t in th e v a r io u s c u l t u r e s o f th e Iro n A g e h a s c o m m o n a s p e c t s , w h e t h e r c r e m a t i o n p r e d o m i n a t e s ( a s in t h e n o r t h o f Ita ly a n d in th e c e n t r a l p a r t o n th e T y r r h e n ia n s id e ) o r b u r i a l ( a s i n t h e s o u t h o f I t a l y a n d in t h e c e n t r a l p a r t o n t h e A d ria tic

s id e ).

h a v e a lre a d y

The

been

O rie n ta l

and

G reek

in flu e n c e s ,

w h ic h

d is c u s s e d , c o n s titu te a n o th e r s o u rc e o f

in s p ir a tio n th a t w a s m o r e o r le s s w id e ly d if f u s e d b e y o n d th e lim its

of

each

e th n ic

grou p

or

cu ltu re :

we

can

c ite

as

e x a m p l e s in t h e d o m a i n o f m y t h s t h e v o y a g e s o f O d y s s e u s a n d D io m e d e s , a n d th e p r o p a g a tio n o f th e c u lt o f H e r a c le s , P y th a g o re a n

d o c trin e s ,

D io n y s ia n

rite s ,

e tc.

But

E tru s c a n

c iv iliz a tio n a t th e tim e o f its s u p r e m a c y a n d e x p a n s i o n — e v e n if it w a s s e c o n d a r y t o G r e e c e — a l s o s p r e a d i t s i d e a s , i m a g e s , a n d c e r e m o n i e s o v e r v a s t t e r r i to r ie s in p e n in s u la r a n d n o r t h -

27

ROME

The monster Volta emerging from a well. Urn. Volterra. Guamacci Museum. Museum photo.

ern Italy. Archaeological data, literary sources, and epigraphic documents reveal the existence of bilateral and multilateral exchanges among the major cultural centers of the Italic world. Among the most significant examples: the Etrusco-Latin cultural koine of the sixth century b . c ., whose presence in the religious domain is shown not only by the form and decoration of sacred buildings, but also by certain cults, legends, and miracles; the system of giving dual names to the gods, as well as to persons, a system that is shared by the Umbrian and Etruscan pantheons (Mars Grabovius, in the Iguvine Tables; or Fufluns Pachies in Etruria) and that is also found in Latium and Campania; the close resemblances between augural doctrines and practices in Umbria and Rome; and the fusion of Greek and Italic beliefs, notably in southern Italy. Campania, especially, is the meeting place and the melting pot in which the Greek, Etruscan, Samnite, and Latin traditions combine. Between the fourth and sec­ ond centuries b . c ., broad areas of integration and unification of religious ideas and practices existed throughout the pen­ insula (which explains the vulgarization of the cults of Mars and of Heracles-Hercules, the diffusion of terra-cotta and small bronze votives, certain types of temples, etc.). In the course of this process, the hegemony of Rome certainly also plays an important role in the acceleration and catalyzing of this process, which preceded the general assimilation of the Italic religions by Roman religion.

28

Hercules suckled by Uni. Florence, Archaeological Museum.

Etruscans and Italians: The Poverty of Mythic Narratives The extraordinary development of mythological imagina­ tion and erudition among the Greeks seems to contrast with an extreme paucity of stories about gods and heroes among the peoples of ancient Italy. Naturally when we express a judgment—or, perhaps, an impression— of this kind, we must take into account the limits imposed on our knowledge by the loss of any original literatures, with the exception of Latin literature. We have only a few fragments of the Etruscan and Italic traditions, occasionally collected or sum­ marized much later by classical and Byzantine authors, often with obvious alterations. A large proportion of these narra­ tives suggest a legendary world already open to the influence of the Greek myths, if not thoroughly elaborated by the Greeks in terms of their interpretation of the origins of the Italic peoples, cities, and cults. In such a context it is difficult to isolate the local elements, and especially to evaluate their authenticity and age. The same problem exists for the interpretation of Etruscan artistic representations, in partic­ ular for the scenes engraved on mirrors and the reliefs on small cinerary urns and sarcophagi, sometimes with more or less obscure episodes from local legends, or, rather, elements of these legends inserted into Greek compositions. It is certainly always possible that orally transmitted sagas were at the origin of these scenes, but of these no evidence

R E L I G I O N

r e m a i n s . W e m a y , h o w e v e r , s ti ll f i n d s o m e e c h o o f t h e m th e e n ig m a tic re p r e s e n ta tio n s s c u lp te d n erary

s te la e

A p u lia

and

of

th e

th e

A d ria tic

re g io n s

n e cro p o lise s

of

o r e n g ra v e d (th o s e

N o v ila ra

of

on

on

th e

in fu ­

D a u n ia

in

fro n tie r

IN

fle x iv e p e r io d , a n d p ro ce ss

P R E - R O M A N

th a t th e y

o f G re c o -I ta lic

re m a in e d

m y th ic

I T A L Y

s u b o r d in a te

e la b o ra tio n

th a t

to

w as

th e

m en­

t i o n e d a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h i s a r t i c l e . In t h e m y t h i c a s p e c t s o f th e tra d itio n s o f th e " s a c r e d

s p r in g tim e "

w e can

som e­

M a r c h e s ), w ith th e ir s c e n e s o f b a ttle s , c e r e m o n i e s , n a v i g a ­

t im e s fin d a r e l a ti v e ly a u t o n o m o u s v e i n o f l e g e n d s p r o p e r to

t io n , m o n s t r o u s b e i n g s , e t c .; a n d o n a fe w a r c h a ic n a r r a t iv e

th e S a b e llia n s .

v e s s e ls a n d b r o n z e s . B u t th e s e tra d itio n s , e v e n th o u g h th e y

The Divinities

e x is te d , m u s t b e c o n s id e r e d is o la te d p h e n o m e n a , s p e c if ic to e a c h e t h n i c g r o u p a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f i ts h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p ­

/. Ancient Italy in General

m e n t . T h e e a r l y d if f u s io n o f G r e e k m y th o lo g y , w ith its g o d s a n d h e r o e s , m u s t h a v e s m o th e r e d a n y a tte m p t to e la b o ra te

A s t u d e n t o f t h e a n c i e n t I ta lia n g o d s m u s t n e v e r lo s e s ig h t

th e in d i g e n o u s l e g e n d s i n to o r g a n i z e d c y c le s , e s p e c i a ll y in

o f th e

th e

fu n d a m e n ta l u n ity o f th e G re e k a n d

T y rrh e n ia n

a re a

(E tr u r ia ,

L a tiu m ,

and

C a m p a n ia ),

r e lig io u s

u n ity

o f c la s s ic a l

c iv iliz a tio n , R om an

is,

th e

re lig io n s .

th a t

B e­

w h ic h , w h ile m o r e a d v a n c e d , a l s o c a m e u n d e r G r e e k in flu ­

yond

en ce

a n d b e h a v io r, d iffe re n tia te th e re la tio n s th a t G r e e c e , E tru ria ,

e a rlie r .

On

th e

o th e r

hand,

c e rta in

p r e d is p o s itio n s

th e tr a its th a t, o n th e le v e l o f im a g in a tio n , m e n ta lity ,

con ­

th e Ita lic p o p u l a ti o n s , a n d R o m e m a i n ta i n e d w ith th e s a c r e d ,

c e p t i o n s — l ik e E t r u s c a n i d e a s a b o u t t h e m y s t e r i o u s n a t u r e o f

it is e v i d e n t t h a t t h e i r i d e a s o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s , f u n c t i o n s ,

th e d iv in e — c a u s e d a w e a k d e v e lo p m e n t o f m y th o lo g y , a n d

lo o k s , a n d a t tr i b u te s o f th e m a in d iv in itie s a r e e s s e n tia lly th e

b ased

on

g e n e ra l

w ays

of

th in k in g

e s p e c ia lly o f n a r r a tiv e s th a t r e c o r d t h i s is c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m

and

re lig io u s

th e a c tio n s o f th e g o d s ;

th e e x tr a o r d in a r y

im a g in a tio n

B u t m o d e r n r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e f o c u s e d th e ir a tte n tio n o n a fe w

p ie c e s o f p ic to ria l o r lite ra ry

d a ta ,

s a m e . T h is c a n n o t b e e x p la in e d s o le ly w ith in th e p e r s p e c t iv e o f c o m p a r a tiv e s tu d ie s o f I n d o -E u r o p e a n a n d M e d ite r r a n e a n d iv in itie s (th e s u p r e m e g o d o f lig h t o r o f h e a v e n , fo r e x a m ­

t h a t t h e G r e e k s d e m o n s t r a t e d in t h i s d o m a i n . w h ic h

a llo w

us

to

p l e , o r t h e m o t h e r g o d d e s s , e t c . ) ; it is n e c e s s a r y t o t a k e fu ll acco u n t

o f c o n c r e te

h isto rica l

r e la tio n s h ip s .

The

fact

th a t

o r E tru s c a n -

th e s e d iv in e fig u re s a r e d e s c rib e d a n th r o p o m o r p h ic a lly p u ts

I t a li c l e g e n d s t h a t c a n b e g r o u p e d a r o u n d d i v i n e , d a e m o n i c ,

th e m w ith in th e d o m a i n o f c u l t u r e (th a t is, o f m y th o g r a p h i c

o r h e r o i c f i g u r e s . A ll, o r a l m o s t a ll, o f t h e s e s e e m

im a g in a tio n a n d e ru d itio n , o f th e c re a tio n s a n d tra d itio n s o f

lo c a te ,

been

if n o t t o

d e v e lo p e d

r e c o n s tr u c t, c e rta in

la te ,

in te g ra tin g

E tru s c a n

to h a v e

G re e k e le m e n ts a n d

a lso

i c o n o g r a p h y ) r a t h e r t h a n o f re lig io u s t h o u g h t . B y fa c ilita tin g

p e r h a p s m o r e o r le ss a lte r e d m e m o r ie s o f h is to ric a l f a c ts . T h e

th e ir d if f u s io n , th is c h a r a c t e r is t ic a llo w s a n o s m o s i s b e tw e e n

m o s t s ig n ific a n t a r e (1 ) H e r d e (H e r a c l e s ) , “ s o n o f U n i (J u n o -

a r e a s th a t,

)," w h o w a s n u rs e d b y th e g o d d e s s ; (2 ) M a ris (M a rs ), w h o

tio n s , p a r t ic ip a t e d in t h e s a m e c iv il i z a ti o n , a s w a s p r e c is e ly

w a s p re s e n te d

th e c a s e o f G r e e c e a n d Ita ly t h r o u g h o u t a n tiq u ity . O f c o u r s e

th a t

h is

in a m u l t i t u d e o f i n f a n t i l e o r j u v e n i l e f o r m s

d iffe re n t e p ith e ts

a llo w

us

to

d is tin g u is h

(M a ris

w h ile d i f f e r e n t in

t h e ir in itia l r e lig io u s c o n c e p ­

G r e e k i n s p i r a ti o n w a s in itia lly a n d c o n s t a n t l y d e t e r m i n a n t ;

H a ln a , M a ris H u s r n a n a , M a ris I s m ith ia n s ); h e w a s b e lie v e d

but

to b e th e s o n o f H e r d e ; h e w a s s u b j e c t e d b y M i n e r v a to a r ite

c h a r a c te r is tic s

w h ic h w a s s u p p o s e d to e n s u r e h is im m o r ta lity — a n e p is o d e

w h o w e r e a s s im ila te d . A lth o u g h th e n a m e s o f th e g o d s w e re

t h a t is p r o b a b l y c o n n e c t e d t o t h e s t o r i e s o f t h e l o n g e v i t y a n d

d if f e r e n t, b o th n a m e s o f te n — b u t n o t a l w a y s — c o n v e y e d th e

th e trip le d e a t h a n d

s a m e r e a lity (th e E tr u s c a n n a m e T in jia j, fo r in s t a n c e , c a n b e

r e s u r r e c t i o n o f th e c e n t a u r M a r e s , th e

a n c e s to r o f th e A u s o n e s (A e lia n u s , E p iu r

and

T ag es,

c h ild re n

w ho

Varia Historia

had

th e

9 .1 6 ) ; (3 )

ap p e a ra n ce

and

th is

d id

not

go

so

far

th a t w e re

as

to

su p p ress

p re se rv e d

in

c e rta in

th e G re e k

lo c a l

d iv in itie s

s e e n a s a s im p le " t r a n s l a t i o n " o f th e G r e e k Z e u s , th e L a tin n a m e V e n u s o f th e G re e k

A p h r o d ite , e t c .) . T h e d e g r e e o f

w is d o m o f o ld a g e ; th is s a m e T a g e s w a s s a id to h a v e b e e n th e

id e n tific a tio n v a r ie s d e p e n d i n g o n

i n v e n to r a n d m a s te r o f th e h a r u s p i c i u m , w h ic h c a m e o u t o f

th e

a

t h e ir n a m e s w h e n th e y w e r e in tr o d u c e d i n to I ta ly : p e r c e iv e d

fu rro w

in

th e e a r th , a n d

to

have

had

c o n n e ctio n s

w ith

p e rio d .

B u t c e rta in

G reek

th e c a s e , th e p la c e , a n d

go d s,

n o ta b ly

A p o llo ,

kept

T a r c h o n , th e e p o n y m o u s h e r o o f T a rq u in ia ; (4 ) th e p ro b a b ly

a s fo r e ig n e r s a t first ( th e c u lt o f A p o llo w a s in tr o d u c e d

p a ra lle l s to r ie s a b o u t th e t e a c h i n g o f th e n y m p h V e g o ia ( L a s a

R o m e o n l y i n t h e f i f t h c e n t u r y b . c .), t h e y w e r e f i n a l l y m o r e o r

V écu

le s s c o m p l e te l y i n te g r a te d i n to th e Ita lic p a n t h e o n . A m o n g

o r V e c u v ia ) a n d

h e r re la tio n s

w ith

a

c e rta in

A rru n s

V e lty m n u s, p ro b a b ly fro m C h iu s i; (5 ) th e le g e n d o f C a c u s , a

th e s e g o d s ,

s in g e r w h o s e s o n g s w e r e p e r h a p s tra n s c rib e d

n am e

m an

nam ed

A rtile ; b o th

w ere

t h r e a te n e d

by

by a young th e

w a rrio rs

th e

b ecam e

Hercules).

m o s t p o p u la r w a s H e ra c le s

Herekle,

in

E tru sc a n ,

m a s s iv e

im p o rta tio n

o f G reek

t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y b .c . w h i c h

a tte s te d

on

m o n u m e n ts b e g in n in g

w e re tra n sfo rm e d

in to s e m il e g e n d a r y ta le s ); e l s e w h e r e C a ­

O scan

and

in

h is

L a tin ,

T h is t y p e o f in f lu e n c e m u s t b e c o n n e c t e d w ith th e

A u le a n d C a ile V ip in a s ( w h o t h e m s e l v e s b e lo n g e d to a c y c le o f h isto rica l e v e n ts d a rin g fro m

(in

Herde,

in

E tru s c a n

m y th s

in to

Ita ly , in

w h ic h

is

th e a r c h a ic

p e rio d .

c u s is c i t e d a s T a r c h o n ' s a m b a s s a d o r t o K i n g M a r s y a s , t h e

T h e G re c o -I ta lic th e o lo g ic a l k o in e , a s a g e n e r a l p h e n o m e ­

Collectanea

n o n , w a s b o rn o f a p ro c e s s th a t b e g a n a t th e d a w n o f h isto ric

e p o n y m o f th e Ita lic p e o p l e o f th e M a r s i (S a b i n u s , 1 .8 ) ,

and

tu rn e d

by

V irg il

b a n d it w h o

( Aencid 8 . 1 8 4 f f . ) w as

fin a lly

k i ll e d

as

a

by

cru el

sh ep h erd

H e r c u le s ; (6 ) th e

m o n s t e r ( V ) o l t a , w h o a p p e a r e d in t h e V o l s i n i a n a r e a a n d w a s k i ll e d b y K i n g P o r s e n n a

(P lin y ,

Naturalis Historia

u n d o u b te d ly th e c h a r a c te r w h o m

2 . 1 4 0 ) , is

w e s e e s p r in g in g o u t o f a

tim e s ,

at

le a s t

w ith

th e

first

G reek

a tte m p ts

to

c o lo n iz e

s o u t h e r n I t a l y a n d S i c i ly , a n d c u l m i n a t e d in t h e H e l l e n i s t i c p e rio d

w ith

th e

R om an

co n q u e st of G re e ce .

a g a in s t th e p e r s is te n c e o f c e rta in

B u t it r a n

up

lo c a l c u lts th a t to ta lly o r

p a rtly e s c a p e d G re e k a d a p ta tio n s a n d tr a n s f o r m a tio n s . T h is

w e ll in t h e r e l i e f s o n s o m e u r n s , w i t h t h e h e a d o r p e l t o f a

h a p p e n e d e s p e c i a l l y in o u t - o f - t h e - w a y a n d p e r i p h e r a l z o n e s ,

w o lf, a n d

but

co n fro n tin g m e n

w h o a re arm e d

o r p e rfo rm in g

a lso

in

som e

r ite s o f e x o r c i s m . S o m e o f t h e s e m y th ic s c h e m a t a a r e f o u n d

im p o r t a n t d iv in itie s

beyond

and

th e

s p e c ific a lly

E tru s c a n

d o m a in ,

w h ic h

im p lie s

g reat

tra d itio n s w o u ld

re lig io u s

c e n te rs

s u r v i v e d — d iv in itie s n o t, a n d

in

w h ic h

w h ose

w il l n o t , a l l o w

very

c h a ra cte rs th e m

to b e

r e l a ti o n s w ith t h e Ita lic w o r l d . B u t w e m u s t a s s u m e th a t th e

i d e n t i f i e d w i t h G r e e k m o d e l s . T h i s is t h e c a s e , f o r e x a m p l e ,

c o n n e c t i o n s a n d fu s io n s b e t w e e n th e tr a d itio n s o f d iffe re n t

o f V e ltu n e -V o ltu m n a ,

e th n ic a re a s w e re

Latina,

re a liz e d

o n ly d u rin g a n

e r u d ite a n d

re­

deus Etruriae princeps

(V a rro ,

De Lingua

5 .4 6 ) , a t V o ls in ii in E t r u r ia , a n d o f th e g o d d e s s V e s o n a

29

ROME

in t h e U m b r o - S a b e l l i a n w o r l d . T h e r e w a s a d e f i n i t e i n d i g e ­

r e g i o n s l o c a t e d in t h e n o r t h e a s t , a n d t h e y c o u l d h u r l b o l t s o f

n o u s in flu e n c e o n c e r ta in p a r tic u la r c o n c e p tio n s o f th e d i­

lig h tn in g .

v in e , fo r e x a m p le o n th e m y s te r io u s a n d a n o n y m o u s c o lle ­

s p o n d in g to Z e u s (a n d to th e L a tin o -Ita lic J u p ite r ); h e th r e w

(di involuti, opertanei)

gia l d iv in itie s

indigilamenta

on

F irs t w a s T in

o r T in ia ,

th e s u p r e m e

god

co rre­

th e

th r e e th u n d e r b o lts , o n e o n h is o w n , th e s e c o n d o n th e a d v ic e

in R o m e . B u t t h e r e w a s a l s o t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f

o f th e t h r e e C o n s e n te s , a n d th e th ir d , m o s t te rrib le o n e , a t

tria d s (w h ic h G re e k a n d

in E t r u r i a , a n d

o t h e r a n c ie n t re lig io n s a ls o h a d ),

th e o r d e r o f th e e n ig m a tic S u p e rio r a n d

O b scu re g o d s,

di

s u c h a s th e v e r y f a m o u s R o m a n tria d o f J u p i te r , J u n o , a n d

Superiores et Involuti ( S e n e c a , Quaestiones Naturales

M i n e r v a , o r in U m b r i a t h e g o d s c a l l e d

" G r a b o v i i ," th a t is,

c a m e U n i, th e c o n s o r t o f T in (ia ) a n d h o m o lo g u e o f th e G re e k

J u p i t e r , M a r s , a n d V o f i o n o . A n d f i n a ll y t h e r e w a s t h e p r o l i f ­

g o d d e s s H e ra a n d th e L a tin J u n o — s h e w a s h ig h ly v e n e r a te d

e ra tio n o f m in o r d iv in itie s a n d d a e m o n s .

in

D o u b le n a m e s c o n s titu te th e m o s t im p o rta n t c h a r a c te ris tic

a ll

th e

m a in

E tru sc a n

c itie s ,

in

d iffe re n t

2 .4 1 ). N e x t

fo rm s,

but

e s p e c i a l l y a s t h e g o d d e s s o f m a t e r n i t y ( in t h e s a n c t u a r y o f

o f t h e d i v i n i t i e s o f t h e I t a li c w o r l d ; in c e r t a i n a s p e c t s t h i s w a s

P y r g i s h e w a s e q u iv a l e n t to Ilith y ia o r L e u c o th e a a n d

c o n n e c t e d w ith th e n o r m a l u s a g e , c o m m o n a l s o in G r e e c e , o f

a s s im ila te d to th e P h o e n ic ia n g o d d e s s A s ta r te ) ; M e n e r v a , th e

a d d in g a n

a ttrib u te

epiklesis

or

to

th e

p ro p e r an d

cu rren t

w as

h o m o lo g u e o f M in e rv a a n d A th e n a ; M a ris, th e h o m o lo g u e o f

n a m e o f t h e g o d o r g o d d e s s . B u t in I t a l y ( i . e . , in U m b r i a , in

M a rs a n d A re s , w h o s e e p ith e ts a n d m a n ife s ta tio n s w e r e th e

th e O s c a n -s p e a k in g a r e a s ,

m o s t v a r ie d o f a ll; S e t h l a n s , th e h o m o l o g u e o f V u lca n ( th e

in E t r u r i a , a n d

even

in R o m e ) ,

VelchJan?J

th is p a r t ic u la r i t y a p p e a r s w ith th e f r e q u e n c y a n d e s p e c ia lly

n am e

th e c o h e r e n c e o f a s y s te m c o m p a r a b le to th a t o f th e o n o m a s ­

l a s t - n a m e d d i v i n i t i e s a l s o a p p e a r in o t h e r c e l e s t i a l z o n e s . In

tic s o f p e r s o n s b e a r i n g d o u b le n a m e s ( p e r s o n a l n a m e a n d

th e n o r th w e s t re g io n s w a s a n o th e r h u rle r o f th u n d e rb o lts :

fa m ily n a m e ), a s y s te m

is a l s o a t t e s t e d ) a n d H e p h a e s t u s . T h e s e tw o

fo u n d e x c lu s iv e ly in th e s o c ie t ie s o f

S a t r e s , th e h o m o l o g u e o f th e L a tin S a t u r n u s a n d th e G r e e k

a n c i e n t I t a ly , i . e . , p r e c i s e l y a m o n g t h e E t r u s c a n s , t h e L a t i n s ,

O u r a n o s . O t h e r m a j o r d i v in itie s w e r e T u r a n ( lite ra lly " t h e

a n d t h e U m b r o - S a b e l l i a n s . It i s , in f a c t , v e r y l ik e l y t h a t it w a s

M is tr e s s " ), th e h o m o lo g u e o f A p h ro d ite a n d V e n u s; N e th ­

u s e d to h a r m o n iz e th e r e la tiv e ly in s titu tio n a l c h a r a c t e r o f th e

u n s , th e h o m o lo g u e o f N e p tu n e a n d

P o s e id o n ; T u rm s , th e

Henne-

g o d s ( a s w e ll a s o f d e m i g o d s a n d d a e m o n s ) w ith th e m o d e l

h o m o lo g u e o f H e r m e s (th e n a m e

o f h u m a n s o c i e t y a n d i n s t i t u t i o n s , a s is s e e n in o t h e r c a s e s

M e rc u ry . F in a lly th e r e w e r e s o m e d iv in itie s w h o w e r e b o r ­

(fo r

r o w e d d ir e c tly f ro m G r e e c e : H e r d e (th a t is, H e r a c le s ), A ri-

e x a m p le ,

in

th e

g r o u p in g

of

c e rta in

d iv in itie s

in to

" c o l l e g e s , " a n d in t h e p e o p l e ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e d e m i g o d s , w h o c o u ld b e c lie n ts , h e lp e r s , o r s e r v a n t s ) . T h e first n a m e , w h ic h

co rre sp o n d s

to

th e in d iv id u a l o r p e r s o n a l n a m e

in

t im i o r A r t u m s ( A r t e m i s ) , a n d A p ( u ) l u ( A p o l l o ) . T h e d iv in itie s o f n a tu r e n a tu r a l p r o d u c ts s e e m

h u m a n o n o m a s t i c s , is n a t u r a l l y t h e g o d ' s p r i n c i p a l n a m e ; b u t

r e g io n s

it c a n

a lso

c a te g o r y

Lasa

or

s p e c ific , ritu a l

be

a

of

n am e

o f d e m ig o d s

CharulnJ

d e sig n a tio n ), th e

com m o n (in

Ig u v in e

or a

c e rta in

C a (u )th a a n d

nam es

daw n

(as

in

Ahtu Marti

=

th e

U m b ria n

"O ra cle

[o f]

M a r s " ), o r s im p ly th e g e n e r ic n a m e in d ic a tin g th e d iv in ity

Des Fortuna;

th e

of a

m e m b e rs

"c o n c e p t"

T a b le ts:

of

fo r in s ta n c e , th e

to

E tru ria ,

a r e s o m e tim e s fo llo w e d b y a s e c o n d , m o r e

Flere Nethuns

is a l s o a t t e s t e d ) a n d

U s il, a n d

T h esan ,

(ce le s tia l a n d

te r r e s tr ia l) a n d

of

t o b e l o c a t e d m a i n l y in t h e s o u t h e r n

c e le s tia l

v a u lt:

th e re

p ro b a b ly

S e lv a n s

(=

w e re

th e

th e m o o n

S y lv a n u s ),

s o la r

gods

T iv (r) a n d

th e

F u flu n (s),

th e

and

h o m o l o g u e o f D io n y s u s a n d B a c c h u s . A m o n g th e d iv in itie s o f f a te , d e a t h , a n d t h e n e t h e r w o r ld w h o u s u a lly liv e d in th e in a u s p ic io u s w e s te r n V e tis ( w h o

m ay

re g io n s a r e C ile n (s ), L e t h a ( m ) , C a lu ,

b e V e iv e , i .e .,

V e io v is ,

th e J u p ite r o f th e

th e

n e t h e r w o r ld ) , a n d a ls o th e g o d d e s s V a n th , th e g o d M a n tu s

g o d N e p t u n e o r t h e d i v i n i t y o f N e p t u n e ) . A s in n o b l e n a m e s ,

a n d h is c o n s o r t M a n ia , a n d , b o r r o w e d d ir e c tly fro m G r e e c e ,

(o f th e ty p e

cf. th e E tr u s c a n

=

t h e g o d ' s s e c o n d n a m e g e n e r a l l y h a s a n o b j e c t i v e m e a n i n g ; it c a n re fe r to a p la ce

(Juno Populonjija);

s u g g e s ts a fa m ily c u lt ( f o r e x a m p le ,

to a f a m ily lin e — w h ic h

Culsl Leprnal

=

C u ls u

" o f t h e L e p r n a f a m i l y " in t h e f u n e r a l e l e g y o f t h e T a r q u i n i a n

(Keri Arentikai = C e r e s t h e [ tabella deßxionis] f r o m C a p u a ,

p rie s t L a ris P u le n a s ); to a fu n c tio n A v e n g e r , in a n O s c a n c u r s e a n d th e p a ra lle l n am e

Fufluns

w h e th e r

P ro s e rp in a ).

B u t in t h i s d o m a i n

b e tw e e n

it i s h a r d

to m a k e a c le a r

th e g o d s s tr i c t l y s p e a k i n g a n d

c e r ta in

in fe rn a l d a e m o n s . F in a lly w e m u s t n o te s e p a r a te ly th e tw o d iv in itie s

of

V o ls in ii,

( Veltuna

V o ltu m n a

Veltha

or

in

E tr u s c a n — a s w e s a id a b o v e , th is d iv in ity b e c a m e th e m o s t i m p o r ta n t g o d o f E tru ria fro m th e tim e th e r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f

E tru sc a n

t h e E t r u s c a n s t a t e s b e g a n t o m e e t p e r i o d i c a l l y in h i s s a n c t u ­

is a t t a c h e d a s a n a t t r i b u t e t o t h e n a m e o f t h e

a r y ) a n d N o r t i a , p r o b a b ly th e g o d d e s s o f d e s t i n y : a n a il w a s

b y a s s im ila tio n god

Mars Ultor); o r t o a n o t h e r d i v i n i t y , ( a s in Fuflunsul Pachies, in w h i c h t h e

A ita o r E ita ( H a d e s ) a n d h is c o n s o r t P h e r s i p n a i ( P e r s e p h o n e , d is tin c tio n

B acch u s,

w ho

a s s o c i a t i o n ( Deus

co rre sp o n d s

to

F u flu n s)

Fidius, Janus Junonius,

or

s im p ly

by

e t c .) . T o th is la st ty p e

d r iv e n in to h e r te m p le e a c h y e a r (L iv y , 7 .3 .7 ) . A lo n g sid e

th e se

d iv in e

fig u re s

w ho

w ere

d e fin e d

and

o f f o rm a tio n b e lo n g s th e e x t r a o r d i n a r y i n te r w e a v in g o f d i­

r e p r e s e n te d a n t h r o p o m o r p h ic a l ly u n d e r th e in flu e n c e o f th e

v in e n a m e s th a t c h a r a c t e r iz e s th e U m b r ia n p a n th e o n in th e

G re e k p a n th e o n , s o m e in d ig e n o u s s u p e r n a tu r a l e n titie s s u r ­

Ig u v in e T a b le ts (s e e b e lo w ).

v i v e d , o f te n g r o u p e d in c o l le g e s o f o b s c u r e a n d m y s t e r i o u s d iv in itie s ,

II.

Etruria

w h ose

n u m b er, se x , a n d

n am e a re

not know n

Adversus Nationes 3 . 4 0 ) . T h e s e i n c l u d e d Involuti et Superiores g o d s , a n d t h e Favores Opertanei ( i . e . ,

( V a r r o , in A r n o b i u s

O u r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e E t r u s c a n g o d s is b a s e d p r i m a r i l y o n

th e

p icto ria l r e p r e s e n ta tio n s (c h ie fly e n g r a v e d m ir r o r s , b u t a ls o

" h i d d e n " ) . T h e w r ite r s o f a n tiq u ity m e n tio n o t h e r " c o l le g e s "

fu n e ra ry p a in tin g s , v a s e s , s ta t u e tt e s , e t c .) , e s p e c ia lly w h e n

o r c a t e g o r i e s o f d i v i n i t i e s ; t h e s e w e r e g e n e r a l l y r e f e r r e d t o in

th e s e a re a c c o m p a n ie d b y e x p la n a to r y in s c rip tio n s ; o n o th e r

E tru s c a n b y th e w o rd

aiser o r eiser ( =

" g o d s " ) ; th e e x p re s s io n

E tr u s c a n te x ts , s u c h a s ritu a ls , v o tiv e d e d ic a tio n s , th e m in ­

eiser si-c seu-c,

ia tu re

c o u ld r e f e r e i th e r t o a ll o f t h e s e o r to a s p e c if ic c u l t . T h e r e

m odel

c o m p a riso n

of of

a

l iv e r

fro m

in fo rm a tio n

P ia ce n z a ,

p re se rv e d

in

e t c .;

and

c la s sica l

on

th e

lite ra ry

T h e g r e a t c e le s tia l d iv in itie s h a v e c h a r a c t e r is t ic s a n d

a t­

in

m a y b e a p a r a lle l in t h e p erh ap s

so u rces.

fo u n d

Aiser Thußtha),

th e r itu a l o f th e Z a g r e b

Consentes

or

c o u n s e lo rs

Complices of

M um m y,

( in E t r u s c a n

T in ia -Ju p ite r,

w ho

w e r e t w e l v e in n u m b e r ; b u t t h e r e w e r e a l s o t h e P e n a t e s , w h o

trib u te s a n a lo g o u s to t h o s e o f th e G re e k d iv in itie s to w h o m

w e r e d iv id e d in to f o u r c la s s e s o f d iv in itie s , o f th e sk y , th e

t h e y w e r e a s s i m i l a t e d . T h e y w e r e b e l i e v e d t o i n h a b i t a ll o f

w a te r,

th e

A r n o b iu s 3 .3 8 ) ; th e L a r e s ; a n d th e M a n e s , th a t is, th e s p irits

30

s ix te e n

re g io n s

of

heaven,

p a rtic u la rly

th e

first

fo u r

th e

e a rth ,

and

hum an

s o u ls

(N ig id iu s

F ig u lu s ,

in

R E L I G I O N

of the dead. The relations among all these groups are not clear: the Consentes may have been pairs of major divinities, but they are also sometimes identified with the Penates— who may represent, in another form, all Etruscan divinities. III. The Italic Populations Outside Etruria, the archaeological evidence provided by pictorial representations is very rare. We must therefore rely almost entirely on epigraphic documents, with the occa­ sional help of information found in literary sources. In addition to the scarcity of data, another problem is the multiplicity and dispersion of ethnic groups speaking IndoEuropean languages and of their ritual centers. As a result, it is difficult to propose a synthesis of the data on the Italic divinities, not only for the marginal zones of the Adriatic and southern Italy, but also for the territories of the UmbroSabellian peoples, whose religious experience, that is, cul­ tural experience in general, appears to have been very different. Undoubtedly there were fairly close relations be­ tween these peoples and the ancient Latin and Roman world, due to common underlying characteristics and to very early contacts between the Sabines and the inhabitants of

IN

P R E - R O M A N

ITAL Y

Latium (a large number of Roman cults were supposed to be of Sabine origin, starting with that of the god Quirinus), but also to later influences— and notably that of the Roman religion in the frontier territories of the interior peninsula, especially after the territories began to fall under the political domination of Rome. But the Greek and Etruscan cults also exercised their influence. Probably many of the basic figures of the common pan­ theon of Greece and Italy were adapted to the traditions and rituals of the Italic sanctuaries, beginning with Jupiter, who, under the name of (D)iove-, (D)iuve-, but also lupater, accom­ panied by multiple epithets, is widely attested in the UmbroSabellian area. Even though we have no epigraphic docu­ ment clearly proving the existence of a goddess corresponding to Juno, we cannot exclude the hypothesis that the goddess Hera, whose worship was extremely wide­ spread in Italy, influenced the cults of the mother goddess, such as those practiced in the famous sanctuary of Capua— but unfortunately we still do not know the name of the divinity to whom this sanctuary was consecrated. Yet we find references to Ceres (Kere), at Capua, Agnone, and Rossano di Vaglio; and to Diana in the sanctuary of Diana

Right: Votive statue of a woman with a child. Fifth century. Capua, Museo Campano. Museum photo.

Votive statue of a woman with a child. Fifth to sixth century. Capua, Museo Campano. Museum photo.

31

R OME

T i f a t i n a n e a r C a p u a . In C a m p a n i a a n d in t h e t e r r i t o r y o f t h e is, " t h e

is a l s o w e ll k n o w n . B u t t h e p r e e m i n e n t I t a l i c g o d , and

a tte s te d

by

b o th

e p ig ra p h ic a n d

lite r a r y s o u r c e s , s e e m s to h a v e b e e n M a r s (in th e O s c a n f o rm th e g o d o f w a r a n d m ig ra tio n s a n d th e p a tro n o f

m e r c e n a r ie s . T h e d i s c o v e r y o f a v e r y l a r g e n u m b e r o f s m a ll s ta t u e s r e p r e s e n ti n g M a r s a n d H e r a c l e s in th e v o t iv e d e p o s ­ i ts o f s a n c t u a r i e s a l l o v e r t h e p e n i n s u l a is e v i d e n c e o f d e e p p o p u la r

v e n e ra tio n

fo r

th e se

d iv in itie s .

s p e c if ic a lly Ita lic d iv in itie s w h o d o lo g u e s

in

th e

1.

g o d d e s s o f d e s i r e ." T h e c u lt o f H e r a c le s

p re se n t e v e ry w h e re

Mamers),

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Haren-

P e lig n ia n s , A p h r o d ite -V e n u s a p p e a r s u n d e r th e n a m e

tas, t h a t ( Herekle)

G re c o -R o m a n

T h e re

are

o th e r

n o t re a lly h a v e

w o rld ,

such

as

th e

hom o­

god d ess

M e fitis , a g r e a t d iv in e f ig u r e o f th e S a b e llia n p e o p l e s , k n o w n

Introduction

c. MiCALi, L'Italia avanti il dominio de' Romani ( Florence 1810; 2d ed., 1821; reprinted Turin 1887). d . randai.l maciver , Italy before the Romans (Oxford 1928). f . altheim , Italia, Studi e Materiali di Storia delle Religioni, 10 (1934): 125-55; Italien und Rom. 1: Die Grundlagen (Amsterdam and Leipzig 1941), = Römische Geschichte, 1 (Frankfurt am Main 1951). j. whatmough , The Foundations of Roman Italy (London 1937). M. PALLorriNO, "Le origini storiche dei popoli italici," in X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche, Relazioni (Florence 1955), 2:3-60. g . m . a . Richter , Ancient Italy (Ann Arbor 1955). a . maigri, Arte e civiltà dell'Italia antica (Milan 1960); Études étrusco-italiques (Louvain 1963). c. RADKE, Die Götter Altitaliens (Münster 1965). g . devoto , Scritti minori, 2 (Florence 1967). m . a . levi , L'Italia antica, 1 (Milan 1968).

Ju p ite r

u. h e l ic o n , Rome et la Méditerranée occidentale jusqu'aux guerres puniques

( Diove) , f o r m e d t h e c o u p l e t h a t m a y h a v e b e e n n a m e d " t h e

(Paris 1969). m . pallottino, Civiltà artistica etrusco-italica ( Florence 1971); "Sul concetto di storia italica," in L ltalie préromaine et la Rome républi­ caine: Mélanges offerts à Jacques Heurgon (Paris 1976), 771-89; Genti e culture dell'Italia preromana (Rome 1980). R. bloch . Recherches sur les religions de l'Italie antique. Centre de recherche d'histoire et de philologie de l'École pratique des hautes-études (Geneva 1976); Popoli e civiltà dell'Italia antica, vols. 2 -7 (Rome 1974-78); / Galli e l'Italia, catalog of the exposition (Rome 1978).

e s p e c ia lly

in

I r p i n i a ; it i s c e r t a i n l y

she

w ho,

w ith

S o v e r e i g n s " ( rego) in t h e d e d i c a t i o n s o f R o s s a n o d i V a g li o . She

seem s

to

have

been

p a r tly

a s s im ila te d

to

C e re s

and

V e n u s . C e r e s J o v i a is a l s o c a l l e d " Q u e e n " in t h e i n s c r i p t i o n o f th e T a b le t o f R a p in o , n e a r C h ie ti. A m o n g th e U m b r ia n s (a t P r e s tin o ) a n d th e P ic e n ia n s , th e w o r s h ip o f a n o t h e r fe m a le d iv in ity , C u p r a , w a s w id e s p r e a d ; a f a m o u s s a n c t u a r y

w as

d e d i c a t e d to h e r o n th e A d r i a t ic ( t o d a y 's C u p r a M a r i ti m a ) .

2.

B u t th e ric h e s t a n d m o s t c o m p le te d o c u m e n ta tio n o n th e I t a li c d i v i n i t i e s w o r s h i p e d in a p a r t i c u l a r p l a c e , in t h i s c a s e th e

U m b ria n

c ity

o f G u b b io ,

is

p ro v id e d

by

th e

Ig u v in e

T a b le ts. T h e T a b le ts m e n tio n a la rg e n u m b e r o f d iv in e f ig u re s o r e n titie s , o n ly s o m e o f w h o m a r e k n o w n , s u c h a s J u p ite r,

347ff., with all the references to earlier studies.

3.

M a rs , P o m o n o , V e s o n a , C e r f o , F is o v io , H o lo , H o n d o , T e fro , T r e b o , V o f i o n o , e t c . W h a t s e e m s m o s t s i g n i f i c a n t t o d a y is th a t e a c h

o f th e se

n am es,

ra re ly

u sed

by

i ts e lf , g e n e r a l l y

fo rm s th e first p a r t o f a d o u b le n a m e , th e s e c o n d p a r t b e in g a n a d je c tiv e f o rm e d fro m

th e n a m e o f a n o t h e r d iv in ity ( f o r

e x a m p le , C e r f o M a rtio , P r e s to ta C e r f ia , T o rs a C e r f ia , T o rs a J o v i a , F i s o v i o S a n c i o , e t c . ) . A ll o f t h i s m a k e s u p a n e x t r a o r ­ d in a r y in te r w e a v in g o f re c ip ro c a l r e la tio n s , a k in d o f g e n e a ­ lo g ic a l tr e e .

A t th e

to p

o f th is t r e e

is th e

t ria d

o f Ju p ite r

Etruscans and Italians

g . Q. GiGi.iOLi and g . camporeale . La religione degli Etruschi: Storia delle religioni (6th ed., Turin 1971), 2:537-672, and especially 598ff. a . |. pfiffig , Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975), and especially 16ff., 198ff.,

The Divinities

G. bianchi, "Gli dei delle stirpi italiche," in Popoli e civiltà dell’Italia antica. 7 (1978): 195-236. r. bloch . Recherches sur les religions de l'Italie antique (Geneva 1976). g . q . gigi.ioli and g . camporeale , La religione degli Etruschi, Storia delle religioni (6th ed., Turin 1971), 2:537-672. a . ). pfiffig , Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975). g . radke . Die Götter Altitaliens

(Munster 1965). See also other more specific works cited at the end of the other articles on Italy before Rome.

G r a b o v i o , M a r s G r a b o v i o , a n d V o f i o n o G r a b o v i o , a ll o f w h o m c a n b e c o n n e c t e d to a first e n tity , G r a b o -, w h o s e o r ig in , a c ­ c o r d i n g to G . D e v o to , is a s th e p e r s o n i f ic a ti o n o f r o c k s o r o a k t r e e s , a n d w h o is a l s o f o u n d i n t h e E t r u s c a n d i v i n e n a m e

in crapsti

( = g o d o f t h e g r a b - , o r in t h e

grab-).

flere

T h i s is e v i d e n t l y

S acrificial C ults and R ites in P re-R oman I taly

a s y s te m b o rn o f a c o m p le x th e o lo g ic a l e la b o r a tio n , c o m p li­ c a t e d a ll t h e m o r e b y t h e f a c t t h a t s o m e o f t h e s e d i v i n e e n t i t i e s s e e m t o b e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n s o f c o n c e p t s o r a c t i o n s ( Vofiono-, f o r i n s t a n c e , is " t h e s h a k e r , "

Trebo-

" t h e d w e ll in g ," e t c .) .

N o t h i n g , o r v e r y l i t t l e , c a n b e s a i d a b o u t t h e o t h e r I t a li c p o p u la tio n s , m o r e is o la te d a n d le s s k n o w n . O n th e in d ig e ­

O u r k n o w le d g e a b o u t th e c u ltic f o r m s , e s p e c ia lly th e s a c r i­ f i c ia l f o r m s , t h a t w e r e p r a c t i c e d b y t h e p o p u l a t i o n s o f p r e -

n o u s d i v i n i t i e s o f t h e A p u l i a n s , t h e r e is n o i n f o r m a t i o n a t a l l;

R o m a n I ta ly c o m e s to u s fr o m a fe w o r ig in a l d o c u m e n t s o f

th e n a m e s o f th e G re e k g o d d e s s e s D e m e te r a n d A p h r o d ite ,

g r e a t im p o r ta n c e . A m o n g th e m , th e m o s t im p o rta n t d o c u ­

w h ic h a p p e a r in th e M e s s a p i a n i n s c r ip t io n s , c o u l d b e t r a n s ­

m e n t is th e U m b r i a n t e x t o f th e I g u v i n e T a b le s , th e lo n g e s t

la tio n s o f o n e o r s e v e r a l lo c a l f e m a le d i v in itie s , p a r t ic u la r l y s in c e D e m e te r re c a lls spread

am ong

M enzana

th e c u lt o f C e r e s ,

th e S a b e llia n s . O n

co u ld

be

an

a n cie n t

w h ic h

w a s w id e ­

th e o th e r h a n d , Ju p ite r

lo c a l

god

of h o rses.

O n ce

a g a i n , it is a f e m a l e d i v i n i t y w h o s e e m s t o p r e v a i l i n t h e s e

p r e - L a t i n i n s c r i p t i o n e v e r d i s c o v e r e d in I t a ly . N e x t in i m p o r ­ ta n c e a r e th e E tr u s c a n te x t in s c rib e d o n th e w r a p p in g s o f a n E g y p tia n

m um m y now

in Z a g r e b a n d

th e c la y ta b le t f ro m

C a p u a t h a t a l s o b e a r s a n E t r u s c a n i n s c r i p t i o n . F i n a l ly , t h e r e a re o th e r d o c u m e n ts ,

b o th

E tru sc a n

(th e g o ld e n

p la te s o f

iuvilas

a r e a s . W e c o u ld a ls o c ite th e R e itia o f th e V e n e ti, o f w h o m w e

P y rg i, th e le a d d isk o f M a g lia n o , e t c .) a n d O s c a n (th e

h a v e a fe w r e p r e s e n ta t io n s , fo r e x a m p l e , in th e r e lie f s o n th e

in s c r ip tio n s fro m C a p u a a n d th e

b r o n z e d i s k s f r o m M o n t e b e l l u n a , w h e r e s h e is p o r t r a y e d a s

b e e m p h a s iz e d th a t th e ric h e s t a n d d e e p e s t in fo r m a tio n th a t

a

potnia theron,

w i t h a l a r g e k e y . A m o n g t h e e p i t h e t s o f R e it i a

a t t e s t e d in V e n e t i a n d e d i c a t o r y i n s c r i p t i o n s i s

Tora,

p ro b a b ly

Tabula Agnonensis).

It s h o u l d

th e e p ig r a p h ic s o u r c e s g iv e u s a b o u t th e a n c ie n t c u ltu r e s o f th e

Ita lic w o r l d

is i n f o r m a t i o n

a b o u t r itu a l p r a c ti c e s .

The

o n e o f t h e m o s t a n c i e n t n a m e s o f t h e g o d d e s s . In a n y c a s e ,

v a lu e o f th e s e e p ig ra p h ic d a ta s u r p a s s e s th a t o f a r c h a e o lo g ­

t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a s a n c t u a r y o f A r g i v e H e r a , l ik e t h a t o f J u n o

ic a l d a t a ( t h e r e m a i n s o f s h r i n e s , t e m p l e s a n d t h e i r d e c o r a ­

a t P a d u a , c o n firm s th a t th e V e n e tia n c u lts w e r e e s s e n tia lly

M.P./j.l. 32

tio n s , s c e n e s d e p ic tin g s a c r e d c e r e m o n i e s , a n d s o f o rth ) a n d th e fr a g m e n ta r y a n d in d ire c t in fo r m a tio n s u p p lie d b y c la s s i­

c o n n e c t e d w ith fe m a le d iv in itie s .

c a l lit e r a r y s o u r c e s .

S A C R I F I C A L

C UL T S

Italic sacrificial rites are described in minute detail in the seven bronze tablets from Gubbio. Although their dates have been set at the second and first century b . c . and although they were written partly in the Umbrian alphabet and partly in the Latin alphabet, certain elements of their redaction go back to much earlier times. They consist in a set of sacred regulations that belong to the city-state of Gubbio (Iguvium). Mentioned among them are the city's acropolis (the Fisia acropolis), and the place set aside for the observation of auguries (a templum) and its roads and gates. Its institutions and its priests are named, notably the college of the Atiedii Brethren. The ritual prescriptions are connected with various kinds of ceremonies: a great sacrifice of expiation and puri­ fication of the city and the acropolis, a lustration of the people followed by the exile of foreigners, sacrifices to ward off ill fortune, the sacrifice of a dog, rites of assembly, and the rites of the festivals celebrated every two months. The liturgy took place in three phases: (1) the prayer ratifying the pact with the deity (persklom); (2) the observation of the flight of birds to determine auguries (avie); and (3) the sacrifice itself, or the offering (esono). Different ceremonies were invoked to gain the favor of different deities. The deities were quite numerous; some were well-known and common to all Italic religions (like Jupiter and Mars), while others, more obscure, personified sacred concepts. But almost all of them were characterized by a second name indicating the relationships of kinship or affiliation that united them. The victims of blood sacrifices could be oxen, calves, heifers, pigs, sheep, or dogs, all carefully selected for their age, sex, and color, and according to their breeding, which could be either sacred or profane. The bloodless offerings consisted of liquids, notably the "sacred beverage” and wine, which were used as an accompaniment to the sacrifice or poured as simple libations; finally, there were offerings of grain, cakes, fat, and so forth. The officiating priest, in addition to the augur, was the arsfertor, who corresponds to the Latin flamen. The supreme religious authority was vested in the uhtur (auctor, "maker” ). This extraordinary heritage of knowledge (basically clear, even though there are still some problems in the interpreta­ tion of the texts) opens the way to a whole spectrum of comparisons with Greek and Roman sacrificial rites, to which the Umbrian rites seem to be closely tied by profound analogies. These analogies certainly go back partly to the origins, but they may also have come about through the progressive assimilation of ritual customs within the envi­ ronment of Hellenistic civilization and through the immedi­ ate influence of Rome. Moreover, according to the method of "parallel texts" that K. Olzscha has applied in this area, the Iguvine Tables constitute the point of departure for any understanding of Etruscan ritual texts, primarily those of the Zagreb Mummy and the clay tablet from Capua. Indeed, there are close correspondences between the Umbrian doc­ ument and the Etruscan text of Zagreb. The same entire formulas appear in both; indeed, in certain cases we can juxtapose them as if they were "bilingual." This demon­ strates a basic unity in the mentality and sacred language that also applies to the Roman literary and epigraphic documents that deal with ritual prescriptions (for example, Cato's De Re Rustica, the Acta Fratrum Arvalium, the proceed­ ings of the secular games, and so forth). The ritual that one can read on the wrapping (liber linteus) of the Zagreb Mummy describes a series of ceremonies that took place in a particular religious center, the shrine of Cilth (sacni cilth-), in a chronological order that was fixed by a calendar of religious festivals. The most important part of the text is made up of three long, almost identical liturgical

AND

KI TES

IN

I’ K E

KO M A N

ITALY

Fragment from the Iguvine Table. Gubbio, Palazzio dei Consoli. Photo Garivati.

sequences, the first dedicated to a college of deities (aiser, that is, "the gods," si-c seuc-), the second to a god designated by the expression flere in crapsti (which may correspond to Jupiter Grabovius of Gubbio), and the third to Neptune (flerc nethuns). These three sequences seem to be intended for the purification of the sanctuary, the city, and the people. There are also references to ceremonies in honor of the gods Culsu and Veive (and therefore probably funerary ceremonies) and rites of lustration. There is also a reference to a "royal palace" and to a temple of the goddess Uni. Sacrificial rites were designated by the term ais(u)na (= res divina), which is connected with the form esono found on the Iguvine Tables; these rites included dedications and offerings, with or with­ out the shedding of blood. Given our uncertain knowledge of Etruscan vocabulary, it is difficult to state the exact nature of the victims (who are thought to be similar to the victims of the Iguvian ritual) or of the offerings. We can simply say that the offerings of liquids, notably wine (vinum), seem to have been very important. The Zagreb text is more or less con­ temporary with the Iguvine Tables and must therefore go back to the late phase of Etruscan civilization and to the time of the Roman Republic. On the other hand, the ritual prescriptions of the Capuan tile belong to a much earlier period (fifth century b . c .). These mention sacrifices and offerings to ancestors and to infernal deities. Both of these great documents of Etruscan ritual mention various offici­ ating priests. The principal term designating a priest is cepen 33

ROME

(in Capua, the archaic form cipen), often followed by an exact term indicating functions. Thus, a cepen thaurch was respon­ sible for funerary tasks. Other terms indicating priestly functions appear on tomb inscriptions. The highest sacred office was apparently held by the maru (that is, the Maro, who in Umbria carried out civil functions— it was also Virgil's family name). M.P./g.h.

BIBLIOGRAPHY M. rALLorriNO, "Questioni ermeneutiche del testo di Zagabria," Studi Etruschi 6 (1932): 273-81. g . devoto . Tabulae Iguvinae (Rome 1937). K. o lzscha , Interpretation der Agramer Mumienbinde (Leipzig 1939). I- HEURGON, Étude sur les inscriptions osques de Capoue dites lûvilas (Paris 1942). g . devoto . Le Tavole di Gubbio (Florence 1948). m . pallottino ,

"Sulla lettura e sui contenuto della grande iscrizione di Capua," Studi Etruschi 20 (1948-49): 159-96; "Scavi nel Santuario etrusco di Pyrgi: Relazione preliminare della settima campagna, 1961, e scoperta di tre lamine d'oro inscritte in etrusco e in punico," Archeologia Classica 16 (1964): 76ff. a . i . pfiffig . Religio Iguvina (Vienna 1964); Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975).

C onceptions of the A fterlife among the P eoples of P re-R oman I taly I.

Italian Protohistory

With the exception of the Etruscans, whom we will discuss further on, ancient sources tell us nothing directly about the beliefs of the peoples of pre-Roman Italy concerning the fate of human beings in the next world. All that one can vaguely deduce from the funeral customs and the tombs, that is, through archaeology alone, belongs to the general category of Mediterranean and European protohistories of the Bronze Age and the Iron Age, including those of primitive Greece. The data tend to demonstrate the persistence and the pre­ eminence of a fundamental conception, common to the earliest stages of development in all human cultures: that of a direct relationship between the spirit of the dead—always understood as the survival in some way or another of their individuality—and their mortal remains in their resting place, that is, in the tomb. The tomb must therefore be a secure shelter, and, to the extent possible, garments, food, and objects of daily use will be placed near the body or the ashes of the deceased for use in the future life. Until the most recent periods, that is, approximately the Hellenistic period—and when Rome, after unifying Italy, imposed her civilization on it—the Italic necropolises almost without exception preserved this ritual custom. In fact, it continued until the time of the migrations among the European peoples who lived on the margin of the classical world, while in Greece it disappeared much earlier. The simultaneous use of funerary practices as different as burial and cremation is also found in other civilizations of the antique world (including Greece and Rome), but it is so characteristic of pre-Roman Italy that it makes it possible to distinguish the different territories, ethnic milieus, cultural horizons, and chronological periods. From the perspective of a genuine historical reconstruction, it is not easy to describe 34

the alternation of the two rites. We can say, nevertheless, that, essentially, the burial of bodies in a folded or straight position is the heritage of prehistoric customs that were widespread in Italy even during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age and survived in a large area of the Adriatic, interior, and southern zones of the peninsula; while the practice of cremation, linked to the great movement of European "fields of urns," became widespread at the end of the Bronze Age, and continued afterward, during the Iron Age and the historical period, to be the exclusive or preeminent patri­ mony of the inhabitants of northern and Tyrrhenian Italy. The phase of greatest expansion of the rite, in which it took over even southern Italy and Sicily (probably diffused from the north by land and from the Balkans and the Aegean world by sea), coincides in the final Bronze Age with the culture called "Proto-Villanovian," which is found in remark­ able uniformity throughout Italy (eleventh to ninth century B.c.). At the beginning of the Iron Age (ninth to eighth century b . c .), we see that the zones where cremation pre­ dominates already correspond rather precisely to the territo­ ries of the Liguri (the culture of Golasecca), the Veneti (the culture of Este), the Etruscans (Villanovian culture), and in part to those of the Latins and the Umbrians. On the other hand, burial seems to characterize the Sabellian-Umbrian peoples (including the Piceni of the Adriatic), the Apulians, and the natives of Magna Graecia and Sicily. But the practice of burial gains ground throughout the Tyrrhenian slope beginning in the seventh century, in Latium and in Etruria, with the characteristic dugout tombs. Later, grave monu­ ments, chambered tombs carved into the rock and imitating the interior of homes, and finally veritable mausoleums were superimposed upon, or rather, in many places, substituted for, the dugout tombs. In Etruria there was, in the end, a fairly clear boundary between the southern cities where burial predominated (Caere, Tarquinii, Vulci), and the north­ ern cities where cremation predominated (Volaterrae, Clu­ sium, and Perusia). It is known that in Rome in the historical period, the two rites coexisted and were linked to different familial traditions. It is probable that it was the same in other cities; for it is possible that the practice of one rite or the other depended upon the social status of the deceased. The main ideological significance of cremation is still a matter of dispute; in any case, this does not concern the practice and the diffusion of the rite in Italy during the more recent historical periods. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that there is some connection with the idea of a generative or regenerative power in fire, which might also suggest a relationship between the cinerary vase in the form of a cabin-urn—widespread in prehistoric Latium and in Etruria—the domestic hearth, and the cult of Vesta (MiillerKarpe). The form of the individual tombs would evidently differ according to whether one buried or cremated the body; but neither the rules about the nature and extension of the cemeteries nor the funerary furnishings seem to have dif­ fered in any other way—which leads one to think that there was a profound similarity between the conceptions of the next world. Noteworthy is the general tendency to make the urns or tombs look like a house (from the first cabin-urns to the little urns in stone, the sarcophagi, the tomb facades and hypogea carved into the rock), in order to offer the dead the continuation of their milieu, that is to say a domus aeterna, following the definition that the Romans would later give to the tomb. More significant still is the intention to reproduce the image of the deceased—probably in order to preserve a corporeal support for the spirit, in conformity with the Mediterranean tradition that went back to ancient Egypt.

C O N C E P T I O N S

This practice is manifest not only in the presence of figurines in the proto-Latin cremation tombs, and later in the Etruscan tombs, but especially in the fact that they tended to give human forms to the cinerary urns (such as the "canopic vases" of Clusium). The "portraits" of Etruscan funerary painting and sculpture, and the imagines maiorum, that is, the masks and busts of ancestors, of the Roman funerary custom (Pliny, Naturalis Historia 35.6) are evidently related to this tradition—even though, with time, what had originally borne the mark of magic or religion became a simple com­ memoration or proud aristocratic exhibition. The separation, because of the "impurity" of the dead, between the locales of interment and the locales of habitation—a separation that characterizes all the major cultures but, generally speaking, seems alien to the world of prehistory—is already in operation in Italy between the Bronze Age and the Iron Age. However, it seems that in the beginning this separation was not rigorously demarcated: in many cases ( for example, in Rome, in Villanovian Tarquinii and Bologna, in Este), groups of tombs are placed around centers of habitation. It was only when the movement of urbanization began to take hold, in the eighth and seventh centuries b . c ., that this custom took the form of a ritual rule, confirmed by the Roman law of the Twelve Tables ("It is forbidden to bury or cremate a body in the city"), later to become a general and continuous tradition. The necropolises thus developed outside of the urban centers, along the major routes, and attained dimensions comparable to those of the cities, which they imitated in spacial planning and in the arrangement of the monuments (an exemplary case is that of Caere in Etruria, though one can cite precedents, admittedly embryonic, in protohistorical Latium, as well as the evidence of the recent discoveries at Decima, near Rome). The indig­ enous cities of Apulia constitute a singular exception, still unique in all of ancient Italy: the prehistoric heritage seems here to have crystallized into a system in which homes and tombs were mixed indiscriminately. II.

The Etruscans

A significant amount of information about Etruscan no­ tions of the hereafter is furnished by archaeology, that is, by the tombs and their decoration; by the study of epigraphic documents; and finally by the echoes of their beliefs in the literary sources of the Roman and Christian periods. The tombs are among the most significant expressions, if not the most significant, of the culture of the ancient Etruscans. Contrary to other peoples of ancient Italy, they seem to have paid particular attention and devoted great economic re­ sources to the care of their dead and to the furnishings of the sepulchers— for which no equivalents in monumentality and richness are found outside of certain cultures of the Near East. This concern should correspond logically to special psychological and ideological orientations The faith in the survival of the deceased in his tomb, common to all the religion of pre-Roman Italy—and to the predassical cultures in general, as we have already seen—is indeed manifest in Etruria, especially in the archaic period, with remarkable clarity and intensity: the grandiose tumulus sepulchers of the Orientalizing period with their sumptuous furnishings (such as the famous tomb of the Regolini-Galassi of Caere, the contents of which are conserved in the Vatican museum), and the chamber tombs, filled with all kinds of riches (including an incalculable number of Greek vases), the immense necropolises at Caere (Cerveteri), Tarquinii, Vulci, Clusium, and, in particular, because of the importance of

OF

THE

A F T E R I . I FF.

their decoration, the painted tombs, especially those of Tarquinii. This sudden and incomparable blossoming stands out clearly from the common base of the protohistorical funerary customs of the Iron Age customs which Etruria still knew in the Villanovian period (ninth to eighth century b .c .). The economic and political development of the Etruscan world must have played a predominant role in this process: the seventh and sixth centuries, its greatest period of expan­ sion, witnessed the formation of a dominant class that controlled the wealth and wanted to glorify itself even in the realm of funerary rites. As for the concern that these barbar­ ian potentates showed for their dead, it is probable that they were inspired in this by models and memories of the East. The funerary paintings of Tarquinii represent funerary cere­ monies, games, hunting scenes, dances, and feasts in which the dead play a role, surrounded by their close friends and relatives and their servants: there are so many subjects borrowed from the visible reality that there are almost no allusions to the supernatural world or the hereafter. Evi­ dently interest is entirely focused upon an immanent conti­ nuity of which the images themselves, in perpetuating the effectiveness of the funeral rites, offered a guarantee. But between the fifth and fourth centuries, the atmosphere changes. Fantastic creatures begin to appear in the tombs, most often winged, and certainly belonging to a different world. In painting (at Orvieto) and in sculpture (the stelae of Bologna), the theme of a "voyage" of the deceased to another place emerges. The difference between the realm of the living and that of the dead also materializes. It is clear that traditional Greek beliefs about the underworld, and probably Orphic and Pythagorean influences as well, played a predominant role in this transformation. The realm of the hereafter was represented as a city lined with towers, whose door is guarded by demons. The dead arrive there by chariot or on horseback, also led by demons. Borrowing, in part, the iconography of archaic banquets, they would sometimes represent the stay of the dead in the underworld as a banquet. The rulers of the next world, Aita (Hades) and Phersipnai (Persephone), preside over the feast, while other demons play the role of servants and musicians. The influ­ ence of Greece is evident in the large scene of the Nekyia (the Homeric world of the dead) on the tomb of Orco II at Tarquinii, with Tiresias and other famous heroes of Hellenic mythology; it was inspired by an iconographie tradition that may go back to the tableau of Polygnotus of Thasos that was found in the Lesche of the Cnidians at Delphi (Pausanias 10.28.7). On the other hand, the menacing demons belong to the Etruscan imagination: Vanth and other beings armed with torches who resemble the Erinyes; the terrifying and omnipresent Charun, with his hammer; and the most mon­ strous of all, Tuchulcha, with his serpents. The fact that the dead are submerged in a menacing atmosphere may indicate a pessimistic conception of the destiny of man in the next world. Nevertheless— in the representations of illustrious people (from the most noble families of Tarquinii or Orvieto), serenely lying down or sitting down for a banquet; or in the scenes where corteges of magistrates, with their retinue, march toward the beyond— the accent placed upon the human dignity of the dead seems to contrast with the basic desolation and theatrical horror, thus creating an ambiguity that is difficult to explain. Per­ haps it is not unreasonable to seek an analogy with certain macabre conceptions in the funerary art of the European baroque (Pfiffig). In fact, we know from several literary sources that it was possible, by means of the appropriate blood sacrifices, to raise the souls of the dead to the condition 35

R OME

Comparing the facts furnished by the Greek and Latin sources with the results of a careful analysis of the sacred and funerary texts of the Etruscans allows us to widen and make more precise our understanding of their eschatology. Thus, we can lengthen the list of all the deities and demons of destiny, of death, and of the hereafter that inhabit the deadly western regions of the sky, with the names of the gods Calu, Celi, Letha(m), Larun (or Laran), of the goddess Sur(i), of the goddess or god Culsu (or Culsan), of the demon Leinth (which might possibly mean "H e who causes to die"), whose sex is undetermined, and of the female demon Nathum (or Natinusna)—and recalling the names of the infernal Jupiter, Veive or Vetis (Veiovis), and the divine couple Mantus and Mania, who were certainly associated with Manes. These last, whom the Etruscans also called man(im), are the dead themselves, but considered as spirits, demons, or even as gods. They are also recognized under the name apher, corresponding to the Latin Parentes (Parentes gods); this name denotes the ancestors who are the object of a cult in the inscription of the Capuan tile. The concept of soul or spirit is expressed in Etruscan by the term hinthial (for example: hinthial Patrueles, "the soul of Patrocles"). It was thought that the Etruscan name for the next world was Achrum, derived from the name of the river of the underworld among the Greeks, the Acheron—which would explain the title of the Libri Acherontici or Acheruntici. M.P./m.s.

BIBLIOGRAPHY b.

Canopic jar from Dolciano. Chiusi, Museo civico. Museum photo.

of "divine souls"; this is what is taught in the libri acherontici (Ateius Labeo is here cited by Servius in his Commentary on the Aeneid, 3.168; Arnobius Adversus Gentes 2.62). If the ritual text of the Etruscan inscription of the Capuan tile indeed refers, as we think it does, to the ceremonies performed in honor of the infernal gods, then one has, as early as the fifth century, evidence of ritual practices intended to facilitate the survival of the dead in the next world. On the one hand, such a document may illuminate the importance of the funerary rites known since the archaic period, of which we find a singular representation in the tomb of the funeral bed, in Tarquinii: people are depicted making offerings next to a majestic catafalque bed surmounted by two headdresses that symbolize the presence of a divine couple (who may perhaps be identified with the deceased themselves?). On the other hand, the document may proclaim all those beliefs and practices concerning the deification of the dead, which the disciplina Etrusca would later codify. However, as far as these last are concerned, one should probably consider the influ­ ence of the Greek mysteries and the Orphic, Pythagorean, and Dionysian doctrines, which, coming directly from Greece, or through the intermediary of Magna Graecia, had penetrated into Etruria.

36

NOGARA, Gli Etruschi e la loro civiltà (Milan 1933), 220-89. f . de ruyt ,

Charun, démon étrusque de la mort (Rome and Brussels 1934). f . cuMONT, Recherches sur le symbolisme funéraire des Romains (Paris 1941). M. PALLOTTiNO, "Sulla îettura e sul contenuto della grande iscrizione etrusca di Capua," Studi Etruschi 20 (1948-49): 159-96; "Il culto degli antenati in Etruria ed une probabile equivalenza lessicale etrusco-latina," Studi Etruschi 26 (1958): 49-83. ). b ayet , "Idéologie et plastique," 2: "La sculpture funéraire de Chiusi," in Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire (1960), 35ff. j. m . c . t o yn bee , Death and Burial in the Roman World (London 1971). a . j. pfiffig . Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975).

E tru sca n R

e l ig io n

I. Historical Premises The historian Livy (5.1.6) evokes the Etruscans as "a nation that was devoted beyond all others to religious practices, and all the more because it excelled at them." According to a false etymology, their name of Tusci was derived from the Greek thuoskooi, "experts in sacrifices" (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, 1.30.3). This reputation is al­ most a commonplace in ancient literature. The Christian writer Arnobius (Adversus gentes, 7.26) called Etruria "the creator and mother of superstitions." It is clear that the Greeks and Romans were impressed by Etruscan religion, not so much by its intensity as by a particular characteristic which must have appeared quite strange to them. This was the Etruscans' obsessive search for contact with the super­ natural world through the interpretation and scrupulous

E T R U S C A N

performance of the divine will—a search which, especially in the final phase of Etruscan civilization, became a technique for experts alone. Literary sources of the Roman period, which report with sufficient breadth and which sometimes paraphrase and summarize data lost from the written tradition of the Etrus­ cans, reveal the existence of doctrines that were claimed to have been handed down from an original teaching by superior beings, and that discuss the concept of the sacred, the relationships between the heavenly and terrestrial worlds, the gods, the destiny of men in time and after death, and the forms and rules of divination and worship. We do not know to what degree these concepts, which were ar­ ranged and codified much later, correspond to the earliest practices and beliefs of Etruscan religion, our direct knowl­ edge of which is based on archaeological evidence and sometimes epigraphical documents. Insofar as our limited knowledge of the Etruscan language allows us to understand them, the most important extant Etruscan texts— dedicatory and ritual texts such as the Pyrgian tablets, the Capuan tile, the lead disk of Magliano, and especially the long manuscript written on the cloth of the Zagreb Mummy from Egypt (the sole example of a sacred liber linteus preserved from antiquity)— offer information that not only confirms what we have been able to learn from classical sources, but also adds further data, especially important because of their undeni­ able and immediate authenticity. What is more important, they demonstrate a continuity in the forms of worship and in the sacred language that goes back at least to the end of the archaic period, as is the case with the documents from Pyrgi. Nevertheless, if one hopes to undertake a “historical" recon­ struction of Etruscan beliefs and their development, it re­ mains difficult to distinguish between reality and erudite speculation. In any case, the religion is indisputably the best known aspect of the civilization of ancient Etruria. Considered in a general perspective, it is one of the most interesting and original of ancient religions, with many characteristics that distinguish it from other Mediterranean religions. There has always been a wish to explain these peculiarities by a theory that the Etruscans came from the Orient. This theory, founded on the modern interpretation of an account in Herodotus (1.94) and other ancient sources, is buttressed by the fact that in Etruscan religion there was no dearth of elements having more or less direct ties with Oriental con­ cepts (such as demonology, haruspicy, and funerary cus­ toms). Some scholars, most notably A. Piganiol, have sup­ ported this point of view. But in the past few years, following new archaeological discoveries and linguistic studies of greater depth, the problem of the origins of the Etruscans has opened onto ever broader, more complex and subtle perspec­ tives. In spite of the distant ties that the Etruscans might have had with the Aegean world and Asia Minor, these new insights make it even more improbable that there ever was, at the dawn of historical times, a massive immigration of an already unified people from the eastern Mediterranean. At the same time, all evidence indicates that the Etruscan ethnic group had already taken form in Italy at the end of the Bronze Age at the latest. As for resemblances to Oriental religions, these are of so heterogeneous a nature (we find such elements at diverse periods and in relation to civiliza­ tions as distinct as those of Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Egypt) as to make the idea of a common hereditary tradition unlikely; the resemblances are better explained one by one through cultural contacts.

R E L I G I O N

It is better to refer to historical reality, that is, to character­ istics and events in the life of the Etruscans, than it is to ask vague questions about their origins. We know that their civilization knew a sudden and early burgeoning between the eighth and sixth centuries b . c ., bringing with it the formation of great urban centers and an expansion of polit­ ical and economic power, especially in the maritime sphere— the celebrated Etruscan thalassocracy— which was very im­ portant around the Mediterranean. But its development ended as early as the fifth century, at the end of the archaic age, before Greece at her apogee imposed and affirmed the universal values of classicism that would come to be identi­ fied with the progress of the ancient world and with the very foundations of Western civilization. It is thus understandable that the essential and deepest characteristics of the spiritual world of the Etruscans remained fixed at the level of preclassical cultures, tied to prehistoric traditions and primitive ideas, and variously affected by Oriental and archaic Greek motifs. This explains why so many aspects of Etruscan beliefs would later appear distant, foreign, and obscure to Hellenist-Roman religious and philosophical thought. The massive penetration of influences from Greek civiliza­ tion in Etruria had noticeable repercussions in the realm of their gods and iconography and allowed for a diffusion of myths as well as of certain images of the afterlife. All of their art, not only temple art but also the art of funerary monu­ ments and decorative objects (vases, engraved mirrors, jew­ elry, etc), is dominated by Greek mythological subjects. But it must be asked to what extent Hellenization was a decisive and determining factor in the development of Etruscan religion, and whether this was not more of an external veneer—a "cultural" phenomenon rather than an ideological essence. The reality underlying these pictorial representations was revealed with incontestable clarity in the complex of notions and precepts collected in Roman literature. We must there­ fore trace the elaboration of this complex to the time when Etruria, after losing its capacity for maritime activity, was reduced to the limits of the Tyrrhenian territory, between the Tiber and the Arno. Caught there between the expansion of the Gauls and the Italic peoples of the interior of the peninsula, reduced to an essentially local economy, and finally subjected to the domination of Rome between the fourth and first centuries b . c ., the Etruscans would in the end enclose themselves in the conservatism of their priestly oligarchies and in the cult of their traditions, before defini­ tively bequeathing these vestiges and memories to Roman religion.

II.

General Characteristics of Etruscan Religion

Given the present state of our knowledge—and taking account of the fragmentary and generally indirect character of our sources— it is difficult to form an overall idea of the religious ideas of the Etruscans and even more difficult to define them with simplistic formulas. Such elements as signs of the constant influence of supernatural forces in the world and on human actions, intense relationships between the living and the spirits of the dead, and apotropaic precautions and magical practices of evocation or disguise lead one to think of a persistence of animism. A fetishist theory, pro­ posed by such authors as C. Clemen, appears more uncer­ tain, as the venerated objects, such as weapons or worked rocks (somewhat analogous to the Semitic sacred stones and

37

ROME

prehistoric menhirs), could also have been symbols or at­ tributes of divinities or the dead. Although cults of water, trees, lightning flashes and the places struck by them, as well as cults of the gods of the sky, sun, moon, and sea are often cited, one cannot really call Etruscan religion a religion of nature or of heavenly bodies. It seems, however, that one might easily mark out a cosmological system founded on the material definition and the division of celestial space accord­ ing to astronomical orientation and, in an analogous and recurrent manner, of terrestrial space, or better, of particular terrestrial spaces that may be identified with portions of territory or with the areas of cities and sacred places—i.e., the templum, which may be reduced to the microcosm of the viscera of sacrificed animals. The attributes, the localization, and the hierarchies of the major and minor divinities are inserted into such a system, and the favorable and unfavor­ able powers and presages (to the east and west, respectively, i.e., to the left and right of a subject looking toward the southerly sun) are distributed among them, thus concretely establishing the procedures of divinatory practices. As far as the realm of the divine is concerned, one may simply define Etruscan religion as a polytheism similar to that of the other great religions of the ancient world— including the Greek and Roman religions— with personal divinities largely assimilated to the major gods of the Greek and Italico-Roman pantheon, but also to obscure divinities who are sometimes multiple and named collectively, and sometimes anonymous and enveloped in mystery. Further­ more, it is clearly possible to speak of an accentuated polydaemonism, understood in the sense of the belief in an incalculable number of supernatural beings who have affin­ ities with the daemons and demigods of the Greek world, but regarding whom it is difficult to establish how far they partake of a truly divine nature (or whether these are individually minor gods). They have often been seen in the roles of attendants or servants of major divinities. Depend­ ing on whether they belong to groups of female, infant, or warrior genies, of daemons or of monsters of the hereafter, they present different characteristics, as much from the viewpoint of their appearance as of their localization. In the way in which all of these superior beings are conceived, there are probable signs of primitive survivals, especially in the indeterminate and fleeting character of certain aspects of the divine. This may also explain the apparent weak development of a mythology in the sense of a narration linking together the actions of gods and demi­ gods. Several transmitted accounts or episodes from local legend that may be inferred from artistic representations (on engraved mirrors, for example) seem to have developed under the influence of Greek myths or result from a late and scholarly fusion of Greek and local elements. But the deepest and most original import of Etruscan religion appears in the overwhelming importance of supernatural forces and in the nature of the relationship between men and gods. Every event and phenomenon, rather than being explained ratio­ nally, is thought to result from the direct intervention of a divinity. The following statement made by Seneca is partic­ ularly significant: "Between the Etruscans, the most skilled of men in the art of interpreting lightning, and ourselves [that is, the Hellenistic-Roman world] there are differences. We think that lightning is emitted because clouds collide; they hold that clouds collide in order that lightning may be emitted. They refer everything to the divinity: therefore they are convinced not that lightning flashes give an indication of the future because they are produced, but that they are

38

Lead disk from Magliano. Florence, Museo archeologico. Photo Sopr. Arch.-Firenze.

produced because they have something to indicate" (Seneca, Quaestiones naturales, 2.32.2). People are incessantly preoccupied with observing, recog­ nizing, and understanding the signs of the divine will in order to derive auguries and prescriptions from them, and then with conforming to this will in the most scrupulous way possible by avoiding every fault, even one that is involun­ tary. If they nevertheless commit such a fault, they strive to apply a remedy to it as quickly as possible; all of this they do by means of extremely precise rituals of great formal rigor. Not only worship, but also every private or public form of conduct becomes concentrated and exhausted from this fearful dependence on the supernatural, in the face of which man is apparently bereft of both autonomous consciousness and a sphere of activity that is proper to his own will—and this is the basis for the ethical and juridical concepts that are inherent in the religion (it is in this that Etruscan religion is most clearly differentiated from Greek and Roman religion).

III.

The Teachings of the Sacred Books

In order to apprehend divine injunctions with certainty and to conform to them, people needed precise instructions, instructions that were gathered together into the collection of teachings and norms defined by the Latin expression disci­ plina Etrusca, and that were collected and expounded in the numerous writings which constituted Etruscan sacred liter­ ature. The origin of the disciplina Etrusca and of the books relating to each of its parts was generally attributed to persons of a semidivine nature, such as the infant genius Tages for haruspicy or the nymph Vegoia for the doctrine of

E T R U S C A N

l i g h t n i n g f l a s h e s a n d c e r t a i n o t h e r t e a c h i n g s . In t h i s s e n s e th e E tr u s c a n re lig io n m a y b e c o n s i d e r e d a re v e a le d re lig io n . A s fo r th e s tu d y a n d th e o ry

and

te ch n iq u e

in te rp re ta tio n e n tru ste d

to

o f d iv in e s ig n s a s a s p e c ia lis ts ,

E tru ria

is

e v e r , to s p e c ify

thaurch

th e ir f u n c tio n s a n d

m e n tio n e d

R E L I G I O N

cepen

s p e c ia liz a tio n s (a

in t h e Z a g r e b t e x t is c e r t a i n l y a f u n e r a r y

p r i e s t ) , j u s t a s it is i m p o s s i b l e t o k n o w w i t h c e r t a i n t y t o w h a t d e g re e

"o ffic ia n t"

p rie sts

w e r e d is tin g u is h e d

fro m

d iv in a -

e s p e c i a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d in h a r u s p i c y a n d h e p a t o s c o p y ( i . e . ,

to ry e x p e r t s , e s p e c ia lly th e h a r u s p ic e s . T h e p r ie s th o o d m u s t

th e

o f te n h a v e re c e iv e d p u b lic s u p p o r t; th e e x i s t e n c e o f p r ie s tly

re a d in g

of

v is c e ra — e s p e c ia lly

th e

l iv e r— o f

s a crifice d

a n i m a l s ) a n d in t h e o b s e r v a t i o n o f l i g h t n i n g f l a s h e s , t w o a r t s th a t a re e x p o u n d e d

fulgurales,

in

libri haruspicini

th e

and

in

th e

c o l l e g e s is w i d e l y a t t e s t e d .

libri

r e s p e c t i v e l y . In a d d i t i o n , a t t e n t i o n w a s g i v e n t o a ll

u n u su al

e v e n ts

sou n d s,

a p p a r itio n s ,

and

m a rv e ls e t c .) ,

(m o n s tr o s itie s ,

w h ic h

a re

in e x p lica b le

d e sc rib e d

oslentaria.

and

IV.

ex­

is

th e

tim e , o n e m u s t n o t e th e lim ite d i m p o r t a n c e g i v e n t o o b s e r v ­

h e r e a f t e r . B u t it w o u l d b e w r o n g t o s e p a r a t e t h i s f r o m

th e

rest

th e

flig h t

d e v e lo p e d

of

in

b ird s,

Rom e

w h ic h

and

in

w as,

U m b ria

by

A t th e s a m e

c o n tra st,

and

The

h ig h ly

c o n s titu te d

th e

la st

The Problem of the Hereafter

in g

p la in e d in th e c o l le c ti o n s k n o w n a s

of

s e cto r

E tru sca n

th a t

re m a in s

re lig io n ,

to

s in c e

be

so

co n sid e re d

m any

of

th e

e s s e n tia l

a s p e c t s o f th e a fte rlife a r e s itu a te d w ith in th e m o r e g e n e r a l

fo u n d a tio n fo r R o m a n a u g u r y . T h e e s s e n tia l a s p e c t o f d iv i-

id e a s o f th e r e lig io n . A m o n g t h e s e a s p e c t s a r e th e c o n f o r m ity

n a to r y p ra c tic e s — th e a s p e c t e ls e w h e r e c o n n e c te d

o f th e c h t h o n i c o r s u b t e r r a n e a n w o r ld w ith th e c o s m o lo g ic a l

w ith

th e

v a l u e s o f t h e o r i e n t a t i o n o f c e l e s t i a l a n d t e r r e s t r i a l s p a c e — is

s y s te m

fo u n d

a s s im ila tio n

s in c e

in

th e

th e se

s u p e rio r

s tu d y

o f au sp icio u s

in d ic a te

b e in g s

and

th e

or

s a tis fa c tio n

th u s

a re

in a u s p ic io u s or

th e

w a rn in g s

om ens,

w ra th

about

of

a ll

th e

fu tu re

o f co rre s p o n d e n ce s b e tw e e n of

th e

dead

to

h e a v e n a n d e a r th ; th e

c e rta in

d iv in e

e n titie s ,

w ith

r e s u l t i n g a n a l o g i e s in t h e s p h e r e o f w o r s h i p ; t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f th e

to m b

as a

sa cre d

p la ce

(sacni);

and

so

o n . T h e b e lie f,

in h e r ite d f ro m p r e h i s t o r y a n d th e g r e a t p r e c la s s ic a l c iv iliz a ­

a c tio n .

disciplina Etrusca

is i ts g e n e r a l a n d

t i o n s ( o r f r o m c i v i l i z a t i o n s f o r e i g n t o t h e c l a s s i c a l w o r l d ) , in

r i t u a l n o r m a t i v i t y . It e n c o m p a s s e s e v e r y c u l t i c p e r f o r m a n c e ,

th e s u r v iv a l o f th e p e r s o n a litie s o f th e d ^ a d a l o n g w ith th e

re g a rd le s s

m a t e r i a l r e m a i n s o f t h e i r b o d i e s a n d in t h e p l a c e s in w h i c h

T h e o th e r a s p e c t o f th e o f its

o r ig in

te r m s , w e k n o w th a t th e

or

s p e c ia liz a tio n .

libri rituales

In

m o re

p re c is e

in clu d e d p re c e p ts a b o u t

th e s e w e r e d e p o s it e d , c o n s t i tu t e s a f u n d a m e n ta l id e o lo g ic a l

th e f o u n d in g o f c itie s , th e e s ta b lis h m e n t o f s a c r e d e d if ic e s ,

p r e m i s e a n d im p lie s th e n e e d to p r o t e c t, fe e d , a n d h o n o r th e

a n d e v e n th e p o litic a l a n d m ilita r y s t a t u te s o f th e s ta t e ; th is

d e a d , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r s o c i a l r a n k . T h e c o n t i n u i t y o f l if e is

w a s , in o t h e r w o r d s , a c o d e t h a t w a s n o t o n l y r e lig io u s b u t

to b e in s u r e d b y im a g e s th a t s u b s titu te d fo r (a n d th u s d id n o t

a l s o p o liti c o - in s ti t u t i o n a l (a n o n d i s t i n c t io n t h a t c o n f i r m s th e

m e re ly

fu n d a m e n ta l s u b o rd in a tio n o f th e h u m a n w o rld to th e d iv in e

to m b s re c a llin g th e fa m ilia r h o u s e h o l d e n v i r o n m e n t , a n d b y

w o r l d ). T h e c o n c e p t o f " t h e la w o f th e la n d o f E t r u r i a " a n d

th e r ic h e s t p o s s ib le d e c o r a t io n o f t o m b s w ith c lo th i n g , je w ­

th e

e lry ,

sa cre d

a g r a ria n

and

in ta n g ib le

p ro p e rtie s,

c h a ra cte r

w h ic h

w ere

of

th e

d e fin e d

b o u n d a rie s

by

th e

of

su p re m e

d i v i n i t y , s e e m t o h a v e a r i s e n in t h i s c o n t e x t ; t h e s a m e is t r u e

c o m m e m o ra te )

w eap on s,

fo o d a n d

fo r c o n s e c r a t e d o b je c ts a n d p la c e s ( s a n c tu a r i e s , b u t a ls o c itie s

p e rio d s fro m

fo r th e tim e , f a te , a n d d u r a t io n o f th e liv e s o f m e n a n d o f th e

te n d e d

n a t i o n ( c o u n t e d in " c e n t u r i e s " ) , w h i c h w e r e t o b e f o u n d in

and

libri fatales. A s f o r o n e ' s libri acherontici:

t r e a te d in th e

fa te in t h e h e r e a f t e r , th is w a s th e n o rm a tiv e p o r tio n s o f th e s e

in s tru m e n ts ,

of

th e

and

dead,

by

fu rn itu re ,

u rn s

and

in a d d i t i o n

to

d rin k . T h e s e c h a r a c te ris tic s , a s a rc h a e o lo g y m o st

s u g g e s t i v e l y i n d i c a t e s , a r e m a n i f e s t e s p e c i a l l y in t h e e a r l i e s t

a n d to m b s ). F in a lly th e r e w a s a w h o le c o lle c tio n o f d o c tr in e s

th e

e ffig ie s

(in d e p e n d e n t o f d iffe re n c e s

th e

b e g in n in g

of

h is to rica l

to p re v a il o v e r c r e m a tio n ),

th e o n e

in

fu n e ra ry

tim e s

p ra c tic e s :

in h u m a tio n

b u t th e

h as

im p o r ta n t fa c t,

th a t re v e a ls a te n a c io u s c o n s e r v a tis m ,

is t h a t

t h e s e p r a c ti c e s c o n t in u e d u n til t h e e n d o f E t r u s c a n c iv iliz a ­ tio n . T h e p r o f o u n d ly d if f e r e n t id e a o f a n a f te rlife c o n c e iv e d

w r itin g s in d ic a te th e rite s n e c e s s a r y fo r th e p r o lo n g a tio n o f

as

lif e a n d t h e d i v i n i z a t i o n o f t h e d e a d .

d iffu se d o u t o f G r e e c e a n d w a s to h a v e n o ta b le r e p e r c u s s io n s

T h e ir

fo rm s

of

w o r s h ip ,

at

le a s t

a c c o rd in g

to

w hat

is

a

p la ce

of

d e s tin a tio n

and

re u n io n

of

th e

d eceased

o n t h e E t r u s c a n i m a g i n a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y a f t e r t h e fi f t h c e n t u r y

k n o w n f ro m th e tra d itio n o f o r ig in a l E tr u s c a n te x ts a n d fro m

B.c.

th e m o n u m e n ts , d o n o t s e e m to d iffe r e s s e n tia lly fro m th o s e

a n d r e f in e m e n t— m o r e o r le s s p a ra lle l w ith o ld c u s t o m s a n d

o f th e G re e k s a n d

tr a d itio n s — o f th e d e fin itio n o f a n e s c h a to lo g ic a l s p a c e b a s e d

R o m an s. S acred

e n c lo s u r e s , a lta r s , a n d

te m p le s , u n d e r s t o o d to b e th e d w e llin g s o f th e d iv in ity , a r e c o n ce iv e d

and

c o n s tru c te d

in

an

a n a lo g o u s

fa s h io n ,

a l­

k in g d o m dom

a ls,

a n im a ls ,

and

o ffe rin g s v o tiv e

w ith o u t

o ffe rin g s

fo u n d

( o r c ity ) o f th e d e a d . T h e d e s c r ip tio n o f th e k in g ­

c o m b in e s

e le m e n ts

of

G reek

in s p ira tio n

(th e

so v e r­

sa crifice s

of

e ig n ty o f th e g o d s H a d e s a n d P e r s e p h o n e a n d th e p r e s e n c e

e v ery w h ere;

by

o f m y th ic a l c h a r a c t e r s ) a n d p u r e ly lo c a l e le m e n ts ( m o n s tr o u s

b lo o d le ttin g , a re

th e d e v e lo p m e n t

u p o n th e c o n c e p ts o f th e d e s c e n t to th e u n d e r w o r ld a n d th e

t h o u g h w ith s o m e ty p o lo g ic a l p e c u lia r itie s . A m o n g th e r itu ­ p ray ers,

Im ag es o n fu n e ra ry m o n u m e n ts sh o w

c o n t r a s t , c o n s u l t a t i o n o f t h e v i s c e r a o f s a c r i f i c e d a n i m a l s is

d e m o n s , e n o r m o u s b a n q u e ts , th e in c re a s e d

ty p ic a lly E t r u s c a n . C e r ta in k in d s o f c e r e m o n i e s s e e m to b e o f

w a y s g i v e n t o t h e p e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e d e c e a s e d in p o r t r a i t s a n d

p a rtic u la r im p o r ta n c e , s u c h a s c e r e m o n ie s o f f o u n d a tio n , o f

in s c rip tio n s ). T h e a t m o s p h e r e o f s a d n e s s a n d

f e a r in t h e s e

c o n s e c r a t i o n , a n d f o r th e e x p i a ti o n o f p r i v a t e a n d p u b lic s in s ,

E tru s c a n

la st

w h ic h w e r e a ls o m o s t e s p e c ia lly c o n n e c t e d w ith th e f u n d a ­

n o th in g b u t a n i n te r p r e ta tio n th a t d r a w s o n th e G r e e k id e a o f

m e n ta l th e m e s a n d im p e r a ti v e s o f E tr u s c a n r e lig io n . T h e r e

H ad es.

w e r e a l s o c a le n d a r s o f f e s tiv a ls a n d c e le b r a t io n s , a s is in d i­

o b l i g a t i o n t o w a r d t h e d e a d , in t o m b s , c o n t i n u e t o b e r e f i n e d

c a te d

and

in

th e

s e r ie s

of

p r e s c r ip tio n s

th a t

are

d is tr ib u te d

im a g e s But

at

of

th e

th e

c o n c r e tiz e d

h e re a fte r

sam e

in

a

tim e

c u lt

of

th e

is

in

im p o rta n c e a l­

th e

o ld e r

fo rm s

a n ce s to rs

a n a ly s is of

r itu a l

a s s im ila te d

to

a c c o r d in g to t h e m o n t h a n d th e d a y in th e r itu a l t e x t o f th e

d iv in itie s — a c u lt th a t im p lie s , p e r h a p s a l s o u n d e r th e in flu ­

Z a g r e b M u m m y . C u ltic a c tiv itie s w e r e p e rfo rm e d b y p rie s ts ,

e n c e o f th e m y s te r y

a n d t h e d if f e r e n t c a te g o r i e s o f p r i e s t s a r e lis te d in E t r u s c a n

tin e d

te x ts (d o c u m e n ts o f s a c re d c o n te n t o r f u n e ra ry in s c rip tio n s

" d i v i n e s o u l s ."

c o n t a i n i n g b i o g r a p h i e s o f t h e d e c e a s e d ) . It is d i f f i c u l t , h o w ­

to

tr a n s f o r m

re lig io n s , c e r e m o n i e s s p e c ific a lly d e s ­ th e

hum an

s o u ls o f th e

d eceased

in to

M .P ./ d .w .

39

ROM E

BIBLIOGRAPHY K. o. muli er and w. deecke , Die Etrusker (Stuttgart 1877; 2d ed., Graz 1965). c. o. thui.in , Die etruskische Disziplin (Göteborg 1905- 9). F. Messerschmidt , Griechische und etruskische Religion, in Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni (1929), 5:21. b. nogara , Gli Etrusclu e Ia lora civiltà (Milan 1933), 156-289. c. clemen , Die Religion der Etrusker (Bonn 1936). R. enkinc;. Etruskische Geistigkeit (Berlin 1947). m . pai lottino . L’origine degli Etrusclu (Rome 1947), 135-38. a . grenier . Les religions étrusque et romaine, in Les religions de l'Europe ancienne (Paris 1948), 3:1-233. a . piGANioi., Les Etrusques, peuple d'Orient, in Cahiers d'histoire

mondiale 1, 2 (1953): 344. m . pallotti.n o , Deorum sedes, in Studi in onore dt A. Calderini e R. Paribem (Milan 1956), 223-34. r. iiir hig , "Zur Religion und Religiosität der Etrusker," Historia 6 (1957): 123-32. i.. BANTi, II niondo degli Etrusclu (Rome 1969), 235 - 54. o. q . GiGi iouand g . CAMPOREALE, La Religione degli Etruschi, in Storia delle religioni (6th ed., Turin 1971), 2:537-672. g . dume/ il , La religion romaine archaïque (2d ed., Paris 1974), 661-80. m . pallo tiin o , The Etruscans (London 1975), 138-52 and 260-62. a . i . pfiffig. Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975). r. bloch , Recherches sur les religions de l'Italie antique (Geneva 1976). See also Studi Etruschi, 1-44 (1927-76).

s to n e s , je w e lry , e tc . F o r th e s tu d y o f d a e m o n s o f th e w o rld

E tr u sc a n D a em o n o lo g y

b e y o n d th e g r a v e , o n e m u s t ta k e n o te o f th e f r e s c o e s o f th e s e p u lc h e r s , b u t a ls o th e s c u lp tu r e s o f s a rc o p h a g i a n d u rn s . T h e w r itte n s o u r c e s , le s s n u m e r o u s a n d le s s e x p lic it, m u s t b e

E tru s c a n d e m o n o lo g y (m o r e p ro p e rly , d a e m o n o lo g y ) m a y b e

i n te r p r e te d w ith c a r e a n d

lo o k e d u p o n a s o n e o f th e m o s t in te re s tin g c h a p te r s o f th e

a r c h a e o l o g i c a l d a t a . T h e y i n t e r e s t u s in p a r t i c u l a r f o r t h e i r

h is to ry o f r e lig io n s o f th e M e d ite r r a n e a n

e v i d e n c e a b o u t th e s e m id iv in e b e in g s w h o ta u g h t th e E t r u s ­

h o w e v e r , t h a t it c a n

b e rid o f c e r ta in

w o rld , p ro v id e d ,

s im p lis tic a n d

even

can

d is c ip lin e ,

th a t

is,

h a v e n o v a lu e e x c e p t to c o n firm

Tages

and

V e g o ia ,

or

such

o th e r

n a iv e in te rp re ta tio n s — s u c h a s th e a ll-to o -o b v io u s c o m p a r i­

le g e n d a ry m a tte r s a s , fo r e x a m p le , th e fig u re o f C a c u s , th e

s o n s w ith d e m o n o lo g i e s o f th e O r ie n t th a t a im t o p r o v e th e

m o n s t e r V o lta , a n d o t h e r b e in g s o f th is k in d . O n e m u s t a ls o

O r i e n t a l o r i g i n o f t h e E t r u s c a n s — a n d t h a t it c a n b e p r o p e r l y

b e a r in m i n d t h e v a s t l i t e r a r y a n d e p i g r a p h i c a l d o c u m e n t a ­

s itu a te d w ith in th e r e a s o n a b le p e r s p e c tiv e o f a c o m p a r is o n

t i o n ( L a t i n ) o n t h e c o n c e p t o f t h e " g e n i u s , " w h o is e s s e n t i a l l y

w ith

th e

G reek

w o rld .

In

th is

essay

it

has

b een

ju d g e d

th e d iv in ity w h o r e p r e s e n ts a n d g u a r d s th e v ita l p rin c ip le o f

e x p e d i e n t t o a s s e m b l e a ll t h a t h a s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i n f r a d i ­

m e n , in s titu tio n s , a n d

v in e , th a t is, to t h o s e e n titie s th a t m ig h t b e d e fin e d

in t h e

a l s o b e p l a c e d in a n i n t e r m e d i a t e p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n m e n a n d

G re e k a n d L a tin s e n s e a s " d e m i g o d s ” : n o t f o r g e ttin g , h o w ­

d iv in itie s : " s o n o f th e g o d s a n d f a th e r o f m e n ," n o te s F e s tu s ,

e v e r , t h a t in m a n y c a s e s it is d i f f i c u l t t o s p e c i f y w h e t h e r a p a r t i c u l a r b e i n g is t o b e c l a s s e d

in

th e

u p p e r sp h e re ,

th e

th e g o d s th e m s e lv e s , b u t w h o m a y

w h o a ls o c a lls h im th e s o n o f J u p ite r a n d th e f a th e r o f T a g e s! (F e s tu s , 3 5 9 , 4 5 2

L ). T h e s e c h a r a c te r is tic s o f th e

"g e n iu s "

s p h e r e o f d i v i n i t i e s , o r in t h e l o w e r s p h e r e , m o r e p o p u l o u s

ju s tify th e tr a d itio n a l u s e o f th e w o r d " g e n i e " to d e s ig n a te

and

th e b e in g s w h o a r e fo u n d o n th e lev el o f th e d e m ig o d s a n d

le ss d e fin a b le ,

in w h i c h

th e re a re

daem ons.

N o cu lt,

p r o p e r l y s p e a k i n g , is c o n n e c t e d w ith t h e s e d a e m o n s , e x c e p t in a v e r y l i m i t e d f a s h i o n , f o r t h e i r p r i n c i p a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c is

d aem on s. A d i s c u s s i o n o f E t r u s c a n d a e m i m o l o g y m u s t b e g in w ith a

s e rv e a s in te rm e d ia rie s

fe w o b s e r v a tio n s a b o u t m o n s t e r s a n d o t h e r fa n ta s tic fig u re s

b e tw e e n th e m a n d m e n . F r o m th is p o in t o f v ie w o n e m ig h t

o f O rie n ta l o r G r e e k o r ig in . T h e s e i n v a d e s c u lp tu r e , p a in t­

th a t th e y a c c o m p a n y th e g o d s a n d

s a y th a t th e im a g in a tio n o f th e E t r u s c a n s w a s g iv e n fre e re in ,

in g , a n d

c e rta in ly

e t c .)

im a g e s

m o re to

fre e

e n rich

f a s c in a tin g

th e

th a n and

am ong

re n d e r

w o rld

of

th e

th e G re e k s ,

m o re

as

if it u s e d

c o m p re h e n sib le

su p e rn a tu ra l.

For

in

an d o th e r

th e d e c o r a tio n

in

very

la rg e

o f o b je c ts ( b r o n z e s , v a s e s , je w e ls ,

n u m b e rs,

as

if

th e y

w e re

a

fa v o rite ,

o b s e s s i v e o b j e c t , b e g i n n i n g in t h e O r i e n t a l i z i n g p e r i o d , in th e

se v e n th

ce n tu ry

b . c .:

q u ad ru p ed s

w in g e d

or

w ith

a

re s p e c ts , th a t w o rld s e e m e d d is ta n t a n d o b s c u r e to th e m —

h u m a n h e a d , s p h in x e s , c e n t a u r s , s ir e n s , g riff in s , a n d p a r tic ­

m o r e d is ta n t a n d o b s c u r e , in c id e n ta lly , th a n th e G re e k g o d s

u l a r l y s e a m o n s t e r s . T h e y c o n t i n u e d t o b e p r e s e n t in d i v e r s e

a p p e a re d

c o n t e x t s u n t i l t h e l a t e s t p e r i o d s o f E t r u s c a n a r t . B u t t h e i r l in k

n e a re r

to th e G r e e k s , s in c e m y th

to

m en

m e n — fro m

and

n e a rly

red u ced

h a d b r o u g h t th e g o d s th e m

to

th e

w h ic h a r o s e th e E t r u s c a n s ' o b s e s s io n

of

w ith p a r tic u la r f ig u re s s p e c ific to G re e k m y th , s u c h a s th e

w ith u n ­

G o r g o n , th e C h im e r a , th e S ir e n s , C e r b e r u s , e t c ., in d ic a te s

s iz e

d e r s t a n d i n g a n d i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e d i v i n e w ill t h r o u g h d i v i n a -

th a t

th e re

is s o m e t h in g

th e re

th a t

is

fo re ig n

to

p ro p e rly

t o r y p r a c ti c e s . T h e p o s s ib ility c a n n o t b e e n t ir e l y r u le d o u t ,

E t r u s c a n c o n c e p t i o n s . It is d i f f i c u l t t o b e l i e v e t h a t a ll t h e s e

h ow ever,

im a g e s , g e n e ra lly u s e d fo r d e c o r a tio n , c o r r e s p o n d e d

th a t

E tru sc a n

" p o ly d a e m o n is m "

m ay

a lso

have

to a c ­

o f p rim itiv e te n d e n c ie s , m o r e s p e c ifi­

t u a l d a e m o n i c b e l i e f s . B u t d i s t o r t i o n s in m o n s t r o u s f o r m s ,

c a lly a h e r i ta g e o r r e v iv a l o f id e a s a n d c r e a ti o n s c h a r a c t e r is t ic

th e m ix tu re o f e le m e n ts c h a r a c te r is tic o f d iv e rs e c r e a tu r e s ,

o f p r e d a s s ic a l c iv iliz a tio n s , s u c h a s t h o s e o f th e N e a r E a s t o r

a n d t h e m i x t u r e o f n a t u r a l b e i n g s w i t h a r t i f i c i a l f o r m s ( li k e

been

th e e x p re s s io n

th e M in o a n a n d M y c e n a e a n A e g e a n , w h ic h th e G r e e k s h a d

th e

gone

o t h e r w is e c a lle d th e a n t h r o p o m o r p h ic c in e r a r y u r n s o f C lu ­

beyond

soon er

th a n

th e

o th e rs,

w ith o u t,

h ow ever,

fo rm s

of

vases,

in

th e

o b je c ts

c a lle d

"c a n o p ic

ja r s ,"

s iu m ) s e e m to b e a s p e c ific tra it o f th e m e n ta lity a n d a r tis tic

d i s p e r s in g t h e m e n tire ly . M o s t o f o u r k n o w le d g e o n th is s u b je c t c o m e s fro m m y th ­

im a g in a tio n

of

th e

E tru sca n s.

m o n s t e r w ith

h ead

e x a m p le

of a

th is

w h ic h

is

th e

a p p eared

p ro v id e d b y s c e n e s e n g r a v e d o n th e b a ck s o f b ro n z e m irro rs ,

s a n c t u a r y o f P y r g i . T h e a d d i n g o f w i n g s is a f a v o r i t e m o t i f in

w i t h t h e m o s t v a r i e g a t e d s u p e r n a t u r a l b e i n g s , p o s i n g o r in

th e r e p re s e n ta tio n o f h u m a n b e in g s a n d g o d s , a n d o f h o rs e s

ro o f o rn a m e n t of a

cock

of

w in g e d

t h a t i d e n t i f y i n d i v i d u a l s . B y f a r t h e r i c h e s t d o c u m e n t a t i o n is

as a

th e

An

o lo g ica l a n d fu n e r a r y d e p ic tio n s a n d fro m w r itte n m a te r ia ls

re c e n tly

re lig io u s e d ific e

in

th e

a c tio n , m in g le d w ith i m a g e s o f g o d s a n d w ith e p i s o d e s fro m

t o o , c h ie f ly in a r c h a ic a r t . B u t th a t l e a d s u s b a c k to th e w o r ld

G re e k m y th . A n a lo g o u s c o m p o s itio n s o r is o la te d f ig u re s o f

o f d a e m o n s th a t a r e p ro p e rly E tru s c a n .

d e m ig o d s a n d d a e m o n s a re fo u n d , th o u g h c a lly ,

40

in

th e

r e p r e s e n ta tio n s

on

vases,

le s s s y s te m a t i ­

re lie f s ,

en g rav ed

F rom

a g e n e r a l p o in t o f v ie w , w h ic h e x c lu d e s th e m o r e

s p e c ific a n a ly s is o f p a r tic u la r c a s e s , w e c a n d is c e r n s e v e r a l

E T R U S C A N

D A E M O N O L O G Y

tin u e d to r e g a r d a s th e m i s t r e s s a n d e v e n a u t h o r o f a p a r t o f

disciplina Etrusca.

th e of

th e

th e sis

a d d itio n

to

th a t

T h i s is a n i m p o r t a n t a r g u m e n t i n f a v o r

th e

fe m a le

re p re s e n tin g

fig u re s

of

th e se

th e c o lle c tiv e a n d

scen es,

in

th e s e c o n d a ry ,

s o m e t im e s c o r r e s p o n d to w e ll-k n o w n a n d w e ll-d e f in e d in d i­ v i d u a l i t i e s ; t h i s i s a l s o s u g g e s t e d b y t h e i r p r e s e n c e in o t h e r d e p ic tio n s

in

w h ic h

th e ir

n a tu re

is

u n f o r tu n a te ly

no

le ss

in d e c ip h e ra b le . S o m e o f th e s e fig u re s a r e e v e n p ro b a b ly , b y v irtu e o f th e ir p o s itio n o f s p e c ia l d ig n ity a n d th e ir c lo th in g , t r u e d iv in itie s : th is w o u ld b e th e c a s e fo r T h a ln a , E t h a u s v a , T h a n a o r T h a n r, a n d M a la v is(ch ). L e s s f r e q u e n t a n d c l e a r is t h e e v i d e n c e f o r o t h e r c l a s s e s o f d e m ig o d s o r d e m o n s , s u c h a s th e m a s c u lin e fig u re s o f th e A p o llo n ia n

ty p e ,

or

th o s e

w ho

lo o k

l ik e

S ile n u s ,

or

th e

w a r r i o r s , o r th e s m a ll in f a n t g e n i e s , w h o a p p e a r o n m ir r o r s , w ith m o r e o r le s s o b s c u r e E t r u s c a n n a m e s . A m o n g th e in fa n t or

ju v e n ile

H e rd e

fig u re s ,

(H e ra c le s )

in te r e s tin g .

th e

and

fig u re w ith

In c o n n e c t i o n

of

E p iu r ,

T in ia

w ith

a s s o c ia te d

(J u p ite r),

js

w ith

e s p e c ia lly

th is la s t d iv in ity , o n e

m ay

r e c a ll th e t r a d it i o n c o n c e r n i n g T a g e s , t h e n e p h e w o f J u p i te r , a ch ild w e re

or young

th o s e

m an

of an

w hose

o ld

m an;

ap p e a ra n ce

b o rn

fro m

and

th e

k n o w le d g e

e a rth ,

he

w as

s u p p o s e d to h a v e ta u g h t h a r u s p ic y to th e E tr u s c a n s . T a g e s and

V e g o ia — T a g e s

is r e p r e s e n t e d

on

a

m irro r

under

th e

n a m e P a p a ( o r P a v a ) T a r c h ie s , w ith th e f e a t u r e s o f a y o u n g h a r u s p e x — e x e r c is e d th e c h a r a c te r is tic fu n c tio n o f " in te r m e ­ d ia r ie s " b e tw e e n th e g o d s a n d m e n . B e c a u s e o f th a t th e y a r e f u l ly

c o n ta in e d

in

th e

c a te g o ry

of

E tru s c a n

daem ons

(o r

g e n i e s ) : m o r e p a r t i c u l a r l y , t h o s e w h o r e v e a l t h e d i v i n e w il l . O n e m ig h t a d d to th e m

Infernal daemon with one of the deceased. Private collection. Manfredonia. Photo Pr Ferri.

a y o u n g s in g e r, p e r h a p s a s e e r a s

w e l l , w h o a p p e a r s o n a n o t h e r m i r r o r a n d s o m e u r n s ; h e is c a lle d

C acu ,

but

he

is

c le a rly

d iffe re n t

fro m

C acu s,

th e

f e r o c io u s b r ig a n d o f th e R o m a n l e g e n d t r a n s m itte d b y V irg il. T h e p o s s ib ility th a t th e d a e m o n s m a y h a v e b e e n c o n c e iv e d in o t h e r t h a n a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c f a s h i o n , t h a t i s , a s s h a d o w s c a te g o r ie s o f ty p e s a n d fe m a le ,

in fa n t,

m a r tia l,

fu n ctio n s : a n d D io n y s ia n ,

th a t le a d s u s to th e

m a rin e ,

and

in fe rn a l

w i t h o u t s u b s t a n c e o r in t h e a s p e c t o f a s y m b o l , a r i s e s f r o m s o m e a llu s io n s to th e ir c o n n e c t i o n s w ith p r o g e n e r a t io n a n d

d a e m o n s ( o r g e n i e s ). T h e first c la s s is e x t r e m e l y d iv e r s if ie d

s e x u a lity . A

a n d in c lu d e s th e fig u re s o f y o u n g w o m e n , c lo th e d o r n u d e ,

p h il o s o p h e r P o r p h y r y v is u a liz e d

s o m e tim e s w in g e d , w e a r in g n e c k la c e s , a n d s ta m p e d

u o u s b o d ie s liv in g

by an

in

n ig h t,

th e

w ith

re p o rte d

b y th e N e o p la to n ic

E tru sca n d a e m o n s a s te n ­

lig h t o f d a y , b u t d o o m e d

id e a l o f b e a u ty a n d e l e g a n c e — a n id e a o f th e d e s ir a b le . T h e ir

e c lip s e d

a t ti t u d e s , th e ir a ttr ib u te s (to ile t a r tic le s ), a n d

r e b o r n in t h e s c a t t e r i n g o f t h e ir s e e d

th e ir a s s o c ia ­

at

p e c u lia r tra d itio n

th e

Timaeus,

p o s sib ility ,

h ow ever,

to b e

o f b e in g

( P r o c l u s , in h is c o m ­

De oper. daemon.

tio n w ith T u r a n o f te n m a k e t h e m a p p e a r to b e th e c o m p a n ­

m e n t a r y o n P l a t o 's

io n s a n d s e r v a n t s (to d r e s s h e r, fo r e x a m p l e ) o f th e g o d d e s s

8 ). T h e s e a r e , o f c o u r s e , th e la te r s p e c u la tio n s o f th e le a rn e d ,

Snenath

b u t t h e y m u s t p r e s e r v e t h e m e m o r y o f a n c i e n t b e lie fs a b o u t

o f lo v e ; th is m a y b e th e m e a n in g o f th e in s c r ip tio n

Turns,

" f e m a l e a s s i s t a n t ( ? ) o f T u r a n . " In s o m e r e s p e c t s , t h e s e

1 4 2 , D ; P se llu s

th e e x is te n c e o f o b s c u r e fo rc e s o f fe c u n d ity u ltim a te ly c o n ­

f ig u r e s re c a ll in d iv id u a ls f r o m s c e n e s o f t h e w o m e n 's c h a m ­

n e cte d

b e r s d e p i c t e d o n G r e e k v a s e s . B u t w e a l s o e n c o u n t e r t h e m in

a c c o u n t , c e r ta i n ly o f E t r u s c a n o r ig in , o f th e b irth o f t h e k in g

c o n n e c t i o n w ith o t h e r d iv in itie s , o r c r o w n in g h e r o e s (H e r a ­

o f R o m e S e r v i u s T u lliu s , w h o w a s b o r n f r o m

w ith

th e

con cep t

phallos

of

G e n iu s .

O ne

m ay

re c a ll

c le s , P a r is ), o r v a r io u s l y e m p l o y e d in q u it e d i v e r s e c o m p o s i ­

s la v e w ith a

tio n s , w ith o u t n o ta b le c o h e r e n c e .

p ro p er

T a n a q u il, f a m o u s fo r h e r k n o w le d g e o f th e E t r u s c a n

nam es

p lin e

n am es acco m p any

th e se

In s e v e r a l c a s e s ,

f ig u r e s , ty p ic a lly

E tru s c a n

(D io n y siu s

th a t a p p e a re d

of

H a lic a r n a s s u s

in t h e 4 .2 ;

th e

th e u n io n o f a

h e a rth P lin y

of Q ueen d isc i­

Nat. Hist.

a b o u t w h ic h n o t h i n g e l s e is k n o w n , s u c h a s A l p a n , E v a n ,

3 6 .2 0 4 ) . T h e s a m e a n c i e n t a u t h o r s e x p la in e d th is p r o d ig io u s

Z ip n a , Z irn a , Z in th re p u s , M e a n , M la cu c h , M u n th u c h , P u ­

e v e n t a s th e f e r tiliz in g i n te r v e n tio n o f a g o d o r d a e m o n w h o

n c h , R e s c ia l, a n d T a lith a . S o m e b e a r th e n a m e o f L a s a , w h ic h

c o u ld

a lso

s im p le s e x u a l s y m b o l. T h e m y s t e r i o u s c o n n e c t i o n

o f te n

ap p e a rs

as

th e

first

p art

of

a

d o u b le

nam e,

a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s y s t e m w h i c h is w i d e l y p r e v a l e n t i n s y s t e m s

co n ce iv e

h is

ow n

m a te ria liz a tio n

in

th e

fo rm

of a

b e tw e e n

th e s h a d e s a n d s e x u a l p o w e r m a y w e ll b e a s s o c i a t e d w ith th e

o f d iv in e n a m e s : p a rtic u la rly L a s a A c h u n u n a , L a s a V écu (o r

s c e n e o f e m a c ia te d " a n i m u la e ," h o v e r in g a r o u n d a tr e e , th a t

Nekuia o f

V e c u v i a ) , L a s a T h i m r a e , L a s a R a c u n e t a , a n d L a s a S i t m i c a . It

T i r e s ia s e v o k e s in t h e p a i n t i n g f r o m t h e

m ig h t b e p o s s ib le s o m e d a y to e s ta b lis h s o m e k in d o f c o r r e ­

O r c o II o f T a r q u i n i i , a n d t h a t a r e e x p l i c i t l y i t h y p h a l l i c ( W e i n ­

s p o n d e n c e b e tw e e n L a sa a n d th e G re e k c o n c e p t o f n y m p h .

s to c k ). T h e re s to r a tiv e fe c u n d ity o f th e d a e m o n s m a y a ls o

O n e c a n n o t, h o w e v e r, e x te n d d e s ig n a tio n , d iscu sse d , d isc u s se d

to

le t

a ll

th e

a lo n e

fa rth e r o n .

to

th e te rm

fe m a le th e

L asa

V écu

" l a s a ," a s a g e n e ric

fig u re s

fe m a le or

of

th e

th e b e lie fs t h a t d e t e r m in e d t h e c o m p l e x r i te s w h o s e f u n c t i o n

be

w a s to g u a ra n te e th e m

e a s ily

be

T h is b rin g s u s to th e h e re a fte r, o n w h ic h th e d a e m o n o lo g -

th e tra d itio n c o n ­

ical im a g in a tio n o f th e E t r u s c a n s s e e m s to h a v e lin g e re d w ith

s p ir its

V e cu v ia c a n

id e n tifie d w ith th e n y m p h V e g o ia , w h o m

h a v e b e e n e x te n d e d to th e s o u ls o f th e d e c e a s e d , a s a p a rt o f

b e in g to

fu n e ra ry

ty p e

th e to m b o f

im m o r ta lity a n d to d e ify th e m .

41

ROM E

particular pleasure. Even in this domain, it is difficult to distinguish clearly between divine figures (that is, AitaHades and Phersipnai-Persephone, "sovereigns" of the world of the dead, and, in other connections, Mantus and Mania, or Veive-Veiovis, etc.) and figures who are below the rank of gods. It is probable that Vanth was a goddess of fate, who recorded the fates of human beings. But the extraordi­ nary frequency of her representations in tomb paintings and sculptures, in the costume of the Greek Erinyes (short tunic, fillets crossed over the bosom, buskins, and the attribute c ( a flaming torch) and often in the company of the daemon Charun, suggests that she belongs in the first rank, among the female daemons of the world beyond the grave, in exact correspondence with the Erinyes or Furies, on whom moderns have occasionally and mistakenly conferred the name "lasa." The same thing may be said of Culsu. It is probable that these Etruscan Erinyes, generally placed as guardians at the entrances to the infernal world, were also clearly individualized. The predominant role among the male daemons belonged to Charun, the preeminent person­ ification of death, who is represented with a grey or greenish skin, a hooked nose, sometimes wings, and hair like ser­ pents, and who is always armed with a heavy mallet. He certainly derives from the Greek Charon, whose name he bears. But he deviates from Charon in his appearance and functions. He can also appear in various other guises, differentiated by a second name, as can be seen at Tarquinii, in the Tomb of the Charons. The other clearly characterized daemon is Tuchulcha, who has the beak and feet of a bird of prey, long pointed ears, hair in the form of a nest of serpents, great wings, and enormous serpents for arms: a kind of

monstrous humanoid griffin. A variety of beings with ape­ like faces, more or less individualized, are also encountered, as are kinds of infernal servants or small orchestras of musicians of purely human appearance, except that they sometimes have wings. Finally recall the prevalence of infernal beings that look like animals, characterized by chthonic symbolism, from Cerberus and Scylla to dragons, and especially serpents. The intentionally terrifying appear­ ance of many of these daemonic images, whose role is to frighten the deceased and also to torment them, has been connected with what is known of the somber and even desperate conception of the world beyond the grave among the Etruscans in the final period of their history, between the fourth and first century b .c . But infernal daemons of equally monstrous appearance had already been imagined in classi­ cal Greece in the fifth century, as is proven by the description of Eurynomos in the Nekuia of Polygnotus of Thasos (prob­ ably the distant prototype of the Nekuia on the tomb of Oreo at Tarquinii), in the Lesche of the Cnidians at Delphi (Pau­ sanias Graeciae descr. 10.28.7). As was stated at the beginning, this leads to the qualification of certain exaggerated hypoth­ eses about the originality of Etruscan daemonology. It is also possible that certain Orphic and Pythagorean influences were transmitted by the Italiot environments of the Greek colonies of southern Italy. This last subject remains rather obscure, however, awaiting the future research that is so clearly desirable. M.P./b.f.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mirror showing Tinia and Epiur. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale.

F. de RUYT, Charun, Démon étrusque de la mort (Rome and Brussels 1934). R. HERB1G, Götter und Dämonen der Etrusker (Mainz 1965). s. weinstock, "Etruscan Demons," in Studi in onore di Luisa Banti (Rome 1965), 345-50. c. Q. gigliou and c. camporeale, "La religione degli Etruschi," in Storia delle religioni (6th ed., Turin 1971), 2:537-672. a . ). pfiffig, Religio etrusca (Graz 1975). m . pallottino, "Nome e funzione: A proposito di alcune divinité minori etrusche e romane," in Saggi di antichità (Rome 1979), 2:823-32.

E truscan and I talic D ivination The mantic world of the Etruscans, and more generally of the Italic peoples, was fundamentally similar to that of the Greeks, at least as far as practices were concerned: these, like so many matters of religious life, enter into the general framework of classical antiquity. But certain aspects of them are distinguished characteristically—and were also seen by the ancients as being different—especially the consequences of certain essential ideas about the sacred and the relation­ ship between men and gods on the level of their origins and their history. It is especially necessary to point out two phenomena that, in a way, epitomize the originality of divinatory practices in ancient Italy. The first is a desire to understand the obscure wishes of the gods through every possible sign—a desire that became so obsessive that it dominated all of Etruscan religious ideas and finally almost became identified with religion itself, justifying the existence of genuine technicians of divination, such as the haruspices and the interpreters of lightning flashes. The second was the 42

THE

d e v e l o p m e n t , t h r o u g h t h e o b s e r v a t i o n o f t h e f l ig h t o f b i r d s

fulguratoria),

(auspicium ) ,

ta tio n .

o f th e a u g u ra l d o c tr in e th a t b e c o m e s th e fu n d a ­

(ostenta),

an d p o rte n ts

and

E T R U S C A

w ith t h e ir i n t e r p r e ­

W i t h r e s p e c t t o d i v i n a t i o n b a s e d u p o n a u s p i c e s , it s h o u l d

m e n ta l d o c t r in e o f th e s a c r e d in I t a li c o - R o m a n r e lig io n . T h e first o f t h e s e p h e n o m e n a c o n s t i t u t e s th e e s s e n c e o f

disciplina Etrusca;

D I S C I P L I N A

b e n o t e d t h a t t h e U m b r i a n s p r a c t i c e d it a t t h e s a m e t i m e a s

th is

t h e R o m a n s , a s is w i t n e s s e d b y t h e r i t u a l t e x t s o f t h e I g u v i n e

w a s first t a u g h t b y s e m id iv in e b e in g s (T a g e s a n d V e g o ia ) a n d

T a b le ts; a u s p i c e s s e r v e d e s p e c ia lly a s in tr o d u c t io n s fo r s a c r i ­

w a s tra n s c r ib e d

fi c i a l c e r e m o n i e s .

w h a t w a s d e fin e d

b y th e e x p r e s s io n

in to a s e r ie s o f b o o k s w h o s e c o n t e n t s a r e

M .P ./ d .w .

m o r e o r le ss k n o w n to u s . T h e s e d e a l w ith th e o b s e r v a tio n o f th e

v is c e ra

( haruspicina),

o f a n im a ls

lig h tn in g

{ars

fla sh e s

p ice s . T h e c o n s u lta tio n

T h e D o c t r in e D

S a c r ed B o o k s

an d

E

is c ip l in a

o f h a ru sp ice s e n te re d

in to

R om an

re lig io n a n d c o n t in u e d to b e p r a c tic e d u p to th e e n d o f p a g a n

o f th e

tim e s ,

tr u sc a

F rom

th o u g h a rtis tic

its

E tru sca n

o r ig in s

re p re s e n ta tio n s

we

w e re

n ever

know

th e

f o r g o tte n .

c h a r a c te r is tic

d r e s s o f th e h a r u s p i c e s , w ith a m a n tle h o o k e d t o g e th e r a t th e T h e L a tin e x p r e s s i o n

disciplina Etrusca

th e

of

w h o le

c o m p le x

E tru s c a n

is h e r e m e a n t t o c o v e r

d o c tr in e s

and

n o rm s,

in

c h e s t a n d a h a t w ith a c y lin d r ic a l e n d . T h e o r ig in o f h a r u s p icy w a s tra c e d

b a ck to th e te a c h in g s o f T a g e s , a b e in g o f

p a rtic u la r th o s e c o n c e r n in g d iv in a tio n , b u t a ls o , m o r e g e n ­

d iv in e b irth w h o w a s b e lie v e d to b e th e s o n o f G e n iu s a n d

era lly ,

th e n e p h e w o f J u p ite r; h a v in g a ris e n o u t o f a fu rro w

th e

r itu a l

p ra c tic e s

of

th e

r e lig io n

and

th e

ru le s

in t h e

g o v e r n i n g t h e c iv il l if e o f t h e E t r u s c a n s . A l l o f t h e s e e l e m e n t s

e a r t h , h e a p p e a r e d to m e n a s a y o u n g m a n w ith w h ite h a ir.

are

H e is s a id t o h a v e t a u g h t h is p r e c e p t s to T a r c h o n , th e h e r o

to

be

fo u n d

in

a

s e rie s

of

sacred

te x ts .

T h is

is

a

but

fr o m w h o m T a rq u in ii g o t its n a m e , o r to th e t w e l v e E t r u s c a n

u n i q u e in t h e c l a s s i c a l w o r l d . T h e i r u n i q u e n e s s m a y e x p l a i n

k in g s a n d to th e E tru ria n p e o p le a s a w h o le , s o th a t h e w a s

th e

r e g a rd e d a s th e a u t h o r o f th o s e w ritin g s w h ic h a ls o g o b y th e

phenom enon

th a t

is

e x tra o rd in a ry

w h o lly

in te re s t

c h a r a c te r is tic

w h ic h

th e

of

E tr u r ia

E tru s c a n

tre a tis e s

a r o u s e d a m o n g th e R o m a n s , w h o tra n s la te d o r s u m m a r iz e d

nam e of

Tagetici

Tagetinici.

or

t h e m a n d a d o p t e d s o m e o f t h e i r t e a c h i n g s . In c e r t a i n c a s e s ,

m i r r o r t h a t is c o n s e r v e d

one

F lo re n c e

m ay

fo u n d e d

sp eak upon

of

a

r e lig io u s

p r in c ip le s

c o n c e p tio n

fix e d

by

and

re v e a le d

a

p ra c tic e

and

w ritte n

d e p ic ts

h is h a n d , a n d

th e h is to ric a l im p ro b a b ility o f s u c h a n

chunus).

a n a lo g y , w e d o n o t

A s ce n e e n g ra v e d o n a T u scan th e a r c h a e o lo g ic a l m u s e u m th e

n am e

of

Papa

or

of

P ava

te a c h i n g th e d is c ip lin e to T a r c h o n

(Avle Tar-

T h e c a s u i s t r y u s e d in t h e e x a m i n a t i o n o f v i s c e r a f o r

d iv in e s ig n s w a s p a rtic u la rly c o m p lic a te d , a s e v id e n c e d

by

disciplinarum

v a r io u s a n c ie n t te x ts m e tic u lo u s ly a s s e m b le d a n d s tu d ie d b y

(V itru v iu s , 1 .7 .1 ) th a t a p p e a r s to h a v e b e e n e s ta b ­

C . O . T h u lin . R e a d in g s w e r e m a d e w ith th e h e lp o f p a t te r n s

s ta g e s o f E tr u s c a n re lig io n th e " s y s t e m ” o f th e

scripturae

in

under

T a r c h i e s , w e a r i n g t h e d r e s s o f a h a r u s p e x , h o l d i n g a l i v e r in

tr a d itio n s , a s w ith th e H e b r a ic re lig io n . H o w e v e r , a p a r t fro m k n o w t o w h a t e x t e n t it is p o s s i b l e t o t r a c e b a c k t o t h e e a r l i e s t

h im

lis h e d la te r . B u t th e

disciplina Etrusca

c o n t a in s in its e lf m o tif s

th a t c a n

be seen

in d e p i c t i o n s o f h a r u s p i c e s , b u t a l s o a n d

th a t m a y b e v ie w e d a s b e lo n g in g e i th e r to " s c i e n c e " o r to

e s p e c ia lly b y m e a n s o f th e f a m o u s b r o n z e la m b liv e r f o u n d

" l a w ," m o tifs th a t s e e m to e n c o m p a s s th e s a c r e d a n d p r o f a n e

n e a r P i a c e n z a . T h e s u r f a c e o f t h e l i v e r is d i v i d e d i n t o s q u a r e s

a s p e c ts

of

one

a n o th e r

in

an

in e x tr ic a b le

p ro b a b le , a t le a s t b e g in n in g fro m a c e r ta in hum an

a c tio n

w as

p erfo rm e d — "in (S e rv iu s,

Aen.,

p erfo rm ed — o r

acco rd a n ce 4 .1 6 6 ) .

We

w ith m ay

fa s h io n .

th e

It

is

tim e , th a t e v e r y

s h o u ld

have

been

disciplina Etrusca"

n e v e rth e le ss

co n je ctu re ,

in w h i c h t h e n a m e s o f g o d s a r e f o u n d ; it w a s b e l i e v e d t h a t each

d iv in ity

m a n ife ste d

i t s e l f in i t s o w n

p a r tic u la r s p a c e .

A r o u n d th e e d g e s th e re a r e s ix te e n s q u a r e s c o r r e s p o n d in g to th e s ix te e n z o n e s o f h e a v e n ly s p a c e a n d

to th e ir r e s p e c tiv e

d i v i n i t i e s . T h e i n t e r p r e t e r s ' s k ill w a s t h u s e x e r c i s e d u p o n t h e

t h o u g h o n l y w ith g r e a t c a u t i o n , th a t th e o r ig in a l e x p r e s s i o n

m i c r o c o s m o f t h e l i v e r a s if u p o n a v e r y s m a l l m i r r o r o f t h e

n o w lo s t, w h ic h w a s tr a n s la te d o r p a r a p h r a s e d in to L a tin a s

c e le s tia l

disciplina Etrusca, c o r r e s p o n d e d t o t h e E t r u s c a n w o r d s tesns teis rasnes a n d tesne rasne cei (raina = E t r u s c a n , E t r u r i a ) ,

h a r u s p i c e s — th e f a m o u s c o l le g e o f T a rq u in ii c o u n t e d s ix t y o f

w h ic h i n tr o d u c e a n d a c c o m p a n y th e c la u s e s o f a la n d c o n ­

e v e r y b ra n c h o f E tr u s c a n d iv in a tio n , a n d " h a r u s p e x " b e c a m e

tra c t m a d e b e tw e e n C ip p u s o f P e ru sia

tw o

CIE

f a m i l i e s in

th e

in s c r ip tio n

o f th e

4 5 3 8 ( M a z z a r i n o ) . It a p p e a r s t h a t t h e

c o n c lu s io n o f th e c e le b ra te d

" p r o p h e c y o f V e g o ia " — w h ic h

w ill b e d i s c u s s e d l a t e r — m a k e s a d i r e c t a l l u s i o n t o a r u l e o f c o n d u c t , if n o t t o a m o r a l p r i n c i p l e , in t h e p h r a s e , " I n

th is

a v o i d a ll f a l s e h o o d a n d d u p l i c i t y : c a r r y t h e d i s c i p l i n e in y o u r h e a rt"

(Agrimensores,

L a c h m a n n , 1 , p . 3 5 0 f f .) .

T h o s e w ritin g s o n th e

disciplina Etrusca

th a t w e r e k n o w n to

templum.

The

im p o rta n c e

of

th e

ord er

of

th e

t h e m — w a s s u c h th a t th e ir a u t h o r i ty a p p a r e n tl y e x t e n d e d to t h e g e n e r i c t e r m d e s i g n a t i n g t h e i n t e r p r e t e r o f t h e w ill o f t h e g o d s.

W e a re

c e rta in

th a t

th e

E tru s c a n

e q u iv a le n t o f th is

netsvis ( w h e r e a s t h e L a t i n e x p r e s s i o n liber harus­ picinus r e p r o d u c e s a n d t r a n s l a t e s t h e E t r u s c a n w o r d s zieh nethsrac f r o m t h e f u n e r a r y i n s c r i p t i o n o f t h e T a r q u i n i a n p r i e s t L a r i s P u l e n a s CIE 5 4 3 0 ) . 2. T h e libri fulgurales o r de fulguratura c o n t a i n e d t h e d o c ­ n am e w as

trin e

o f lig h tn in g

b o lts a n d

o f th e ir in te r p r e ta tio n ,

w h ic h

th e R o m a n s c a n b e d iv id e d in to th r e e la rg e g r o u p s : (1 ) th e

c o n s t i tu t e d th e o t h e r g r e a t s p e c if ic s e c t o r o f E t r u s c a n d iv in a ­

libri haruspicini, ( 2 ) t h e libri fulgurales, ( C i c e r o , On divination, 1 . 7 2 ) .

tio n .

a n d (3 ) th e

libri rituales

1. T h e first b o o k s d e a l w ith d i v i n a ti o n b y o b s e r v i n g a n d

T h is

s c ie n c e

w as

tio n a n d

its p a r t s . T h e

in te r p r e tin g th e v is c e r a — p a r tic u la r ly th e liv e r— o f s a c rific e d

in to s ix te e n

se v e ra l g o d s (C ice ro ,

to th e E t r u s c a n s a n d

M a rtia n u s C a p e lla ,

th e m

a

p a rtic u la r r e n o w n . T h e

p r i e s t s w h o p e r f o r m e d th is d i v i n a ti o n w e r e c a lle d th e h a r u s ­

on

c e le s tia l e x p a n s e — w h ic h w a s c a lle d

a n i m a l s ( extispicium ). T h i s p r a c t i c e w a s s p e c i f i c a l l y a t t r i b u t e d w on

fo u n d e d

templum

re g io n s , e a c h

T h e e a s te rn s e c to r

th e

d e fin itio n

templum —

of

th e

in i t s o r i e n t a ­

w a s th o u g h t to b e d iv id e d

o f w h ic h

w a s th e s e a t o f o n e o r

Divin., 2 . 4 2 ; P l i n y , Hist. Nat., 2 . 1 4 3 ; De nuptiis Mercuri et Philologiae, 1 . 4 3 f f . ) . w a s j u d g e d t o b e f a v o r a b l e (pars familiaris) 43

ROME

foundation of cities and the consecration of altars and temples, as well as for the civil and military organizations of the state. Among all of these precepts, there is one that seems to have been of particular importance to the social and economic structures of Etruria: according to ritual norms partly corresponding to those concerning the definition of the heavenly space, the earth was to be divided in order to permit its profitable use, following an ordered system of the division of property. It is clear that land surveying as a system is one of the fundamental factors in the technical and economic advances introduced by Greek colonization in Italy (as the most recent archaeological investigations, notably those undertaken in Metapontum and at Megara Hyblaea in Sicily, have shown), and one that was to play a fundamental role in the life of the Roman world. But in Etruria, the division and delimination of land, insofar as these depended on the will of the gods, had a significance that was clearly Bronze liver. Plaisance, Museo Civico. religious, as shown by the prophecy of Vergoia cited above, which, within a teaching to a certain Arruns Veltymnus, predicted for the last years of the Etruscan "eighth century" and the western sector unfavorable (pars hostilis): the same (i.e., the beginning of the first century b . c .) a series of concept applies to the small model of the liver found at disasters resulting from violations of the boundaries and Piacenza, where the favorable sector is indicated (on the passages of properties. This probably reflects the conserva­ convex side) by the word usils (= of the sun), i.e., the tive tendencies of the Etruscan oligarchies in the face of the portion of the day, while the unfavorable sector is indicated agrarian reforms promulgated at Rome by the Greeks and by the word tivs( = of the moon), or the portion of the night. taken up later by M. Livius Drusus. Yet this does not prove that the astral element would have Among the ritual books, a more specific category of writings was established, which was called libri fatales and had any particular importance. By collating the names of the which was devoted to doctrines of time and of fate, i.e., to divinities cited by Martianus Capella with those engraved in the durations of the lives of men, cities, and states. These the squares on the liver of Piacenza, we may deduce that the supreme gods such as Tinia-Jupiter, Uni-Juno, Minerva, and books also treated of the concept of "centuries," understood Mars occupied the eastern sector and in particular the as cycles that were not only natural but also religious, that northeastern quarter of the celestial vault. Some of them brought renewal and were punctuated by portents, render­ ing obligatory the performance of particular rites of purifica­ were explicitly designated as throwers of the lightning bolt tion. Other writings, called libri acherontici (from the name of (manubiae): the god Tinia-Jupiter could throw three lightning the river of hell, the Acheron), seem to refer more particu­ bolts from three different celestial regions (and his name is larly to one's destiny after death; we know that they con­ repeated in three of the border squares on the liver of tained instructions for ceremonies by which men could gain Piacenza). It was the nature gods in particular, such as immortality, i.e., transform themselves into "divine souls" or Nethuns-Neptune, Catha (the sun), Fufluns-Bacchus, into "gods of the soul": di animales (Servius, Aen., 3.168; Selvans-Silvanus, who were found in the southern sectors. Arnobius, Adversus gentes, 2.62). Then follows a very large In the western sector, the pars hostilis, were the infernal section of the disciplina Etrusca that, if we go by what is divinities or the gods of fate, such as Letham, Cel, Culsu, written in it, should also enter into the category of libri fatales, Fortuna, the Manes, and Vetis-Veiovis. Naturally, the zone i.e., the theory, classification, observation, and explanation from which the lightning came indicated the divinity for of odd or portentous events: of ostenta. This is probably an which it was the sign. The interpretation was based on the occasional practice which, in unforeseeable cases, left every­ intensity, form, and color of the lightning bolt, the noise that thing to the interpreter's experience and verbal responses. accompanied it, the place where it struck, and its effects. The Nevertheless, there were also written documents called casuistry was very complicated. Distinctions were made ostentaria (a late collection or transcription, attributed at least between good and bad and private and public lightning in part to the Etruscan haruspex Tarquitius—the name comes bolts, between those that gave advice or orders, commutable from libri Tarquitiani) of which a few fragments remain, or fixed sentences, etc. Particular rites of purification were recorded in Latin literature, and which seem to have all the performed at the place where the lightning had struck and characteristics of a summary, as may be seen in the following where it was thought to remain under the surface in the form example: "A ewe or a ram, if it is draped with purple or with of a small stone: this sacred place was called bidental in Latin. gold, brings an increase of abundance to the head of the state In his Quaestiones naturales II, Seneca left an ample and or country, multiplies the progeny of the country, and makes methodical summary of all of these doctrines, which ancient it happier" (extract from the book of Tarquitius, cited by tradition dated back to the writings of the nymph Begoe or Macrobius, Saturnalia, 3.7.2). Signs may be of very different Vegoia (from which the name of the libri Vegonici also comes). kinds; unusual celestial apparitions, rains of blood or of The observation and interpretation of lightning bolts was left stones (and logically lightning bolts should be classified to a special priest called the fulgurator, from which it seems under this same heading, since they elsewhere constitute, as possible to deduce the Etruscan name (trutnvt frontac) from we have seen, a peculiar but essential chapter in Etruscan the bilingual Etrusco-Latin inscription of the priest L. Cafadivination), earthquakes, the falling of statues, plants with tius, which is preserved in the Pesaro Museum. 3. The contents of the libri rituales were much more varied unusual shapes or aberrant growth, animals that behave strangely or that have exceptional characteristics, monstrous and complicated. We know (especially from Festus, 285) that beings, and so on. Obviously, under this heading were also they contained a series of prescriptions for the rites of 44

THE

Mirror from Tuscany. Florence, Archaeological Museum.

classified the signs of the flight of birds, which otherwise does not seem to have been the object of a technically developed divinatory art in Etruria, nor to have had a primordial role in worship, as it did in the Roman and Umbrian religions. Por­ tents announce the future, but in many cases they are the frightening manifestation of some private or public impurity or fault, which requires purification by special and extremely meticulous rites. Finally, we must stress the exceptional im­ portance that Roman religion placed on the Etruscan tradi­ tions of the observation of the ostenta and the expiatory rites that they required. By contrast, the divination by oracles that was so typical of the Greek world seems to have been wholly foreign to the disciplina Etrusca. We said at the beginning that there is no way of knowing when all that has been described so far became, even in substance, the heritage of Etruscan religion and culture. It is very probable—and this is the general opinion of researchers on the subject—that the disciplina Etrusca, as a written "corpus," was systematized mainly during the last part of the history of Etruria and thus resulted from the reflection and traditionalism of priestly circles that were already in contact with Hellenistic and Hellenistic-Roman scholarship. In the same way, accounts of primordial events, such as the "preachings" of Tages, are for the most part artificial recon­ structions of a mythical or etiological type. Nevertheless, we cannot imagine that such a heritage of beliefs, practices, and speculations, some of which are analogically tied to ritual forms from distant times and places— such as the bronze model of the liver at Piacenza which evokes small terra-cotta

D I S C I P L I N A

E T R U S C A

models of livers used for haruspicy in Mesopotamia and Asia Minor— could have resulted solely from scholarly inventions from before the high point of Etruscan civilization, i.e., the archaic period. Numerous traditions whose origins can be traced back precisely to the archaic period (portents, proph­ ecies, and especially the testimony of the "books" attributed to the Sibyl of Cumae— the libri Sibyllini— which are con­ nected with King Tarquinius Superbus and also with the libri fatales: Livy, 22.9) and the fact that the existence of the fundamental elements of haruspicy from the fourth century onwards can be established on the basis of artistic represen­ tations suggest that the essential elements of the ideas, norms, and practices that became known to the Romans under the name of disciplina belong to the earliest stages of Etruscan religion; and we should attribute to the late periods little more than a better organization of the sacred laws, along with a general literary definition of the sacred. The first ideas were probably transmitted orally and in the form of songs (Lucretius, 6.381; Censorinus, De die natali, 4.13). The attribution of these teachings to demigods such as Tages and the nymph Begoe or Vegoia probably goes back to fairly early local traditions. The attribution to Tages must be related to the city of Tarquinii because of its relationship with Tarchon, and the attribution to Begoe or Vegoia (whose Etruscan name is Lasa Vécu or Vecuvia) to the city of Clusium or a Vécu family— which might suggest that these cults and myths have noble origins. But these two cases, as well as other indications, seem to throw into relief the tendency of the Etruscan religion to seek the "sources" of doctrines and religious precepts in the authority of supernatural beings, which to some extent gives it the character of a "revealed" religion. It is likely that in the beginning these two teachings were not clearly distinguishable from one another. Not only haruspicy but also the ritual discipline was traced back to Tages, in particular all that concerned the jus terrae Etruriae and the libri acherontici (Servius, Aen., 8.398). Vegoia is cited with regard not only to the doctrine of lightning bolts, but also to warnings about the intangibility of boundaries, as we have already seen. The idea that the books that circulated under the names of Tages (Tagetici) and Vegoia (Vegonici) were generally collections of their oral teachings emerges quite clearly from the body of citations found in literary sources. The legendary and semilegendary characters who collected and spread them, such as Tarchon or Arruns Veltymnus, must have been very important. In any case, the canonical attributions and divisions are undoubtedly fictive and late, especially since there are references to unknown authors, such as the Marcii, or authors completely foreign to the disciplina Etrusca, such as the Carthaginian Mago, all of whom are anachronistically associated with Vegoia (Servius, Aen., 6.72; Agrimensores, Lachmann, p. 348). With these authors, we come to those historians who collect, develop, summarize, and translate (from Etruscan into Latin) tradi­ tional doctrines, first L. Tarquitius (Priscus), the author of the previously cited libri Tarquitiani, and then A. Caecina, Aquila, Nigidius Figulus, Umbricius Melior, Capito, Labeo, and several others into the late imperial period. M.P./d.w.

BIBLIOGRAPHY c. o. THULiN, Die Götter des Martianus Capella und der Bronzeleber von Piacenza (Giessen 1906); Die etruskische Disziplin (Göteborg 1906-9) M. PALLOTTiNO, "Uno specchio di Tuscania e la leggenda etrusca di Tarchon," in Rendiconti della Pontißca Accadentia Romana di Archeologia 45

ROME 6 (1930): 49-87. b. niocara, Gli Etruschi e la loro civiltà (Milan 1933), 189-219. M. i’allottino . Deorum sedes, in Studi in onore di A. Calderim e R. Paribeni (Milan 1956-57), 223-34. s. mazzarino , "Sociologia del mondo etrusco e problemi della tarda etruscità,” in Historia 6 (1957): 98-122. R. bloch . Les prodiges dans l'Antiquité classique (Paris 1963), 43-76. a . |. pfiffig . Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975). c. a . mastrelli, "Etrusco-piceno frontac e greco K e ra u n o s S t u d i Etruschi 44 (1976): 149-61.

p o p u la tio n s w h o s p o k e d ia le c ts o f th e O s c a n ty p e d u r i n g a le s s -d iffe re n tia te d

a r c h a ic

p h ase.

The

U m b ria n s

(U m b r i),

w h o m a d e th e ir w a y n o r th w a r d a lo n g th e v a lle y o f th e T ib e r a n d b e y o n d th e A p e n n in e s to th e o u t e r lim its o f th e P a d u a n p la in , c o n s titu te d a d is tin c tly s e p a r a te b r a n c h w ith th e ir o w n i n n o v a tio n s ; b u t t h e r e w e r e a ls o s o m e s im ila r g r o u p s to th e s o u t h , s u c h a s th e V o ls ci in L a t iu m . If w e c o n s i d e r t h i s d i s p e r s i o n a n d t h e v a r i e t y o f g e o g r a p h ­ ical a n d

h i s t o r i c a l c o n d i t i o n s , w e c a n n o t s p e a k o f a n I t a li c

r e lig io n a s a d e f in e d re a lity , u n d e r s t o o d a s a u n it a r y c o n c e p t . M o r e o v e r , s u c h a n id e a w a s to ta lly a lie n to th e a n c i e n t s ' w a y o f th in k in g .

T he R elig ion o f th e S abellia n s an d U m br ia n s , I ta lics o f C en tr al an d S o u th er n I ta ly I.

R a th e r w e m u s t d is tin g u is h

and

e v a lu a te th e

fa c ts a b o u t th e p e o p le s a n d p la c e s o f th e c u ltu r e s th a t a r e b e s t k n o w n h i s t o r i c a l l y a n d t h a t a r e m o s t f u l ly d o c u m e n t e d . W e can

th u s re a lis tic a lly s tu d y

th e re lig io n

o f th e S a b in e s

(w h ic h w e k n o w fro m R o m a n tra d itio n ) a n d th e re lig io n o f th e

I. Historical and Linguistic Background

S a b e llia n s

L u ca n ia ,

T h e p e o p l e w h o liv e d in th e h e a r t o f th e Ita lia n p e n in s u la ,

etc.

of

A b ru z z i,

O ur

e s s e n tia lly o n

S a m n iu m ,

k n o w le d g e

of

th e

C a m p a n ia , S a b e llia n s

Irp in ia , is

b ased

l o c a l e p i g r a p h i c e v i d e n c e in t h e O s c a n

la n ­

w h o b e lo n g e d to a s in g le lin g u is tic s to c k o f I n d o - E u r o p e a n

g u a g e , s u c h a s th e T a b u la A g n o n e n s is , a n d th e in s c rip tio n s

o r ig in (b u t d iffe re n t fro m L a tin ), a n d w h o m m o d e r n s c h o la r s

o f C a p u a , th e C ip p u s o f A b e lla , th e c o lle c tio n o f t e x ts fro m

d e sig n a te

by

th e

g en eral

n am e

of

S a b e llia n -U m b r ia n s

or

R o ssan o

d i V a g lio ; a n d

in s c rip tio n s

on

th e

a rc h a e o lo g ic a l

O s c o - U m b r i a n s , E a s t e r n I ta lic s , o r s im p ly " I t a l i c s ," m a d e u p

re m a in s fro m s h r in e s . W e c a n a ls o s tu d y U m b ria n re lig io n ,

a f u n d a m e n ta l e le m e n t o f th e p o p u la tio n a n d th e r e b y o f th e

o r m o r e e x a c t l y I g u v i n e r e l i g i o n , s i n c e w e k n o w it e x c l u s i v e l y

h isto ry a n d

t h e c u l t u r e o f p r e - R o m a n , a n c i e n t I t a ly . O r i g i ­

t h r o u g h th e I g u v in e T a b le s, fro m Ig u v iu m , th e a n c ie n t n a m e

n a lly

p e o p le

th e se

m ay

a ll h a v e

n a m e c o n n e c t e d w ith th e r o o t

had

sahh-,

a

com m on

th e h is to ric a l n a m e s o f S a b in e s , S a b e llia n s , a n d

(Safinim

n a tio n a l

fro m w h ic h a r e d e r iv e d S a m n iu m

in i ts i n d i g e n o u s f o r m ) , w h e n c e c o m e s t h e n a m e o f

fo r G u b b io . B u t fo r e a c h o f t h e m , w ith th e e x c e p t i o n o f th e U m b ria n re lig io n , th e fr a g m e n ts th a t w e h a v e a r e n o t su ffi­ c i e n t t o g i v e a c l e a r i d e a o f t h e i r t r u e c h a r a c t e r . T h i s is p a r t l y due

to

th e

p a u city

of

in fo rm a tio n

p ro v id e d

by

c la s s ic a l

th e S a u n ite s o r S a m n ite s . L e g e n d s e v o k e v e r y a n c ie n t k in ­

a u t h o r s a n d s c h o l a r s ( in c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e g r e a t i n t e r e s t t h a t

s h i p r e l a t i o n s a m o n g t h e m , a s w e l l a s s i m i l a r i t i e s in t h e a r e a

th e a n c i e n t s to o k in E t r u s c a n r e lig io n ). A s a r e s u lt , a s y n t h e ­

o f th e ir re lig io u s tra d itio n s . Y e t fro m th e d a w n o f h isto rica l

s i s o f a ll t h e d a t a s e e m s t o b e c a l l e d f o r .

t im e s , th is e t h n i c g r o u p a p p e a r s to h a v e b e e n

fra g m e n te d

i n t o m a n y d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s a n d t r i b e s , e a c h h a v i n g i ts

II. The Myth of the Animal Guide or Ancestor

o w n n a m e a n d c h a r a c te r is tic d ia le c t, b e h a v io r, a n d h is to ry . T h e ir

c o n ta c ts

w ith

th e

T y rrh e n ia n

ce n te rs

of

E tru ria ,

At

th e

o ld e s t,

u n d o u b te d ly

co m m u n a l,

lev el

th e re

are

L a tiu m , a n d C a m p a n ia , a n d w ith th e G re e k c o lo n ia l w o rld ,

tra d itio n s a b o u t th e m ig r a tio n s o f g r o u p s u n d e r th e g u id a n c e

c o u p le d

o r a d v i c e o f a s a c r e d a n im a l th a t m a y a ls o g iv e its n a m e to th e

w ith

th e ir e x p a n s io n

w ith in

th e p e n in s u la

so u th ­

w a r d a n d t o w a r d th e T y r r h e n ia n S e a , d e t e r m in e d th is v a s t

e t h n i c g r o u p t h a t c l a i m s i t. F o r e x a m p l e , t h e S a b e l l i a n s w e r e

p r o c e s s o f c u ltu r a l in te g r a ti o n . A s a r e s u lt o f th is in te g r a ti o n ,

g u i d e d b y a b u ll ; t h e P i c e n i , b y a w o o d p e c k e r

th e E a s t e r n Ita lic s b e n e f ite d m o r e a n d m o r e fr o m th e i m p o r t s

w h ic h t h e y g o t t h e ir n a m e ) ; th e H irp in i a n d th e L u c a n i , b y a

fro m g r e a t u rb a n c iv iliz a tio n s , d e s p ite th e ir o w n f u n d a m e n ­

w o lf

ta l t i e s t o p a s t o r a l a n d a g r a r i a n c o m m u n i t y s t r u c t u r e s a n d t o

sh ip

p rim itiv e

t rib e s : t h u s th e F r e n t a n i a n d th e h a r t ( w h o s e I n d o - E u r o p e a n

c u s to m s .

T h is

in flu e n c e

co u ld

not

fa il

to

have

p e o p le

in q u e s t i o n

can

be

m ay

nam e

r e p e r c u s s i o n s in t h e a r e a o f r e l i g i o n . The

(hirpus

id e n tifie d

and

c la s s if ie d

and

in I t a l i c , a n d

have

bhrento-

e x iste d

lukos

(picus,

fro m

in G r e e k ) . T h e s a m e r e l a t i o n ­

fo r o th e r

m in o r

p o p u la tio n s

and

is a t t e s t e d p a r t i c u l a r l y i n n e i g h b o r i n g A p u l i a ) ,

th e U r s e n tin i a n d

s p r in g tim e ), th a t is, th e p r o p itia to r y o r e x p ia to r y o f fe rin g to

are

d iv id e d

in to

tw o

m a in

grou p s:

th e

s o -c a lle d

O scan

l a n g u a g e ( n a m e d a f t e r th e O s c a n s in C a m p a n ia ) , w id e s p r e a d

s o m e th in g

c a lle d

ver sacrum

m ig ra tio n s

A lth o u g h

th e y h a v e a c o m m o n o r ig in , th e Ita lic l a n g u a g e s

w as

th e b e a r. T h e r itu a l b a s is fo r th e s e

m o r e p r e c i s e l y in l i n g u i s t i c , h i s t o r i c , a n d g e o g r a p h i c t e r m s .

(th e

sacred

t h e g o d o f a ll t h o s e b e i n g s w h o w e r e b o r n d u r i n g a g i v e n p e rio d o f tim e . H u m a n s , h o w e v e r , w e r e n o t s a c rific e d b u t

in s o u t h e r n I t a l y a n d d o c u m e n t e d b y a s i g n i f i c a n t n u m b e r o f

w e r e c o m p e lle d to le a v e th e ir o rig in a l g r o u p to g o a n d s e ttle

in s c rip tio n s th a t u s e in d ig e n o u s a lp h a b e ts , G re e k a n d L a tin ;

e ls e w h e r e a n d to fin d n e w

and

e x c lu s iv e ly

tu r n tr ig g e r e d th e fo r m a tio n o f n e w g r o u p s (s e e th e a rtic le

th r o u g h th e te x ts o f th e I g u v in e T a b le s o f G u b b io , w h ic h u s e

" V e r S a c r u m ," b e lo w ). C le a r ly th e s e a r e c o n c e p t s p e c u lia r to

th e

U m b ria n

la n g u a g e ,

know n

a lm o s t

m e a n s o f s u b s i s t e n c e , w h i c h in

th e

p rim itiv e s o c ie tie s o f a p a s to r a l-n o m a d ic ty p e . T h e th e rio -

h e r i t a g e o f t h o s e p e o p l e w h o m w e c a ll S a b e l l i a n s ( S a b e l l i ) in

m o rp h ic e le m e n t w a s im p o rta n t n o t o n ly a m o n g th e se p e o ­

th e b r o a d e s t s e n s e o f th e L a tin t e r m — p e o p l e w h o in c lu d e d

p le

a t t h e t i m e o f t h e R o m a n c o n q u e s t s m a l l g r o u p s s e t t l e d in

w o rld ,

w hat now

re a s o n to b e lie v e , a lth o u g h h e s ita n tly , th a t th e s e a r e s u r v iv ­

U m b ria n

and

L a tin

a lp h a b e ts.

The

first

la n g u a g e

is

is c a l l e d A b r u z z i ( t h e M a r s i , P a e l i g n i , P r a e t u t t i i ,

V e s ti n i , a n d

M a rru c in i)— a n d

fa rth e r s o u th ,

th e S a m n ite s ,

a n d th e n th e F r e n to n i, th e C a m p a n i o r O s c i, th e H irp in i, th e

b u t a lso as

A.

in

m o re

A lfö ld i

ad van ced has

s o c ie tie s

re c e n tly

show n.

of

th e

T h ere

E u ra sia n is

som e

a ls o f to te m is m . T h e m y th

o f th e a n im a l g u id e , o r a n c e s to r, fe e d e r, a n d

L u c a n i , a n d t h e B r u t t i i , a ll t h e w a y t o t h e M a m e r t i n i i n S i c i ly .

p r o te c to r , w a s q u ite w id e s p r e a d

I t is l ik e l y t h a t t h e S a b i n e s ( S a b i n i ) o f c e n t r a l I t a l y a n d t h e i r

m a i n e d e s p e c ia lly lin k e d to p a s t o r a li s m a n d t r a n s h u m a n c e ;

n e ig h b o rs th e A e q u i, th e H e rc in i, e t c ., w h o w e r e s c a tte r e d

c le a r a rc h a e o lo g ic a l e v id e n c e s u p p o r ts

a ro u n d

P ice n ti o r

r e l a ti o n s h ip in th e c u l t u r e o f th e s o - c a lle d A p e n n in e B r o n z e

P ice n i a lo n g th e A d ria tic s lo p e , b e lo n g e d to o ld e r s tr a ta o f

A g e . W e e v e n f i n d it i n t h e o l d e s t L a t i n a n d R o m a n l e g e n d s .

46

L a tiu m

s in c e

p r e h i s t o r y , a s w e ll a s

th e

in p r e h i s t o r i c I t a l y ; it r e ­ th e

v a lid ity o f th is

THE

S A B E L L 1 A N S

AND

U M B R I A N S

Etruscan Tabula Agnonensis. London, British Museum. Museum photo. Right: Ex-voto. Avellino, Museo Irpino. Museum photo.

In the oldest Latin legends we may recall the sow who led Aeneas and his companions from Lavinium to Alba Longa, or the she-wolf of Rome. The traditions and rites of the Luperci may also be recalled. Even in prehistory these concepts must have clashed with the substantially different beliefs and rites of agrarian societies. They were probably permanently obliterated in the wake of the religious ideas that spread within the zones of proto-urban and urban cultures of coastal Italy, notably in the south and along the Tyrrhenian coast, under Greek and Etruscan influence. Even in the historical period, these ancient concepts seem to have characterized the people of inland Italy, who were still tied, at least in their place of origin, to pre-urban structures, to an essentially pastoral economy, and to a mobility that involved aggressive and warlike tendencies. This fits the description of the Sabellian-Umbrians exactly. What is most interesting is that the ver sacrum was an enduring rite that continued to be performed in later periods, as well as an etiological myth of the origins of the Italic people, a myth that later became part of the scholarly reconstruction of the legendary ethnography of Italy in the heroic era. Their very ancient relation with the

god Mars (in the Oscan form Mamers) stressed this warlike feature, which must be connected with the increasing use of mercenaries. The sources explicitly attest that animal guides, particularly the bull and the woodpecker, were consecrated to this god. We may therefore assume that the original figures or the theriomorphic divine forces were gradually transformed into simple attributes or symbols. This second­ ary character is obvious, for instance, in the representations of the Italic bull (viteliu), which overcomes the Roman she-wolf on the coins of the federated Sabellians who rose up against Rome during the Social War (90-87 b .c .). That was the last attempt by these people to assert a “national” consciousness. III.

Personal Deities

Belief in more or less anthropomorphic, personal deities seems to have been the ancestral patrimony of the SabellianUmbrians, but it spread, becoming solidified and compli­ cated as contacts developed with the Greek and Tyrrhenian (i.e., Etruscan, Latin, and Campanian) religious worlds. 47

Ex-voto. Avellino, Museo Irpino. Museum photo.

Ex-voto. Avellino, Museo Irpino. Museum photo.

Many of the most ancient centers and cult sites in southern Italy were subject to Italic occupation. Thus came into being a vast network of correspondences, identifications, and reciprocal influences, of common experiences and develop­ ments, which must have resulted in the diffusion of the cults of the supreme celestial deity (D)iove-Jupiter, of MarsMamers, of Herekle-Herakles, and of Kere-Ceres. But there were also specifically Italic deities, or deities peculiar to each

Italic environment, such as the goddess Mefitis in the Sabellian area (Irpinia and Lucania), the goddess Cupra in Umbria and in the Picenum, and the god Cerfo in Gubbio. Our knowledge of the Umbrian pantheon is especially rich be­ cause of the Iguvine Tablets. This pantheon presents the characteristic system of double names for gods, in which the second element plays the role of a qualifying adjective (as in personal names) and is often derived from the name of

48

THE

S A B E L L I A N S

k n o w le d g e o f th e

AND

U M B R I A N S

a n o t h e r g o d , fo r e x a m p l e , T e fre Jo v ie (T e fro “ o f J u p i te r " ) ,

d e ta ile d

S e rfe M a rtie (Ç e r f o " o f M a r s " ) , P r e s to ta S e rfia (P r e s t o t a " o f

c e r e m o n y b e g a n w i t h t h e o b s e r v a t i o n o f t h e f l i g h t o f b i r d s in

Ç e r f o " ) . T h is c r is s c r o s s i n g o f d i r e c t o r c o lla t e r a l k i n s h ip lin e s

an

g i v e s it t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f a l a r g e f a m i l y o f g o d s . T h i s d o e s

co rre sp o n d e d

n o t n e c e s s a r il y s ig n ify , h o w e v e r , a t r u e m y th o lo g i c a l t h e o g -

a n d L a tin c o n c e p t i o n o f th e

a p p ro p ria te a n d

r ite s o f U m b r ia n

p re c is e ly

o r ie n te d

r e lig io n .

E ach

p a rt o f th e sk y

th a t

to a p a rt o f th e e a r th , re c a llin g th e E tru s c a n

templum.

A s in R o m e b u t n o t in

o n y s u c h a s e x i s t e d a m o n g t h e G r e e k s a n d in o t h e r a n c i e n t

E tru ia , a u g u r y r e p r e s e n ts th e s o le fo rm o f d iv in a tio n , o r at

r e lig io n s . T h e a b s t r a c t c h a r a c t e r o f c e r ta in

le a s t its p rin c ip a l fo r m . A n e x p i a to r y p u rific a tio n

p rim a ry n a m e s ,

s u c h a s S a ç i ( " p a c t o f s a c r e d a l l e g i a n c e " ) in th e e x p r e s s i o n

th e s a c r e d

lupater Saçe

v ic tim s o b ta in e d fro m

(Ju p ite r

"o f

S a çi"),

su g g e s ts

ra th e r

th a t

th is

a c t. R eal sa crifice s w e re p e rfo rm e d sa cre d

b re e d in g fa rm s

p reced ed

w ith a n im a l

(sakri)

o r p ro ­

( perakni ) , t h e a n i m a l s d i f f e r i n g a c c o r d i n g

n e tw o r k o f r e la tio n s h ip s w a s th e fru it o f a c o n c e p t u a l e la b ­

fan e o n e s

o r a tio n p e c u lia r to th e I g u v in e r e lig io n . T h is d o e s n o t a lte r

d e itie s ( o x e n ,

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e d o u b l e n a m e f o r g o d s is w i d e l y a t t e s t e d ,

b l o o d l e s s o f f e r i n g s , i . e . , o f f e r i n g s o f f o o d a n d d r i n k . T h e r ite

t h o u g h in a le s s ty p ic a l a n d c o h e r e n t w a y , o u t s id e U m b r ia ,

la m b s , p ig s , e t c .) . T h e r e w e r e a ls o

to

th e

fre q u e n t

w a s a c c o m p a n ie d b y v o w s a n d p r a y e r s in v o k in g th e p r o te c ­

n o t o n l y in a ll o f t h e S a b e l l i a n c o u n t r y b u t a l s o in L a t i u m a n d

tio n o f t h e g o d s f o r th e c it y a n d th e s h r in e . T h e c u r s e p la c e d

E tr u r ia .

o n f o re ig n e rs ( E tr u s c a n s , I a p u z c u s , N a h a r k u s ) w a s n o ta b le . T h e T a b le ts a ls o p r o v i d e in f o r m a tio n o n th e v a r io u s p rie s tly

IV. The

fra m e w o rk s

f u n c tio n s , p a rtic u la rly th o s e o f th e c o lle g e o f p rie s ts k n o w n

Forms of Worship

w ith in

w h ic h

p e o p le

a s th e A tie d ii B re th r e n . u n d e rsto o d

th e ir

W ith in th e g e n e r a l f r a m e w o r k o f th e c o n s e r v a t is m

o f th e

c o n n e c t i o n s w ith th e g o d s , a n d th e r e f o r e th e fo r m s o f th e ir

Ita lic p e o p l e , t h e c u l t o f t h e d e a d a n d f u n e r a r y p r a c ti c e s w e r e

w o r s h ip , d id n o t d if f e r in e s s e n c e f r o m w h a t w e k n o w a b o u t

c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t r a d i t i o n s w i d e s p r e a d a ll o v e r I t a l y i n t h e

th e re lig io n o f R o m e a n d , m o r e g e n e r a lly , o f th e G r e c o -I ta lic

c o u r s e o f p r o t o h i s to r y , w ith a c l e a r p r e d o m i n a n c e o f t h e r ite

w o rld . T h e s e fo rm s in c lu d e th e o b s e rv a tio n o f th e s ig n s o f

o f in h u m a tio n

d i v i n e w il l ; o b j e c t s o r l i v i n g c r e a t u r e s d e d i c a t e d a n d c o n s e ­ c r a te d

to

th e

gods

(devotio);

p riv a te

and

p u b lic

rite s

of

p ro p itia tio n a n d e x p ia tio n , w ith p r a y e r s , o f f e r in g s w ith o u t b lo o d sh ed

or

n o ta b ly w ith

sa crifice s ;

v o tiv e

g ifts;

p la ce s

of

w o r s h ip ,

o p e n - a i r a l ta r s ; la te r , t e m p le s b u ilt o n

G re e k

in

d itc h

graves.

In

th e

A d ria tic

re g io n

of

P i c e n u m , a n d o c c a s i o n a l l y i n b u r i a l s o f c h i e f s in l o w e r I t a ly , th e

fu n e ra ry

fu rn ish in g s

have

a

p a r tic u la r

o p u le n ce .

T h r o u g h c o n t a c t w ith th e G r e c o -T y r r h e n i a n w o r ld , a t y p e o f to m b a p p e a r e d a n d s p r e a d la te r a m o n g th e C a m p a n ia n s o f C apua

and

th e

L u c a n ia ris o f P a e s tu m ; th e

to m b s

h ad

th e

we

s h a p e o f c a s e s a n d w e r e d e c o r a t e d w ith p a in tin g s f e a tu r in g

s h o u ld n o te c h a r a c t e r is t ic s p e c u lia r to e a c h o f th e r e lig io u s

m o s tly m a rtia l s u b je c ts b u t a ls o h a d r e f e r e n c e s to th e a fte rlife

c e n t e r s t h a t w e m e n t i o n e d e a r l i e r . In C a m p a n i a , f o r i n s t a n c e ,

a n d c o n c e i v a b l y e c h o e s o f P y t h a g o r e a n d o c t r i n e s . It d o e s n o t

and

E tru s c a n

m o d e ls .

But

in

th is

g en eral

o v e rv ie w ,

a t C a p u a , a n im p o r ta n t c o lle c tio n o f O s c a n e p i g r a p h s a t te s ts th a t s a c r e d b u ild in g s c a lle d

iuvilas

(p r o b a b l y a l ta r s o r s m a ll

s h r in e s ) w e r e th e s ite s o f c e r e m o n i e s c e le b r a te d o n c e r ta in d a y s o f fix e d fe s tiv a ls , s o m e t im e s e v e n tra te s

o f fic ia tin g .

Fondo

P a ttu re lli

A lso w ith

ap p ear,

h ow ever,

th a t

th e

p ro b le m

C apua,

th e

s tr a n g e

s to n e

im p o s in g

s h r in e

s ta tu e s

d e a th

in sp ire d

a

M .P ./g .h .

w ith p u b lic m a g is ­

in its

of

p r e o c c u p a t i o n a n d d o c tr in a l r e f le c tio n a m o n g th e S a b e llia n s a n d t h e U m b r i a n s c o m p a r a b l e to t h o s e f o u n d in E t r u r ia .

of

d e p ic tin g

m o t h e r s s e a t e d w i t h c h i l d r e n i n t h e i r a r m s , a n d w i t h a ll i ts t e r r a - c o tt a v o t iv e o b j e c ts , is e v i d e n c e o f a c u l t d e v o te d t o th e

BIBLIOGRAPHY

g o d d e s s o f fe rtility . T h e i n s c r ip t io n o n t h e T a b u la A g n o n e n s is in S a n n io d e s c r i b e s a p r o c e s s i o n a l r i te w ith

s t a t i o n s in

fro n t o f th e n u m e r o u s a lta r s in sid e a s a c r e d e n c lo s u r e th a t w e r e d e d i c a t e d t o C e r e s , F l o r a , a n d o t h e r m i n o r d e i t i e s ; in c e r ta in y e a r s a h o lo c a u s t w a s c e le b r a te d . T h e s h r in e o f th e g o d d e s s M e f i t i s i n t h e A n 's a n t o V a l l e y n e a r M i r a b e l l a E c l a n o in th e h e a r t o f I rp in ia a t t e s t s w h a t w a s p r o b a b ly a c h t h o n i c c u l t . T h e s h r in e w a s r ic h in v o t iv e o b j e c ts a n d m a y h a v e b e e n c o n n e cte d h en ce

th e

w ith m o re

th e

to x ic e m a n a tio n s

g e n e ra l

m e a n in g

of

fro m

th is

th e

w o rd

w ild

s ite ,

mephitis,

" f o u l- s m e ll in g ." A l s o d e d ic a t e d t o M e fitis ( w h o is id e n tif ie d w i t h V e n u s a n d C e r e s ) is a n o t h e r s h r i n e , p o s s i b l y c o n n e c t e d w ith a n o r ig in a l c u lt o f th e w a te r s a n d d is c o v e r e d a t R o s s a n o d i V a g li o i n L u c a n i a . T h i s s h r i n e is i n t e r e s t i n g e s p e c i a l l y f o r its

O scan

in s c rip tio n s

in

th e

G reek

a lp h a b e t,

w h ic h

M.

L e j e u n e h a s s tu d i e d , a s w e ll a s f o r t h e a r c h i t e c h t o n i c s t r u c ­ tu r e s th a t s u r r o u n d a la r g e a lta r. T h e g e n e r a l f e a tu r e o f th e s e Ita lic r e lig io u s c e n t e r s w a s t h e f o r m o f th e s a c r e d e n c l o s u r e w ith its a l ta r s a n d v o t iv e m o n u m e n t s . T r u e t e m p le s in th e G r e e k a n d E t r u s c a n - L a t in s ty le a p p e a r e d l a te a n d in i s o la te d p l a c e s , fo r i n s t a n c e , in P a e s t u m o r in P i e tr a b b o n d a n t e . T h e Ig u v in e T a b le ts, th e lo n g e s t p re -L a tin in s c rip tio n y e t d i s c o v e r e d in I t a l y , b r i n g u s in t h e m s e l v e s a p r o f o u n d a n d

F. von DUHN, Italische Grdlferkunde, 2 vols. (Heidelberg 1923, 1939); vol. 2 with F. Messerschmidt . |. wiiATMOL'GH, The Fou lutations of Roman Italy (London 1937). g . devoto . Tabulae Iguvinae (Rome 1937). e . c . evans . The Cults of the Sabine Territory (New York 1939). |. iieurgo n , Étude sur les inscriptions osques de Capoue dite Iuvilas (Paris 1942). f . vetter , Handbuch der italischen Dialekte (Heidelberg 1953). i. heuroon , Trois études sur le "Ver sacrum" (Brussels 1957). m. g . bruno , "I Sabini e la loro lingua," in Rendiconti dell’lstituto Lombardo di Scienze e Lettere 95 (1961): 501-41; 96 (1962): 413-42 and 565-640. v. pisani. Le lingue dell'ltalia antica oltre il latino (2d ed., Turin 1964). a . i . pfiffig . Religio Iguvina (Vienna 1964). g . radke , Die Götter Altitaliens (Münster 1965). G. devoto , Gli antichi Italici (3d ed., Florence 1967); Scritti minori, vol. 2 (Florence 1967). e . t . salmon , Samnium and the Samnites (Cambridge 1967). v. ciANFARANi, Culture adriatiche d 'Italia (Rome 1970). d . adamf steanu and m . lejeune , II Santuario lucano di Macchia di Rossano dt Vaglio, Memorie delle'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Classe di

scienze morali, ser. 8, 16 (Rome 1971): 37-83; the complementary contributions of m . leieune have been published in the reports of the same academy, 1972, pp. 663-84; 1973, pp. 399-414. |. heurgon , "I culti non greci della Magna Grecia," in Le genti non greche della Magna Grecia (Atti dell'XI Coitvegnodi Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1971) (Naples 1972), 55-75. a . alfoi.di, Die Struktur des voretruskischen Römerstaates (Heidelberg 1974). u. bian ciii, “Gli dei delle stirpi italiche," in Popoli e civiltà dell’ltalia antica 7 (1978): 195-236.

49

ROME

T he B eliefs and R ites of the A pulians, an I ndigenous P eople of S outheastern I taly The Latin form Apuli is derived from, or at least related to, the term "Iapyges" used by the Greeks to designate the indigenous populations of southeastern Italy, i.e., ancient and modern Apulia, including the three groups of the Daunians, the Peucetians, and the Messapians (settled from north to south, respectively, in the present-day provinces of Foggia and Bari and in the Salentine peninsula). For the territory of the Messapians, names of other ethnic groups are also cited, such as the Salentines and the Calabrians— the source of the geographic term Calabria (which, beginning in the Middle Ages, spread to the southwestern extremity of Italy and took on its contemporary meaning); in the Roman period, the region was divided into Apulia in the north and Calabria in the south. All of these peoples, by their ethnolinguistic character, their traditions, and their cultural pro­ ductions, constitute a well-defined group in the populations and cultures of ancient Italy. The language, today called Messapian and documented by a number of inscriptions discovered especially in the southern part of the country, is certainly Indo-European, but, unlike those of the other Italic peoples, it has important connections with the other side of the Adriatic, which in a way confirm the ancient traditions of an Illyrian origin of the Iapyges. On the other hand, their name is related, if not identical, to that of the Iapuzcus (or Iabusques) cited in the Umbrian inscription of the Iguvine Tablets, that is, people inhabiting central Italy and probably the Adriatic coast; it is also connected to the name of the Iapodes or Iapydes of northern Dalmatia— which confirms the original existence of important ethnic relationships be­ tween the two coasts of the Adriatic. The culture and particularly the religion of the pre-Roman Apulians present, insofar as they can be known, a peculiar mixture of indigenous elements, chiefly connected with prehistoric and protohistoric traditions, and Greek elements

Achilles, seated, playing a lyre; on the right, Priam; and on the left Andromache and Hecuba. Stela from Daunia. Photo pr. Silvio Ferri, Pisa.

50

Priam surrounded by Trojan men and women. Stela from Daunia. Photo pr. Silvio Ferri, Pisa.

from the colonies established on the margins of this territory by the eighth century b .c . but preceded by precolonial incursions going back to the Mycenaean age (the role of Taranto seems to have been important). Classical sources transmit the memory of a web of legends elaborated by the Greeks about the colonization of Apulia by the Arcadians, Cretans, Illyrians, etc., and about the eponymous heroes Iapyx, Messapus, Peucetius, and Daunus. Daunus was known not as a foreigner but as an indigenous king and must certainly be connected with a Paleo-Italic mythic source, as is proved by the etymological identity of his name with the Latin name Faunus. There are also legends about the Adri­ atic enterprises of Diomedes and his death in Daunia while he was returning from Troy, and about the founding of cities and sanctuaries, among which those of Athena Ilias at Luceria and of Calchas and Podalirius on Mount Gargano are especially famous. These tales preserve traces of local tradi­ tions, for example, of the curative powers of the waters of the heroon of Podalirius and the oracles granted during the sleep of anyone who slept wrapped in the skin of a sacrificed ewe. Behind the worship of Greek goddesses such as Demeter and Aphrodite, whose names are mentioned along with their special attributes in the Messapian inscriptions, we glimpse indigenous divine figures; to one god, Menzana, identified with Jupiter, these same Messapians, who were reputed as breeders of horses, sacrificed living horses. The funerary domain is known exclusively through ar­

MY T H S

AND

C UL T S

OF

THE

A N C I E N T

V E NE TI

chaeology, which provides very abundant and diverse data. The principal rite is that of burial in stone tumuli (called "specchie") in pits or stone containers, and only later in room-shaped tombs that imitated houses, with rich funerary furnishings which attest to the traditional belief in the survival of the dead as long as their sepulcher lasts. The beautiful anthropomorphic stelae of Daunia, decorated with geometric designs, with customary or ritual scenes, and with representations of mythical episodes and monstrous ani­ mals, are connected with forms diffused in European prehis­ tory and protohistory. Another remarkable expression of conservatism is the custom of burying the dead in inhabited zones— a custom which, even in the historical period, con­ trasts with the advanced character of the great urban centers girded with imposing defensive walls. M.P./j.l.

BIBLIOGRAPHY M. mayer, Apulien vor und während der Hellenisierung (Leipzig and Berlin 1914). i. whatmough , The Foundations of Roman Italy (London 1937). j. BERARD, La colonisation grecque de l'Italie méridionale et de la Sicile dans l'Antiquité (2d ed., Paris 1957), 368ff., 426ff. O. parlanceli, Studi messapici (Milan 1960). G. giannelli. Culti e miti della Magna Grecia (2d ed., Florence 1963).

M yths and C ults of the A ncient V eneti, an I ndo -E uropean P eople of N orthern I taly Among the peoples and cultures of ancient Italy, the Veneti constituted a unit well defined by the territory they occupied (between the Alps and the Adriatic, a territory that still bears their name); by the Indo-European language they spoke, which was quite close to Latin; and by their particular culture, which developed coherently from the end of the Bronze Age to the dawn of the Roman conquest (i.e., from the tenth to the third or second centuries b .c .), all the while preserving a basic protohistorical stamp. Consequently, the Paleo-Venetian world on the one hand had close natural ties to the central European domains of Hallstatt and Slovenia, as is understandable, and on the other hand remained open to all of the cultural influences of neighboring northern Etruria, particularly the Etrurian alphabet. But there were few influ­ ences from Greek culture. Venetian organization still contin­ ued to be tied to pre-urban and proto-urban structures. The major centers, which we know best, were Ateste (modem Este) and Patavium (modern Padua), which along with Vicentia (modern Vincenza) and Verona became "real" cities only considerably later. The port of Adria, near the mouths of the Po and the Adige, was the principal point of contact with Etruscans and Greeks. To the north, Venetian culture reached into the Alpine valleys, where it exerted its influence on the territories inhabited by the Rhaetians, who spoke another language. To the east, it encountered the local cultures of the Carni and the Istrians, with whom the Veneti mixed freely. Celtic expansion into the Alps and northern Italy did not reach the center of the Venetian cultural domain, but merely touched its margins. The Veneti, like other ancient peoples of Italy, had their place in the legendary cycles of origins elaborated by Greek

Deity of the Veneti. Bronze plaque. Este, Museo nazionale atestino. Photo Soprintendenza.

ethnography and mythology in contact with the Italic world. The Veneti were said to have originated in Asia Minor, which they left under the leadership of Antenor. Their legends account for the presence and cult of Diomedes, the preemi­ nent Adriatic hero and the founder of Adria; they are full of elements revealing knowledge of local facts, such as the fame of the Veneti for horse breeding. At the mouth of the Timavo River, white horses were sacrificed to Diomedes, who was supposedly responsible for the origin of the shrines of Argive Hera and Aetolian Artemis; both of the shrines consisted of wooded enclosures that shut in wild animals. Livy (10.2) reports that the main temple in Padua in the fourth century was consecrated to Juno. All signs suggest that this was a 51

ROM E

c la s s ic a l p h e n o m e n o n o f th e tr a n s p o s itio n o r in te r p r e ta tio n

in A b a n o , c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e g o d A p o n u s . A s t h e r e a r e n o

o f a n a tiv e g o d d e s s , p r o b a b ly th e m o s t im p o r ta n t d e ity o f th e

e x t a n t l it e r a r y s o u r c e s , w e c a n s a y little a b o u t th e re lig io n

V e n e ti: s h e p r o t e c te d

w ith r e s p e c t to th e d e a d o r id e a s o f th e a fte rlife . T h e f u n e r a r y

f e r t i li ty , t a m e d

p a ss io n s, a n d

h e a le d

m e n . H e r n a m e , R e i t i a , is k n o w n p r i n c i p a l l y t h r o u g h d e d i ­ c a to r y

in s c r ip tio n s o n

a

s h r in e

in

E s te

and

is,

m o reo v er,

cu s to m s

fit

in to

tr a d itio n s , w ith

th e

g e n e ra l

fram ew o rk

of

p ro to h is to ric

m o r e o r le s s e la b o r a te f u n e r a r y tr a p p in g s ,

fo llo w e d b y d iffe re n t e p ith e ts th a t a r e s e p a r a te ly a t te s te d ,

b u t g e n e r a lly w ith a c lo s e a d h e r e n c e to th e rite o f c r e m a tio n .

s u c h a s S a in a ti. N o te th e a n a lo g y b e tw e e n h e r n a m e a n d th a t

M .P ./g .h .

o f t h e R h a e t i a n p e o p l e . In o t h e r p l a c e s ( i n t h e C a d o r e ) a n d in a d iffe re n t w a y , th e g o d d e s s a ls o a p p e a r e d a s L o u d e ra (i.e ., L ib e r a ).

T h e re

w as

yet

a n o th e r

d e ity

w ith

th re e

fo rr s,

m a s c u l in e (id e n tif ie d w ith A p o llo ) o r f e m in in e .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

T h e c u l t t o o k p l a c e in o u t d o o r s h r i n e s a d o r n e d w i t h v o t i v e g ifts (s t a tu e t t e s , b r o n z e p la te s th a t a r e illu s tra te d o r th a t b e a r in s c r ip tio n s a n d a lp h a b e tic a l s ig n s , v a s e s , o b je c ts fo r w o m ­ e n ' s u s e , e t c . ) , in w h i c h l i b a t i o n s a n d h o l o c a u s t s w e r e c a r r i e d o u t.

M o s t o f th e

e v id e n c e

is a r c h a e o l o g i c a l .

W e know

of

v a r i o u s p l a c e s o f w o r s h i p i n E s t e , o t h e r s in P a d u a , V i n c e n z a , L a g o l e d i C a l a l z o , in t h e R h a e t i a n t e r r i t o r y i n M a g r é , a n d in S a n z e n o in t h e V a lle d i N o n . T h e r e w a s a c u l t o f s u l f u r w a t e r

wHATMOUGH, The Foundations of Roman Italy (London 1937). f . von duhn and F. Messerschmidt , Italische Gräberkunde, 2 (Heidelberg 1939). g . B. Pellegrini and a . L. PROSDOCiMi, La lingua venetica (Padua 1967). M. LEiEUNE, Manuel de la langue vénète (Heidelberg 1974). g . fogolari, "La protostoria delle Venezie," in Popoli e civiltà dell' Italia antica I.

(Rome 1975), 4:61-222, with a detailed bibliography on the religion of the Veneti, pp. 219ff.

L u ca n i, Ve

S

r

T h e I ta lic R ite " S ac r ed S p r in g tim e "

o f th e

:

a c r u m

U rs e n tin i,

e t c .,

and

w hy

th e ir

nam es

evoke

th e

n a m e s o f a n i m a l s . A s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e s e s t o r i e s is o n e t h a t f o c u s e s o n e v e n t s o f a l a t e r p e r i o d in h i s t o r y b u t t h a t a l s o p r e s e n t s l e g e n d a r y f e a t u r e s a n d is b u i l t o n t h e s a m e f o u n ­ d a t io n a s th e e a r l ie r s to r ie s . In th is s to r y , a " p r i n c e p s " o f th e

T h e L a tin e x p r e s s io n

ver sacrum

(s a c re d s p r in g tim e ) w a s u s e d

S a m n ite s n a m e d

b y R o m a n a u t h o r s in a p r e c i s e t e c h n i c a l s e n s e t o d e s i g n a t e

c r a te d

an

bom

I t a li c

d e a lin g

r ite

th a t

w ith

w as

a tte s te d

th e o r ig in s a n d

sev eral

h isto ry

tim e s

by

so u rce s

o f p e o p le s c la s sifie d

S t h e n n i u s M e t t i u s is s a i d

to A p o llo th e

ver sacrum

to h a v e c o n s e ­

o f a ll t h o s e w h o w o u l d b e

in t h e f o llo w in g y e a r , in a n a t t e m p t to a v e r t a p la g u e .

B u t th e

p la g u e

rag ed

a g a in

tw e n ty

y e a r s la te r; th e o r a c le

t o d a y in th e S a b e llia n -U m b r ia n lin g u is tic b r a n c h . A s f a r b a c k

m a d e it c l e a r t h a t n o h u m a n s a c r i f i c e h a d t a k e n p l a c e a n d

a s th e tim e o f th e v e r y first s e ttle m e n ts b y p e o p le k n o w n a s

t h e r e f o r e im p o s e d e m i g r a t i o n o n a ll th e y o u n g m e n b o m th a t

t h e A b o r i g i n e s ( i . e . , t h e S a b i n e s ) i n c e n t r a l I t a l y in t h e R ie t i b a sin

and

L a tiu m ,

th e

th e re

tim e o f th e ir s o u th w a r d w as a cu sto m

e x p a n s io n

o f c o n s e c r a tin g

to w a rd

to a g o d

th e

e n t i r e g e n e r a t i o n b o m in a g i v e n y e a r a f t e r w a r s , f a m i n e s , o r

y e a r . T h e e x p a t r i a t e s c l u s t e r e d in S i la ( in m o d e r n C a l a b r i a ) , w h ic h t h e y s u b s e q u e n t l y le ft t o c o m e to t h e a id o f M e s s in a . T h e r e t h e y w e r e w e l c o m e d a n d f i n a ll y s e t t l e d . T h e y r e c e i v e d th e ir n a m e ,

Mamertini,

fro m th e g o d M a m e rs (M a rs ) ( F e s tu s ,

e v e n o v e r p o p u la tio n . Y o u n g m e n o ld e n o u g h to b e a r a r m s

p . 1 5 0 L .) a c c o r d in g to th e h is to ria n A lfiu s w h o h a d w ritte n

w e r e c o m p e lle d to le a v e th e ir c o u n tr y a n d f o u n d " c o l o n i e s "

an

in n e w l a n d s ( D i o n y s i u s o f H a l i c a r n a s s u s 1 . 1 6 ; V a r r o , q u o t e d

v e r s i o n o f th e s e tt le m e n t in S icily o f C a m p a n ia n m e r c e n a r ie s

b y P lin y th e E ld e r , had

re a ch e d

Naturalis Historia 3 . 1 0 9 ) .

th e

s ite

S acran i "b e c a u s e

th e y

(F e s tu s , event

pp.

is

4 2 4 -2 5

c o n n e c te d

of

R om e,

w ere

w e re b o rn

L .;

Aen.

S e rv iu s

w ith

th e

of a

T h e S a b in e s , w h o

a c c o rd in g ly sa cre d 7 .7 9 6 ) .

le g e n d a ry

c a lle d

s p rin g tim e " Y et

a n o th e r

d ia sp o ra

of

S a b i n e s , o n e t h a t s h o w e d a ll t h e e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s o f t h e

sacrum: m ade year.

t o s a c r i f i c e a ll t h e v ic to ry

w as

l iv in g c r e a t u r e s b o r n w on,

d iffe re n t w a y : th e c h ild re n

th e

vow

of m en

w as

w e re e x e m p t.

fo u n d ed

th e

M a m e rtin e

s ta te

in

th e

i d e a liz e d

t h ird

c e n tu ry .

S i g n ific a n tly , u n d e r G r e e k in f lu e n c e A p o llo to o k th e p l a c e o f M a rs a s th e g o d

w ho

re c e iv e d

th e v o w s .

M a rs, h o w e v e r,

r e m a in e d th e e p o n y m o u s g o d a n d g u a rd ia n o f th e M a m e rt i n e s , a n d h i s i m a g e a p p e a r e d o n a ll t h e i r c o i n s . A t t h i s t i m e ,

ver

a s a r e s u lt o f th e d iffu s io n o f th e m a rtia l tr a d itio n s o f th e

d u rin g o n e

f u l f il l e d

w ho

P u n ic w a r s . T h is is s u r e ly a n

th e

d u rin g a lo n g w a r a g a in s t th e U m b ria n s , a v o w w a s

O n ce

a c c o u n t o f th e

in

a

W hen a

S a b e llia n s , th e id e a o f th e

ver sacrum

a s th e u ltim a te re m e d y

fo r p u b lic c a la m itie s m u s t h a v e b e c o m e g e n e r a liz e d . E v e n R o m e , t h r e a t e n e d b y H a n n i b a l , r e s o r t e d t o t h e r i t e in 2 1 7 b.c . a f te r th e b a ttle o f L a k e T r a s im e n e : a v o w w a s m a d e to J u p ite r

f a m i n e s t r u c k , it w a s t h o u g h t n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e h u m a n s ,

th a t in v o lv e d

t o o , in

on

c a r r y i n g o u t t h e v o w i n t h e y e a r s 1 9 5 a n d 1 9 4 b. c ., b e c a u s e o f

r e a c h in g a d u lt h o o d w e r e s e n t o f f, g u i d e d b y a b u ll, to fo u n d

v a r io u s q u ib b le s a n d r e s tr ic tio n s th e y s a c rific e d o n ly s o m e o f

th e v o w . T h e y

a c o lo n y . W h e n

w e re co n se cra te d

th e y a rriv e d

in

to

th e O s c a n

M a rs, a n d c o u n try

(C a m ­

o n ly a n im a ls .

But w hen

it c a m e

to a c tu a lly

th e a n im a ls (L iv y 2 2 .9 , 2 3 .4 4 , 2 4 .4 4 ) . W e c a n fu r th e r s p e c u la te

p a n i a ) , t h e b u ll s u d d e n l y c u r l e d u p o n t h e g r o u n d a s if h e

l o g ic a ll y t h a t t h e t r a d i t i o n m u s t h a v e s t a y e d a l i v e p a r t i c u l a r l y

had

a m o n g th e S a b e llia n s, a s a t te s te d b y t h e

fo u n d

h is p la c e . T h e n e w c o m e r s s to p p e d , c h a s e d

th e

ver sacrum v o w e d

b y th e

l o c a l i n h a b i t a n t s a w a y , s e t t l e d , a n d s a c r i f i c e d t h e b u ll t o t h e

It a li c i n s u r g e n t s a t t h e t i m e o f t h e S o c i a l W a r , w h i c h b r o k e o u t

god

e a r l y in t h e f i r s t c e n t u r y b.c . ( S i s e n n a f r a g . 9 9 , 1 0 2 P ) .

M ars.

Thus

w ere

bom

th e

S a m n ite

p e o p le

(S tra b o w ood­

In th e h i s t o r y o f th is s tr a n g e m a n if e s ta tio n o f Ita lic re lig i­

w h o w a s a lso c o n s e c ra te d to M a rs , e m ig ra te d

o s ity , w e h a v e to d is tin g u is h th re e a s p e c ts o r " m o m e n t s " :

to P ic e n u m w h e r e th e y fo u n d e d th e P ice n i ( F e s tu s , p . 2 3 5 L .;

fir s t, t h e p o s s ib le e x i s t e n c e o f a p r im itiv e r itu a l in s t it u ti o n ;

5 .4 .1 2 ) . p eck er

S im ila rly ,

(picus),

P lin y th e E ld e r , T h e re

are

th e

HN

S a b in e s ,

g u id e d

by

a

green

s e c o n d , its fo r m a l e s ta b l is h m e n t a n d its le g e n d a r y d e f in itio n

3 .1 1 0 ) .

p ro b a b ly

m any

o th e r

s to rie s

of

a

m y th ic a l

as

an

e tio lo g ic a l s a g a

o f o r ig in s ; a n d

th ir d ,

i ts

p e re n n ia l

c h a r a c t e r s im ila r to t h e s e , s to r ie s th a t d e a l w ith th e o r ig in s o f

n a t u r e o r its r e c u r r e n c e in th e c o u r s e o f h is to r ic a l tim e . O n

v a r i o u s I t a li c p e o p l e a n d e x p l a i n t h e m i g r a t i o n o f t h e H i r p i n i ,

t h e f i r s t p o i n t , it i s d i f f i c u l t t o s a y a n y t h i n g b e y o n d f o r m i n g

52

THE

I T AL I C

RITE

OF

THE

" S A C R E D

S P R I N G T I M E '

Poussin, Spring. Paris, Musée du Louvre. Photo Giraudon.

hypotheses. The basic themes of the legend, i.e., the migra­ tion of armed men, the proliferation of ethnic groups, the expiatory and purificatory character of the vow, the conse­ cration only of living creatures, resulting in blood sacrifices (with exile substituting for slaughter in the case of humans), and the presence and the ambiguously divine meaning of an animal guide who also played an eponymous role for the new group— all of these themes together seem to correspond to the living conditions and mentality of a primitive society of herdsmen characterized by great mobility and aggressive­ ness and by theriomorphic conceptions of the divine that recalled totemism. This type of society has numerous ele­ ments that can be compared with those of other cultures. There are, moreover, definite signs of a spread of the pastoral economy to the more interior populations of the Italian peninsula during the Bronze Age. Conceivably the move­ ments of the populations of the high Apennine valleys brought with them a wide range of beliefs and specific rites based partly on the idea of a necessity or a sacred vocation for migration, and in part on the attraction of more abundant grazing lands for the animals. For the continued growth of these populations forced them to look for new resources in order to survive, and during their greatest expansion, the SabellianUmbrian people occupied increasingly larger and richer areas. But it is evident that the traditions tended to crystallize into myths in the course of the Italic diaspora, probably in cultural environments that had come under Greek influence. (In Campania the Samnites came into contact with the Greeks by the fifth century b .c .) The structure of the myth has characteristic and constant features, with three basic

elements: (1) the consecration to the deity (notably to Mars, the god of the Sabellians) of all that was produced in a given year (in spring, during the month of Mars— March), because of a vow of purification or expiation after a scourge such as a war or a plague; (2) a migration for colonization, by young men old enough to bear arms; (3) the role of an animal guide (usually consecrated to Mars). Once established, the pattern was imposed retrospectively on legendary tales about ori­ gins, which were nourished by many additional facts re­ membered about real events. At the same time, the myth became the religious norm for rites performed later, in historically documented times. We may conclude that this is one of the most important examples of a dialectic relation­ ship uniting ritual and myth. The violent political and military events that shook Italy during the fourth and third centuries b .c . (the enormous spread of the conquering Sabellians as far as Apulia and Sicily; the invasions of the Gauls in the north; the enterprises of Greek chiefs from Alexander of Epirus to Pyrrhus; and the progressive assertion of the hegemony of Rome and the struggles against Carthage, which culminated dramatically with Hannibal's Italian expedition) undoubtedly provided many occasions to resort to this extreme and venerable remedy, the Italic rite of the ver sacrum. The evidence, as we have noted, lies in the semilegendary episode of the Mamer­ tini and in the attenuated, peculiar version of the same rite that the Romans adopted after the shock of Hannibal's bold advances. But the substitution of Apollo (in the first instance) and Jupiter (in the second) for Mars, and the partial nature of the sacrifice in the ver sacrum celebrated in Rome, amply 53

ROME

T he L atins and the O rigins of R oman R eligion The Latins ( Latini) were the inhabitants of a territory which once stretched to the south of the low er course of the Tiber up to the Pontine plain (Pomptinus ager: Livy 6.5 .2 ). The Latium antiquum or vetus was bounded on the northw est by the Tiber and by the land of the Etruscans; on the northeast it was contiguous with the Sabine territory. It formed a vast expanse bordered on the east by the Alban range, from m ounts Palombara, Tivoli (Tibur), Palestrina (Praeneste), and Cori (Cora), to Terracina (Anxur) and Circeo (Circeii); and was bordered on the w est by the coast of the Tyrrhenian Sea. At the heart of this region are the hills that served as habitats, such as Alba Longa, which tradition places in the middle of the populi Latini, or M onte C avo (Mons Albanus), which was the seat of a federal cult of Jupiter Latiaris. To this Latium vetus, which took form in protohistory by the beginning of the first millennium b .c . (during the transi­ tion betw een the Bronze Age and the Iron A ge), was later added a Latium Adjectum or novum m ade up of the territory conquered by the Romans in the historic period (starting in the sixth century b .c .), which included the Volscian, Aequi, Hernican, and Auruncan territories (see Pliny the Elder, Naturalis Historia 3 .6 8 - 70). These Latins, w hom the tradition refers to as the populi Latini ("L atin n ation") or by the collective nam e of nomen Latinum, settled on the hills in autonom ous groups m ore or less tied to one another, vicatim ("b y villages"). These terri­ torial associations were basically founded on religious grounds, creating a feeling of com m unity that was m ani­ fested later (in the historical epoch) by the existence of federations. These united the majority of the Latins around com m on cults, for instance, around the shrine of Juppiter Latiaris on Mons Albanus, or around the shrine of Diana Aricia in the Nemus Dianae ("th e sacred grove of D iana"). O ther federal cults played an im portant role in history. M ost notable is the recently excavated city of Lavinium. Its necrop­ olis dates back to the tenth century b.c ., with rem ains of sixth-century ram parts, a federal cult which in historic times is attested by the discovery of thirteen archaic altars and of a heroon in m em ory of A eneas, located near a tomb from the seventh century b.c According to the latest archaeological discoveries, the oldest inhabitants of Latium devoted them selves principally to raising livestock and additionally to exploiting natural resources (salt, fruit, and gam e). The m ore the woodlands were cleared and the m arshlands dried up, the m ore the Latins took to farming and to the making of pottery and iron tools. Did these Latins, w hose language belonged to the IndoEuropean family, drive back or subdue "autochthonous" populations? Recently it was com m on to contrast the IndoEuropean invaders, w ho practiced the ritual of crem ation, to the natives, w ho w ere accustom ed to the ritual of inhum ation.2 This schem a is not consistent with the facts. C ontrary to the hypotheses of the previous theory, archae­ ology has at least show n that the ritual of crem ation (at the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age) has alm ost always preceded the ritual of inhumation (in the late Iron Age: eighth through seventh centuries), though these practices did not necessarily take on any ethnic significance.3 The advances m ade by the com m unity of the Latins can be

.1

Mars from Todi. Museo etrusco gregoriano. Rome, Vatican Museum. Museum photo. dem onstrates that the requirem ents of a particular time could impose a significant deviation from the model of the myth. Evidently, since times and circum stances had changed, it had becom e som ething of an anachronism to express in concrete terms a rite so ancient and so shrouded in legend— assum ing that it had ever actually existed. M .P./g.h.

BIBLIOGRAPHY w. Eisenhut, Ver sacrum, in Pauly/Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie, vol. 15 A (1955), col. 917. |. HEURGON, Trois études sur le "ver sacrum" (Brussels 1957).

54

G R E C O - I T A L I C

T R A D I T I O N S

v e r ifie d b y th e g r o w in g w e a lt h a n d n u m b e r o f t h e ir c e n t e r s ,

AND

L E G E N D S

SUMMARY BIBLIOGRAPHY

w h ic h m u ltip lie d t h r o u g h o u t th e e i g h t h a n d s e v e n t h c e n t u ­ rie s: S a tr ic u m , A n tiu m (A n z io ) , A r d e a , L a v in iu m (P r a tic a d i M a r e ), P o lito riu m (p o s s ib ly D e c im a ), F ic a n a , P r a e n e s t e (P a l­ e s t r i n a ) , a n d o f c o u r s e R o m e . T h e f i r s t d o c u m e n t in t h e L a t i n l a n g u a g e i s t h e i n s c r i p t i o n o n t h e g o l d e n f i b u la o f P r a e n e s t e

manias mcd fhefhaked numasioi ( in Manius me fecit Numerio, " M a r i u s m a d e m e ( o r

(e n d o f th e s e v e n th c e n tu r y ): c la s s ic a l L a tin :

(Ann Arbor 1964). |. i i i i k iri

A p o llo a n d L a to n a (h is m o th e r ) ,

H e rc u le s a n d D ia n a , a n d M e r c u r y a n d N e p tu n e in to h e t e r ­ o g e n e o u s p a irs. a t th e h a n d s o f H a n n ib a l, p ro v o k e d le c tis te rn iu m

h isto ry ,

th e

ad Georg.

1 .1 2 ) ; th e a s s o c i a ti o n

D i a n a ( A r t e m i s ) is b a s e d

on

o f A p o llo

th e g e n e a l o g i c a l tie s th a t

l in k b r o t h e r a n d s i s t e r . T h e p a t t e r n o f m y t h o l o g i c a l c o u p l i n g w a s u s e d in R o m e t o a c c l i m a t i z e t h e i d e a o f a s s o c i a t i o n . T h i s s t a t e m e n t is v a l i d n o t

E v e n m o re d ra m a tic c ir c u m s ta n c e s , th e d is a s te rs s u ffe re d seco n d

and

th e c e le b r a tio n o f th e

in 2 1 7 u . c . F o r t h e

R om ans

o ffered

d e i t i e s , s ix g o d s a n d

s a crificia l

first tim e in m e a ls

to

s ix g o d d e s s e s , g r o u p e d

a

th e ir

dozen

in to c o u p le s

o n ly fo r th e d iv in e p a irs w h o a r e u n k n o w n

to th e p lo ts o f

G r e e k m y t h o l o g y ( V u l c a n a n d V e s t a ; M e r c u r y a n d C e r e s ) ; it a ls o a p p lie s to th e c a s e s th a t a t first g la n c e s e e m m o st

th o ro u g h ly

m ark ed

by

H e lle n is m .

to b e th e

It s e e m s

th a t th e

litu rg ic a l p r e s e n t a t io n o f th e le c t is t e r n iu m o f th e tw e l v e g o d s

a c c o r d i n g t o t h e H e l l e n i c p a t t e r n , in t h e f o l l o w i n g o r d e r : 45

m a d e it p o s s i b l e t o s h e d n e w

Ju p ite r a n d J u n o ; N e p tu n e a n d

a n d J u n o h a d b e e n k in g a n d q u e e n o f th e c ity s in c e t h e y to o k

M in e rv a ; M a rs a n d

V en u s;

t h e ir p l a c e s s id e b y s id e in th e C a p ito lin e t e m p le , to w a r d th e

A p o llo a n d D ia n a ; V u lca n a n d V e s ta ; M e r c u r y a n d C e r e s . Though

th is

cerem o n y

w as

c e le b ra te d

in

R o m e 46 o n l y

o n c e , it w a s t h e s o u r c e o f t h e i d e a o f c o n s t i t u t i n g a n o f f ic i a l c irc le o f tw e lv e p rin c ip a l d e itie s . T h e s e

lig h t o n a n o ld tr u th . J u p i te r

di consentes47 e v e n t u ­

e n d o f t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y b .c . As

fo r M a rs a n d

c o u p le

in

th e

V en u s,

s tric t s e n s e

in

Rom e

o f th e

th e y

term .

d id

M ars

n o t fo rm w as

th e

a

o ld

a lly h a d t h e ir o w n s ta t u e s m a d e o f g ild e d b r o n z e ; t h e s e w e r e

w a rrio r g o d

p la ce d , e a c h

n ic h e , in s id e th e P o r tic o th a t w a s

a p p e a r e d m o r e a n d m o r e a s th e tu te la r y p o w e r o f th e n a tio n

b u il t a t t h e f a r w e s t e r n e n d o f t h e F o r u m a t t h e f o o t o f t h e

o f th e d e s c e n d a n ts o f A e n e a s . T h e G re e k p re c e d e n t s e e m s

in i ts o w n

w h o p r e s id e d o v e r R o m a n a r m s , w h ile V e n u s

s im p ly to h a v e s u g g e s te d to th e R o m a n s th e id e a o f a s s o c i ­

C a p i t o l . 46 W h at can

t h e s e d i f f e r e n t g r o u p i n g s te ll u s ? 44 If w e c o n ­

a t i n g t h e t w o e s s e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r s in t h e i r h i s t o r y : A e n e a s ,

s id e r th e tw o o ld e s t tria d s , w e a r e s tr u c k b y t w o f a c ts . F irs t,

th e fo u n d e r o f th e n a tio n , a n d R o m u lu s , th e fo u n d e r o f th e

Ju p ite r r e m a in e d

th e k e y s to n e o f b o th

C a p ito lin e

He

c i t y . 52 A n o t h e r p r o b l e m c o n c e r n s t h e s e l e c t i v e l is t o f t h e d o z e n

tria d .

w as

h a rd ly

th e a r c h a ic a n d

to u ch ed

by

th e

w ave

th e of

a s s im ila tio n , e x c e p t to th e e x t e n t th a t h is a s s o c ia te d u r in g th e

d e itie s o f th e s e c o n d

s e c o n d l e c tis te r n iu m w a s J u n o , w h o w a s a l r e a d y o n e o f h is

a r e m i s s i n g ? F i r s t t h e r e is H e r c u l e s , w h o h a d b e e n o n e o f t h e

C a p ito lin e c o n s o r ts . S e c o n d , o n ly o n e g o d b o r e a L a tin n a m e

s ix

th a t

great

d id

(w h ich

not

y ie ld

is c o n n e c t e d

to

any

w ith

s y n c r e tis t

Quirites,

o p e ra tio n :

“ c itiz e n s ").

Q u ir in u s

He

h as an

O n t h e l is t o f t h e f i r s t l e c t i s t e r n i u m , h a l f t h e n a m e s a r e o f

74

G reek

o r ig in

(A p o llo ,

L a to n a ,

H e rcu le s),

le c tis te r n iu m . W h a t a b o u t th o s e w h o

w o rs h ip e d

in s ig h t,

d u rin g

G eo rg es

th e

D u m é z il

first le c t is t e r n iu m . has

r e c a lle d

th e

W ith

case

of

d e itie s w h o h a d b e e n " d e m o t e d " a f te r m ilita ry c a ta s tr o p h e s : " e x c e p t fo r th e th r e e g r e a t C a p ito lin e d iv in itie s , th e c e r e m o ­

U m b r i a n h o m o l o g u e b u t n o G r e e k e q u i v a l e n t . 50 p u re ly

d e itie s

and

th e

n ie s

a fte r T ra s im e n o

do

not

honor by

d iv in itie s in v o k e d a f te r T re b b ia ; th e n e w

n am e

any

of

th e

d i s a s te r h a s lo w -

R O M A N

e re d th e m

G O D S

O n e o t h e r c o n s e q u e n c e re s u lte d . T h e s e in n o v a tio n s in d i­

in r a n k , a s if t h e y h a d d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e i r i n d i f ­

f e r e n c e o r t h e i r i n a d e q u a c y . A n a p p e a l is n o w m a d e t o o t h e r

r e c tly s ta m p e d a s a r c h a ic th e d e itie s w h o w e r e r e s is ta n t to

d iv in itie s , to M e n s r a t h e r th a n

s y n c r e tis t a s s im ila tio n s .

to F o rtu n a , to M a rs ra th e r

T hey

d id

n ot d isa p p e a r

fro m

th e

th a n to G e n iu s , to V e n u s r a th e r th a n to Ju v e n ta s . H e rc u le s '

litu rg y , th a n k s to R o m a n c o n s e r v a t is m . B u t m a n y w e r e s o o n

e lim in a tio n

to

its e lf

is

p e rh a p s

an

e x p re ssio n

of

th is

sam e

b ecom e

" f o s s il i z e d ,"

f o llo w in g

th e

e x a m p le

o f th e

m o v e m e n t , n o t s o m u c h a d e m o t i o n a s a c e rtifie d r e p o r t o f

S a cro ru m

h is i n c a p a c i t y t o a d j u s t to th e c i r c u m s t a n c e s /'”

k in g s h ip c o lla p s e d h a d b e e n p e r p e tu a te d fo r n o r e a s o n o th e r

B e s id e s

lim itin g

th e

s e le c tio n

to

th e

tw e lv e

p riv ile g e d

( " t h e k in g o f th e s a c r if ic e s " ), w h o w h e n

R ex

p o litic a l

th a n to a v o id d o in g a d is s e rv ic e to th e g o d s .” F irs t w a s Q u ir in u s , w h o m

g o d s , t h e l e c t i s t e r n i u m h a d e v e n g r e a t e r s i g n i f i c a n c e . A ll t h e

t io n

w o r ld a s in t h e L a tin w o r l d . T h e y w e r e w o r t h y to b e h o n o r e d

C a p ito lin e tria d . A n o th e r w a s J a n u s , th e g o d o f b e g in n in g s ,

w ith

th e

zeal a p p ro p ria te

to

th e

i m p o r t a n t t o a ll t h e p e o p l e , m e n

ritus graecus.

T hey

and

in a ll t h e ir

w om en,

w ere

th e

o f th e c ity god

had

th e e c o n o m i c a n d s o c ia l e v o l u ­

c h o s e n d e i t i e s h e n c e f o r t h h a d a r i g h t t o t h e c i t y in t h e G r e e k

a lre a d y

o f tr a n s itio n s ,

e lim in a te d

w ho

p la y e d

o n ly b e c a u s e o f th e in itia tiv e ta k e n

a fflic tio n s . L iv y ( 2 6 .9 .7 ) d e s c r ib e s th e d r a m a t ic s u p p lic a tio n

w a s S ilv a n u s , th e s y lv a n g o d

t h a t t o o k p l a c e in 2 1 1

A n o th e r w a s A n n a

. w hen

R o m e w a s a t th e m e rc y o f

tim e o f th e

s p e c ific

ro le

in

th e

R o m a n litu rg y . A n o th e r w a s G e n iu s , w h o e n jo y e d a re v iv a l

t e m p le s , w h o p r a y e d to th e g o d s to d e liv e r th e m f ro m th e ir b .c

a t th e

a

b y A u g u s tu s .

w h o w a s re la te d

P e re n n a , w h o su rv iv e d

A n o th e r

to F a u n u s .

b e c a u s e o f th e

H a n n i b a l : " T h e w a i l i n g o f w o m e n w a s h e a r d n o t o n l y in p r i v a t e

fe s tiv a l th a t m a r k e d th e p a s s a g e f ro m th e o ld y e a r to th e n e w

h o u s e s , b u t e v e r y w h e r e m a t r o n s c a m e t o lie d o w n a c r o s s p u b li c

y e a r . F in a lly th e r e w e r e th e P e n a te s , th e g o d s w h o w a tc h e d

w a y s ; th e y ra n a r o u n d th e s h r in e s , s w e p t th e a lta r s w ith th e ir

o v e r s u p p lie s , a n d th e L a r e s , th e g o d s w h o p r o te c te d c u lti­

l o o s e n e d h a i r , fe ll t o t h e i r k n e e s , r a i s e d t h e i r h a n d s ( supinas

v a te d

manus)

h e a r th o f th e R o m a n fa m ily .

to th e g o d o f h e a v e n , a n d p r a y e d to th e m to w re s t th e

m o t h e r s a n d t h e i r l ittle c h i l d r e n f r o m v i o l e n c e / '

la n d

and

w ho

w e re

p a rtic u la rly

w o r s h ip e d

at

th e

E a c h o f th e s e g o d s c o r r e s p o n d s to a n o r ig in a l a s p e c t o f th e

c ity o f R o m e fro m th e h a n d s o f t h e e n e m y a n d to s a v e th e R o m a n

d iv in e

r e p r e s e n ta tio n

o f th e

R om an s.

T hey

b e lo n g

to

th e

c a t e g o r y o f g o d s t h a t a r e " d i f f i c u l t to p r o n o u n c e in G r e e k ," to b o r r o w

Latona and Apollo under the palm tree of Delos. Amphora. Paris, Musée du Louvre. Photo Giraudon.

( 2 .5 0 .3 ).

an

e x p re ssio n

W itn e s s

th e

fro m

te rm

D io n y s iu s o f H a lic a r n a s s u s

" L a r e s ,"

w h ic h

fo r

la ck

of an

a p p r o p r ia te te rm w a s im p ro p e rly tr a n s la te d b y th e G re e k s a s

heroes

(fo r e x a m p le ,

in D i o n .

H a l. 4 .1 4 .3 ) ,

w h e re a s R o m e,

r e c o g n iz in g o n ly g o d s a n d m e n , w a s u n a w a r e o f th e in te r ­ m e d ia te b e in g , th e h e r o .” C o n s e q u e n tly , w h a t h a d b e e n c h a lle n g e d b y th e in n o v a ­ t i o n s o f t h e e n d o f t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y b .c . w a s t h e i r r e d u c i b l e o r ig in a lity o f th e R o m a n p a n th e o n . S o m e d e itie s w e r e r e le ­ g a te d to th e s h a d o w s . O th e r s lo s t th e ir o n o m a s t i c p r iv ile g e a n d w e r e h e n c e fo rth tra n s la ta b le in to a " f o r e i g n " la n g u a g e . If t h e i r r a n g e o f i n f l u e n c e s t o o d

to g a i n b y it, t h e ir id e n t i ty

w a s , o n th e o th e r h a n d , e x p o s e d to s y n c r e tis t o v e r la y s . O n e m e re ly

has

to

re a d

Fasti

O v i d 's

to

get

g r o u n d c o v e r e d in t h e f i r s t c e n t u r y a .u end

of

th e

th ird

a

.56

m e a su re

of

th e

In t h i s s e n s e , t h e

b .c . c o r r e s p o n d s

c e n tu ry

to

a

d e c is iv e

t u r n i n g p o i n t in t h e r e l i g i o u s h i s t o r y o f R o m e . T h e f o l l o w i n g is a s u m m a r y o f t h e d i f f e r e n t g r o u p i n g s o f d e itie s

in

R om e.

ro m an

ty p e ;

ita lic s .

I. T h e

C a p ito lin e

The

g ro u p in g s

g ro u p in g s

a rc h a ic

tr ia d :

of

of a

H a l.

Ju p ite r -J u n o -M in e r v a

6 .1 7 .2 ) .

A p o llo -L a to n a ,

IV . T h e

H e r c u le s -D ia n a ,

b. c .: J u p i t e r - J u n o ,

217

A p o llo -D ia n a , 2 2 .1 0 .9 ) .

n a tu re

fa b rica tio n (se e

first le c tis te r n iu m

L i v y 5 . 1 3 . 4 ) . V. T h e l e c t i s t e r n i u m of

r itu a l

lite r a r y

tria d : J u p i te r - M a r s -Q u ir i n u s .

a re

in

a re

in

II. T h e

L iv y

1 .3 8 .7 ;

I II. T h e t r i a d C e r e s - L i b e r - L i b e r a ( i n 4 9 3 b. c .; s e e

1 .5 5 .1 - 6 ) . D io n .

th e

The

l is t

M e rc u ry -N e p tu n e

of

(se e

o f th e tw e lv e g r e a t g o d s

N e p tu n e -M in e rv a ,

V u lca n -V e sta ,

V I.

b .c .:

of 399

M e rc u ry -C e re s tw e lv e

M a rs -V e n u s , (s e e

a g r ic u ltu ra l

L iv y d e itie s :

Juppiter-Tellus, Sol-Luna, Ceres-Liber, Robigus-Flora, MinetvaVenus, Lympha-Bonus Eventus ( s e e V a r r o De Re Rustica 1 .1 .4 - 7 ). V irg il

V II.

The

( Georgies

lis t

of

1 .5 - 2 5 ),

tw e lv e

d e itie s

as

C aesar

b e in g

p ro p o se d

a rra n g e d as

by a

Sol-Luna ( = clarissima mundi lumina), Liber-Ceres, Fauni-Dryads, Neptune, Aristaeus ( = cultor nemorum), PanMinerva, Triptolemus ( = unci puer monstrator aratri), Sihmnus, a n d a t v e r s e 2 5 : Caesar. V I I I . T h e lis t o f t w e n t y Di Selecti o f V a r r o ( c f . A u g u s t i n e De civitate Dei 7 . 2 ) : Janus, hppiter, Saturn, Genius, Mercury, Apollo, Mars, Vulcan, Neptune, Sol, Orcus, Liber pater, Tellus, Ceres, luno, Luna, Diana, Minerva, Venus, Vesta. th irte e n th :

R .S ./t .l .f .

75

ROM E

NOTES

gods and goddesses who protect the people and the city of Carthage 23. The reference on the inscription of the shield of the Capitol,

The abridged references refer to bibliographic collections. See the articles "Roman Religion" above, and "The Religion of the Roman Republic" below. 1. Text cited by G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque (2d ed., 1974), 36. 2. The book Roman Dynamism (1947) by H. Wagenvoort is the translation by H. J. Rose of the book published originally in the Netherlands under the title Imperium: Studien over het manabegriy in zede en taal der Romeinen (1941). Note that the Dutch title makes explicit reference to the idea of mana. 3. G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., pp. 36-48. 4. It was only from the Augustan Age that the poets had occasionally used—by metonymy—numina in place of dei; but the older usage was not lost, as is attested by the Virgilian expression quo numine laeso (Aeneid 1, 8), which means "which will (of Juno) having been violated": cf. the exegesis of Th. Birt, Zu Vergil Aeneis I, 8: quo numine laeso, B PhW, 38 (1918): cols. 212-16 (ibid., 46-47). 5. H. Wagenvoort, Wesenszüge altrömischer Religion, in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, 1, 2, pp. 352ff. 6. L. Accii tragoediarum fragmenta, ed. Q. Franchella (Bologna 1968), § 596 ( = 2d ed. Ribbeck, Scaenicae Romanorum poesis fragmenta, § 646 = H. Warmington, ed.. Remains of Old Latin, 2:546, § 650). 7. Cf. Livy, 8.9.6. 8. The formula D(is) M(anibus) became usual on the epitaphs. It is followed by either the genitive or the dative of the form designating the deceased. 9. On this problem, see Le culte des soinvrains dans l'Empire romain . . . Entretiens préparés et présidés par W. den Boer (Geneva 1973), as well as the review by J. Béranger, Gnomon 48 (1976): 379-84. What are we to think of the deus of the first Bucolic of Virgil—a title which a shepherd gives to his benefactor Octavian? The shepherd promises to worship his god. The religious aspect is thus revealed here more than in the fervent eulogy of literary inspiration which is addressed by Lucretius (5.8) to Epicurus: "deus ille fuit, deus, inclute Memmi." 10. Tacitus, Ann. 15.74.3 (example cited by J. Béranger, /./., 383). 11. Pliny, Natural History (N.H .) 12.3: Haec (sc. arboreset silvae) fuere numinum templa priscoque ritu simplicia rura etiam nunc deo praecellentem arborem dicant. Nec magis auro fulgentia atque ebore simulacra quam lucos et in iis silentia adoramus. 12. Varro cited by Augustine, City ofG od (C.D.) 4.31.

13. Some have wanted to explain the absence of anthropomor­ phism by a "technical incapacity" of the Romans. This hypothesis does not stand up well to recent conclusions of archeology which have found figurines in the oldest tombs of Latium (these testify at least to the ability to represent the human figure); cf. E. Gjerstad, Early Rome. 4, 2 (Lund 1966), 579-81. See the observations of P. Boyancé, REA, 57 (1955): 66-67, and of G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque. 2d ed., pp. 44ff. 14. Cf. Livy 5.32.6. 15. Cf. Festus, p. 354, 28 L. 16. The ancient etymology which had explained the name "Fau­ nus" by favere (Servius ad Georg. 1.10) has been contested by the moderns, but perhaps we may return to it: cf. Latte, R.R.G., 83, n. 3. In that case, one must understand the expression "Faunus" ("the propitious god") in the same way as "Di Manes," as a euphemism of propitiatory value. 17. Cf. G. Wissowa, Ruk2, 216 (with indications of ancient sources); G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., p. 355. 18. Virgil Georgies 3.1 and 294. 19. Cf. G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., pp. 385-87: The Pales of the Parilia is concerned with small livestock, while the two Pales of 7 July are concerned with sheep and cows. 20. Varro, cited by Servius ad Georg. 3.1. 21. Wissowa (Rule2, 38, n. 1) has commented on the principal passages: Actes des Arvales (CIL. 6, 2099 2, 1, 3; 2104, 2; 2107, 9); Cato De agricultura 139, etc. 22. As G. Dumézil notes (La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., p. 59, n. 2), the case of Macrobius, Saturnalia 3.9.7, is different: Si deus, si dea est cui populus civitasque Carthaginiensis est in tutela (in the formula of the evocatio) corresponds to a known Latinism: "every one of the 76

noted also by Servius (ad Aen. 2.351: Genio Romae, sive mas sive femina), calls on an analogous commentary. To the extent to which "Genius" can only be a masculine, the siiv mas siiv femina cannot apply to the divinized Rome. God or goddess? In ignorance, the formula allows either hypothesis. 24. This is the classic example—and, moreover, unique in the annals—of the transfer of a cult of foreign origin to Rome. Toward the end of the siege of the Etruscan city of Veii (in 3% b . c .), the Roman dictator M. Furius Camillus ensured the good graces of the tutelary goddess by the evocatio—a prayer in which he asked Juno Regina to abandon her city in exchange for a "temple worthy of her grandeur" in Rome. Cf. above, this article. As we know, the pomerium is the sacred frontier that delimits the zone of urban auspices in opposition to the ager effatus ( = the adjacent ground made available for other auspices); the pomerial line was indicated by a series of cippus columns: cf. Aulus Gellius 13.14.1; Varro L.L. 5.143. 25. Cf. the argument made against Latte, R.R.G.. pp. 43 and 45, n. 1, by G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., pp. 108-10, an argument that bears on not only the meaning but also the antiquity of the formula. 26. G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., p. 110, n. 1, has noted a text of Ovid (Metamorphosis 15.861-70) in which the same typology appears, recalling the conjoint formula Indigetes and

Noivnsiles. 27. Virgil G. 1.498. We note also the cult of Jupiter Indiges at Lavinium (Livy 1.2.6); the cult of Sol Indiges, which, very important at the origin, is entered in the calendar on the date of 11 December (for documentation, cf. Latte, R.R.G., pp. 44 and 73). Pliny's reference to a locus Solis Indigetis near the Numicus at Lavinium (N.H. 3.56; for this reading of the manuscripts instead of the correction of Barbarus lucus /ovis Ind.. see Castagnoli, Lavinium, 1, p. 93, n. 10), as well as the comments of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (1.55.2), confirm the antiquity of the cult. 28. J. Bayet, Histoire politique el psychologique de la religion romaine (2d ed., Paris 1969), has rightly insisted on this aspect. 29. This detail of the bull "white as snow" offered to Jupiter Latiaris is due to Arnobius Adversus nationes 2.68 (In Albano antiquitus monte nullos alios licebat quam nivei tauros immolare candoris). The same author indicates that later a senatorial decision also authorized animals with red (rufulos) hair. If the account of Arnobius is correct, the sacrifice on Mount Alban departed from the ritual pattern that required castrated animals for Jupiter: cf. Ateius Labeo, cited by Macrobius (S. 3.10.4). It is true that according to Virgil (G. 2.146-48) and Servius (ad locum) the bull was also sacrificed to Capitoline Jupiter by the winners on the day of the ceremony of triumph. 30. The suspension of all war during the feriae Latinae, as well as the communio sacrorum, has suggested to Latte (R.R.G., p. 145) the idea of a possible influence of the Greek amphictyony, which might have been transmitted by an Etruscan intermediary: the Etruscan confederation of the "twelve cities," which met near the sanctuary of Voltumna, located near the Volsinii (Livy 4.23.5; 4.25.7, etc.). 31. Servius ad Aen. 7.515. 32. In an inscription (CIL, 1, 22, 2444), Diana of Aricia is called Diana af louco ("Diana of the sacred forest"). 33. Cato, Orig, frag., H.R.F., 58, P. Cf. Festus, p. 128, 15 L; Manius Egerius lucum Nemorensem Dianae consecravit ("Manius Egerius con­ secrated to Diana the sacred forest of Nemi"). 34. The statute of the cult, which served for those that followed as a model for other foundations, made an allusion to an altar: lex arae Dianae in Aventino ("regulation of the altar of Diana on the Aven­ tine": CIL, 3, 1933). 35. Different interpretations have been proposed by G. Wissowa (Ruk2, 250-51), L. Latte (R.R.G., 173), and G. Dumézil (La religion romaine archaïque. 2d ed., 412-13). 36. Regarding the cult of Diana and the effacement of the Latin goddess under Roman hegemony, cf. R. Schilling, "Une victime des vicissitudes politiques: La Diane latine," Coll. Latomus, 70 ( = Hom­ mages à Jean Bayet), 1964, 650-67; reprinted with the same title in

R.C.D.R.

R O M A N 37. Cf. H. Le Bonniec, Le culte de Ce res à Rome des aridities à la fin de la république (Paris 1958), 277-311. For an opposing view, see A. Alföldi, Il Santuario federate latino di Diana sh//'Aventino e il tempio di Ceres, S.M .S.R., 32 (1961): 21 -39. (This scholar moves fhe date of the foundation of the temple and of its political role after the reform of the Decemvirs back to the second half of the fifth century b.c .) 38. Cf. R. Schilling, Les Castores romains à la lumière des traditions indo-eurofHvnnes, Collection Latomus ( = Hommages à Georges Dumézil) (Brussels 1960); reprinted with the same title in R.C.D.R. 39. Cf. J. Gagé, Apollon romain (Paris 1955), 158ff.; 167. 40. Cf. Robert Schilling, La religion romaine de Vénus (Paris 1954), 242-66. 41. Regarding the statuettes of Aeneas and Anchises from Veii, the proposed date varies from the sixth to the fourth century b.c . It seems reasonable to accept at the latest the beginning of the fifth century. See, in particular, A. Alföldi, Die trojanischen Urahnen der Römer (Basel 1957). See, most recently, W. Fuchs, Die Bildgeschichte der Flucht des Aeneas, A.N.R.W.. 1, 4 (1973), 615-32. 42. With regard to the line of continuity that exists between the two triads, see the article "Roman Religion," above. 43. Cf. above, this article. The cult of Ceres is classed by Festus (p. 268, 31 L.) among the sacra (vregrina ("foreign cults"). Although Indo-European in its structure, the triad here seems influenced by a Greek model. For a discussion, see H. Le Bonniec, Le culte de Cérès à Rome, 277- 311; for an opposing view, see A. Alföldi, Early Rome and the Latins, 95-100. 44. Cf. Livy 5.13.4-6. This Hellenic rite, which came from the Etruscan town of Caere, was repeated four times consecutively in the course of the following years: cf. Wissowa, Ruk2, p. 422 and n. 7. 45. An undifferentiated list is furnished by Ennius, Annales, 60-61 (ed. Warmington): Juno Vesta Mi nenn Ceres Diana Venus Mars Mercu­ rius Jovis Neptunus Vulcanus Afwllo. The hierarchical order is indicated by Livy (22.10.9; cf. also 22.9.10).

S A C R I F I C E

46. We know that the lectisternium of the twelve divinities must have inspired in Octavian one day the idea of organizing a joyous masquerade—the cena dôdekatheos—in the course of which the twelve guests were disguised as gods and goddesses (Suetonius Aug. 70). 47. The twelve di consentes of the Forum are cited by Varro (R.R . 1.1.4). The expression is unique: the term consentes ("who are together") was assimilated by the Latins to consentientes ("who decide in accord"). 48. Cf. G. Lugli, Roma antica: II centro monumentale (Rome 1946), 114-15. 49. We have retained here only the divine groupings that have a ritual existence. However, the number twelve influenced the group of twelve "agricultural divinities" imagined by Varro (De re rustica 1.1.4-6), as well as the semireligious, semimythological list of Virgil (G. 1.5-20). Elsewhere, Varro, cited by Augustine (C D. 7.2), had drawn up a list of twenty principal divinities (deos selectos). 50. Regarding the equivalence of the Latin Quirinus and the Umbrian Vofiono-, see G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., p. 161 and n. 3. 51. Cf. ibid., p. 475. 52. These phrases reproduce a part of the commentary of my book R .R.V ., 207-8. 53. G. Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque, 2d ed., p. 475. 54. Cf. Festus, p. 422 L.: "He who performs the ceremonies that the kings used to perform is named Sacrificulus Rex (or Rex Sacrorum)." 55. The word heros, copied from the Greek, appears only later, in the language of the poets, for example, in Virgil. 56. Cf. R. Schilling, "Ovide interprète de la religion romaine," R.E L. 46 (1969): 222-35; reprinted in R.C.D .R., same title.

Juppiter, te hoc ferto obmovendo bonas preces precor, uti sies volens propitius milii liberisque meis domo familiaeque meae mactus hoc ferto ( J u p i t e r , in m a k i n g t h i s o f f e r i n g t o y o u , I p r a y w i t h g o o d

R o m a n S ac r ifice

p r a y e r s th a t y o u w a tc h o v e r m e a n d b e g r a c io u s u n to m e , m y

(sacrificium)

in d i­

c h i l d r e n , m y h o u s e , a n d a ll m y h o u s e h o l d ; m a y t h i s o f f e r i n g

c a t e s th a t s o m e t h in g is v o l u n t a r i ly t a k e n a w a y b y m a n fr o m

b e a c o m f o r t t o y o u ) . T h i s u t t e r a n c e is a s c l e a r a s it is p r e c i s e .

In i t s i n t r i n s i c m e a n i n g , t h e t e r m

s a crifice

t h e p r o f a n e w o r l d t o b e o f f e r e d t o t h e g o d s ( sacrum

facere).

To

o f c a k e ), th e le g itim a c y o f th e re q u e s t p u rp o se

p u rp o se

w as

to c o m f o r t th e g o d s ,

w ho

in

th e

R o m a n c o n c e p tio n w e r e a llie s o f m a n k in d . T h e R o m a n s w e r e

th is

tie d to th e g o d s b y b o n d s o f r e c ip r o c i t y d e f i n e d b y th e n o t i o n

re m a rk

of

pietas,

b y v ir tu e o f w h ic h

m en

had

t o h o n o r ( colere) t h e

N o t h in g illu m i n a t e s t h e m e a n s a n d e n d s o f s a c r i f i c e b e t te r th e a c c o m p a n y in g

p ra y e r th a t a

o f th e

te x t,

so

sa crifice .

flo rid

w ith

A m ong

its a r c h a ic

mactus, w h i c h t h e magis a u c t u s it s e e m s

on

sense of

a ll

th e

s p e c ific

te rm s

l a n g u a g e ,2 w e

a n cie n ts

in

s h o u ld

i n te r p r e te d

in

th e

to re fle ct th e o ld c o n c e p t th a t

d iv in e p o w e r h a d to b e " c o m f o r t e d " w ith th e s a c r if ic e .

g o d s w h o in t u r n o w e d m e n p r o t e c t i o n . th a n

fertum i s a k i n d (bonas preces), a n d t h e

H e n a m e s th e in te n d e d g o d , th e o f fe rin g (th e

w h a t e n d ? P r o b a b ly , in a c c o r d a n c e w ith th e w o r l d v i e w a t th e o r ig in , th e

R om an

p easan t ad ­

T h u s, s is te d

th e s a c r i f i c e in t h e b e g i n n in g s e e m s

e s s e n tia lly

" s u s ta in in g "

th e

(De Agricultura

w h e n h e b e c o m e s th e re c ip ie n t o f a m e a l

th a t s h o u ld

be

m a d e to o f fe r a p ro p itia to r y s a crifice to C e r e s , th e g o d d e s s o f

th e e p ith e t

dapalis

c o n firm e d

1 3 4 ) l is ts th e a r r a n g e m e n t s

by

in

d r e s s e d t o a p a r t i c u l a r g o d . In t h i s c a s e , C a t o ' s f o r m u l a t i o n

o f a " j u g " o f w in e

(urna vint) a n d a n as ( a R o m a n

th e v a lu e o f o n e

god.

to h a v e c o n ­ T h is

t h a t is a p p l i e d

(daps)

id e a

is

to Ju p ite r

th a t c o n s is te d

o f fe rin g o f s a c r e d flo u r

w ith

lim ite d to C e r e s a l o n e . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e r u l e s o f th is p o l y ­

pecunia.4 T h e

th e is tic h ie r a r c h y , o n e m u s t first a d d r e s s J a n u s , th e g o d o f

s tr a n g e r s to th e c e r e m o n y , s in c e a p a rt o f th e fo o d th a t w a s

c e le b ra n t a n d

th e p a r tic ip a n ts d id n o t re m a in

b e g in n in g s , a n d th e n th e s o v e r e ig n g o d , Ju p ite r (th e te x t a ls o

n o t co n se c ra te d

m e n tio n s J u n o , a r a th e r s u s p e c t a d d itio n ). O n c e th e s e p r e ­

c o n s u m e d b y th e p a r t ic ip a n t s .s

lim in a r ie s

have

been

a tte n d e d

to ,

th e

o ffe rin g

to

C e re s

c o n s i s ts o f th e e n t r a il s o f a s o w a n d a lib a tio n o f w in e . T h is is a l r e a d y

a

R om an

in n o v a tio n ,

n a m e ly ,

th a t th e

p art set

a s i d e f o r t h e g o d w h e n a b l o o d s a c r i f i c e is p e r f o r m e d s h o u l d b e th e

(cor), The

exta,

lu n g s

o r e n tra ils , o f th e a n im a l, in c lu d in g th e h e a rt

(pulmones),

w o rd in g

c h a r a c te r is tic

of

th e

e le m e n ts

liv e r

(jecur),

p ray er th a t

to

re cu r

a n d g a llb la d d e r Ju p ite r in

th e

c o n ta in s o th e r

(fel) . 1 a ll

th e

f o r m u la s :

A lth o u g h th e th e

epulum

w a s d is trib u te d

daps

fo r th e u s e o f la y m e n a n d

r e p r e s e n ts a s a c rific e a t th e fa m ily le v e l,

c o rre s p o n d s to a m o re s o le m n

a n d s u b s id iz e d b y th e s ta te . T h e Ju p ite r

c o in o r w e ig h t),

assara

g r o w th , b e f o r e th e h a r v e s t . F ir s t, th e s a c r if ic e c o u ld n o t b e

every

year

on

13

m e a l o rg a n iz e d

epulum Jovis

N o v em b er,

on

w a s o f f e r e d to

th e

C a p ito lin e ,

s t a r t i n g a t t h e e n d o f t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y b. c . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e d e s c rip tio n p ro v id e d b y V a le riu s M a x im u s ( 2 .1 .2 ) , " T h e g o d w a s in v ite d to ta k e h is p la c e o n a c o u c h , J u n o a n d M in e r v a o n c h a i r s ." T h is

epulum

t h u s d e a lt w ith th e C a p ito lin e tr ia d ,

77

ROME

Sacrificial scene (relief). In the background: facade of the temple of the Capitoline Jupiter and wall topped with statues of men and animals fighting. In the foreground: Emperor Marcus Aurelius, capite velato, assisted by the flamen Dialis wearing his apex cap; he pours a libation on the flame of the tripod altar. Behind him, a bearded man wearing a toga and a crown of laurels, probably representing the senate. In front of him, a camillus holding a casket of incense (acerra) and a pipe player; the head of the victim hovers over them. To the right, sacrificers, one holding an ax, the other a jar (situla). Rome, Museo dei Conservatori. Photo Alinari-Giraudon.

and gods and goddesses conformed to the prevailing cus­ toms of the men and women of the times. The word epulo was hardly ever used as an epithet of Jupiter, which would have resulted in an expression symmetrical to Juppiter Dapa­ lis, but it did serve to designate the priests specially charged with the responsibility to celebrate official sacrifices in order to relieve the pontifex; this college of priests was known as the septemviri epulones. What kinds of food could one offer the gods? Particular preferences aside, the following list was drawn up by Verrius Flaccus, a great scholar in the time of Augustus, and pre­ served in a summary by Festus:6 "commodities that can be offered in sacrifice: grain, pearl barley, wine, leavened bread, dried figs, pork, lamb, cheese, mutton, bran, sesame and oil, fish with scales except angelfish (a saltwater fish also known as monkfish)." In addition to these foods, the firstfruits of the harvest were offered to the appropriate protective deities, for in­ stance, the first must (sacrima) was offered to Liber Pater. We 78

should also point out that the list drawn up by Festus is not complete. It mentions cheese, but it omits milk, for example, which was an older offering than wine: lukewarm milk was a favorite of one of the oldest deities, Pales, the goddess of shepherds and their flocks, whose festival, the Parilia (21 April), coincided with the anniversary of the founding of Rome.7 Alongside these bloodless sacrifices are blood sacrifices that can be traced back to equally ancient times.8 The usual victims are animals belonging to the pig, sheep, or cow families. Perhaps we should distinguish between what are called hostia9 (expiatory victims to appease the wrath of the gods) and victima (victims offered as signs of gratitude). But these fine distinctions seem to have disappeared in historical times. On the other hand, the Roman liturgy seems to have been subject to precise general rules. The animal has to be of a certain age that varies depending on the circumstances. Thus, we can distinguish among victims that still suckle (lactentes), two-year-olds (bidentes), and adult victims (hostiae majores). Normally a god demands a male victim and a goddess, a female.10 By the same principle of analogy, a sky god requires a light animal, and a netherworld god a dark one. But exceptions to these rules do occur. There are particular sets of rules for certain deities. Jupiter is to receive a castrated animal,11 whereas Apollo, Neptune, and Mars demand an intact male, such as a bull.12 Mars has the honor of being the recipient of a triple offering that groups the representatives of the three animal species: boar, ram, and bull, designated by the term suovetaurilia. 13 How does the sacrifice actually proceed? First it presup­ poses certain conditions on the part of the celebrant, who must be in a state of ritual purity. For example, he cannot perform his duties if a member of his family has just died, making the family funesta (in mourning).14 Wearing a toga that is rolled up into a cinctus Gabinus ( freeing the arms), the celebrant washes his hands in a bowl (malluvium) and dries them with a towel (mantele). So as not to be disturbed during the ceremony, he covers his head with a tail of his toga. He thus appears capite velato, which to the ancients was a peculiarly Roman attitude, in contrast with the uncovered head, capite aperto, of the Greek ritual.15 Among the sacrifices, some are performed within the family circle, for instance, the Lemuria which the paterfamil­ ias celebrates according to an archaic liturgy that aims at expelling the Lemures, evil spirits, from the house.16 Others are celebrated within the social group as constituted by the curia, among them the Fornacalia celebrated in honor of Fornax, the goddess of ovens, during the roasting of grain;17 or the Fordicidia, the sacrifice of a pregnant cow (forda) to the goddess Earth, who is supposed to be full of seed on that day (15 April).18 The most solemn sacrifices are the publica sacra "which are offered for the people at the expense of the state."19 These sacrifices require a ceremonial regulated by an ordering of several phases. First of all, the probatio, a kind of admission test— the chosen animal must be beyond re­ proach: it must be appropriate to the deity and have no physical defect; it must conform to precise norms. Thus, as Pliny the Elder reminds us, "a calf is admitted only if its tail reaches the knucklebone; if it is any shorter, the sacrifice will not please the gods."20 The victim is adorned with boughs (verbenae), and its head is decorated with white or scarlet headbands (infulae). Often if it is a cow or an ox, its horns are gilded (taurus auratus et bos femina aurata, in the liturgy of the Arval Brethren, designates

R O M A N

a b u ll o r h e i f e r w i t h g o l d e n h o r n s ) ; 21 c a t t l e o r p i g s w e a r a k i n d o f c o v e r ( dorsuale) o n t h e i r b a c k s , b u t n o t s h e e p , w h i c h

(altilanei),

a r e o f f e r e d w ith th e ir th ic k f le e c e

w h ic h h a s n e v e r

litatio,

re c o rd s th e

s a c r i f i c e . If t h e y a r e n o t g o o d

( if , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e h e a r t o r

p a r t o f t h e l i v e r i s m i s s i n g ) , 30 t h e s a c r i f i c e h a s t o b e g i n a g a i n , s u b s titu tin g

b e e n s h e a r e d . 22

S A C R I F I C E

o r th e a p p r o v a l g i v e n b y t h e g o d s f o r h is

a

new

(hostia succidanea)

v ic tim

fo r

th e

first

T h u s a d o r n e d , t h e v i c t i m i s l e d n e a r t h e a l t a r ( ara ) , in f r o n t

a n i m a l. R o m a n t e n a c i ty is e v i d e n t in a d e c i s io n b y th e s e n a t e

o f t h e t e m p l e ; n e x t t o t h e a l t a r is p l a c e d a m o v a b l e h e a r t h

(in 1 7 6 B .c .) t h a t e n j o i n e d t h e c o n s u l s w h o h a d fa ile d t o g e t a

(Joculus),

litatio

(caespite)23 a n d

o f te n g a r n is h e d w ith tu r f

in te n d e d

(Favete Unguis!)25 w h i l e

A n o r d e r g o e s o u t c a llin g fo r s ile n c e a

(tibicen)

flu tist

"is

h e a rd

try in g

to

cover

s o u n d s ." T h e c e le b r a n t th e n p r o c e e d s to th e

up

a ll

o th e r

immolatio:

(in s p e c tio n

had

re v e a le d

a

liv e r

in

a

s ta te

of

to ta l

d e c o m p o s i ti o n ) " t o s ta r t s a c r if ic in g a g a in w ith a d u lt v ic tim s

t o r e c e i v e t h e p r e l i m i n a r y l i b a t i o n s o f w i n e a n d i n c e n s e . 24

The

u n til

th e y

o b ta in e d

th e

g o d 's

(usque

a p p ro v a l"

ad

litationem).31 litatio

O n c e th e

is o b t a i n e d , t h e n e x t p h a s e c a n p r o c e e d .

c e l e b r a n t p a s s e s h is k n if e a l o n g t h e a n i m a l 's b a c k b o n e f r o m

T h e exta a r e r e m o v e d f r o m t h e v i c t i m ; t h e y a r e t h e n d u s t e d w i t h mola salsa; a f e w a d d i t i o n a l p i e c e s a r e t h r o w n i n , augmenta o r magmenta.32 T h e s e s u p p l e m e n t s m u s t r e p r e s e n t t h e r e s t o f t h e v i c t i m . B o t h exta a n d augmenta a r e t h e n c o o k e d in a p o t (olla extaris). T h i s i s t h e w a y t h e y a r e o r d i n a r i l y

h e a d t o ta il. T h is s y m b o l i c g e s t u r e o f p o s s e s s i o n c o m p l e te s

c o o k e d in t h e h is t o r i c a l p e r i o d , b u t t r a d it i o n a l s o m e n t io n s

v i c t i m 's h e a d w ith

s a lt,

is d u s t e d

p rep ared

c o m p le te d

w ith

mola salsa

w ith

by

a

th e

lib a tio n

Then

th e

a s s is ta n t

dorsuale

flo u r m ix e d

o p e ra tio n

w i n e . 27 T h e

s tr i p p e d o f a ll its t r a p p in g s , t h e

th e a c t o f th e

(lo o s e

v e s t a l s ) , 26 a n of

v ic tim

t h a t is is

th e n

infulae.

a n d th e

The

consecratio.

re a d s

to

exta

b ro ilin g th e

c e le b ra n t re c ite s h im

th e

"to

fo r m u la ic p r a y e r t h a t a n a v o id

any

o m is s io n

or

exta

The

o n a s k e w e r . 33

a r e t h e n c u t u p ( e x c e p t in s a c r i f i c e s o f l u s t r a ti o n

o f f e r e d b y t h e c e n s o r s ) . 34 T h e s e

prosecta,

or

prosicies.

can now

i n v e r s i o n . " 28 T h e m o m e n t o f d e a t h h a s a r r i v e d . It i s a c h i e v e d

b e o f f e r e d t o t h e g o d . T h e w h o l e o f f e r i n g is t h e n b u r n e d o n

m o s t o f te n

to p

ta n ts .

Agone?

th ro u g h

O ne

th e

assista n t

m e d ia tio n

o f t h e c e l e b r a n t 's a s s i s ­

(victimarius

s a crifice r

popa)

or

asks,

(" S h a ll 1 g o a h e a d ? " m e a n in g " S h a ll I p e rfo rm

th e

o f th e

Exta porricere,

b lo o d . The

a lta r th a t h a s

ritu a l o f

th e

a lre a d y

dare,

or

A rv a l

been

s p r in k le d

w ith

th e

is t h e n a m e o f t h i s o p e r a t i o n .

B re th re n

exta reddere:

u ses

s u g g e s tiv e

e x p re s sio n ,

n a m e ly ,

h a m m e r o r a n a x , p r o b a b l y t o d a z e i t. A n o t h e r a s s i s t a n t , t h e

"re n d e rin g

u n to "

d u e t h a t d e i t y . 35 T h e c e l e b r a n t a n d h i s a s s i s t a n t s a r e e n t i t l e d

s ta b s th e j u g u la r v e in

w ith

a

k n if e

(culter).

The

g u s h i n g b l o o d i s c o l l e c t e d a n d s p r e a d o v e r t h e a l t a r . If t h e a n im a l

ever

re s is ts

in

th e

co u rse

(hostia effugia),

w o rse y e t, e s ca p e s

of

th e se

o p e ra tio n s,

or

o rg an s

up

to a llo w

(inspicere exta).

T h is

an

is

th e A rv a l B re th re n

(litatio).

inspexerunt ( " t h e y e x a m i n e t h e v i c t i m litatio” ).29 T h i s p r o c e d u r e c o n f o r m s t o th e R o m a n

litu rg y a n d

m ake

hostiae litationem

fo r

c h a r a c te r o f th e c o n s u lta tio n o f th e

exta.

th a t

of is

is s e t a s i d e f o r

fro m

th e

litu r g y t h u s c le a r ly d i s tin g u is h e s th e s a c r e d p ro fan e

p a rt.

It u n d e r s t a n d s

th e

b lo o d

p art

and

th e

o r g a n s a r e r e p u t e d t o b e t h e s e a t s o f lif e i t s e l f , a c c o r d i n g t o

to

th e

p u rp o se

of

th e

p r in c ip le

d e fin e d

by

T re b a tiu s:

sola anima deo sacratur

( " t h e s o u l a l o n e is c o n s e c r a t e d t o t h e g o d " ) . 37 R o m a n s a c r i ­ fice d iffe rs f u n d a m e n ta lly fro m fo r a n

undifferentiated

G r e e k s a c r i f i c e , w h ic h c a lls

d is trib u tio n

o f a ll p a r t s o f t h e v ic tim

b e tw e e n th e g o d a n d

t h e w o r s h i p e r s , 38 n o t t o m e n t i o n t h e

to th e d iv in a to ry

tric k

w ho,

w h ic h

s o u g h t t o d e c e i v e t h e g o d s . 3