The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic An...

1171. Macrob. 1. 10. 2. Macr. tells us that after the change some people in error held the festival on the 19th, i. e. on the day which was now xiv K. Ian.

1172. Hartmann, Der Röm. Kalender, p. 203 foll., thinks it was originally one of the feriae conceptivae, like the Compitalia, Paganalia, &c., and only became fixed (stativae) when it was reorganized in 217 B.C. But if so, why is it marked in the calendars in large letters? And Hartmann himself points out (p. 208) that Dec. 17 is the first day of Capricornus, i. e. the coldest season, which in the oldest natural reckoning would be likely to fix the day (Colum. 11. 2. 94).

1173. Macr. l. c.; Cic. Att. 13. 52.

1174. Mommsen, C. I. L. i. 337.

1175. Frazer, Golden Bough, ii. 172; Brand, Popular Antiquities, ch. 13; Usener, Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen, 1. 214 foll. See for Italy, Academy, Jan. 20, 1888.

1176. C. I. L. i. 48. But Prof. Gardner tells me that the reading Saet. is not certain.

1177. Macrob. 1. 10. 19 foll.; 1. 7. 24 and 25; Marq. p. 11 note 3. The conjunction of Ops with him in this function is rejected (rightly, I think) by Wissowa, de Feriis, iv. But see below on Opalia.

1178. Jordan’s note on Preller, ii. 10.

1179. e. g. Virg. Aen. 8. 321.

1180. See, however, Schwegler, R. G. i. 223 foll.

1181. Varro, L. L. 5. 42; Dion. Hal. i. 34 (cp. 6. 1); Fest. 322; Solinus, 1. 13; Servius, Aen. 2. 115; Middleton, Rome in 1885, p. 166.

1182. R. Peter, s. v. Dis in Lex. 1181; Macr. 1. 11. 48.

1183. Lucan, 3. 153; Middleton, op. cit. 167.

1184. Preller, ii. 13; i. 182.

1185. The temple was traditionally dated B.C. 497 (Livy, 2. 21); cp. Aust, de Aedibus sacris, p. 4: so too the festival, though both had an older origin (Ambrosch. Stud. 149). The latter was reorganized in Greek fashion in obedience to a Sibylline oracle in B.C. 217 (Livy, 22. 1).

1186. Plut. Q. R. 34 notes the cult of such gods when all fruits have been gathered.

1187. Macr. 1. 8. 3 and 1. 16. 30 (also, but probably in error, attributed to Jupiter). Plut. Q. R. 42, and Poplic. 12, states it distinctly; but there is no indication of the source from which he drew.

1188. Cp. the legendary connexion of both with ship-building and the coining of money; though it is of course possible that this was simply suggested by the Janus-head and the ship of early Roman coins.

1189. Seneca, Ep. 18. 1. Martial is full of Saturnalian allusions; e. g. 12. 62.

1190. Popularized, of course, by the poets: Virg. Georg. ii. 538; Tibull. i. 3. 35; &c.

1191. Was this one of the reasons why Christmas was fixed at the winter solstice? Cp. John Chrysostom, tom. iii. 497e: quoted by Usener, op. cit. p. 217.

1192. Varro, R. R. 1. 35. 2 ‘Dum in xv diebus ante et post brumam ut pleraque ne facias.’ Columella, 2. 8. 2, seems to follow Varro. Virg. Georg. 1. 211 extends the time ‘usque sub extremum brumae intractabilis imbrem’ (cp. Serv. ad loc.).

1193. Sat. i. 10. 19 and 22, and Dion. Hal. 3. 32; Plut. Q. R. 34.

1194. See Marquardt’s excellent summary in Staatsverwaltung, iii. 357, and Preller, ii. 15 foll.

1195. Dion. Hal. 6. 1. Fasti Amit. Dec. 17. We do not know who was the sacrificing priest; perhaps the Rex Sacrorum, or a magistrate.

1196. Macrob. 1. 10. 18.

1197. Martial, 14. 1; at least this seems to be the inference from ‘Synthesibus dum gaudet eques dominusque senator.’ Cp 6. 24.

1198. Livy, 22. 1. 19 ‘lectisternium imperatum et convivium publicum.’

1199. Tertull. Apol. 42.

1200. Odes, 3. 17. Cp. Martial, 14. 70. The pig-offering indicates an earth-deity: Henzen, Acta Fratr. Arv. p. 22; Marq. 173.

1201. Martial, bk. 14, is the locus classicus for all this.

1202. Brand, Pop. Ant. 183.

1203. Macr. i. 10. 24; 11. 49. In the latter passage he says ‘quae homines pro se atque suis piaculum pro Dite Saturno facerent.’

1204. Brand, 180.

1205. Marq. 192, and the passages there quoted.

1206. Sat. 1. 7. 37. For later evidence see Marq. 588.

1207. p. 50, and note 13.

1208. C. I. L. i 2. 337.

1209. O. Gilbert (1. 247 note) holds this latter view.

1210. Ephem. Epigr. 1. 37. Wissowa (de Feriis, v) points out that all such entries, in which the god’s name in the dative is followed by the place of sacrifice, apply to consecrated temples only—and the Regia was not one.