The Religion of Ancient Rome | Page 5

to these we may add the sacred spears of Mars, and the
sigilla of the State-Penates. But for the most part the numina were
without even such symbolic representation, nor till about the end of the
regal period was any form of temple built for them to dwell in. The
sacred fire of Vesta near the Forum was, it is true, from the earliest
times enclosed in a building; this, however, was no temple, but merely
an erection with the essentially practical purpose of preventing the
extinction of the fire by rain. The first temple in the full sense of the
word was according to tradition built by Servius Tullius to Diana on the
Aventine: the tradition is significant, for Diana was not one of the di
indigetes, the old deities of the 'Religion of Numa,' but was introduced
from the neighbouring town of Aricia, and the attribution to Servius
Tullius nearly always denotes an Etruscan[3] or at any rate a
non-Roman origin. There were, however, altars in special places to
particular deities, built sometimes of stone, sometimes in a more
homely manner of earth or sods. We hear for instance of the altar of

Mars in the Campus Martius, of Quirinus on the Quirinal, of Saturnus
at the foot of the Capitol, and notably of the curious underground altar
of Consus on what was later the site of the Circus Maximus. But more
characteristic than the erection of altars is the connection of deities with
special localities. Naturally enough in the worship of the household
Vesta had her seat at the hearth, Ianus at the door, and the 'gods of the
storehouse' (Penates) at the cupboard by the hearth, but the same idea
appears too in the state-cult. Hilltops, groves, and especially clearings
in groves (luci) are the most usual sacred localities. Thus Quirinus has
his own sacred hill, Iuppiter is worshipped on the Capitol, Vesta and
Iuno Lucina have their sacred groves within the boundaries of the city,
and Dea Dia, Robigus, and Furrina similar groves at the limits of
Roman territory. The record of almost every Roman cult reveals the
importance of locality in connection with the di indigetes, and the
localities are usually such as would be naturally chosen by a pastoral
and agricultural people.
Such were roughly the main outlines of the genuine Roman 'theology.'
It has no gods of human form with human relations to one another,
interested in the life of men and capable of the deepest passions of
hatred and affection towards them, such as we meet, for instance, in the
mythology of Greece, but only these impersonal individualities, if we
may so call them, capable of no relation to one another, but able to
bring good or ill to men, localised usually in their habitations, but
requiring no artificial dwelling or elaborate adornment of their abode;
becoming gradually more and more specialised in function, yet gaining
thereby no more real protective care for their worshippers--a cold and
heartless hierarchy, ready to exact their due, but incapable of inspiring
devotion or enthusiasm. Let us ask next how the Romans conceived of
their own relations towards them.
=2. The Relation of Gods and Men.=--The character of the Roman was
essentially practical and his natural mental attitude that of the lawyer.
And so in his relation towards the divine beings whom he worshipped
there was little of sentiment or affection: all must be regulated by
clearly understood principles and carried out with formal exactness.
Hence the ius sacrum, the body of rights and duties in the matter of

religion, is regarded as a department of the ius publicum, the
fundamental constitution of the state, and it is significant, as Marquardt
has observed, that it was Numa, a king and lawgiver, and not a prophet
or a poet, who was looked upon as the founder of the Roman religion.
Starting from the simple general feeling of a dependence on a higher
power (religio), which is common to all religions, the Roman gives it
his own characteristic colour when he conceives of that dependence as
analogous to a civil contract between man and god. Both sides are
under obligation to fulfil their part: if a god answers a man's prayer, he
must be repaid by a thank-offering: if the man has fulfilled 'his bounden
duty and service,' the god must make his return: if he does not, either
the cause lies in an unconscious failure on the human side to carry out
the exact letter of the law, or else, if the god has really broken his
contract, he has, as it were, put himself out of court and the man may
seek aid elsewhere. In this notion we have the secret of Rome's
readiness under stress of circumstances, when all appeals to the old
gods have failed,