EARLY ROMAN RELIGION. 63 



what we usually term the greater gods, the " di consentes," do we 

 find closer connection than what we would naturally expect from 

 the fact that both nations assigned divinities to the more important 

 functions of life. That the way in which the Roman and the Greek 

 regarded them was very different, I hope to show further on. 



The second point that strikes us is, that these gods that I have 

 mentioned, and many another, such as Ceres, Priapus, god of gar- 

 dens, and Faunus and Pales are preeminently the gods of a rustic, 

 agricultural community that is occupied, not so much with the earlier 

 stage of the grazing of cattle, but with the more settled and advanced 

 labour of tilling the ground. This fact comes still more strongly 

 when we look at the old Calendar of Festivals, which is chiefly taken 

 up with agricultural celebrations ; they fall into three groups : those 

 of Spring, expressive of fear and hopes for the growing crops and 

 herds ; those of Summer, the festivals of fulfilment, especially of har- 

 vest " ( for we are in the south of Europe where harvest comes 

 early), and lastly those of Winter, the festivals of sowing and puri- 

 fication." 



I close this list with a most interesting and, at first sight, be- 

 wildering group of divinities, which were grouped around the early 

 years of the young Roman. When the child is weaned, there is one 

 to teach him to eat, another, Potina, to show him how to drink, 

 Cunina to keep him quiet in his cradle, Locutius to help him in his 

 first efforts to speak, others to guard his first attempts to walk; in 

 fact, forty-three gods of childhood have been counted. (Varro). 

 To us, as to the early Christian Fathers, " this crowd of small deities 

 condemned to menial services " may seem somewhat ridiculous, but 

 they are most valuable to the student, as they show very clearly the 

 way in which the early Roman created his divinities, and at what 

 stage of religious development we find them. Taking, then, the 

 divinities of this early community as a whole, we are now able to 

 attempt to analyze their character, i.e., define their theology. The 

 fact of supreme importance to note is that they are not gods. The 

 very word the early Roman used for them is a witness to this : they 

 are niimina-powers. They are not personal, they have no individu- 

 ality. As Ovid says : " Think not Vesta to be ought else but living 

 flame "—Fasti VI. Hence they stand in strong contrast to the an- 

 thropomophic deities of the Greeks. We find a number of facts 

 about early Roman religion that connect closely with the abstract 

 nature of these multitudinous spirits. For many years there were 

 no temples of the gods in the city : for how could these impersonal 



