IV. Was Attis at Rome under the Republic?

BY DR. GRANT SHOWERMAN,

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN.

APART from its general interest as poetry of a high order of merit, the sixty-third poem of Catullus has a special interest resulting from its containing the first allusion in the field of Roman literature, and the first definite allusion in any field of Roman evidence, to Attis, the Phrygian youth whose name is coupled with that of Cybele, the Great Mother of the Gods, as Endymion with Selene, and Adonis with Aphrodite; and who finally rose to such importance at Rome under the Empire as to be worshipped as at least a minor deity side by side with the Great Mother of the Gods herself. The absence of allusion to him in Roman literature up to the time of Catullus, together with the fact that no other Roman author up to the time of Ovid contains mention of him, forms one of several reasons for doubt not only as to the importance of Attis in the worship of the Great Mother at Rome under the Republic, but even as to his actual presence during that period. It will not be without interest to readers of Catullus if it can be determined whether the being whose name here first appears in Roman literature was present and worshipped at Rome when the poet wrote, or whether his worship had not yet been introduced.

The worship of the Great Mother was introduced at Rome by the State in 204 B.C. as a result of the Sibylline prophecy which declared that a foreign enemy could be driven from Italy if the Great Idaean Mother were brought from Pessinus to Rome. The date of the event was the fourth of April, and the occasion was celebrated by the institution of the Megalesia. On the tenth of April, 191 B.C., the goddess, who had thus far occupied the temple of Victory on the

Palatine, was received into a temple of her own on the same hill.1 Allusions to the cult under the Republic are comparatively rare. In 161 B.C. a law was passed which regulated the expenditure at the mutitationes or reciprocal banquets given by the patricians in honor and encouragement of the cult.2 In III B.C. the temple was destroyed by fire, and rebuilt by Metellus.3 The worship was in charge of a Phrygian priest and a Phrygian priestess, who performed orgiastic rites and made house-to-house collections called the stips. Roman citizens were at first forbidden by law to enter the priesthood of the cult (which meant their becoming eunuchs) or to take part in the processions when the ceremonies were Phrygian; but the beginning of the second century of the cult's existence at Rome saw a Roman citizen voluntarily enter the service of the Mother, with no other punishment than the loss of civil rights. Cicero complained of the loss of the original purity of the cult, and said that the collection of the stips was a financial burden. A fragment of Varro seems to refer to the rites of the cult at Rome, and Catullus' Attis, Lucretius' interpretation of some of the ceremonies of the worship, and passages in Ovid and Livy describing the introduction of the Mother at Rome, reflect the increasing interest felt in her, without, however, giving a very clear idea as to the importance of her worship at that time. It is only after the time of Claudius that it becomes possible to have a comparatively complete knowledge of the importance of the cult and of the character and significance of its rites and practices. It is also only after the time of Claudius that the evidence of literature, art, and inscriptions is of such definiteness as to make it absolutely certain that Attis was admitted to a share in the ceremonial of the cult and received a share of its worship. Whether the lack of evidence is merely

1 Livy XXXVI. 36, 3.

8 Val. Max. I. 8, 11; Ovid Fast. IV. 348.

4 Dion. Hal. II. 19; Cic. De Leg. II. 9, 22.

5 Dion. Hal. 1.c.

De Harusp. Resp. 12, 24; De Leg. II. 16, 40.

2 Aul. Gell. II. 24, 2.

6 Val. Max. VII. 7, 6.

8 Men. Sat. ed. Buecheler 132, 149, 120, 121; Luc. II. 600 sqq.; Ovid Fast.

IV. 178 sqq.; Livy XXIX. 14.

accidental and Attis had really been present as an object of worship with the Great Mother from the date of the introduction of the cult, or whether he was first introduced under the early Empire, is a question adhuc sub iudice. The view that he was present from the first is held by Marquardt in his Staatsverwaltung III2. p. 368, and F. Cumont in De Ruggiero's Dizionario Epigrafico, s.v. Attis, while the opposite view is held by Rapp in Roscher's Lexicon, s.v. Attis, sp. 724. To demonstrate, by the examination of the arguments advanced in favor of both views, and by the presentation of further evidence, that Attis was not present as an object of worship under the Republic, but that he was first introduced in the time of the early Empire, is the object of this paper.

The belief that Attis was worshipped under the Republic is based upon : (1) a coin; (2) an emended fragment of Varro, which in its manuscript state is wholly unreadable; (3) the improbability that a pair so closely united in legend and worship as were the Great Mother and Attis in the East were separated on the migration of the cult to Rome. The further argument advanced by Cumont, that the cult at Rome was in the care of a Phrygian priest and a Phrygian priestess, and that the duality of the priesthood, by its correspondence to the duality of the divinities, indicates the presence of both these latter at Rome, is hardly of sufficient weight to call for discussion. The priesthood in Phrygia consisted of both male and female ministers,1 and it was entirely natural to send a minister of either sex in charge of the cult when it was established at Rome. The existence there of a dual priesthood cannot be taken to prove more than that the Roman ministry was modelled on the Phrygian, and this would signify nothing as to Attis.

Let us examine in detail the main grounds for believing that Attis was present and worshipped during this period. First, the coin. This is a denarius, struck by one Cetegus. It bears on the obverse the head of Dea Roma, and on the reverse the representation of a stripling bestride a he-goat

1 Dion. Trag. in Athen. 636; Nicand. Alex. 217-220; Polyaen. VIII. 53, 4.

galloping to the right. The youth is nude, wears a galea which resembles at its summit the Phrygian pileus, and holds a branch on his shoulder. Cavedoni, Bulletino dell' Istituto 1844 p. 22, identifies the Cetegus of the coin with Publius Cornelius Cethegus, an orator who flourished in the first half of the first century B.C. The figure he identifies with the Phrygian Attis on the basis of a legend in Pausanias VII. 17, which relates that Attis, having been exposed by his parents, was cared for by a he-goat. The motive of the representation on the coin, according to Cavedoni, who is followed by Mommsen 2 and Babelon,3 is the commemoration of the introduction of the cult of the Great Mother and Attis in 204 B.C., under the consulship of Marcus Cornelius Cethegus, ancestor of the Cetegus of the coin. Supposing the coin to have been struck in 104 B.C., it would mark the hundredth anniversary of the cult at Rome. But there are difficulties in the way of accepting Cavedoni's view. The identity of the striker of the coin is not certain (for there were at least eight Cornelii who bore the name Cethegus), nor is its exact date known. It was struck about 104 B.C. Further, there is no proof that the legend which Pausanias says is local (eπixópios) among the Pessinuntians, dates back so far as to be well known at Rome in the second century B.C. Nor is it certain that the figure on the coin represents a Phrygian, for the headdress, the only means of identification, is described by Cavedoni as a galea which at its upper extremity resembles the Phrygian pileus, and by Mommsen as a Phrygian cap, or a helmet which resembles one. Another difficulty is the obscurity of the allusion. The representation of a nude stripling bestride a galloping he-goat has little in it to call to mind the legend of the infant Attis cared for by a he-goat. As an allusion to the introduction of the cult of the Great Mother, the ambiguous portrayal of one detail in a legend of her favorite would be far from felicitous. Less than a representation of the head of the deity herself, which actually does occur on the first coin which bears an absolutely clear allusion to her,1 1 Cf. Arnob. V. 6, where Attis is merely nourished by goat's milk.

2 Münzwesen n. 136.

3 I. 395 n. 18.

4 Bab. I. 526 n. 19.

or at least a representation of Attis with unmistakable attributes, could hardly be expected. The most that can be admitted is that if the figure does represent a Phrygian, which is doubtful, it is meant merely to suggest Phrygia, the original home of the Great Mother, and is a general, not a specific, allusion.1

The second item of evidence advanced to prove that Attis was worshipped at Rome under the Republic consists in a conjecturally emended fragment of Varro, which in its manuscript state is unreadable. The mere statement is sufficient description of its value. The manuscript reading is: qui dum esse na hora nam adlatam imponeret aedilis signo siae (sie W) et deam gallantes vario retinebant studio. Lachmann's emendation, on which the argument of Attis' presence at Rome is based, reads as follows: qui dum messem hornam adlatam imponunt Attidis signo, synodiam gallantes vario recinebant studio. The reading of Riese, however, departs as little from the manuscript, and gives as good sense as that of Lachmann: qui dum messem hornam adlatam imponeret aedilis signo Cybelae, deam gallantes vario recinebant strepitu. The sense of this is excellent: the aedile places a grain-offering on the statue of Cybele, the great parent of the fruits of the earth, while her worshippers celebrate her noisy rites; but there is no mention of Attis. Finally, further to emphasize the fact that no importance is to be attached to evidence of this nature, Buecheler also emends the fragment, and makes it read as follows: qui cum e scacna coronam adlatam imponeret aedilis signo, synodiam gallantes vario recinebant studio.2

Finally, in order to estimate the value of the third ground for believing that Attis was worshipped at Rome under the Republic, viz., the improbability that a pair so closely united in legend and worship as were the Great Mother and Attis in the East were separated on the migration of the cult to Rome,

1 Another interpretation is that attagus, the Phrygian word for hircus (Arnob. V. 6) is equivalent to Cetegus, and that the striker of the coin intended the goat as a play on his name. Bulletino dell' Ist. 1.c.

2 Men. Sat. 150 ed. Buecheler. For the readings of Riese and Lachmann, cf. Riese's edition.