d meant for the fixing of this pole. I will
add here that it has occurred to me that these huts
must, in one sense at least, be a survival (like other
points of ritual), from the days of pastoral life, and
of the migration of the Aryans. Temporary huts are
characteristic of pastoral as contrasted with
agricultural life, and must have been used during the
wanderings, as by the Israelites. See Schrader,
_Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples_ (Eng.
Trans., London, 1890), p. 404.
APPENDIX II
PROF. DEUBNER'S THEORY OF THE LUPERCALIA
(See pp. 34 and 106)
In the _Archiv fuer Religionswissenschaft_, 1910, p. 481 foll., Prof.
Deubner has published an interesting study of this puzzling festival, to
which I wish to invite attention, though it has reached me too late for
use in my earlier lectures.
It has long been clear to me that any attempt to explain the details of
the Lupercalia on a single hypothesis must be a failure. If all the
details belong to the same age and the same original festival, we cannot
recover the key to the whole ceremonial, though we may succeed in
interpreting certain features of it with some success. Is it, however,
possible that these details belong to _different_ periods,--that the
whole rite, as we know it, with all the details put together from
different sources of knowledge, was the result of an accretion of
various features upon an original simple basis of ceremonial? Prof.
Deubner answers this question in the affirmative, and works out his
answer with much skill and learning.
He begins by explaining the word _lupercus_ as derived from _lupus_ and
_arceo_, and meaning a "keeper off of wolves." The _luperci_ were
originally men chosen from two gentes or families to keep the wolves
from the sheepfolds, in the days when the Palatine was a shepherd's
settlement, and they did it by running round the base of the hill in a
magical circle (if I understand him rightly). If that be so, we need not
assume a deity Lupercus, nor in fact any deity at all, nor need we see
in the runners a quasi-dramatic representation of wolves as
vegetation-spirits, as Mannhardt proposed (see my _Roman Festivals_, p.
316 foll.). This view has the advantage of making the rite a simple and
practical one, such as would be natural to primitive Latins; and the
etymology is apparently unexceptionable, though it will doubtless be
criticised, as in fact it has been long ago.
|