expect that the victim, as being destined to carry away the unholiness
(or whatever we choose to call it) of the culprit, would be burnt whole,
not offered to the deity in the form of exta, or eaten by the
sacrificers.[401] But this does not seem to have been the case in the
Roman practice; in all the examples of _piacula_ of which we have
details, the exta are laid on the altar as in the typical
sacrifice.[402] The inference seems to be that the theological idea of
sacrifice had established itself completely ever since the formation of
the _ius divinum_; the victim is not a scapegoat in any sense, but
really an expiatory offering; and not only does the sacrificer yield up
something of value, but he offers it to increase the strength of the
deity as well as to appease his anger.

A curious point may be noticed in the last place. The practical Roman
mind seems to have invented a kind of sacrificial insurance, by which a
piacular sacrifice might be offered beforehand to atone for any omission
in the ritual which was to follow. Thus the Fratres Arvales, if they had
to take an iron implement into their sacred grove, offered a piaculum
before as well as after this breach of religious rule.[403] Again, the
_porca praecidanea_, which I have already mentioned as offered before
harvest, was an example of the same system of insurance; for the first
cutting of the corn was a sacred rite, and one in which it was easy to
take a false step. Writing of this, Gellius says in general terms that
_hostiae praecidaneae_ are those which are offered the day before
_sacrificia solennia_.[404]

The term "piacular sacrifice" (_piaculum_) had a wide range of meaning,
apart from the examples here given. With one important form of it I
shall deal in the next lecture:[405] others we shall come across later
on.

NOTES TO LECTURE VIII

[340] See Appendix C.

[341] Cato, _R.R._ 139, where the language suggests that
as the deity was unknown, the _ius_ of the religious act
was also uncertain, _i.e._ the ritual was not laid down.
De Marchi translates (_La Religione_ _nella vita
domestica_, i. 132) "sia a te fatto il debito
sacrificio," etc., which sufficiently expresses the
anxiety of the situation. Keil reads here "ut tibi ius
_est_," and gives no variant in his critical note; but
the words just below, "uti id recte factum siet," seem
to me to suggest the subjunctive. In any case there is
no