Now keeping in mind the fact that Janus is the guardian spirit of entrances, let us recall again the fact that he was the first deity in all invocations both public and private[[1273]], and that Vesta was the last[[1274]]. Vesta in the house was, as Cicero expresses it, ‘rerum custos intimarum’; she presided over the penetralia—the last part of the house to which any stranger could be admitted; exactly the opposite position to that of Janus at the entrance[[1275]]. Both deities retained at all times the essential mark of primitive ideas of the supernatural: they resided in and in a sense were, the doorway and the hearth respectively. What we know of the priests who served them tells the same tale of an origin in the house, and the family—the foundation of all Italian civilization. Vesta was served by her sacred virgins, and these, we can no longer doubt, were the later representatives of the daughters of the head of the family, or the headman of the community[[1276]]; the innermost part of the house was theirs, the care of the fire, the stores (penus), and the cooking. To the father, the defender of the family, belonged naturally the care of the entrance, the dangerous point, where both evil men and evil spirits might find a way in. And surely this must be the explanation of the fact that no priest is to be found for Janus in the Roman system but the Rex sacrorum[[1277]], the lineal representative of the ancient religious duties of the king, and therefore, we may infer with certainty, of those of the primitive chief, and of the head of the household[[1278]]. In the most ancient order of the priesthoods, the Rex sacrorum came first, just as Janus was the first of all the gods[[1279]]: then came the three great Flamines, and then the Pontifex maximus, in whose care and power were the Vestals. Translating the order into terms of the primitive family, we have first the head of the house, next the sons, and lastly (as women do not appear in these lists), the daughters represented by the later priesthood, to which they were legally subordinated. The order of the gods, the order of the priests, and the natural position of the entrance to the house, all seem to lead us to the same conclusion, that the beginning of Janus and his cult are to be sought, and may be found, in the early Italian family dwelling.
We may agree with Roscher, who has worked out this part of the subject with skill, that this position of Janus in the worship of the family and the state is the origin of all the practices in which he appears as a god of beginnings. For these the reader must be referred to Roscher’s article[[1280]], or to Preller, or to Mommsen, who sees in this aspect of the god, and rightly no doubt, that which chiefly reflects the notion of him held by the ordinary Roman. He was himself the oldest god, the beginner of all things, and of all acts[[1281]]; to him in legend is ascribed the introduction of the arts, of agriculture, ship-building, &c.[[1282]]. He is an object of worship at the beginning of the year, the month, and the day[[1283]]. All this sprang, not from an abstract idea of beginning—an idea which has no Roman parallel in being sanctified by a presiding deity, but from the concrete fact that the entrance of the house was the initium, or beginning of the house, and at the same time the point from which you started on all undertakings.
Such developments of the original Janus were no doubt as old as the State itself. In the Salian hymn he is already ‘deorum deus’[[1284]], and ‘duonus cerus’[[1285]], which Festus tells us meant creator bonus. But even in the State there are, as we have seen, sufficiently clear traces of his original nature to forbid us to attribute these titles to any lofty and abstract philosophical ideas of religion.
The known cult-titles of Janus are for the most part explicable in the same way. Geminus, Patulcius, Clusius, and Matutinus, speak for themselves. Junonius probably arose from the concurrence of the cults of Janus and Juno on the Kalends of each month, as Macrobius tells us[[1286]]. Consivius[[1287]] is explained by Roscher as connected with serere, and used of Janus as creator (beginner of life: cf. duonus cerus). Curiatius, Patricius, and Quirinus[[1288]] are titles arising from the worship of the god in gentes, curiae, and the completed state, and have no significance in regard to his nature.
iii Id. Ian. (Jan. 11). NP.
KARM[ENTALIA]. (PRAEN. MAFF.)
xviii Kal. Feb. (Jan. 15). NP.
KAR[MENTALIA]. (PRAEN. MAFF. PHIL. CAER.)
The full name of the festival is supplied by Philoc. and Silv. There is a much mutilated note in Praen. on Jan. 11 which is completed by Mommsen thus[[1289]]: ‘[Feriae Carmenti ... quae partus curat omniaque] futura; ob quam ca[usam in aede eius cavetur ab scorteis tanquam] omine morticino.’
The first point to be noticed here is that the same deity has two festival days, with an interval of three days between them. There is no exact parallel to this in the calendar, though there are several instances of something analogous[[1290]]. The Lemuria are on May 9, 11, 13; but here are three days, and no special deity. Kindred deities have their festivals separated by three days, as Consus and Ops (Aug. 21, 25); and we may compare the Fordicidia and Cerealia on April 15 and 19, and the Quinquatrus and Tubilustrium, both apparently sacred to Mars, on March 19 and 23. All festivals occur on days of uneven number; and if there was an extension to two or more days, the even numbers were passed over[[1291]]. But the Romans did not apparently consider the two Carmentalia to be two parts of the same festival, but two different festivals, or they would not have tried to account as they did for the origin of the second day. It was said to have been added by a victorious general who left Rome by the Porta Carmentalis to attack Fidenae[[1292]], or by the matrons who had refused to perform the function of women, in anger at being deprived by the Senate of the right of riding in carpenta; and who, when the decree was withdrawn, testified their satisfaction in this curious way.