[1000]. de Civ. Dei 2. 29. S. Augustine couples it with the focus Vestae, as something well known: and this could not be said at that time of any object in the temple of Jupiter Feretrius. The epithet Capitolinus would suit the stone of Terminus far better; and this is, in fact, made almost certain by Servius’ language when speaking of Virgil’s ‘Capitoli immobile saxum’ (Aen. 9. 448), which he identifies with the ‘lapidem ipsum Termini.’ Doubtless if we could be sure that such a stone existed, we might guess that it was an aerolite (Strachan-Davidson, p. 76, who quotes examples).
[1001]. So Nettleship, l. c.: and Strachan-Davidson, l. c.
[1002]. He quotes Plin. N. H. 37. 135 ‘cerauniae nigrae rubentesque et similes securibus.’
[1003]. Communicated to Mr. Strachan-Davidson, and mentioned by him in a note (op. cit. p. 77). An instance in Retzel, History of Mankind, vol. i. p. 175. The other suggestion, that it was a meteoric stone, is also quite possible: for Greek examples, see Schömann, Griech. Alterthümer, ii. 171 foll.
[1004]. Liv. 30. 43.
[1005]. We may compare the ‘orbita’ of the cult of Jupiter Sancius at Iguvium: Bücheler, Umbrica, 141. See above, p. [139].
[1006]. It may be as well to say, before leaving the subject, that I certainly agree with Mr. Strachan-Davidson that the ordinary oath, ‘per Iovem lapidem,’ where the swearer throws the stone away from him (described by Polybius, 3. 25), has nothing to do with the ritual of the Fetials.
[1007]. Festus, p. 2. Cp. 128, where this stone is distinguished from the other, which was the ‘ostium Orci.’ Serv. Aen. 3. 175.
[1008]. Serv. l. c. Marquardt, and Aust following him, add the matrons with bare feet and the magistrates without their praetexta: but this rests on the authority of Petronius (Sat. 44), who surely is not writing of Rome, where the ceremony was only a tradition, to judge by Fest. p. 2.
[1009]. Varro, L. L. 6. 94.