[1415]. It may indeed be misrepresented by Plutarch (who is the only writer who mentions it), and may have been originally an ἀλολυγή. For the confusion of mournful and joyful cries at a sacrifice see Robertson Smith, 411.
[1416]. Robertson Smith notes (p. 396) that young men, or rather lads, occur as sacrificers in Exodus xxiv. 5.
[1417]. p. 91 foll.
[1418]. Mannhardt is not lucid on this point; he was evidently in difficulties (pp. 97-99). He seems clear that the application of the blood produces an identity between victim and youths; but in similar cases it is not through death that victim, god, and priest become identical, but through the life-giving virtue of the blood. The blood-application must surely mean the acquisition of new life; but he makes it symbolic of death.
[1419]. Frazer, G. B. ii. 242.
[1420]. Mannhardt seems to have felt this difficulty (p. 86), and to have tried to overcome it, but without success.
[1421]. I here omit the feasting, as it is by no means certain at what point of time it took place. If the victims themselves were eaten, it would be part of the sacrificial act and would precede the running; but this is not common in the case of such piacula, and one victim, we must remember, was a dog. It is more likely that Val. Max. is here wrong (see above, p. [311], note 6).
[1422]. See Mannhardt, Antike Wald- und Feldkulte, 318 foll., and for other examples, Frazer, G. B. ii. 1 foll.; Preller-Robert, Griech. Myth. i. 144 (Zeus-festival on Pelion).
[1423]. After Schwegler, i. 361; rejected by Marq. (439, note 4).
[1424]. p. 101. The ‘wolves’ represent of course the Palatine city.