A Smaller Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities

by William Smith

Atlantes. (From Temple at Agrigentum: Professor Cockerell.)

ĀTRĀMENTUM, a term applicable to any black colouring substance, for whatever purpose it may be used, like the melan (μέλαν) of the Greeks. There were, however, three principal kinds of atramentum: one called librarium, or scriptorium (in Greek, γραφικὸν μέλαν), writing-ink; another called sutorium, which was used by the shoemakers for dyeing leather; the third tectorium, or pictorium, which was used by painters for some purposes, apparently as a sort of varnish. The inks of the ancients seem to have been more durable than our own; they were thicker and more unctuous, in substance and durability more resembling the ink now used by printers. An inkstand was discovered at Herculaneum, containing ink as thick as oil, and still usable for writing. The ancients used inks of various colours. Red ink, made of minium or vermilion, was used for writing the titles and beginning of books. So also was ink made of rubrica, “red ochre;” and because the headings of laws were written with rubrica, the word rubric came to be used for the civil law. So album, a white or whited table, on which the praetors’ edicts were written, was used in a similar way. A person devoting himself to album and rubrica, was a person devoting himself to the law. [[Album].]

ĀTRĬUM (called αὐλή by the Greeks and by Virgil, and also μεσαύλιον, περίστυλον, περίστῳον) is used in a distinctive as well as collective sense, to designate a particular part in the private houses of the Romans [[Domus]], and also a class of public buildings, so called from their general resemblance in construction to the atrium of a private house. An atrium of the latter description was a building by itself, resembling in some respects the open basilica [[Basilica]], but consisting of three sides. Such was the Atrium Publicum in the capitol, which, Livy informs us, was struck with lightning, B.C. 216. It was at other times attached to some temple or other edifice, and in such case consisted of an open area and surrounding portico in front of the structure. Several of these buildings are mentioned by the ancient historians, two of which were dedicated to the same goddess, Libertas. The most celebrated, as well as the most ancient, was situated on the Aventine Mount. In this atrium there was a tabularium, where the legal tablets (tabulae) relating to the censors were preserved. The other Atrium Libertatis was in the neighbourhood of the Forum Caesaris, and was immediately behind the Basilica Paulli or Aemilia.

AUCTĬO signifies generally “an increasing, an enhancement,” and hence the name is applied to a public sale of goods, at which persons bid against one another. The sale was sometimes conducted by an argentarius, or by a magister auctionis; and the time, place, and conditions of sale, were announced either by a public notice (tabula, album, &c.), or by a crier (praeco). The usual phrases to express the giving notice of a sale were, auctionem proscribere, praedicare; and to determine on a sale, auctionem constituere. The purchasers (emtores), when assembled, were sometimes said ad tabulam adesse. The phrases signifying to bid are, liceri, licitari, which was done either by word of mouth, or by such significant hints as are known to all people who have attended an auction. The property was said to be knocked down (addici) to the purchaser. The praeco, or crier, seems to have acted the part of the modern auctioneer, so far as calling out the biddings, and amusing the company. Slaves, when sold by auction, were placed on a stone, or other elevated thing, as is the case when slaves are sold in the United States of North America; and hence the phrase homo de lapide emtus. It was usual to put up a spear (hasta) in auctions; a symbol derived, it is said, from the ancient practice of selling under a spear the booty acquired in war.

AUCTOR, a word which contains the same element as aug-eo, and signifies generally one who enlarges, confirms, or gives to a thing its completeness and efficient form. The numerous technical significations of the word are derivable from this general notion. As he who gives to a thing that which is necessary for its completeness may in this sense be viewed as the chief actor or doer, the word auctor is also used in the sense of one who originates or proposes a thing; but this cannot be viewed as its primary meaning. Accordingly, the word auctor, when used in connection with lex or senatus consultum, often means him who originates and proposes.—The expressions patres auctores fiunt, patres auctores facti, have given rise to much discussion. In the earlier periods of the Roman state, the word patres was equivalent to patricii; in the later period, when the patricians had lost all importance as a political body, the term patres signified the senate. Hence some ambiguity has arisen. The expression patres auctores fiunt, when used of the early period of Rome, means that the determinations of the populus in the comitia centuriata were confirmed by the patricians in the comitia curiata. Till the time of Servius Tullius there were only the comitia curiata, and this king first established the comitia centuriata, in which the plebs also voted, and consequently it was not till after this time that the phrase patres auctores fiunt could be properly applied. Livy, however, uses it of an earlier period. The comitia curiata first elected the king, and then by another vote conferred upon him the imperium. The latter was called lex curiata de imperio, an expression not used by Livy, who employs instead the phrase patres auctores fiunt (Liv. i. 17, 22, 32).—After the exile of the last Tarquin, the patres, that is the patricians, had still the privilege of confirming at the comitia curiata the vote of the comitia centuriata, that is, they gave to it the patrum auctoritas; or, in other words, the patres were auctores facti. In the fifth century of the city a change was made. By one of the laws of the plebeian dictator Q. Publilius Philo, it was enacted that in the case of leges to be enacted at the comitia centuriata, the patres should be auctores, that is, the curiae should give their assent before the vote of the comitia centuriata. By a lex Maenia of uncertain date the same change was made as to elections.—But both during the earlier period and afterwards no business could be brought before the comitia without first receiving the sanction of the senate; and accordingly the phrase patres auctores fiunt came now to be applied to the approval of a measure by the senate before it was confirmed by the votes of the people. This preliminary approval was also termed senatus auctoritas.—When the word auctor is applied to him who recommends but does not originate a legislative measure, it is equivalent to suasor. Sometimes both auctor and suasor are used in the same sentence, and the meaning of each is kept distinct. With reference to dealings between individuals, auctor has the sense of owner. In this sense auctor is the seller (venditor), as opposed to the buyer (emtor): and hence we have the phrase a malo auctore emere. Auctor is also used generally to express any person under whose authority any legal act is done. In this sense, it means a tutor who is appointed to aid or advise a woman on account of the infirmity of her sex.

AUCTŌRĀMENTUM, the pay of gladiators. [[Gladiatores].]

AUCTŌRĬTAS. The technical meanings of this word correlate with those of auctor. The auctoritas senatus was not a senatus-consultum; it was a measure, incomplete in itself, which received its completion by some other authority. Auctoritas, as applied to property, is equivalent to legal ownership, being a correlation of auctor.

AUDĪTŌRĬUM, as the name implies, is any place for hearing. It was the practice among the Romans for poets and others to read their compositions to their friends, who were sometimes called the auditorium; but the word was also used to express any place in which any thing was heard, and under the empire it was applied to a court of justice. Under the republic the place for all judicial proceedings was the comitium and the forum. But for the sake of shelter and convenience it became the practice to hold courts in the Basilicae, which contained halls, which were also called auditoria. It is first under M. Aurelius that the auditorium principis is mentioned, by which we must understand a hall or room in the imperial residence; and in such a hall Septimius Severus and the later emperors held their regular sittings when they presided as judges. The latest jurists use the word generally for any place in which justice was administered.

AUGUR, AUGŬRĬUM; AUSPEX, AUSPĬCĬUM. Augur or auspex meant a diviner by birds, but came in course of time, like the Greek οἰωνός, to be applied in a more extended sense: his art was called augurium or auspicium. Plutarch relates that the augures were originally termed auspices. The word auspex was supplanted by augur, but the scientific term for the observation continued on the contrary to be auspicium and not augurium. By Greek writers on Roman affairs, the augurs are called οἰωνοπόλοι, οἰωνοσκόποι, οἰωνισταί, οἱ ἐπ’ οἰωνοῖς ἱερεῖς. The belief that the flight of birds gave some intimation of the will of the gods seems to have been prevalent among many nations of antiquity, and was common to the Greeks, as well as the Romans; but it was only among the latter people that it was reduced to a complete system, governed by fixed rules, and handed down from generation to generation. In Greece, the oracles supplanted the birds, and the future was learnt from Apollo and other gods, rarely from Zeus, who possessed very few oracles in Greece. The contrary was the case at Rome: it was from Jupiter that the future was learnt, and the birds were regarded as his messengers. It must be remarked in general, that the Roman auspices were essentially of a practical nature; they gave no information respecting the course of future events, they did not inform men what was to happen, but simply taught them what they were to do, or not to do; they assigned no reason for the decision of Jupiter—they simply announced, yes or no. The words augurium and auspicium came to be used in course of time to signify the observation of various kinds of signs. They were divided into five sorts: ex caelo, ex avibus, ex tripudiis, ex quadrupedibus, ex diris. Of these, the last three formed no part of the ancient auspices.—1. Ex caelo. This included the observation of the various kinds of thunder and lightning, and was regarded as the most important, maximum auspicium. Whenever it was reported by a person authorised to take the auspices, that Jupiter thundered or lightened, the comitia could not be held.—2. Ex avibus. It was only a few birds which could give auguries among the Romans. They were divided into two classes: Oscines, those which gave auguries by singing, or their voice, and Alites, those which gave auguries by their flight. To the former class belonged the raven (corvus) and the crow (cornix), the first of these giving a favourable omen (auspicium ratum) when it appeared on the right, the latter, on the contrary, when it was seen on the left: likewise the owl (noctua) and the hen (gallina). To the aves alites belonged first of all the eagle (aquila), which is called pre-eminently the bird of Jupiter (Jovis ales), and next the vulture (vultur). Some birds were included both among the oscines and the alites: such were the Picus Martius, and Feronius, and the Parra. These were the principal birds consulted in the auspices. When the birds favoured an undertaking, they were said addicere, admittere or secundare, and were then called addictivae, admissivae, secundae, or praepetes: when unfavourable they were said abdicere, arcere, refragari, &c., and were then called adversae or alterae. The birds which gave unfavourable omens were termed funebres, inhibitae, lugubres, malae, &c., and such auspices were called clivia and clamatoria.—3. Ex tripudiis. These auspices were taken from the feeding of chickens, and were especially employed on military expeditions. The chickens were kept in a cage, under care of a person called pullarius; and when the auspices were to be taken, the pullarius opened the cage and threw to the chickens pulse or a kind of soft cake. If they refused to come out or to eat, or uttered a cry (occinerent), or beat their wings, or flew away, the signs were considered unfavourable. On the contrary, if they ate greedily, so that something fell from their mouth and struck the earth, it was called tripudium solistimum (tripudium quasi terripavium, solistimum, from solum, according to the ancient writers), and was held a favourable sign.—4. Ex quadrupedibus. Auguries could also be taken from four-footed animals; but these formed no part of the original science of the augurs, and were never employed by them in taking auspices on behalf of the state, or in the exercise of their art properly so called. They must be looked upon simply as a mode of private divination. When a fox, a wolf, a horse, a dog, or any other kind of quadruped ran across a person’s path or appeared in an unusual place, it formed an augury.—5. Ex diris, sc. signis. Under this head was included every kind of augury which does not fall under any of the four classes mentioned above, such as sneezing, stumbling, and other accidental things. There was an important augury of this kind connected with the army, which was called ex acuminibus, that is, the flames appearing at the points of spears or other weapons. The ordinary manner of taking the auspices, properly so called (i.e. ex caelo and ex avibus), was as follows: The person who was to take them first marked out with a wand (lituus) a division in the heavens called templum or tescum, within which he intended to make his observations. The station where he was to take the auspices was also separated by a solemn formula from the rest of the land, and was likewise called templum or tescum. He then proceeded to pitch a tent in it (tabernaculum capere), and this tent again was also called templum, or, more accurately, templum minus. [[Templum].] Within the walls of Rome, or, more properly speaking, within the pomoerium, there was no occasion to select a spot and pitch a tent on it, as there was a place on the Arx on the summit of the Capitoline hill, called Auguraculum, which had been consecrated once for all for this purpose. In like manner there was in every Roman camp a place called augurale, which answered the same purpose; but on all other occasions a place had to be consecrated, and a tent to be pitched, as, for instance, in the Campus Martius, when the comitia centuriata were to be held. The person who was then taking the auspices waited for the favourable signs to appear; but it was necessary during this time that there should be no interruption of any kind whatsoever (silentium), and hence the word silentium was used in a more extended sense to signify the absence of every thing that was faulty. Every thing, on the contrary, that rendered the auspices invalid was called vitium; and hence we constantly read in Livy and other writers of vitio magistratus creati, vitio lex lata, &c. The watching for the auspices was called spectio or servare de coelo, the declaration of what was observed nuntiatio, or, if they were unfavourable, obnuntiatio. In the latter case, the person who took the auspices seems usually to have said alio die, by which the business in hand, whether the holding of the comitia or any thing else, was entirely stopped.—In ancient times no one but a patrician could take the auspices. Hence the possession of the auspices (habere auspicia) is one of the most distinguished prerogatives of the patricians; they are said to be penes patrum, and are called auspicia patrum. It would further appear that every patrician might take the auspices; but here a distinction is to be observed between the auspicia privata and auspicia publica. One of the most frequent occasions on which the auspicia privata were taken, was in case of a marriage: and this was one great argument used by the patricians against connubium between themselves and the plebeians, as it would occasion, they urged, perturbationem auspiciorum publicorum privatorumque. In taking these private auspices, it would appear that any patrician was employed who knew how to form templa and was acquainted with the art of augury. The case, however, was very different with respect to the auspicia publica, generally called auspicia simply, or those which concerned the state. The latter could only be taken by the persons who represented the state, and who acted as mediators between the gods and the state; for though all the patricians were eligible for taking the auspices, yet it was only the magistrates who were in actual possession of them. In case, however, there was no patrician magistrate, the auspices became vested in the whole body of the patricians (auspicia ad patres redeunt), who had recourse to an interregnum for the renewal of them, and for handing them over in a perfect state to the new magistrates: hence we find the expressions repetere de integro auspicia, and renovare per interregnum auspicia.—The distinction between the duties of the magistrates and the augurs in taking the auspices is one of the most difficult points connected with this subject, but perhaps a satisfactory solution of these difficulties may be found by taking an historical view of the question. We are told not only that the kings were in possession of the auspices, but that they themselves were acquainted with the art and practised it. Romulus is stated to have appointed three augurs, but only as his assistants in taking the auspices, a fact which it is important to bear in mind. Their dignity gradually increased in consequence of their being employed at the inauguration of the kings, and also in consequence of their becoming the preservers and depositaries of the science of augury. Formed into a collegium, they handed down to their successors the various rules of the science, while the kings, and subsequently the magistrates of the republic, were liable to change. Their duties thus became two-fold, to assist the magistrates in taking up auspices, and to preserve a scientific knowledge of the art. As the augurs were therefore merely the assistants of the magistrates, they could not take the auspices without the latter, though the magistrates on the contrary could dispense with their assistance. At the same time it must be borne in mind, that as the augurs were the interpreters of the science, they possessed the right of declaring whether the auspices were valid or invalid. They thus possessed in reality a veto upon every important public transaction; and they frequently exercised this power as a political engine to vitiate the election of such parties as were unfavourable to the enclusive privileges of the patricians. But although the augurs could declare that there was some fault in the auspices, yet, on the other hand, they could not, by virtue of their office, declare that any unfavourable sign had appeared to them, since it was not to them that the auspices were sent. Thus we are told that the augurs did not possess the spectio. This spectio was of two kinds, one more extensive and the other more limited. In the one case the person who exercised it could put a stop to the proceedings of any other magistrate by his obnuntiatio: this was called spectio et nuntiatio (perhaps also spectio cum nuntiatione), and belonged only to the highest magistrates, the consuls, dictators, interreges, and, with some modifications, to the praetors. In the other case, the person who took the auspices only exercised the spectio in reference to the duties of his own office, and could not interfere with any other magistrate: this was called spectio sine nuntiatione, and belonged to the other magistrates, the censors, aediles, and quaestors. Now as the augurs did not possess the auspices, they consequently could not possess the spectio (habere spectionem); but as the augurs were constantly employed by the magistrates to take the auspices, they exercised the spectio, though they did not possess it in virtue of their office. When they were employed by the magistrates in taking the auspices, they possessed the right of the nuntiatio, and thus had the power, by the declaration of unfavourable signs (obnuntiatio), to put a stop to all important public transactions.—The auspices were not conferred upon the magistrates in any special manner. It was the act of their election which made them the recipients of the auspices, since the comitia, in which they were appointed to their office, were held auspicato, and consequently their appointment was regarded as ratified by the gods. The auspices, therefore, passed immediately into their hands upon the abdication of their predecessors in office.—The auspices belonging to the different magistrates were divided into two classes, called auspicia maxima or majora and minora. The former, which belonged originally to the kings, passed over to the consuls, censors, and praetors, and likewise to the extraordinary magistrates, the dictators, interreges, and consular tribunes. The quaestors and the curule aediles, on the contrary, had only the auspicia minora.—It was a common opinion in antiquity that a college of three augurs was appointed by Romulus, answering to the number of the early tribes, the Ramnes, Tities, and Lucerenses, but the accounts vary respecting their origin and number. At the passing of the Ogulnian law (B.C. 300) the augurs were four in number. This law increased the number of pontiffs to eight, by the addition of four plebeians, and that of the augurs to nine by the addition of five plebeians. The number of nine augurs lasted down to the dictatorship of Sulla, who increased them to fifteen, a multiple of the original three, probably with a reference to the early tribes. A sixteenth was added by Julius Caesar after his return from Egypt. The members of the college of augurs possessed the right of self-election (cooptatio) until B.C. 103, the year of the Domitian law. By this law it was enacted that vacancies in the priestly colleges should be filled up by the votes of a minority of the tribes, i.e. seventeen out of thirty-five chosen by lot. The Domitian law was repealed by Sulla B.C. 81, but again restored B.C. 63, during the consulship of Cicero, by the tribune T. Annius Labienus, with the support of Caesar. It was a second time abrogated by Antony B.C. 44; whether again restored by Hirtius and Pansa in their general annulment of the acts of Antony, seems uncertain. The emperors possessed the right of electing augurs at pleasure. The augurs were elected for life, and even if capitally convicted, never lost their sacred character. When a vacancy occurred, the candidate was nominated by two of the elder members of the college, the electors were sworn, and the new member was then solemnly inaugurated. On such occasion there was always a splendid banquet given, at which all the augurs were expected to be present. The only distinction in the college was one of age; an elder augur always voted before a younger, even if the latter filled one of the higher offices in the state. The head of the college was called magister collegii. As insignia of their office the augurs wore the trabea, or public dress, and carried in their hand the lituus or curved wand. [[Lituus].] On the coins of the Romans, who filled the office of augur, we constantly find the lituus, and along with it, not unfrequently, the capis, an earthen vessel which was used by them in sacrifices. The science of the augurs was called jus augurum and jus augurium, and was preserved in books (libri augurales), which are frequently mentioned in the ancient writers. The expression for consulting the augurs was referre ad augures, and their answers were called decreta or responsa augurum. The science of augury had greatly declined in the time of Cicero; and although he frequently deplores its neglect in his De Divinatione, yet neither he nor any of the educated classes appears to have had any faith in it.