¹ In the MSS the sermon has erroneously been attributed to St. Augustine (see the pseudo-Augustinian sermo 265 [PL 39.2237–40]). The sermon shows, however, the imprint of Caesarius' mind and style so clearly that there can be hardly any doubt that he is the author of this notable composition. It throws revealing light on the difficulties a pastor of souls in Caesarius' day had to cope with in a region whose inhabitants, though theoretically Christianized, were still bogged down in the customs of pagan society.Google Scholar

² That Caesarius was quite active in working for the eradication of pagan customs, especially of the superstitious usages practiced on the Kalends of January, is confirmed by a passage in his biography written by Cyprian of Toulon and four other disciples: ‘Praedicationes quoque contra sacrilegos et aruspices, contra kalendarum quoque paganissimos ritus, contraque auguria, lignicolas, fonticolas, diversorumque vitia fecit’ (Sancti Caesarii Vita ab eius familiaribus scripta 1.55, ed. Morin, G., Sancti Caesarii episcopi Arelatensis opera omnia 2 [Maredsous 1942] 319).Google Scholar

³ Sancti Caesarii episcopi Arelatensis sermones (Sancti Caesarii episcopi Arelatensis opera omnia 1.1–2 [Maredsous 1937]). The edition of the sermons is reprinted in CCL 103 and 104. Morin's untiring, lifelong editorial labors have found due recognition in an article by Daly, W. M. (‘Caesarius of Arles: A Precursor of Medieval Christendom,’ Traditio 26 [1970] 1–28). On the basis of Morin's edition of the sermons, Daly describes the important role Caesarius plays as a witness to the new social order which gradually began to take shape in the period of transition from the imperial framework of Rome to that of medieval Christendom.Google Scholar

⁴ Sermo 13.5 (CCL 103.67).Google Scholar

⁵ Sermo 193 (CCL 104.782–86). In quite a number of MSS, the sermon has erroneously been ascribed to St. Augustine (see the pseudo-Augustinian sermo 130 [PL 39.2003–05]). In other MSS, it has been handed down under the name of Sedatus, bishop of Nîmes, a contemporary of Caesarius (see Wilmart, A., ‘Une homélie de Sedatus, évêque de Nîmes, pour la Nativité de Notre Seigneur,’ Rev. Bénéd. 35 [1923] 7f., who gives a plausible explanation of how the confusion might have come about).Google Scholar

⁶ Sermo 193.2 (CCL 104.784).Google Scholar

⁷ Ibid. Google Scholar

⁸ Sermo 192.2 (CCL 104.780): ‘qui cervulum facientes in ferarum se velint habitus commutare.’ Like the sermons 13 and 193, sermo 192 also went under the name of a number of authors other than Caesarius. Besides St. Augustine (see the pseudo-Augustinian sermo 129 [PL 2001–03]), St. Maxentius, Faustus of Riez, and a certain ‘Faustinus episcopus’ were erroneously credited with its authorship (see Morin's introductory note and critical apparatus to the sermon in CCL 104.779).Google Scholar

⁹ ‘Agniculam facere,’ Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie 14 (1906) 430f.: ‘facere hat hier den Sinn: ein Tier vorstellen, sich als wildes oder zahmes Tier vermummen, einen Hirsch oder ein Lamm machen, indem man ein Geweih aufsetzte oder sich in ein Lammfell steckte.’ We may add that, before Denk, the term cervulum facere had correctly been understood and rendered with den Hirsch spielen by Arnold, C. F., Caesarius von Arelate und die gallische Kirche seiner Zeit (Leipzig 1894) 174.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Hieron, ., De vir. ill. 106 (ed. Richardson, E. C., TU 14.1 [1896] 49): ‘Pacianus, in Pyrenaei iugis Barcelonae episcopus, scripsit varia opuscula, de quibus est Cervus.’ This work of Pacian's has perished. It was to Dexter, the son of Pacian, that Jerome dedicated his De viris illustribus (see ibid., Prologus, Richardson 1).Google Scholar

¹¹ From this we may conclude that the title of Pacian's little book was perhaps Cervulus, not Cervus, as reported by Jerome.Google Scholar

¹² Paraenesis sive exhortatorius libellus ad poenitentiam 1 (PL 13.1081).Google Scholar

¹³ The term cervulum facere survived in the French proverb: ‘N'en faire que le cerf.’ See Jacobus Hofmann, Joh., Lexicon Universale 1 (Leyden 1698) 532 s.v. Biculam facere, sive cervulum: ‘Unde proverbium apud Gallos, , n'en faire que le cerf. In variis enim Galliae inprimis urbibus id ludicri olim in usu.’ Google Scholar

¹⁴ This exegetical work of St. Ambrose consists of four sermons. The arrangement of the sermons in the MSS is not uniform. While the ‘De interpellatione David’ is the second sermon in our earliest witness, an eighth-century MS, it is in the fourth place in MSS of the twelfth century. On the basis of internal criteria, Schenkl, C., the editor of the work in the Vienna Corpus, has accepted the arrangement found in the later MSS. The passage on the cervus as a type of David and Christ occurs in the first chapter of the second and fourth sermons respectively. On ‘tractatus’ as a synonym of ‘sermo’ or ‘homilia,’ see Jordan, H., Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatar (Leipzig 1911) 309.Google Scholar

¹⁵ De interpellatione Iob et David 4 [2].1.5 (CSEL 32.2.271).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Hilarus, , often mistakenly called Hilarius, died about 540.Google Scholar

¹⁷ On the vicus Mimatensis, see Graesse, G. T., Orbis latinus ³ (Berlin 1922) 205.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Vita B. Hilari episcopi 2 (Acta SS, Oct. 11 [Paris and Rome 1870] 638).Google Scholar

¹⁹ See nn. 1 and 5 supra. See nn. 1 and 5 supra. Google Scholar

²⁰ Though the precise date of the Synod of Auxerre is not known, it is certain that it was held during the episcopate of Aunarius (Aunacharius), who was bishop of Auxerre from 561 to 603. In his capacity as diocesan bishop, Aunarius was the first to affix his signature to the document containing the forty-five canons of the synod.Google Scholar

²¹ Synodus Autissiodorensis can. 1, ed. Maassen, F., Concilia aevi Merovingici (MGH, Leg. 3, Concilia 1) 179; ed. de Clercq, C., Concilia Galliae A.511–A.695 (CCL 148a) 265.Google Scholar

²² Among earlier authors who have advanced this view, Caspari, C. P., Kirchenhistorische Anecdota 1 (Christiania 1883; repr. Brussels 1964) 175 n. 2, mentions Sirmond, Jacques, Ménard, Hugo, Baluze, Étienne, and Henschel, G. A. L. ‘in seiner Ausgabe von Du Cange's Lexikon.’ To these four authors we may add Vossius, G. J., quoted by Martin Lipenius in his treatise Historia strenarum (Graevius, J. G., Thesaurus antiquitatum Romanarum [12 vols.; Venice 1732–37] 12.470); and Berger, Christoph Heinrich, Commentatio de personis vulgo larvis seu mascharis von der carnavals-lust, critico, historico, morali atque iuridico modo diligenter conscripta (Frankfurt and Leipzig 1723) 218: ‘Vecolo aut cervolo facere, hoc est sub forma vitulae aut cervuli per plateas discurrere.’ Of recent authors we may mention Nilsson, M. P., ‘Studien zur Vorgeschichte des Weihnachtsfestes,’ ARW 19 (1916–19) 76 f.; Schneider, F., ‘Über Kalendae Ianuariae und Martiae,’ ibid. 20 (1920–21) 98; Jecker, G., Die Heimat des hl. Pirmin, des Apostels der Alamannen (Beiträge zur Geschichte des alten Mönchtums und des Benediktinerordens 13; Münster in Westf. 1927) 144 n. 73; McNeill, J. T. and Gamer, H. M., Medieval Handbooks of Penance (Records of Civilization 29; New York 1938) 277 and n. 1; de Vries, J., Keltische Religion (Religionen der Menschheit 18; Stuttgart 1961) 174.Google Scholar

²³ Consentius, a fifth-century Latin grammarian, is the first author to mention the tendency in his native Gaul toward a shift in the pronunciation from i to e (Grammatici Latini [ed. Keil, H., 7 vols; Leipzig 1855–80] 5.394, lines 11–14). On the confusion occurring in the pronunciation of i and u, see Kieckers, E., Historische lateinische Grammatik mit Berücksichtigung des Vulgärlateins und der romanischen Sprachen 1 (Munich 1930) 23–25; on the omission of final m, ibid. 155.Google Scholar

²⁴ In fact, ae for e is found a second time in our document: caelaverunt for celaverunt (see de Clercq's edition [n. 21 supra] 270; critical apparatus to line 133).Google Scholar

²⁵ We quote some instances according to de Clercq's edition. We find e for i: trepalium (269.94); susteneant, conscripsemus, and instituemus (270.127; 129; 130); o for u: matricola (265.10); avuncoli (269.93); o for final um: ad archidiacono; ad synodo (266.20 f.; 23); omission of final m: ante <h>ora secunda; post media nocte (266.37; 38).ora secunda; post media nocte (266.37; 38).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=We+quote+some+instances+according+to+de+Clercq's+edition.+We+find+e+for+i:+trepalium+(269.94);+susteneant,+conscripsemus,+and+instituemus+(270.127;+129;+130);+o+for+u:+matricola+(265.10);+avuncoli+(269.93);+o+for+final+um:+ad+archidiacono;+ad+synodo+(266.20+f.;+23);+omission+of+final+m:+ante+ora+secunda;+post+media+nocte+(266.37;+38).>Google Scholar

²⁶ ‘Janvier (Calandes de),’ DACL 7.2 (1927) 2150.Google Scholar

²⁷ The penitentials bore various names: Libri poenitentiales, Iudicia de poenitentia, Libri de remediis peccatorum, and the like.Google Scholar

²⁸ In this connection, it ought to be noted that some penitentials of Frankish origin have erroneously been ascribed to Irish and Anglo-Saxon authors, as, for instance, the Excarpsus Cummeani (‘Pseudo-Cummean’), and the Poenitentiale Pseudo-Theodori (‘Pseudo-Theodore’). These penitentials were not written by Cummean († 662) and Archbishop Theodore of Canterbury († 690), but are the works of later compilers who combined substantial extracts from the genuine penitentials of Cummean and Theodore with material freely borrowed from other sources. On ‘Pseudo-Cummean,’ see Bieler, L., The Irish Penitentials (Scriptores Latini Hibernici 5; Dublin 1963) 7; Oakley, T. P., English Penitential Discipline and Anglo-Saxon Law in Their Joint Influence (Studies in History, Economics and Public Law 242; New York 1923) 30 and n. 1; on ‘Pseudo-Theodore,’ ibid. 31f.Google Scholar

²⁹ See the transcription of the penitential by Lowe, E. A., The Bobbio Missal, A Gallic Mass-Book (MS Paris. Lat. 13246): Text (HBS 58; London 1920) 175, and the facsimile of the MS in HBS 53 (London 1917) fol. 289^r. Lowe (‘The Palaeography of the Bobbio Missal,’ The Bobbio Missal [MS. Paris. Lat. 13246]: Notes and Studies [HBS 61; London 1924] 105) supposes that the text was written by a busy priest ‘a little over twelve hundred years ago, in an obscure village somewhere on this side of the Alps, in a district where French was the spoken language.’ Google Scholar

³⁰ Schmitz II 322. Schmitz (ibid. 319) acknowledges his indebtedness to Prof. Ouverleaux, Brussels, who placed at his disposal a diplomatic transcription of the penitential in the Brussels MS, with comments on some vagaries of spelling in the document, which are characteristic of the Merovingian period. On the spelling ‘peneteat,’ Ouverleaux remarks (ibid. 319 n. 2): ‘On trouve quatre fois peneteat (scriptura plena), ce qui m'a autorisé à résoudre partout ailleurs l'abréviation pent. par peneteat.’ Google Scholar

³¹ Poenitentiale Hubertense can. 35 (Wasserschleben 382; Schmitz II 336). The penitential was first published by Martène, E. in his Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum amplissima collectio (9 vols.; Paris 1724–33) 7.28–30 ‘ex ms. Andaginensis monasterii Huberti, S. in Arduenna,’ and republished from Martène's edition by Wasserschleben and Schmitz. The MS used by Martène for his edition is lost. The penitential probably dates from the first half of the ninth century (Schmitz II 332). On Saint-Hubert, an abbey of Augustinian canons in the Ardennes in Belgian Luxembourg (originally Andagium), see Cottineau, L. H., Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés 2 (Mâcon 1939) 2731f.Google Scholar

³² Medieval Handbooks (n. 22 supra) 276f.Google Scholar

³³ Poenit. Merseburgense can. 32: ‘Si quis, quod in kalend. Ianuar. multi faciunt, quod adhuc de paganis residit [sic], in cervolum, quod dicitur, aut in vecola vadit, III ann. poen., quia hoc daemonum est’ (Wasserschleben 395; Schmitz II 361). — Poenit. Valicellanum I can. 88: ‘Si quis quod in kalendis Ianuarii, quod multi faciunt, adhuc de paganis residet [sic], in cervolum quod dicitur aut in vetula vadit, III annos peniteat, quia hoc demonium est’ (Schmitz I 311). The Merseburgense (called after the ninth-century MS 103 of the Cathedral Library at Merseburg, Germany) is closely related to the Burgundian Penitential; and the First Vallicellian (edited by Schmitz from a late tenth-century MS [E. 15] of the Biblioteca Vallicelliana at Rome) in turn is a direct descendant of the Merseburgense. Google Scholar

³⁴ See the text of Poenit. Burgundense (can. 34) above and n. 44 infra. Poenit. Floriacense can. 31: ‘Si quis, quod in calendis Ianuarii multi faciunt, quod de paganis remansit, in cervulo quod dicitur, aut in vehicula [sic] vadit, III annis poeniteat, quia et hoc daemonium est’ (Wasserschleben 424; Schmitz II 343). The Floriacense, dating from about 775–800, is called after the Benedictine Abbey Fleury-sur-Loire (Floriacum, in the diocese of Orléans), the original owner of the MS by which the penitential has been transmitted. From this MS it was published by E. Martène in his De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, and republished by Wasserschleben from Martène's work, 1700 edition, and by Schmitz from the 1788 edition. The MS is now lost. On the Abbey Fleury-sur-Loire, see Cottineau, , Répertoire (n. 31 supra) 2.2610–13. — Poenit. Hubertense can 35: ‘Si quis in calendis Ianuarii cervolam [sic] velvetolam observaverit, quae de paganis remansit, III annis poeniteat’ (Wasserschleben 382; Schmitz II 336). On this penitential, see n. 31 supra. Google Scholar

³⁵ Poenit. Vindobonense can. 35: 'Si quis in kalendas Ianuarias vadit in cervulo aut alias inlicitas causas fecerit, III annos penit., que adhoc [sic] daemonium est et a paganis relictum (Schmitz II 353; see Wasserschleben 419). The penitential (called after the tenth-century MS 2225 [olim theol. 651] in the Nationalbibliothek at Vienna) contains the Burgundian Penitential with only insignificant modifications, and, in addition, a number of miscellaneous canons (canons 43–94), many of which are also found in the First Vallicellian Penitential. Google Scholar

³⁶ Poenit. Sangallense Tripartitum (preserved in cod. Sangall. 150, saec. ix) can 21: ‘Si quis in kalendis Ianuarii consuetudine paganorum cum cervulo aut qualibet vetula ambulaverit, III annos peniteat’ (Schmitz II 181). — Poenit. XXXV Capitulorum (Capita iudiciorum) 18: ‘Si quis in calendas januarias consuetudine paganorum cum cervulo aut qualibet vetula (variant: vecula) ambulaverit, III annos paenit., quia et hoc demonum est’ (Wasserschleben 517; Schmitz II 237). ‘Vetula’ is the reading in the ninth-century cod. Sangall. 150; the variant ‘vecula’ is from cod. Vindobon. 2223 (olim jur. can. 116) saec. viii/ix. Both the Tripartite St. Gall Penitential and the Capita iudiciorum belong to the series of Frankish composite penitentials of the late eighth or early ninth century. — Poenit. Valicellanum II can. 62: ‘Si quis in Kalendis Ianuarii consuetudine paganorum cum cervola [sic] aut quolibet veluculo [sic] ambulaverit, III annos peniteat’ (Schmitz I 379). This penitential, preserved in MS C.6 of the Library of the Vallicelli at Rome, dates from the tenth or early eleventh century. Fournier, P. (‘Études sur les pénitentiels,’ Revue d'histoire et de littérature religieuses 7 [1902] 59–70; see esp. 67–70) has suggested that it is probably the work of an Italian canonist who compiled a large number of penitential canons of Frankish origin, altered them in some particulars to bring them up to date, and augmented his collection by adding some more canons then in circulation in Italy.Google Scholar

³⁷ English Penitential Discipline (n. 28 supra) 117 n. 4.Google Scholar

³⁸ See ibid. 130.Google Scholar

³⁹ As a rule, pagania, a pagan superstition, a pagan practice, is used in the plural, for instance, ‘paganias facere’ (MGH, Leg. 2.1.25).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Wasserschleben, 255; Schmitz II 682.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Libri duo de synodalibus causis et disciplinis ecclesiasticis 1.304 (ed. Wasserschleben, [Leipzig 1840; repr. 1964] 145): ‘Fecisti aliquid, quod pagani faciunt in kalendis Ianuariis in cervulo vel vegula (variant: ‘in ceritulla vel vinegula’ Morin. ex. cod. Paris.)? Tres annos poeniteas.’ The Migne text of the work (PL 132.187–400), entitled De ecclesiasticis disciplinis et religione Christiana, is a reprint of the edition by Stephanus Baluzius (Étienne Baluze), Paris 1671. The numbering of chapters in this edition differs from that in Wasserschleben's edition. Our canon is chapter 300 of the first book (col. 250 of the Migne volume).Google Scholar

⁴² Decretum collectarium 19.5 (PL 140.965): ‘Fecisti aliquid tale quale pagani fecerunt et adhuc faciunt in Kalend. Ianuarii, in cervulo, vel in vegula (variant: vehiculo Schmitz II 431)? Si fecisti, triginta dies in pane et aqua poeniteas.’ Google Scholar

⁴³ ‘Si quis kalendas ianuarias in cervolo vel vicola vadit, III annos peniteat’ (ed. Lowe, ; see n. 29 supra).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ ‘Si quis — quod in kl ianuariis multi faciunt quod adhuc de paganis resedit — in cervolo quod dicitur aut in vecola vadit, III annos peneteat [sic], quia et hoc demonum est’ (ed. Schmitz, ; see p. 96 and n. 30 supra).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Poenit. Sangallense Simplex can. 28: ‘Si quis kalendis januarii in cervulo aut vetula vadit, III annos abstineat’ (Schmitz II 347; Wasserschleben 428). Apart from textual variations and the different arrangement of the material, the provisions of this penitential are the same as those of the Burgundense and related penitentials.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Poenit. Pseudo-Romanum can. 36: ‘Si quis in kalendis Ianuarii, quod multi faciunt, et in cervulo, ut dicunt, aut in vetula vadit, III annos poeniteat’ (Wasserschleben 368; Schmitz I 479; Schmitz II 296). In order to have a satisfactory text, we accept the reading of the tenth-century cod. Sangall. 679 which adds ‘ut’ after ‘in cervulo’ (see the critical apparatus in Schmitz II 297). The reading ‘in cervulo ut dicunt’ agrees with the reading ‘in cervulo quod dicitur’ of the Floriacense and Burgundense (see nn. 34 and 44 supra) and with the reading ‘in cervolum quod dicitur’ of the Merseburgense, First Vallicellian Penitential, and Parisiense (see nn. 33 supra and 52 infra). With the ‘ut’ missing, as in the editions of Wasserschleben and Schmitz, the text is awkward, and Schmitz (II 296) does not improve it by reading ‘ducunt’ in the place of ‘dicunt.’ Of Halitgar's work only the sixth and last book is a penitential in the strict sense of the word. In the Preface to this book, Halitgar gives it the misleading title Liber poenitentialis ex scrinio Romanae ecclesiae. The view of Schmitz that it is Roman in origin and constituted the model for the development of the penitential system has been rejected by the overwhelming majority of the leading scholars on the subject of the penitentials.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ See the texts of these penitential canons nn. 33, 34, and 36 supra. Google Scholar

⁴⁸ See the texts of these penitential canons nn. 34 and 36 supra. Google Scholar

⁴⁹ See the text of this penitential canon p. 98 supra. Google Scholar

⁵⁰ See Regino's text n. 41 supra. Google Scholar

⁵¹ See Burchard's text n. 42 supra. Google Scholar

⁵² Poenit. Parisiense (preserved in cod. Paris. B.N. Lat. 7193, saec. viii) can. 26: ‘Si quis, quod in kalendas ianuarias multi faciunt, in cervolum quod dicitur aut vecula vadit, III annos peniteat, quia et hoc daemonum est.’ See the transcription of the penitential by Lowe, E. A., ‘The Vatican Manuscript of the Gelasian Sacramentary and its Supplement at Paris,’ Journal of Theological Studies 27 (1926) 366. The article is now also accessible in Lowe, E. A., Palaeographical Papers (1907–1965), collected by Bieler, L. (2 vols.; Oxford 1972) 1.203–20; for the transcription of the above-quoted canon, see p. 213. This document has been called Poenit. Parisiense by Wasserschleben, (412–18) and Poenit. Parisiense II by Schmitz, (II 326–30).Google Scholar

⁵³ Excarpsus Cummeani (‘Pseudo-Cummean’) 7.9: ‘Si quis kalendis Ianuarii aut in vecola (variants: vetula, vefula) aut in cervolo vadit, tribus annis peniteat, quia hoc daemonum est’ (Wasserschleben 481; Schmitz I 633; Schmitz II 627). On this penitential, which was formerly known through the edition of Fleming, P. in his Collectanea sacra (Louvain 1667; repr. PL 87.977–98), see n. 28 supra. See also the list of MSS given by McNeill, and Gamer, , Medieval Handbooks (n. 22 supra) 437f.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Poenit. Casinense (preserved in MS 372 of Monte Cassino) can. 60: ‘Si quis in Kalendis Ianuariis cum cervulo aut vecula vadit, III annos peniteat, quia hoc demonium est’ (Schmitz I 413). The penitential was compiled in Italy in the late ninth or the tenth century. The view of Schmitz (see ibid. 388–97) that it is Roman in origin and took shape between 700 and 750 has been refuted by Fournier, , ‘Études sur les pénitentiels,’ Rev. d'hist. et de litt. relig. 7 (1902) 121–27.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Poenit. Pseudo-Theodori 12.19 (Wasserschleben 597). This penitential, which has erroneously been attributed to Theodore of Canterbury (see n. 28 supra), dates from the ninth century (see Oakley, , English Penitential Discipline [n. 28 supra] 31f.). Over thirty MSS which contain it are still extant, bearing witness to its wide diffusion and appreciation (see the list of MSS in McNeill, and Gamer, , Medieval Handbooks [n. 22 supra] 434f.). Wasserschleben's text (566–622) is a reprint of the text of Kunstmann, F., Die lateinischen Poenitentialbücher der Angelsachsen mit geschichtlicher Einleitung (Mainz 1844) 43–105. Kunstmann's text in turn is based on the edition of the penitential by Thorpe, B. from a Cambridge MS (Ancient Laws and Institutions in England [London 1840] 277–306; for the above-quoted canon, see p. 293).Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Vita Eligii episcopi Noviomagensis 2.16 (ed. Krusch, B., MGH, Script. rer. Meroving. 4 [1902] 705). The sermon takes up the entire chapter 16 of the second book of the biography (ibid. 705–708), and seems to be a condensation of several genuine sermons of Eligius (for remains of genuine sermons of Eligius, see ibid. 751–61; the sermons in PL 87.593–654 are spurious). Schneider (‘Über Kalendae Ianuariae’ [n. 22 supra] 99) points out that we may disregard the De rectitudine catholicae conversationis, since Krusch has proved that it is but a later, separate edition of that chapter of the biography (2.16) from which the composite, genuine sermons can be extracted. The word iotticus, as Krusch (see Schneider, , ibid. 100 n. 3) has plausibly suggested, must be cognate to iocus. It refers in all likelihood to the disguises Caesarius mentions besides the annicula and cervulus: aut alia quaelibet portenta' (sermo 193.2 [CCL 104.784]).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Dicta Pirminii 22 (ed. Jecker, , Die Heimat des hl. Pirmin [n. 22 supra] 55). On Jecker's edition, see Lehmann, P., ‘Dicta Pirminii,’ Erforschung des Mittelalters: Ausgewählte Abhandlungen und Anfsätze 4 (Stuttgart 1961) 142–47. Pirmin's little work is a good example of an eighth-century missionary's manual. The first part contains a brief account of the history of salvation; the second part, a summary of Christian duties. Besides Holy Scripture, Pirmin's sources are Augustine, Martin of Braga, Caesarius of Arles, Isidore of Seville, and the Benedictine Rule.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Homilia de sacrilegiis 5.17 (ed. Caspari, C. P., Eine Augustin fälschlich beigelegte Homilia de sacrilegiis [Christiania 1886] 10f.). Citing a number of parallels, Caspari (ibid. 55 and n. 3; 56 and n. 3) explains feclum as a corruption of vitulum. On the author of the homily, and the time and place of its composition, see ibid. 66–73.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Homilia 7.24 (Caspari 14). As Caspari (ibid. 12 n. 6) correctly states, chapter 7 of the homily is mutatis mutandis drawn from sermo 192 of Caesarius (CCL 104.779–82). The above-quoted passage is from the second chapter of this sermon (780). It is the passage which was used by the compiler of the ‘Pseudo-Theodore’ for his expository note on the term ‘in cervulo aut vetula vadere.’ Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Ep. ad Ehfridum (ed. Ehwald, R., MGH, auct. ant. 15 [1919] 488f.).Google Scholar

⁶¹ The reading ermula is well established through several MSS, and cannot be emended. Referring to Papias, the eleventh-century lexicographer, Du Cange (3.290 s.v. Ermula) explains ermula: 'statua sine manibus.‘ So does Ehwald (see his critical apparatus), citing Thes. Gloss. 1.518: 'hermula statua sine manibus,’ but is then misled by Du Cange to make ermula synonymous with vetula: ‘ermulam cervulumque pro vetula ac cervo accipio, de quibus Du Cange s. v. cervula.’ It may well be that, in his addiction to mannerisms in style, Aldhelm preferred the bookish word ermula, which he probably knew from some gloss, to the simple word statua (on this, see Schneider, , ‘Über Kalendae Ianuariae’ [n. 22 supra] 93 n. 5). The reading ermula also embarrassed Chambers, E. K., The Mediaeval Stage (2 vols.; Oxford 1903) 1.258: ‘St. Eadhelm, who is my only authority for the presence of the cervulus in England, [adds] an ermulus.’ Google Scholar

⁶² See Poenit. Merseburg. (n. 33 supra); Poenit. Valicell. I (ibid.).Google Scholar

⁶³ See Dicta Pirminii, p. 102 supra. Google Scholar

⁶⁴ See Poenit. Bobiense (n. 43 supra).Google Scholar

⁶⁵ See Poenit. Vindob. (n. 35 supra); Poenit. XXXV Capitulorum (n. 36 supra); Poenit. Paris. (n. 52 supra); Hom. de sacrilegiis (p. 102 supra).Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Poenit. Pseudo-Theodori (pp. 100–101 supra ).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Dicta Pirminii (p. 102 supra ).Google Scholar

⁶⁸ In this connection, we would call attention to capitularies of the Carolingian monarchs, decrees of synods, and instructions issued by prominent churchmen, requiring that priests be able to understand and use the penitential code, and that candidates to the priesthood be examined on this subject before ordination. On this, see Oakley, , English Penitential Discipline (n. 28 supra) 14; McNeill, and Gamer, , Medieval Handbooks (n. 22 supra) 390f. A similar explanation of the term in cervulo aut vetula vadere is found in a gloss on can. 88 of the First Vallicellian Penitential: ‘Cervulos aut vetula sunt quae fiunt more paganorum: jocatur, quia vel homines se induunt similitudinem ferarum vel bestiarum imagine falsa’ (Schmitz I 311). For the text of the canon, see n. 33 supra .Google Scholar

⁶⁹ The compiler of the ‘Pseudo-Theodore’ was not the first to borrow this passage from sermo 192.2 of Caesarius. About two hundred years before him, Isidore of Seville († 636) used the same passage, together with the sentence preceding it (‘In istis diebus miseri homines et, quod peius est, etiam aliqui baptizati sumunt formas adulteras, species monstruosas’), as the source for his De ecclesiasticis officiis 1.41 (PL 83.775): ‘Tunc enim miseri homines et, quod peius est, etiam fideles, sumentes species monstruosas, in ferarum habitu transformantur.’ In a similar way, the beast-mimicry of the Kalends of January is denounced in a sermon which has erroneously been ascribed to Bishop Maximus of Turin, a contemporary of Ambrose of Milan, , Augustine, , and Jerome, , namely, Homilia 16, de Cal. Ian. (PL 57.257): ‘Numquid non universa ibi falsa sunt et insana, cum se a Deo formati homines aut in pecudes aut in feras aut in portenta transformant?’ In the homiliary compiled by Paul the Deacon (Paulus Diaconus Warnefried) by order of Charlemagne, no fewer than fifty homilies are ascribed to an author named simply ‘Maximus’ (see the list of homilies in Paul the Deacon's original homiliary, publ. by Leclercq, J., ‘Tables pour l'inventaire des homiliaires manuscrits,’ Scriptorium 2 [1948] 205–14, and republ. by Smetana, C. L., ‘Aelfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary,’ Traditio 15 [1959] 165–80, with the patristic citations brought up to date by references to recent editions). Of these fifty homilies, however, only fourteen are from the pen of Bishop Maximus of Turin, while the remaining are of unknown origin. Their author is perhaps another bishop by the name of Maximus. On this, see Mutzenbecher, A., ‘Bestimmung der echten Sermones des Maximus Taurinensis,’ Sacris Erudiri 12 (1961) 197–293, and the list of the fifty sermons, divided into two classes: those which can be considered genuine, and those of unknown origin (ibid. 201 n. 18); see further, Mutzenbecher's critical edition of Maximi episcopi Taurinensis sermones, CCL 23, p. xix. Homily 16 in the Migne volume (Nr. 37 of the pars hiemalis in Paul the Deacon's original homiliary; see Leclercq 206, Smetana 168) is one of the sermons of unknown origin.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Of older scholars who have advanced this view, one might especially mention Usener, H., Das Weihnachtsfest ² (Bonn 1911) 218: ‘Die beste Verdeutlichung aus romanischem Gebiet gibt “die Alte” (uetula, uecla, vecchia), die überall einstmals beliebte Vermummung zu den Kalenden des Januars, gegen welche die Synoden und Prediger zu eifern bis ins Mittelalter nicht müde wurden.’ Google Scholar

⁷¹ ‘Die anniculae bei Caesarius von Arles,’ Studio, neophilologica 21 (1948–49) 42–46.Google Scholar

⁷² See the critical apparatus to the sermons CCL 103.67 and 104.784.Google Scholar

⁷³ It certainly is less complex than the unsuccessful and methodically unsound attempt of Boese, R. (Superstitiones Arelatenses e Caesario collectae [diss. Marburg 1909] 57–61) to explain the passages in Caesarius with the help of the passage in the sermon of Eligius. For the wording of this passage clearly shows that Eligius does not copy Caesarius verbatim, but uses an intermediary source (on this, see n. 84 infra). For the same reason we must reject Boese's arguments against Caspari's explanation of vetulas as a corruption of vitulas (ibid.).Google Scholar

⁷⁴ See Grandgent, C. H., An Introduction to Vulgar Latin (Boston, New York, and London 1907) 105; Havet, L., Manuel de critique verbale appliquée aux textes latins (Paris 1911; repr. 1967) 129, 252.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ See PL 39.2004 n. 1, and Morin's critical apparatus CCL 104.784. Rohlfs makes no mention of this MS.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ PL 56.890–93. The document prescribes special penalties for clerics who have acted against regulations laid down by ecclesiastical authority.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Ibid. 5 (891).Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Ibid. 891 n. g.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ ‘Die anniculae’ (n. 71 supra) 43: ‘Aber was ist annicula? Glaubte Morin darunter ein einjähriges Tier, eine bestia annicula, zu verstehen?’ Google Scholar

⁸⁰ CCL 104.780.Google Scholar

⁸¹ That for the making of the second mask the skins of various species of young female animals were used can perhaps also be deduced from the term ‘cum cervulo aut qua1ibet vetula ambulare’ in some of our later sources, to wit, Poenit. Sangall. Tripart. can. 21 and Poenit. XXXV Capit. 18. See the texts of these penitentials n. 36 supra. Google Scholar

⁸² ‘Iam vero illut [sic] quale vel quam turpe est, quod viri nati tunicis muliebribus vestiuntur, et turpissima demutatione puellaribus figuris virile robur effeminant.’ Google Scholar

⁸³ ‘Die anniculae’ (n. 71 supra) 45: ‘Auch in diesem Falle würde anicula besser zu dem Sinne “altes (Hexen-) weib” passen als das nirgends belegte avicula “Grossmutterchen.”’ Google Scholar

⁸⁴ CCL 103.236. Eligius (MGH, Script. rer. Meroving. 4.705) borrows this passage from an intermediary source: ‘Similiter et auguria vel sternutationes observare nolite, nec in itinere positi aliquas aviculas cantantes adtendatis.’ After ‘auguria’ the intermediary source has added ‘vel sternutationes.’ The ancients regarded a sneeze (sternutatio) to be a favorable omen. See, for instance, Odyssey 17.541–45: as Penelope uttered the wish that Odysseus might return soon and revenge the violence of the wooers, Telemachus ‘sneezed loudly’ (μεγ' ἔπταϱεν), and Penelope interpreted the sneeze as a good omen; or Xenophon, , Anab. 3.2.9: as Xenophon spoke to the soldiers of the hope of safety, a soldier sneezed, and the army accepted it as a good omen from Zeus; cf. Cic., De divin. 2.84. On this popular belief in antiquity, see Samter, E., Die Religion der Griechen ² (Leipzig and Berlin 1925) 33f.; Nilsson, M. P., Geschichte der griechischen Religion ² (2 vols.; Munich 1955) 1.56, 790. A sneeze is also regarded as a good omen in German folklore (see Wuttke, A., Der deutsche Volksglaube der Gegenwart ⁴ [Leipzig 1925] Nrs. 287, 309, 316).Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Varro, , l. l. 6.76: ‘Hinc oscines dicuntur apud augures, quae ore faciunt auspicium’; Cic., De divin. 1.120 : ‘Eademque efficit in avibus divina mens, ut tum huc, tum illuc volent alites, tum in hac, tum in illa parte se occultent, tum a dextra, tum a sinistra canant oscines’; Festus, , De verb. signif. 197 (Lindsay 214): ‘Oscines aves Ap. Claudius esse ait, quae ore canentes faciant auspicium, ut corvus, cornix, noctua’; Servius, , in Verg. Aen. 3.361 (editio Harvardiana 3 [1965] 142): ‘Aves autem aut oscines sunt aut praepetes: oscines quae ore futura praedicunt, praepetes quae volatu augurium significant cum sunt prospera’: cf. ibid. 1.393 (ed. Harvard, . 2 [1946] 190); Cic., De nat. deor. 2.160; Plin., Nat. hist. 10.43.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Césaire d'Arles: Sermons au peuple, with introduction, translation, and notes, vol. 1 (Sources chrétiennes 175; Paris 1971). The first volume contains, besides a comprehensive introduction, the French translation of sermons 1–20, with the Latin text, based on Morin's edition, on the opposite page.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Ibid. 1.426f.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Ibid. 427.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Saint Caesarius of Arles: Sermons (3 vols.; The Fathers of the Church 31 [New York 1956]; 47 and 66 [Washington, D.C. 1964 and 1973]). We shall quote the three volumes as volumes 1, 2, and 3 of this translation.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Ibid. 1.78.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ibid. 1.78 n. 6.Google Scholar

⁹² Ibid. 3.32.Google Scholar

⁹³ Ibid. Google Scholar

⁹⁴ See the Latin text p. 90 supra. Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Cf. Leumann, M., Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre (Munich 1963) 215f.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ See the texts of the penitential canons quoted in nn. 33, 34, 35, 36, and 44 supra. Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Sermo 155 (PL 52.611): ‘Et ille qui liberat, invenit praemium; qui negligit, acquirit offensam.’ Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Sermo 13.5 (CCL 103.67).Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Sermo 193.1 (CCL 104.783).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Sermo 155 (PL 52.611). See also Homilia de pythonibus et maleficiis (PG 65.27), which has erroneously been included among the writings of Severian of Gabala, but is from the pen of Peter Chrysologus: ‘et dicunt se facientes istaiocari Non sunt ioca, sed sunt crimina.’ Cf. also Caesarius, , sermo 193.2 (CCL 104.782): obviously wishing to forestall such excuses, Caesarius portrays those taking part in the beast-mimicry of the Kalends of January as ‘wretched men who have a mania for sacrilegious rites rather than playful pranks’ (quibuscumque miseris hominibus sacrilego ritu insanientibus potius quam ludentibus).Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ On the nuncupatio votorum, a time-hallowed custom observed at Rome and throughout the Roman Empire, see Tac., Ann. 16.22; Plin., Ep. 10.35 (Kukula); Suet., Nero 46.Google Scholar

¹⁰² On the pompa circensis, a religious ceremony which preceded the ludi circenses, see Tertullian, , De spectaculis 7.2f. (CCL 1.233). A fuller description of this procession is found in Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Antiquitates Romanae 7.72.1–14. It differs in a number of points from the account given by Tertullian. The variance is probably due to the fact that Tertullian was not interested in giving the exact marching order of the procession, but in singling out particular features under the aspect of idolatry.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Sermo 155 (PL 52.611): ‘Qui se deum facit, Deo vero contradictor existit; imaginem Dei portare noluit, qui idoli voluit portare personam.’ Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Ibid. The passage is a good example of Peter Chrysologus' style: rhythmical, parallel sentence structure, its effect being enhanced by the figure of homoioteleuton. On Peter Chrysologus' latinity and style, see Baxter, J. H., ‘The Homilies of St. Peter Chrysologus,’ The Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1921) 250–58.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Hom. de pyth. et malef. (PG 65.27). On this homily, see n. 100 supra. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ The importance of Ravenna as a center of Christian life can be seen from the fact that in 430 the episcopal see of the city became a metropolitan see, with jurisdiction over Forlì, Faënza, Imola, Bologna, and Modena.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ About half a century before Peter Chrysologus preached his New Year's sermon, the Campanian calendar was promulgated at Capua on November 22, 387. The calendar contains a list of festivals authorized by imperial consent. The first on the list is that of the vota on January 3 (CIL 10.3792: ‘III Nonas Ian. Vota’). Unfortunately we do not know how this feast, patriotic in character, was celebrated in the Campanian region. On the Campanian Calendar and the festival of the vota, see Peterson, R. M., The Cults of Campania (Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome 1; Rome 1919) 41f.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Without furnishing any source, Van der Meer, F., Augustinus de Zielzorger (Utrecht and Brussels 1947) 58, states that on the Saturnalia of the old calendar, the harbor mob, ‘dressed up as women and decked in the heads of animals’ (als vrouwen verkleed en gemaskerd met dierenkoppen), roamed ‘howling and yowling’ (brallend en joelend) through the streets of Hippo. We know of no document supporting this statement, which was repeated in the German translation of the work (Augustinus der Seelsorger ² [Cologne 1953] 72) but omitted in the English translation (Augustine the Bishop [London and New York 1961] 54).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Or. 9: εἰς τὰς ϰαλάνδας (ed. Foerster, R., 1.2.393–98).Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ “Eϰϕϱασις ϰαλανδῶν (Foerster 8.472–77).Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Hom. in Kalendas 1 (PG 48.954).Google Scholar

¹¹² Ibid. Google Scholar

¹¹³ De mensibus (Wünsch 74).Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Hom. 4: Adv. Kalendarum Festum (PG 40.216–25).Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Ibid. 221.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ On this, see Nilsson, , ‘Studien zur Vorgeschichte’ (n. 22 supra ) 88f.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Sermo 192.2 (CCL 104.780).Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Because of its literary interest, we should like to call attention to the description of another military carnival, which is found in the Acts of St. Dasius (Mαϱτύϱιον τοῦ ἁγίου Δασίου, ed. Musurillo, H., The Acts of the Christian Martyrs [Oxford Early Christian Texts; Oxford 1972] 272–78. Musurillo's text is taken from Cumont, F., ‘Les Actes de S. Dasius,’ Anal. Boll. 16 [1897] 11–15). It differs considerably in a number of details from the account given by Asterius. First of all, this carnival, allegedly celebrated in the camp of a Roman legion stationed at Durostorum in Lower Moesia, is not connected with the festive season of the Kalends of January, but with the winter festival of the Saturnalia. It begins with the election of a ‘king’ whose office it is to play the part of Saturn. Clothed in royal attire and attended by his bodyguard, he goes about in public for a full thirty days to taste of every pleasure, however vile and shameful. Moreover, the reign of the king of the Saturnalia ends tragically: on the feast of Saturn (December 17), he immolates himself on the altar of the god by cutting his own throat. This gruesome description of the Saturnalia carnival forms, as it were, the frame for the Acts of St. Dasius. The bizarre tale of the Acts concerns a Christian soldier, named Dasius, who is elected king of the Saturnalia in the year 304 or shortly after. Knowing well enough what is expected of him, he steadfastly refuses to defile himself with such wicked acts of debauchery, and is thrown into prison. When Dasius is brought before the commander of the legion, this officer, strange to say, makes no mention whatsoever of his refusal, but only commands him to worship the images of the reigning emperors, Diocletian and Maximian. Dasius then professes his Christian faith; the officer attempts to persuade him to go through the form of sacrificing before the images of the rulers, but fails to shake his constancy. The story of their interview ends with another odd incident: when Dasius fears that he is being tricked into appearing to sacrifice, he scatters the incense all around, throws down the images of the emperors, and tramples on them. Thereupon he is led to his beheading and dies a martyr's death on November 20 of that year. The authenticity of the Acts has been upheld by Nilsson, (‘Studien zur Vorgeschichte’ [n. 22 supra] 85–87; ‘Saturnalia,’ RE, zweite Reihe, 2.1 [1921] 208), but rejected by Delehaye, H. Paying due regard to opinions differing from his own, Delehaye concludes that we cannot be certain that the martyr, though he may well be an historical figure, was a soldier, or that he suffered at Durostorum rather than at Heraclea. In his view a motif borrowed from elsewhere has been used to elaborate upon the simple theme of a martyr's decapitation (Les Passions des martyrs et les genres littéraires [Brussels 1921] 321–28; see also Delehaye's comments in Anal. Boll. 27 [1908] 217f.; and Propylaeum ad Acta SS. Decembris [Brussels 1940] 536). The authenticity of the Acts has also been rejected by Geffcken, J., ‘Die Verhöhnung Christi durch die Kriegsknechte,’ Hermes 41 (1906) 220–29; Wissowa, G., art. ‘Saturnus’ in Roscher, W. R., Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie (6 vols.; Leipzig 1884–1937) 4.440; Religion und Kultus der Römer ² (Munich 1912) 207 n. 9; Schwenn, F., Die Menschenopfer bei den Griechen und Römern (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 15.3; Giessen 1915) 167f.; Frutaz, A. P., ‘Dasius,’ LThK² 3 (1959) 171; Van Doien, R., ‘Dasius,’ DHGE 14 (1960) 92; and Musurillo, p. xli.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ With an extension into what is now the Upper Rhine region of West Germany.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ Arnold, , Caesarius von Arelate (n. 9 supra) 174: ‘Sie verkleideten sich als Hirsche und Hindinnen [Arnold still had to rely on the Migne text], nähten sich in Tierfelle oder setzten sich Tierköpfe auf. Wahrscheinlich hing dieser Brauch mit dem Kultus des altceltischen Gottes Cernunnos zusammen, der mit einem Hirschgeweih dargestellt wurde, vor ihm Hirsche, und Rinder, ’ Nilsson, , ‘Studien zur Vorgeschichte’ (n. 22 supra) 77: ‘Dabei kommt einem gleich der mit Hirschhörnern ausgestattete Gott Cernunnos in den Sinn, dessen inschriftlich bezeugtes Bild unter der Notre-Dame in Paris gefunden worden ist; inschriftlose Bilder hat man in Gallien öfters gefunden.’ Google Scholar

¹²¹ For the sake of completeness we should add that the figure of the god does also appear on some monuments antedating the time of Tiberius: on coins, for instance, dating from 50–40 b.c.Google Scholar

¹²² The torc, from Lat. torques, was a twisted narrow band, worn by the upper ranks of nobility during the period of Celtic art called La Tène III.Google Scholar

¹²³ See Espérandieu, E., Recueil général des bas-reliefs, statues et bustes de la Gaule romaine (12 vols.; Paris 1907–66; repr. Ridgewood, N.J. 1965–66) Fig. 3133. Espérandieu gives a description and interpretation of each monument. The altar of Paris is now in the Cluny Museum.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ The name Cernunnos is to all appearances genuinely Celtic. The opinion that the word is akin to Latin cornu was discarded long ago. For suggested explanations of the name, see Heichelheim, F., ‘Tierdämonen (keltisch),’ RE, zweite Reihe 6.1 (1936) 923, and de Vries, Keltische Religion (n. 22 supra) 105f., with the literature cited by both authors; cf. now also Olmsted, G. S., The Gundestrup Cauldron (Collection Latomus 162; Brussels 1979) 160. Professor Olmsted rightly emphasizes the tentative nature of these explanations since, with the exception of the single inscription on the Paris monument, ‘the epithet Cernunnos is known nowhere else and would seem to have few other connections’ (ibid.). Still, with everything considered, the association of the epithet with the Irish word cernach (‘victorious’) appears to be quite plausible, and its connection to the Breton St. Cornely, ‘protecteur du bétail, des bovins,’ and to the Dacian Cernenus, could well be accurate (ibid.). It is a pleasant duty to express my thanks and appreciation here to Professor Garrett Olmsted, S., who helped me so generously with advice and information on this section of my article.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ See Espérandieu, , Recueil (n. 123 supra) Fig. 3653. The relief is now in the Museum of Rheims.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ In the extant stone representations of Cernunnos, either the antlers are nearly all gone, or there are left only the two pedicles on the forehead of the god, indicating the support from which the antlers spread out, as, for instance, in the statue discovered at Sommérécourt, dép. Haute-Marne, now in the Museum of Épinal (ibid., Fig. 4839), and in the stele found at Meaux, dép. Seine-et-Marne (ibid., Fig. 3210).Google Scholar

¹²⁷ This is the characteristic pose of the god in a number of monuments from Gaul. In addition to the Paris monument, we should mention the altar in the Museum of Saint-Germain (ibid., Fig. 1319); the relief found at Vendœuvres-en-Brenne, now in the Museum of Châteauroux, dép. Indre (ibid., Fig. 1539); and the statue of Sommérécourt (see preceding note). It is also the pose of the god on the great silver cauldron of Gundestrup, Denmark, now in the National Museum, Copenhagen (see Olmsted, G. S., ‘The Gundestrup Version of Tain Bo Cúailnge,’ Antiquity 50 [1976] 98 and Fig. 6 (A); for a detailed description and study of the Gundestrup cauldron, see Olmsted, , The Gundestrup Cauldron [n. 124 supra]). There seems to be hardly any doubt about the identity of the cross-legged figure on the Gundestrup cauldron. One should note, above all, the important fact that he holds a torc in his right hand and a horned serpent in his left, attributes which link him to poses exhibited by the god in our monuments from Gaul. Taken together with his cross-legged pose and his stag-antlers, these traits establish a unique identity for this mysterious deity (see ibid. 161). Moreover, the Gundestrup cauldron allows us to connect him with Setanta or Cú Chulainn in the Táin. It may be significant that Cú Chulainn is referred to as ailit (‘wild deer’) in the Táin, and that in the macgnímrada section of the Táin he captures a wild deer and brings it in triumph to Emain Macha. In both Irish epic and Irish tradition, this deity was the protector of cattle and ‘the beasts of the plains.’ His festival in Celtic tradition was on Imbolc, February 1, so that the custom of masquerading in the disguise of beasts and with stag-antlers on the Kalends of January may be a displacement of an earlier Celtic observance. On the other hand, Olmsted (ibid. 160f.) rightly cautions us against the tendency to identify every cross-legged, stag-horned Celtic deity with Cernunnos. Similar traits are also found in two horned, cross-legged bronze female statuettes, one from Clermont-Ferrand (dép. Puy-de-Dôme), and the other of unknown provenance, but now in the British Museum. The simple presence of stag-horns does not, therefore, infallibly connect cave paintings of the French palaeolithic period like the ‘Sorcerer’ in Les Trois Frères in the northern spurs of the Pyrenees or the standing horned figure carved on the rocks in the Val Camonica to our Gaulish group.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ A motif quite akin to that of the gold stream on the relief of Rheims was used by the craftsman of the stele discovered at Titelberg, near Differdange (Differdingen), Luxembourg, now in the Museum of Luxembourg (Espérandieu, Fig. 4195): at the right of the god are the heads of a bull and a stag, the latter spitting coins on a rectangular tablet.Google Scholar