↑ arvau

Wikipedia / Lucus

In ancient Roman religion, a lucus (, plural lucī) is a sacred grove.

A lucus was a cultivated place, more like a wooded park than a forest, and might contain an aedes, a building that housed the image of a god, or other landscaped features that facilitated or gave rise to ritual. It has been conjectured, for instance, that the Lupercal, referred to as a "cave", was a small lucus with an artificial grotto, since archaeology has uncovered no natural cave in the area.

Etymology and definition

Terminology for sacred groves

was one of four Latin words meaning in general "forest, woodland, grove" (along with , , and ), but unlike the others it was primarily used as a religious designation, meaning "sacred grove." Maurus Servius Honoratus, a late Roman grammarian, provides an explanation for the differences between these words, writing that a " is a multitude of trees with , a is an ordered multitude of trees," and a is "one which is extended and uncultivated." Isidore of Seville—a 6th-century scholar—defines the as a "place enclosed by dense woods" ("") that blot out sunlight (""), and he claims that they were named for the lamps used there as part of religious ceremonies (""). Evidence from Livy, a 1st-century BCE Roman historian, appears to corroborate this definition, for he describes the grove ("") of Hera at Crotone as "enclosed by dense woods and tall fir trees" (""). The 1st-century BCE poet Ovid describes a with the adjective , which is a term itself defined by the 5th-century CE author Macrobius as sometimes meaning "untainted" (""), perhaps implying that the represents a grove undisturbed by human hand. Moreover, Ovid describes as the property of the divine, writing in his Metamorphoses that Nereus and the Nereids "possess" ("") a sacred grove, which incidentally also reveals that ownership of a could belong to multiple deities.

In the works of Ovid, the term appears to describe the broader forest region surrounding a . For instance, Ovid recounts a story in which the goddess Diana returns from a day of hunting in a forest ("") and retires into her , where she then invites Calliope and the forest nymphs to bathe together "in the forest" (""). Within this passage, the term denotes the surrounding woodlands where Diana had been hunting. Moreover, while detailing the kidnapping of Persephone, he describes the goddess Proserpina playing within a , while the surrounding natural space is referred to as a . According to the classicist Sofia Bianchi Mancini, the could, at least in Ovid, serve as the defining threshold for a . Mancini notes Ovid's version of the myth of Pentheus, wherein the legendary Theban king approaches an "open plain free from trees" ("") that is surrounded by trees (""). Though not strictly defined as a within the text, Mancini argues that the notion of such an area devoid of trees is essentially the etymological definition of a —that being, a clearing. In any case, it is within this particular area that the sacred rites of Bacchus are conducted, and it is from the surrounding woodland that Pentheus witnesses this ceremony with "profane eyes," perhaps, in doing so—according to Mancini—effectively trespassing on the grove.

Statius, a 1st-century CE poet, utilizes the terms , , and to describe the same location. In his Thebaid, for instance, he describes a that is "enduring of time and bent by robust old age" (""), but later in the same passage—after the goddess Diana is mentioned (who is known in the poem by the name )—the site is suddenly referred to as a , and in the following lines, it is then later redesignated as a . This exact same series of changing terminology (i.e. > > ) reappears throughout the poem. In a later passage, he describes Adrastus and his companions walking through a forest (""), but then—upon seeing Hypsipyle and mistaking her for Diana—Adrastus addresses her as a "powerful goddess of the groves" (""). Even later in the same section of the text, Hypsipyle, in exchange for her assistance in a war against Thebes, is promised an altar ("") that will "mark the sacred grove" (""). According to Mancini, it is the act of performing a religious ritual in these spaces that transforms them from a regular forest into a sacred grove. Hence, these sites are only denoted as or after divine presence is noted: The first example only becomes a after Diana is introduced to the site (""), and the second example only becomes a once the altar is promised to mark the site.

The same type of transition between a and a also occurred in reverse. Instead of following a progression from > > , the poet might instead present a regression of > > . The downgrade from a to a may have resulted from some sort of perceived tainting of the grove after it had been violated. For instance, Ovid, in his version of the myth of Actaeon, describes the hunter first wandering through an "unfamiliar " () before arriving in the sacred grove ("") of Diana. However, after Actaeon trespasses on the site, it is suddenly referred to once more as a : Ovid describes the nymphs surrounding Diana “filling the whole grove with sudden cries” (“”). In another story, this one by Statius, a is slowly destroyed so as to allow the construction of a funeral pyre for the mythical character Opheltes and, as the site is ruined, it is demoted to a and eventually . First, Statius proclaims that "miserable destruction" ("") awaited the , but then, after the beasts and birds flee in fright (""), and the "towering birch tree falls" (""), it is referred to as a . Finally, after various other acts of desecration, the gods Pan and Silvanus abandon the site, while the "forest groans" ("").

Connection with lalux

Quintilian, a 1st-century CE orator, mentions a theory that the word derived from the verb ("to be light") via enantiosemy, on account of the darkness of the grove, presumably because the foliage could block out light. This particular etymology was not produced by Quintilian, but taken from earlier Roman scholarship, perhaps specifically the writings of Aelius Stilo, a prominent philologist preceding Quintilian to whom several other enantiosemic etymologies are directly attributed. In any case, this explanation became somewhat well-known in antiquity, as it reappears throughout numerous other works. For instance, Servius cites the "" (" from not being light") etymology as an example of words that emerge from antiphrasis, and Isidore mentions this same etymology multiple times throughout his works. This etymology was not, however, necessarily highly regarded by even the ancient grammarians, with Quintilian including it amongst the "most hideous absurdities" (""). The phrase has even survived into modern English usage as a way of referring to illogical explanations.

Moder etymologists, however, do accept a connection between the terms and ("light"). According to the Indo-European scholar Michiel de Vaan, the word derives from Proto-Italic , itself from Proto-Indo-European ("light space"). On the basis of its Indo-European cognates, such as Sanskrit ("open space") and Old High German ("forest, grove"), it is probable that the Latin word also originally meant "clearing." This original sense is perhaps reflected in the writings of the 2nd-century BCE author Cato the Elder, who describes the "thinning of a " (""). According to the classicist Filippo Coarelli, this act of clearing the site is probably the process for the creation of a , or a clearing. John Scheid, a scholar of Roman religion, argues that—by clearing the grove—the suppliants could once more permit light to shine on the area, thus allowing the space to fulfill its etymological purpose.

However, the classicist Alisa Hunt argues against "light-centric" interpretations of a , noting that even the ancient Romans clearly felt as if the derivation from the lack of light ("") was tentative, and other ancient sources actually premise their etymological interpretation of the word on the presence of artificial light (e.g. candles). For instance, Isidore of Seville claims that they were named for the lamps used there as part of religious ceremonies (""). However, Servius explicitly rejects this theory, directly stating that a is not termed as such because there are artificial lights in the grove (""). Regardless, Isidore and Servius concur that were lit by artificial means, particularly utilizing .

Managing a grove

Expiatory rites

Ovid describes a prayer designed to expiate a shepherd in the event of having accidentally violated a sacred grove. The prayer lists numerous potential violations, appearing to try and cover a multitude of circumstances wherein the shepherd might have committed some religious crime, including the scenario that they might have cut off a branch of a tree in the grove. For a shepherd, the act of cutting off a branch or feeding it to their flock appears to have been relatively common, as Ovid himself elsewhere references the feeding of foliage to sheep (""). Nevertheless, to have violated the grove in such a manner was evidently still a religious infringement that required some level of amendment. Given that, in this passage, the shepherd unintentionally wandered into the site, it implies that a had an unclear boundary, as otherwise the shepherd would not have been so unsure regarding the exact limits of the grove. Moreover, even the need itself for a catch-all prayer covering every possible offense indicates that the Romans themselves were not always certain of the precise limits to sacred groves. According to the , an ancient law composed sometime after 241 BCE, it was forbidden to cut any of the sacred trees or remove anything from the grove, except on the day of one particular sacred festival. The law stipulates that anyone who does violate the grove must perform an expiatory sacrifice to Jupiter and also pay a fine. In his book On Agriculture, Cato records a Roman ritual , "to clear a clearing". The officiant is instructed to offer a pig as a piaculum, a propitiation or expiatory offering made in advance of the potential wrong committed against the grove through human agency. Afterwards, Cato provides further instructions for an additional ritual, stating that "If you wish to till the ground, offer a second sacrifice in the same way, with the addition of the words: “for the sake of doing this work" ("").

Pliny the Elder references this same prayer, stating that—according to Cato—it was permissible to cut down sacred trees provided that a sacrificed had been performed prior. The word piaculum is repeated three times in the prayer, emphasizing that the sacrifice of the pig is not a freewill offering, but something owed to the deity by right (ius). The piaculum compensates the deity for a transgression or offense, and differs from a regular sacrifice offered in the hope of procuring favor in return (do ut des). The ritual described here by Cato is similar to a practice documented in the epigraphic record for the Arval brotherhood, who would supposedly sacrifice "at the altar two expiatory pigs for pruning(?) the grove and performing work" (""). However, whereas Cato describes two separate sacrifices each of one pig, the Arval brotherhood appears to have combined both rites into one sacrifice of two pigs.

The particular verb used to describe the arboricultural practice documented in the is , which is otherwise sparsely attested, though it is glossed by Festus as equivalent to ("to restrain, hold back"). The veracity of this statement from Festus is corroborated by Cato, who uses the term —an inflected form of —in a similar part of the prayer where the Arval brotherhood instead uses . Given that the ultimate purpose of Cato's prayer was to ("to thin, clear") a grove, a term itself glossed by Festus as referring to the clearing of an area so as to fill the space with light. Thus, it can be concluded that, in the Catonian text, the verb must have referred to some action that—when performed on trees—simultaneously 'restrained' the trees and cleared the area to make room for light. On this basis, Hunt suggests that the word most likely denoted some sort of pruning. Consequently, it can be assumed to that supposedly synonymous word also referred to the pruning or trimming of trees. However, the classicist Andrew Fox suggests that there are other possible interpretations of the word that still satisfy the aforementioned definitional criteria: It could have, for instance, referred to the act of trying branches back so as to force trees to grow in a specific manner. Festus, or at least the later editor Paul the Deacon, does equate a form with ("to prune"), and Hunt interprets this particular form as a manuscript error for , though Fox argues that it is unclear why either Festus or Paul would have defined the same term twice.

According to the classicist Nicole Belayche, the expiatory rite served to legitimize the act of clearing, thus protecting the suppliant from any potential violation of the sacred space. Given that the Arval brethren oversaw a sacred grove of Dea Dia, it might be assumed that their specific expiatory ritual was designed to exonerate them of any infringement on her sacred site. However, according to Hunt, the make no indication that the ceremony was motivated by any sense of wrongdoing committed against the sacred space. Dea Dia herself is hardly even mentioned in the proceedings, which only state that the ritual occurred at her grove. It is tempting, but misleading, to read ecological principles into ritualized agriculture; for the early Romans, respect was the partner of fear in their regard for the divine forces in nature, and the open invocation with which this prayer begins is a contractual "out" or hedge. In fact, Hunt argues that the pruning of the grove of Dea Dia was likely harmful to the trees. The Arval brotherhood conducted this ritual annually, and yearly trimmings are often detrimental to mature trees. Such arboricultural information was certainly known to the Romans, as Pliny the Elder writes that "a trimming is beneficial for trees, but to slaughter them every year is most injurious" (""). Moreover, the ceremony was always conducted in May, which—according to modern arboreal science—is a terrible time for pruning trees. The Romans also held reservations regarding the trimming of trees during this time, with the 1st-century author Columella writing that in "regions that are sunny, where winters are mild, the best and most natural pruning is that of autumn."

Violations of the grove

Evidence from Pliny might imply that at least some believed that failure to adhere to proper rituals could bring disaster upon the collective Roman people. Pliny the Elder records that an elm branch was removed in the of Juno at Nocera, which at the very least coincided with Roman defeats during the Cimbrian War. According to Fox, it is likely that—in this particular scenario—the pruning was not intentionally harmful, but presumably the rites had not been obeyed and thus the act constituted a religious crime. Pliny describes the deed with violent language, stating that the branch had been amputated (""), perhaps indicating a more violent removal rather than a meticulous pruning. In any case, according to Pliny, the branch miraculously grew back of "its own volition" ("") and even flowered, and afterwards Rome suddenly saw great victories in the war.

The Romans evidently viewed violations of the sacred grove as religious offenses. Festus, a 2nd-century Roman grammarian, mentions a "pre-eminent grove" ("") that, if violated (""), would be "cleansed by the head of the violator" (""), perhaps referring to beheading. Furthermore, Valerius Maximus, a 1st-century BCE Roman rhetorician, records the supposed divine wrath of Asclepius directed towards Decimus Turullius, a prefect of Marc Antony who supposedly cut down the trees in a sacred grove dedicated to the god. According to Maximus, upon Marc Antony's defeat in the Battle of Actium, Turullius was condemned to death by Augustus, and—due to the divine machinations of Ascelpius—his execution happened to occur in the same grove which he had previously violated. Many of the details of this story are probably of the result of Valerius employing poetic license, and it is likely that this account is not fully accurate.

However, the Romans did not necessarily respect all sacred groves: Plutarch, a 1st-century CE Greek historian, writes that Sulla—during his siege of Athens—destroyed the sacred groves ("," "") present in the Lyceum and the Academy, in spite of the cultural importance to the Athenians. Tacitus, a 1st-century CE historian, describes a Roman army, at the behest of its commander Suetonius Paullinus, destroying sacred groves to "savage cults" ("") in Roman Britain, supposedly because "they [the Britons] considered it a pious duty to slake the altars with captive blood and to consult their deities by means of human entrails." Tacitus does not explicitly address the potential of divine punishment for the Roman troops, though he immediately follows the account of the destruction of the groves with the foreboding words: "While he [Suetonius] was thus occupied, the sudden revolt of the province was announced to Suetonius."

In literature

The 1st-century BCE poet Lucan recounts a tale wherein Julius Caesar destroys a sacred grove outside the city of Massalia when it had sided with his enemy Domitius Ahenobarbus during the civil war. This story is most likely a fabrication, though the tale is perhaps tangentially based on a real historical event—that being the then recent destruction of a sacred grove at Mona, an island in Britain, during the campaigns of Suetonius Paullinus. In any case, Lucan describes the grove as "untouched by men’s hands from ancient times" (""), which parallels similar languages utilized by Ovid to describe other sacred groves. Ovid, for instance, describes the ancient grove of Cadmus ("") as having never been "violated by an axe" (""), and he writes that an "ancient wood" ("") sacred to the god Maenalus had also been "long unprofaned by the axe" (""). Furthermore, Ovid—whilst recounting the story of Erysichthon—states that the Thessalian king had once violated grove of Ceres ("") with an axe ("") and to have "profaned the ancient sacred groves with iron ("").

Lucan states that Caesar's soldiers felt trepidation at the thought of violating a sacred place, writing that they were moved by the "solemnity and terror of the place" ("") and believed that "that, if they aimed a blow at the sacred trunks (""), their axes would rebound against their own limbs." Regardless, within the poem, Caesar himself chooses to grab an axe and strike a tree, declaring "Believe that I am guilty of sacrilege, and thenceforth none of you need fear to cut down the trees.” Lucan further writes that, afterwards, "all the men obeyed his bidding." though they were still "not easy in their minds" as "they had weighed Caesar’s wrath against the wrath of heaven." Nevertheless, according to the classicist Antony Augoustakis, Caesar's actions were perhaps not to be interpreted as a religious crime. as the grove is itself not necessarily described as ideal: It is portrayed as horrifying and said to lack divine presence. Alternatively, the classicist Charles Sayor argues that the violation of the grove is instead to be construed as an evil act, akin to "a cut in the cosmos extending through the worlds of man, nature and the gods." Furthermore, according to the philologist O. C. Phillips, this whole story serves to characterize Caesar in a negative light: It evokes other stories from Graeco-Roman culture, namely the aforementioned myth of Erysichthon, and confers those connotations onto Caesar.

The classicist Matthew Leigh argues that the darkness of this grove is notably self-perpetuating: The grove is, according to Lucan, "a space of darkness and cold shade, and banished the sunlight far above." As long as the grove remains uncut, the trees shall continue to blot out sunlight, thus reinforcing the terrifying aura of the locale. Leigh proposes that, by cutting down the trees, Caesar permitted light to once more penetrate through the foliage, consequently removing the fear-inducing power of the locale. According to Leigh, this passage from Lucan thematically parallels a separate story from the 1st-century BCE poet Lucretius, who writes that the philosopher Epicurus "was the first that dared to uplift mortal eyes" against "the weight of superstition," and that neither fables of the gods could quell him, nor thunderbolts, nor heaven with menacing roar." Ultimately, Lucretius concludes that Epicurus was the "first of all men to shatter the confining bars of nature’s gates." Both Caesar and Epicurus defy superstition, going against the will of the gods, and they are ultimately not met with any divine retribution, instead only revealing the fallacies underlying the old beliefs.

Moreover, Lucan's story may show some similarities with a section of the Aeneid where the hero Aeneas oversees the desolation of anolive tree ("") sacred to Faunus. In another work of Virgil, his Georgics, the tree is representative of untamed wilderness in opposition to civilization, and consequently its destruction in the Aeneid at the behest of the Trojans is perhaps symbolic of their efforts to establish a new civilization in Italy. Both in Virgil and in Lucan, the sacred trees are leveled out of military necessity, with the Trojans in the Aeneid specifically seeking to fight on even ground (""). Furthermore, both authors describe the felling of the trees with the verb ("they fall down"), and both proceed to list a series of five separate trees as a part of a three-line passage—those being, in Virgil, pitch pines (""), holm oak (""), ashen logs (""), "splitable" oak (""), and large mountain ash trees (""), and, in Lucan, mountain ash trees (""), gnarled holm oaks (""), Dodona's woods (""), alder (""), and cypress (""). The classicist Florian Barrière argues that the particular choice of tree in Lucan is probably itself a subversion of the stock idealized natural landscape in poetry. For instance, ash and holm oak trees were used in Virgil's Georgics to build boats and in his Aeneid as part of military construction, and are therefore—according to Barrière—not particularly "bucolic." Moreover, yew trees (""), which Lucan mentions in a separate passage, and cypress trees both appear elsewhere as funerary trees.

The question of a potential heavenly response is explicitly evoked in the poem from Lucan: He claims that, upon witnessing the destruction of the grove, the Gauls bewailed, but the besieged Massalians rejoiced, for they believed that Caesar's actions would incur the ire of the gods. Lucan himself dismisses upon the hopes of the Massalians, writing that "But Fortune often guards the guilty, and the gods must reserve their wrath for the unlucky." The destruction an oak-tree ("") is perhaps even symbolic of Caesar's inevitable victory in the civil war over Pompey, who—earlier in the poem—is compared to a tree (""). Alternatively, Augoustakis argues that Lucan had implicitly implored the reader to consider Caesar's own eventual assassination, just as the aforementioned Turullius was later executed after having violated a sacred grove. However, Philips argues that—within the time frame of Lucan's epic—Caesar is faced with no divine recompense, and he is in fact rewarded at times with exceptional fortune. For instance, Lucan writes, regarding the clearing of a flood in Spain for Caesar's army, that "Fortune, contented with having frightened her favorite a little, came back in full force; and the gods earned pardon by an exceptional exercise of their support." In this respect, that being the lack of divine retribution, Lucan parallels Virgil, for in the Aeneid, Aeneas escapes punishment for his violation of the grove of Faunus. Virgil, like Lucan, initially appears to set up the potential of divine punishment: Just as the Massalians rejoice that Caesar's actions shall surely earn him heavenly wrath, Turnus—an enemy of Aeneas—prays to Faunus, proclaiming that whereas he has honored the rites of the god, Aeneas has defiled them (""). Nevertheless, both Aeneas and Caesar are ultimately victorious, with Aeneas later slaying Turnus.

Emotional reaction to groves

Ovid describes two separate groves that—upon viewing—one would be compelled to accept that a resided within the place. In his Amores, Ovid mentions an "ancient grove" ("") made "extremely gloomy with its dense trees" (""), upon viewing which "you would agree a dwelt within the place" (""). Moreover, in his Fasti, Ovid describes a under the Aventine Hill made "black by the shade of holm-oaks" (""), at the sight of which one would be able to say that a resided within (""). Pliny the Elder similarly refers to sacred groves as the dwellings of deities, stating "nor do we pay greater worship to images shining with gold and ivory than to the forests ("") and to the very silences that they contain." Another author, the 1st-century CE geographer Pomponius Mela describes the woodlands of Gaul as "pleasant" ("") with their "vast groves" ("").

Seneca the Younger, a 1st-century CE Stoic philosopher, describes a grove with "ancient trees" ("") that have "grown to an unusual height" ("") and are "shutting out a view of the sky by a veil of pleached and intertwining branches" (""). These characteristics are perhaps framed by Seneca in a positive light: He purports that "the loftiness of the forest, the seclusion of the spot," and one's "marvel at the thick unbroken shade in the midst of the open spaces" will prove to them "the presence of " (""). Moreover, Seneca states that the onlooker's "soul will be moved by a certain imitation of " (""). According to the classicist Antti Lampinen, Seneca's account presents a positive ekphrasis, and is to be understood as expressing admiration for the grove and its qualities. However, according to the classicist Joanna Pypłacz, the particular "imitation of " ("") is comparable to the feeling of the sublime described by Edmund Burke as a "passion similar to terror."

In other writings, these characteristics are more explicitly recast as more horrifying and dreadful. For example, Statius describes a sacred grove of Diana where "no suns can penetrate" through the woods and "an empty terror keeps the silence and a semblance of the light shut out makes an eerie pallor." Moreover, in Lucan's account, the grove is explicitly described as devoid of traditional divine presence: He writes that "No rural Pan dwelt there, no Silvanus, ruler of the woods, no Nymphs." Instead, the gods present in this grove are barbaric and dreadful, they have wooden statues the "mere antiquity and the ghastly hue" of which "struck terror" into the hearts of the Roman soldiers. Even the natural world dares to tread upon the site: Lucan purports that "birds feared to perch," "wild beasts would not lie down." Unlike Lucan's grove, Statius emphasizes the divine presence in this locale: He directly states, "nor does the shade lack its deity," and explicitly describes Diana as an "inhabitant" of the site ("").

Ovid, in contrast, does not describe the ominous feeling evoked by a sacred grove, but instead begins by highlighting its natural beauty. However, the pleasant visage of this grove is artificial and deceptive, with Ovid writing that, though not "wrought by any artist's hand" (""), the site had imitated art by its "own cunning" (""). Ultimately, the grove proves treacherous, for it is the "sparkling spring" ("") that transforms Actaeon into a stag, resulting in his death at the hands of his own hunting dogs. Ovid otherwise made frequent use of the ironic conflict between terrible events and pleasant natural scenery, so much so that according to the classicist Charles Segal, nature—in Ovid's works—becomes "a kind of trap, suddenly and unexpectedly sprung, which reveals the insecurity and danger surrounding the dwellers in such a world." Propertius, a 1st-century BCE elegiac poet—in his telling of the death of Tarpeia—similarly establishes a contrast between the tragic events occurring within the grove and its physical beauty. He opens the tale by proclaiming that his subject shall be the "crime of Tarpeia" ("") and her "shameful grave" (""), immediately establishing a dour tone. Yet, he almost immediately proceeds to describe "fruitful" grove () and the "bowered home of Silvanus" (""), whose "sweet pipe" compels sheep to "come from the heat to drink" ("").

Worship at groves

The Lucaria ("Grove Festival") was held on July 19 and 21, according to the Fasti Amiterni, a calendar dating from the reign of Tiberius found at Amiternum (now S. Vittorino) in Sabine territory. Julius Frontinus, a 1st-century CE Roman engineer, recounts his own personal visit to "sacred groves" ("") and "sacred trees" (""), where he supplicated the gods. Frontinus justifies his particular choice of locale for worship, stating that he "was living the rural life" (""), implying that these sacred trees were viewed as a largely extra-urban phenomenon and therefore an at least atypical religious rite for city-dwelling folk. Apuleius records that "when pious travelers happen to pass by a sacred grove (lucus) or a cult place on their way, they are used to make a vow (votum), or a fruit offering, or to sit down for a while." Servius says that a lucus is so called because non luceat, "it is not illuminated", perhaps implying that a proper sacred grove hosted only legitimate daytime ceremonies and not dubious nocturnal rites that required torchlight.

Sacred groves of the Roman Empire

A lucus might become such a focus of activity that a community grew up around it, as was the case with the Lucus Augusti that is now Lugo in Spain and the Lucus Feroniae near Capena. Lucus is therefore part of the Latin name of several different ancient places in the Roman Empire from which the modern name derives, including:

Lucus Augusti, the name of multiple sites, such as:

See also

Notes

References

Bibliography