Ethnicity in Roman Religion 479Italian and imperial communication rather than strengthening mutually exclusive ethnic
or urban identities. Intellectually, here, Varro is to be assigned to contemporaries such
as Diodorus Siculus or Pompeius Trogus, writers of universal histories (Alonso-Núñez
1990; van Wickevoort Crommelin 1993; Liddel and Fear 2010).
We need not wait for a Judeo-Christian tradition of universal history being established
(Wallraff 2009) before seeing another instance of an interest in the history of religion.
Writing under the emperor Tiberius, in a huge effort, Valerius Maximus collected “mem-
orable deeds and sayings” by sifting through a large amount of late republican and
Augustan literature (Mueller 2002). Aiming at moral improvement, by the examples
of earlier virtuous people, history offered a powerful resource for contemporary society.
The careful arrangement in topical books and chapters, supported by Roman and foreign
examples, reflects the spread of historical argumentation beyond aristocrats who had full
control over what theirmaioreshad done or would not have done. Surely, the exem-
plary behavior is that of those persons, but there is a shift in authority. In the very first
sentence of his books, Valerius stresses that those interested in first-hand documents (doc-
umenta sumere uolentibus, “those wishing to collect the sources”) are spared the trouble
of any long research (V. Max. 1, praef.). Foreign examples are deferred to a second place
in every class of examples, buturbis Romae exterarumque gentium facta simul ac dicta
memoratu digna(“deeds performed by the city of Rome as well as foreign peoples, and
sayings worthy of being remembered”), as the whole work starts, are both documented
as a series ofdomesticae peregrinaeque historiae(“histories domestic and foreign”), as a
treasure of a history home and away, as one might render the phrase that follows shortly
afterward in the preface. For the empire of the early Principate, only universal history
(omnis aeui gesta, “deeds of every age”) could be adequate. Such is the historical work
dedicated to Tiberius Caesar, who enjoyshominum deorumque consensus maris ac terrae
regimen(“the consensus of men and gods and the ruling of sea and land”).
Religion plays an important role for Valerius’ enterprise. As he explains at the end of
his preface, since he has in mind first to inquire into the proper way of treating the gods
(initium a cultu deorum petere), the topic of the first book is to be the condition of such
ritual (de condicione eius summatim disseram), a sentence that could serve as the title of
the book. In a highly selective manner, Valerius offers an account of Roman republican
religion. It is an account of religious ruling taking precedence against anything else, an
account of public priests being in the very center of religion by virtue of total control
of knowledge, and it is an account lacking chronological indications: there is change,
but it is change in quantity and territorial expansion, not in quality. The most important
feature of historical change, however, is the emperor. He is a new and very dynamic figure
in religion, too, and central in Valerius’ framework (Mueller 2002), a rallying point for
the whole Empire, bridging any ethnic difference. This is what “a history made at home
and abroad” powerfully drives home. This is how ethnic difference is dealt with.
REFERENCESAlonso-Núñez, Jose Miguel. 1990. “The Emergence of Universal Historiography from the 4th to
the 2nd CenturiesB.C.” In Herman Verdin, Guido Schepens, and Els de Keyser, eds.,Purposes of
History: Studies in Greek Historiography from the 4th to the 2nd CenturiesB.C., 253–66. Leuven:
Orientaliste.