476 Jörg Rüpke
a phase of 170 years of aniconic cult (fr. 18 Cardauns=Aug.civ. 4.31), and reflects the
implications in a number of further passages.
Despite the historical sensitivity of the introduction, theAntiquitiesare not a histor-
ical narrative, but, as far as books 2–14 are concerned, a systematic handbook, even if
interspersed by etiologies. And yet, these systematic data and philosophical reflections
are set into a clearly historical framework. Fragments 35–39 of the first book of Varro’s
Antiquitates rerum divinarumlist the introductions of deities and cults into the city of
Rome by the earliest kings. Following the list of kings and their synoikistic supporters,
Varro describes the growth of the number of gods in the city of Rome (fr. 38 Cardauns
=Tertullian,Apol. 25.12):
Romulus established for the Romans as gods Ianus, Iupiter, Mars, Picus, Faunus, Tiberi-
nus, and Hercules. Titus Tatius added Saturnus, Ops, Sol, Luna, Vulcanus, Lux...Cloacina.
Numa added as many male as female deities. During the reign of Numa religion did not
yet consist of images or temples with the Romans. A parsimonious piety, poor rites, no
Capitol-like splendour, but temporary made of turf, and Samian (i.e., terracotta) vessels, the
city of Rome was not yet flooded by the ingenuity of Greeks and Etruscans to form images.To an extent unknown to us, Varro might have noticed the foundation of temples down
to his own time. Two fragments survive that are related to foundations of the latter half
of the second centuryBCE, Lucullus’ temple of Felicitas (fr. 43 Cardauns=Aug.civ.
4.23) and M. Aemilius’ temple for Alburnus (fr. 44 Cardauns=Tert.nat. 1.10.14), a
foundation not without conflicts, for the senators “ruled that no general should dedicate
a sanctuary which he had vowed during a war before assentment by the senate; as it
happened to Marcus Aemilius, who had performed a vote for the god Alburnus.” Varro
did not only notice the growth of the pantheon. He tells his readers that Liber Pater
(or Dionysios) was driven out from all of Italy in 186BCE(fr. 45 Cardauns=Tert.nat.
1.10.14). For the time immediately before the publication of the books, he notes the
fight between the senate and the general populace about the banning of Egyptian cults
from the Capitoline hill, to which I have already referred earlier:
Varro relates that Serapis and Isis and Harpocrates and Anubis were excluded from the Capi-
toline hill and that their altars were thrown out by the senate and only rebuilt by popular
pressure. Nevertheless, on the first of January, the consul Gabinius reluctantly approved the
sacrifices to them, as a result of popular agitation, but because he had made no decision
regarding Serapis and Isis, and had a higher regard for the Senate’s censure than the pres-
sure of the mob, he forbade to construction of altars to them. (fr. 46a Cardauns=Tert.nat.
1.10.17)A parallel chronological sequence is attested for book 15, thus bracketing the systematic
treatment as a whole. In this second series (frr. 214–221 Cardauns), Varro adds informa-
tion about the foundation of further cults, thus enlarging the chronological realm even
back to Hercules’ visit to Rome.
Why did Varro write his history—in addition to, or rather as a frame for, his systematic,
antiquarian handbook and his philosophical interpretations of religion? What ends did a
history of religion serve? If we look at earlier instances of the historicization of religion,