widespread, and from around the first centuryad appeared in a more simplified form
as the permanent display of padded couches (puluinaria) in the majority of public
temples. It is from this period that we also find in temples the tables on which the
additional offerings were made.
Thanks to the instructions of the Fratres Arvales, we know that the banquet for
the divinity was sometimes more elaborate. It involved, at least on certain occasions,
two courses (mensae); a meat course and a second course of sweetened wine and
cake, in the manner of a symposium, during which the statue of the divinity was crowned
and daubed with perfume (Scheid 1990: 623–30). If it is presumed that, in the cult
space and ritual practices, one deity was often associated with other divinities, and
that parts of the “banquet,” perhaps those that came from the additional sacrifices
(with victims of an inferior status), were offered to the divine guests of the titular
deity of the place, then we may also suppose that a sacrifice took a good deal longer
than the laconic formulae of the epigraphic or historical documents might often sug-
gest. During this phase of the sacrifice, the officials consumed nothing (Scheid 2004).
The divinity was always the first to receive her share of the sacrificial offering and
did this either alone or with divine companions. During these proceedings, the sacrificer,
his aides, and other assistants had to wait. In certain cases, the communities (for
example priests, or even the Roman senate during the votive sacrifices at the begin-
ning of the year) made use of this waiting period by organizing discussions con-
cerning the cult or decisions to be taken within that particular group (for example,
the election of the president of the sacerdotal college or the preparation of the for-
mula for new vows to be announced after the completion of the votive sacrifices).
When the sacrificial offering had been consumed by the flames, thrown into a stream,
or disposed of in a pit, the rest of the victim was touched by the sacrificer and so
rendered fit for human consumption. The same procedure held for liquid offering
and, without doubt, for offerings of produce (porridge, cakes, bread, etc.). Through
these gestures, the sacrificer announced that he was not consuming a sacred food,
but one that the divinity had, in a sense, agreed to share with him, or had granted
to him, according to the principle of reciprocal gift-giving between men and gods.
We see, however, that in minor sacrifices, offered in the course of a meal, the order
was reversed: in such cases, it was the gods who received a share of the mortals’
food (see below).
The victims offered to the gods of the Underworld were burnt up completely
(holocaust), since the living could not share food with the patron divinities of the
world of the dead. “Magic” sacrifices, offered in order to influence a divinity, often
employed holocaust, since they were generally aimed at Underworld gods. In light
of the particular results expected from these rites, the offerings and the general
context differed from those of the everyday rituals.
The consumption of meat (accompanied by bread and mixed wine), or of liquid
offerings, by those performing the sacrifice presents a complex problem, since there
was a vast array of different procedures. The single overriding principle which
governed sacrificial banquets was that of hierarchy and privilege. Those overseeing
and carrying out the sacrifice generally ate their share straightaway, at community
expense. During certain festivals, executive groups banqueted at public expense
Sacrifices for Gods and Ancestors 267