This note proposes to emend the problematic preserved reading ad cuius mensae sacra (Val. Max. 4.2.3) to ad Iouis mensae sacra.

La catégorie du banquet public existait dans la société romaine qui opposait convivium privatum et convivium publicum. Contrairement à l’idée reçue, le terme latin epulum ne désignait pas toujours, et pas seulement, le banquet public, car les mots convivium et cena pouvaient aussi s’y appliquer. À l’origine, les banquets publics – banquets rituels ou banquets d’investiture des prêtres et magistrats (cena aditialis) – ne concernaient que les prêtres et les magistrats, parfois les sénateurs (Epulum Iovis). Ces participants disposaient (...) du epulandi publice ius. En 217, le banquet des Saturnales fut ouvert au populus, mais ce cas resta isolé dans le cadre rituel. En revanche, à partir du début du IIe siècle, les nobles prirent l’habitude d’offrir des banquets au peuple lors de leurs funérailles familiales, puis au Ier siècle, les imperatores le firent d’abord lors de la Dîme d’Hercule puis lors de leurs triomphes. Dans ces circonstances, le convivium publicum devenait alors l’epulum populi romani et l’epulandi publice ius concernait les membres du populus, sans doute répertoriés sur une liste.Une telle évolution montre que la présence du populus n’était pas, sous la République, consubstantielle au banquet public. Elle montre aussi que le caractère public d’un banquet n’était pas déterminé par le statut du donateur ou l’origine des fonds mais par la qualité de représentants de la cité des bénéficiaires (magistrats, sénateurs ou citoyens), ainsi que par sa localisation dans un lieu public. (shrink)

‘sed ad hunc bolum ut pervenias, opus erit tibi aut epulum aut triumphus alicuius, ut tune fuit Scipionis Metelli, aut collegiorum cenae, quae nunc innumerabiles excandefaciunt annonam macelli.’ Varro, RR 3. 2. 16.

eliciunt caelo te, Iuppiter; unde minoresnunc quoque te celebrant Eliciumque uocant.constat Auentinae tremuisse cacumina siluae,terraque subsedit pondere pressa Iouis. (Ov.Fasti3.327–30)They draw you down from the sky, Jupiter, and that is why more recent generations still worship you today, and call you Elicius. It is certain that the summit of the Aventine wood trembled, and the earth sank beneath the weight of Jupiter.Dismayed by an unprecedented flurry of thunderbolts, the pious King Numa sets out to expiate the omen. His divine (...) consort Egeria advises him to learn theritus piandi(291) from Picus and Faunus, who will, however, only reveal the necessary information under compulsion. Numa makes plans to ambush the gods, taking up position in a cave within a grove ‘under the Aventine, black with the shade of the holm oak, at sight of which you would say, “A spirit is here”’ (lucus Auentino suberat niger ilicis umbra, | quo posses uiso dicere ‘numen inest’, 295–6). The description of this numinous location continues (297–9):in medio gramen, muscoque adoperta uirentimanabat saxo uena perennis aquae;inde fere soli Faunus Picusque bibebant.In the middle was a meadow, and an unceasing stream of water, covered with green moss, flowed from the rock. From it Faunus and Picus, unaccompanied, were in the habit of drinking.Once captured by the king, Faunus and Picus tell Numa that only Jupiter himself can be consulted about Jupiter's own domain (if we readtectaat 316; Jupiter's weapons, if we readtela, and there's little to choose between those readings), but that with their help Numa may be able to draw Jupiter down from the sky to answer his enquiry. (shrink)

‘sed ad hunc bolum ut pervenias, opus erit tibi aut epulum aut triumphus alicuius, ut tune fuit Scipionis Metelli, aut collegiorum cenae, quae nunc innumerabiles excandefaciunt annonam macelli.’ Varro, RR 3. 2. 16.

Gercke reads with the MSS. Δ and E: ‘haec adhuc Etruscis philosophisque communia sunt: in illo dissentiunt quod fulmina a Ioue dicunt mitti et tres illi manubias dant.’ Mr. Garrod remarks that the soundness of ‘nouem’ is clinched by the passage he cites from Pliny, N.H. II. 138. But the suggestion he bases on this—to alter ‘illi’ to ‘Ioui’—seems unsatisfactory, as ‘mittiy’ in the first clause is left in crying need of a governing agent; ‘Ioui’ comes in too late in (...) the sentence, and the whole is given an awkward turn that Seneca surely could and would have avoided—by writing ‘fulmina >a Ioue< nouem dicunt mitti.’ Even if ‘a Ioue’ is merely a conjecture of the Δ family, as Mr. Garrod seems to hold, it is a conjecture good enough to pass muster. Perhaps copyists then dropped ‘illi’ from a feeling that it was needless after ‘a Ioue.’ But construction practically demands it. (shrink)