nity gradually became accustomed to render definite homage to numerous other deified abstractions by means of general festivals or by representative priesthoods specially destined for their service; in particular instances it appointed also special flamines, so that the number of them was at length tifteen. But among these they carefully distinguished the three great kindlers (famines majores), who down to the latest times could only be taken from the ranks of the old burgesses, just as the three old incorporations, the Palatine and Quirinal Salii and the Arvales, always asserted precedence over all the other colleges of priests. Thus the necessary and stated observances due to the gods of the community were intrusted once for all by the state to fixed corporations or regular ministers; and the expense of sacrifices, which was probably not inconsiderable, was covered partly by the assignation of certain lands to particular temples, partly by fines (P. 80, 163).
It cannot be doubted that the public worship of the other Latin, and probably of the Sabellian, communities also was essentially similar in character. At any rate it can be shown that the Flamines, Salii, Luperci, and Vestales were institutions not special to Rome, but general among the Latins, and at least the three first colleges appear to have been formed in the kindred communities independently of the Roman model.
Lastly, as the state made arrangements in reference to its own gods, so each burgess might make similar arrangements in his individual sphere, and might not only present sacrifices, but might also consecrate set places and ministers, to his own divinities.
Colleges of sacred lore. There was thus enough of priesthood and of priests in Rome. Those, however, who had business with a god, resorted to the god, and not to the priest. Every suppliant and inquirer addressed himself directly to the divinity—the community of course by the king as its mouthpiece, just as the curia by the curio and the equites by their colonels; no intervention of a priest was allowed to conceal or to obscure this original and simple relation. But it was no easy matter withal to hold converse with a god. The god had his own way of speaking, which was intelligible only to one who was acquainted with it. He who did rightly understand it knew not only how to ascertain, but also how to manage, the will of the god, and even in case of need to overreach or to constrain him. It was natural, therefore, that the worshipper
