Talk:Dii Consentes

merge proposal
Someone proposed a merge, then left no discussion. Which leads me to believe it was a fairly casual request. The dii consentes is a Roman concept, evidently, to reckon with the notion of the Olympians as imported from Greece. There's also an Etruscan element discussed. The article shouldn't be merged until someone determines that it thoroughly covers the question of who the dii consentes were, and that the product of that coverage (as well as the sources required to discuss it) doesn't differ significantly from "Twelve Olympians." Cynwolfe (talk) 22:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The concept of Consentes or Complices/consensiones does not allow their identification with the 12 Olympians, as we already discussed in the article Novensiles. They are the Penates Iovis and their identity is by definition unknown. (Arnobius and Martianus). Fortuna might be the general term for these Penates.Aldrasto11 (talk) 13:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * My comment above was made several months ago, before I'd started to look at this question. I'm glad you're looking at this. I'm wary of identifying them solely with the Penates Iovis, based on the little I've read, but I think this needs a fresh looking at from top to bottom.  Cynwolfe (talk) 14:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The fragment of Ennius is attributed to Varro, De re rustica 1.1; however, it is precisely not there. Varro says he's going to call on twelve agricultural gods who are emphatically, he says, not the 12 urban gods (six male, six female) "whose images stand around the forum, bedecked with gold" and who are the Di Consentes. The note in the Loeb Classical Library edition is what gives the list from Ennius. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless I've overlooked it, I also don't find this fragment of Ennius in Courtney, The Fragmentary Latin Poets (the citation of "frg. 45" is for some older edition of something, either frag-poets or maybe Skutsch's Ennius). Cynwolfe (talk) 15:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, the numerical ref is probably to Skutsch but the passage can be found in Vahlen's Annales . Cynwolfe (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What I lack now is why Ennius's list of 12 gods was identified as Varro's 12 urban Consentes. The notes I'm finding connect Ennius's list to the lectisternium of 217 BC. What a mess. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I should keep my jumbled thought process out of print till it arrives at some cogency. Here seems to be the logic:
 * Ennius lists 12 gods that correspond to the list given by Livy (in male-female pairs) for the lectisternium of 217.
 * The 12 gilded statues, six male-female pairs, that Varro mentions represent the gods celebrated at this lectisternium. Varro calls them the Di Consentes.
 * Therefore, the 12 gods listed by both Ennius and Livy are the Consentes.
 * At LL 8.70, Varro refers to the dei Penates, dei Consentes as if they're separate. I have to go do something IRL, but I feel more reassured that this is not incorrect, and can be explained to accommodate Arnobius and Martianus, who each presents interpretational difficulties. Meawhile, here are Bouché-Leclercq, C. Long, and our friends at Roman and European Mythologies. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes I see the Roman themselves had much confused opinions. However, interesting the inscription of the 3rd century that sets the Consentes aside from Minerva. Also Varro with his rustic Consentes different from the urban.

The simplest explanation in my view is that the concept was originally Etruscan as defined by Arnobius. Later the Romans inherited it and confused these 12 gods 6 males and 6 females， whose number was though unknown, with the 12 Olympians as since the lectisternium on. Grenier already remarked this confusion.Aldrasto11 (talk) 12:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * That sounds reasonable, and what I had eventually gathered: the difference in Martianus can be explained by his more direct recourse to Etruscan doctrine; Arnobius has to be treated with caution because his stated purpose is to ridicule others' religions. It's looking as if in Roman usage Consentes was taken to mean the Twelve Great Gods thought of as a council (since in the literary tradition, the Homeric epics shows the gods meeting in council to deliberate), which was a natural way for the political Romans to think of it. This general sense of a "council" is what Varro's about in De re rustica in giving his list of agricultural duces, set up as the agrarian equivalent of the urban Consentes. Could you give the Grenier citation? Cynwolfe (talk) 12:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Arnobius looks here the most reliable source. I read him recently once again and in presenting factual info he does not look much biased by his apologetic aim. On the contrary he is diligent in gathering and collating his sources. Of course as he himself admits he is unable to understand the material. Charlotte Long's translation of the passage on the Consentes looks imprecise after confronting the original and Grenier's text and translation: III 40 "...et totidem feminae, nominibus ignotis et miserationis parcissimae; sed eos summi Iovis consiliarios ac particepes existimari". I.e. their name is unknown and they have very little mercy

, but they are considered the advisers and participants of Iupiter. This last adjective is the most intriguing and makes the identification with the Olympians dubious.


 * Finally I get the impression that the Romans had no clearcut concept apart from the fact these gods were 12 and highly esteemed as the identification with the Olympians purports. As Bonnefoy remarks Consentes meant sharing the same seat, not consentientes, but later they took up this meaning. Cf. Martianus I 41 "Senatores deorum qui Penates ferebantur Tonantis ipsius quorumque nomina, quoniam publicari caeleste secretum non pertulit, ex eo quod omnia pariter repromittunt, nomen eis consensione perficit."


 * Arnobius and Martianus agree that their name was a heavenly secret. Cf. the story of the bull that died from hearing the name of Iupiter.


 * Varro too testifies that their identity was uncertain as in R R I 1 he substites his favourite Samothracian great gods Caelum and Terra, Sol and Luna etc. for the Olympians and the only thing that matters to him is that they are those who make crops grow. L L VIII 70 does not imply that they are different from the Penates in my view.


 * Grenier's relevant observations are at pp. 200-201 of his article "Indigetes et Novensiles", available on line at Persee'.Aldrasto11 (talk) 09:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The key here seems to be the etymology: in following the Etruscan schema, Martianus understands the Consentes in terms of where they are situated (as cosmology). The Roman hear/read Consentes as having to do with consensus and council, and thus the term becomes loose. I've always found the story about the bull dropping dead from hearing the name particularly … vivid, is the only word I can think of. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

The original concept cannot be not the Olympians. Cf. Bonnefoy.Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)