Earlier in the week, an intriguing paper by an associate named Athanaricus surfaced, proposing a novel linguistic interpretation of the Roman deity Quirinus. The argument drawn upon the Proto-Indo-European term Perkwunos, suggesting a connection between this enigmatic Roman figure and the concept of the Striker or Thunderer.
While I lack the linguistic expertise to delve into the finer points of the paper’s arguments, some elements struck me as rather unconventional. Notably, the mention of Hercules Quirinus seemingly lends credence to the notion that Quirinus embodies the characteristics associated with the Striker or Thunderer, akin to Hercules himself.
However, we must proceed with caution here.
The realm of Indo-European names and titles does not lend itself to simple interpretations. Numerous epithets are often shared across various deities within a pantheon, particularly when they pertain to specific locations of worship or concepts resonating with multiple gods alongside their divine attributes.
Take, for example, the epithet Larissaeus, which is attributed to both Zeus and Apollo. This usage stems from the temples dedicated to both deities situated in Larissa at Argos. A similar epithet for Athena arises from her temple resting near the river Larissus. Thus, attempting to unify these figures under a single divine essence based solely on this toponymical connection leads to dubious conclusions. Admittedly, there are valid arguments for attributing sky-related characteristics to several of these figures.
Another quintessential illustration involves Surya, whose meaning fluctuates with context. It may refer to the Sky Father (as the Sun), the Son of the Sky Father (the Sun again), or even a Daughter of Surya, among other interpretations tied to Vedic hymns that touch upon Yama and the afterlife realm.
Instead of attempting to pinpoint the deity associated with these epithets, it’s likely more beneficial to evaluate the attributes they are meant to convey. What inherent quality differentiates the deity, leading to specific titles or names? What message are we trying to impart?
In this particular case, we must examine what ‘Quirinus’ represents in the Roman mytho-political context.
Things become intricate at this juncture, as our ordinary analytical methods reveal various, sometimes conflicting, linguistic or contextual interpretations.
The starting point is the Latin term Quiris, Quirites, which can be interpreted as relating to “citizenship.” This notion introduces a fascinating aspect, as it tends to evoke a sense of civic rather than military belonging. Here, we identify the Roman citizen not merely as a warrior but as a ‘fellow man’—in fact, there’s a Proto-Italic derivation suggesting ‘Fellow Man’ directly. I might also consider ‘Koryos,’ a Proto-Indo-European term for ‘warband or army,’ especially given a prevailing folk etymology tracing its roots to a Sabine term, Cures, which means “spear.” The identity of ‘spear-man’ resonates through history, as exemplified in today’s “German,” and interestingly correlates with the depiction of Janus Quirinus as ‘Janus the Spear-Wielding,’ linking him to broader concepts involving the deity Shiva-Rudra and similar sky gods, particularly within the context of ‘wanderer’ or ‘traveler’.
How does this connect to our discussion? If we perceive Quirinus as representative of ‘citizen’ or ‘Roman,’ then it is logical to find references in classical texts, such as those of Plutarch, that identify Quirinus with Romulus in a divine context.
As Mankind stands as an embodiment of the essence of humanity, so too does the Roman citizen reflect bonds of kinship with the founder of Rome, both in direct lineage and through the ‘mytho-political’ frameworks that bind them.
Yet, this comparison breaks down when considering the distinctions between ‘Quiris’ as a ‘peacetime citizen’ and the broader representation of Quirinus, who presides not only over peace but also embodies dualities, including those associated with Janus.
I propose that the term ‘Quiris’ evolved from a broader context and transformed over time, capturing the Roman identity in its peacetime essence. If ‘Koryos’ serves as the root for Quiris and Quirinus, it would suggest that Romans viewed themselves predominantly as a martial society—this perspective may draw parallels to Tacitus’ description of certain Germanic tribes known colloquially as “Harii,” which translates to ‘raiding party.’
Regardless of these linguistic complexities, it seems quite plausible to associate Quirinus with the essence of being ‘Roman’—either as a deity or, perhaps more fittingly, an embodiment of the Roman spirit.
Support for this interpretation can be found in comparisons to the language and beliefs of the Umbrian Grabovii preserved in the Iguvine Tablets. There, the cognate for Quirinus was identified as Vofionus. The etymology is indeed open for debate; one theory posits a connection to the Proto-Indo-European ‘Leudh’ or ‘Hlewdh,’ implying meanings aligned with ‘people’ or ‘growth’—which could reflect an understanding of Quirinus as “the Patron of the People” or “the Strengthener of the People.” This perception has been notably linked to the figure of Toutatis among the Celts, deriving from the same PIE root and related to concepts of strength and unity.
I theorize that the concept embodied by Quirinus aligns with that of Aryaman in Vedic traditions—a title indicating recognized status within a community.
It is critical to clarify that ‘Arya’ in the Vedic context is not merely an ethnic term; rather, it signifies adherence to a custom or ethos of the tribe. Hence, Aryaman governs relationships founded upon the principle of proper conduct, whereby observance of cultural norms defines membership in a group.
Bringing this back to Quirinus, the existence of a consort named Hora is unsurprising. ‘Hora,’ linked to modern terms for ‘hour’ and ‘year’, promotes ideas concerning the appropriateness of action, suggesting an alignment with natural laws and timing. In Greek tradition, Horae embodies qualities tied to justice, peace, and order, all connected through the divine figure of Themis, which aligns with the structured societal values of the Romans.
Coincidentally, reflecting on classical Indo-European mythology, various pairs of deities symbolize relationships that encapsulate the cosmic order, including connections observed in Vedic narratives where the dualities of law and nature play pivotal roles. The foundational elements of unity and legal order manifest prominently through traditions across cultures.
Thus, returning to Quirinus suggests a broader connotation than mere ‘Romanness’; Quirinus may represent an aspect of the Sky Father.
This notion complicates the assertion of Romulus as Quirinus and the direct lineage connecting him with Hora, leading me to suspect these beliefs may represent post facto interpretations. The connection of Quirinus with Romulus may be about mythic resonance, creating a narrative where the attributes of Quirinus and Hora reflect their foundational role in establishing the Roman identity.
More could certainly be elaborated on this intricate topic—but for now, let’s shift focus.
One notable question remains unaddressed: what does ‘Hercules Quirinus’ signify?
I propose that ‘Hercules Quirinus’ effectively indicates “Hercules the Roman”—a distinctly Roman embodiment of Hercules, contrasting him with various representations that may align more closely with non-Roman influences. In essence, Hercules Quirinus would encapsulate the ideals of the Roman citizenry, serving the Roman state as an active manifestation of its divine attributes.
