EVOLUTION OF CEREMONIAL GOVERNMENT. 39 



state-functionary is paid, the king gives his ministers and officers royal 

 bounty. Without traveling further a-field for illustrations, it will suffice 

 if we note these relations of causes and effects from early European 

 times downward. Of the ancient Germans, Tacitus says : " The chief 

 must show his liberality, and the follower expects it. He demands at 

 one time this war-horse ; at another, that victorious lance imbrued with 

 the enemy's blood. The prince's table, however inelegant, must always 

 be plentiful ; it is the only pay of his followers." That is, a monopoliz- 

 ing supremacy had, as its sequence, gratuities to dependents. Medi- 

 aeval times were characterized by modified forms of the same system. 

 In the thirteenth century, " in order that the princes of the blood, the 

 whole royal house, the great officers of the crown, and those ... of 

 the king's household, should appear with distinction, the kings gave 

 them dresses according to the rank they held and suitably to the season 

 at which these solemn courts were celebrated. These dresses were 

 called liveries because they were delivered," as the king's free gifts ; a 

 statement showing clearly how the reception of such presents signified 

 subordination. Down to the fifteenth century on a feast-day, the Duke 

 of Burgundy gave to the knights and nobles of his household " presents 

 of jewels and rich gifts . . . according to the custom of that day ; " 

 such presents, in addition to maintenance, house-room, and official 

 dresses for themselves and their servants, probably constituting the sole 

 acknowledgment for their attendance. It need scarcely be added that, 

 throughout the same stages of progress in Europe, the scattering of 

 largesse to the people by kings, dukes, and nobles, was similarly a con- 

 comitant of that servile position in which such return as they got for 

 their labor in addition to daily sustenance was in the shape of gratui- 

 ties rather than in the shape of wages. Moreover, we still have, down 

 to our own day, in vails and Christmas-boxes to servants, etc., the rem- 

 nants of a system under which fixed remuneration was eked out by 

 gifts a system itself sequent upon the earlier system under which gifts 

 formed the only remuneration. 



Thus it becomes tolerably clear that, while from presents offered by 

 subject persons there eventually develop tribute, taxes, and fees, from 

 donations made by ruling persons there eventually develop salaries. 



Something must be added concerning presents passing between 

 those who do not stand in acknowledged relations of superior and inferi- 

 or. Consideration of these carries us back to the primitive form of pres- 

 ent-making, as it occurs between strangers or members of alien societies; 

 and, on looking at some of the facts, there is suggested a question of 

 muVn interest : whether from the propitiatory gift made under these 

 circumstances there does not originate another important kind of social 

 action ? Barter is not, as we are apt to suppose, universally under- 

 stood. Cook, speaking of his failure to make any exchange of articles 

 with the Australians of his day, says, " They had, indeed, no idea of 



