CEREMONIAL RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT. 219 



many countries it is, or has been, forbidden to utter the 

 name of the god; the name of the king is in other places 

 similarly interdicted ; elsewhere it is an offence to refer by 

 name to a dead person; and among various savages the 

 name of the living person may not be taken in vain. The 

 feeling that the presence of one who is to be worshipped or 

 honoured, is a bar to the use of violence, also has its parallel 

 sequences. !N&quot;ot only is the temple of the god a sanctuary, 

 but in sundry places the burial-place of the chief is a sanc 

 tuary, and in other places the presence of the monarch, 

 as in Abyssinia where &quot; it is death to strike, or lift the hand 

 to strike, before the king; &quot; and then among European 

 peoples, the interdict on fighting in presence of a lady, 

 shows how this element in ceremonial rule extends into 

 general intercourse. Finally let me add a fuller statement 

 of a curious example before referred to the use of incense 

 in worship of a deity, as a political honour, and as a social 

 observance. In Egypt there was incense-offering before 

 both gods and kings, as also among the Hebrews : instance 

 the passage from the Song of Solomon (iii., 6-7) &quot; AVho is 

 this that cometh out of the wilderness like pillars of smoke, 

 perfumed with myrrh and frankincense. . . Behold his 

 bed [litter], which is Solomon s.&quot; Clavigero tells us that 

 &quot; incense-offering among the Mexicans, and other nations of 

 Anahuac, was not only an act of religion towards their gods, 

 but also a piece of civil courtesy to lords and ambassadors.&quot; 

 During mediaeval days in Europe, incense was burnt in 

 compliment to rank: nobles on entering churches severally 

 expected so many swings of the censer in front of them, 

 according to their grades. 



While, then, we are shown by numerous sets of paral 

 lelisms the common origin of observances that are now 

 distinguished as political, religious, and social while we 

 thus find verified in detail the hypothesis that ceremonial 

 government precedes in time the other forms of govern 

 ment, into all of which it enters ; we are shown how, in con- 



