royalty could have preserved the dynasty so long from extinction.[1]
(iii.) The position of the tribal high-priest is somewhat analogous to that of the state-priests of other European nations (e g., the Rex Sacrificulus of the Romans or the Archon Basileus of the Athenians). These latter offices were relics of former monarchy, stripped of all temporal powers. Is not the same explanation possible also here?
Can the priesthood of the ancient Germans be due to the former existence of monarchy? In Tacitus' time most of the tribes with which the Romans came in contact were not monarchical ; but this need not always have been the case.[2] A nation may come into existence either through the confederation of small communities (as in Iceland) or through their union under one head. That the ancient German tribes arose by the latter process is made probable by the fact that many of them occupied territory which had been gained by conquest; for in a state of civilisation no further advanced than that of the ancient Germans, offensive warfare can hardly be carried on successfully except under a permanent head. Again the genealogies, which traced the tribesmen, primarily no doubt the noble families, back to a common ancestor, point to the former existence of monarchy, or at all events of patriarchal government on a large scale. Moreover, it is to be observed
- ↑ It is perhaps worth observing that in Alcuin's Vita Willebrordi (c. 10) the Frisian king (like the Swedish king in the Vita Anscharii) is represented as casting lots on what appears to have been regarded as a public occasion.
- ↑ It seems probable that the Cherusci were formerly under monarchical government. Tacitus (Ann., xi., i6) uses the expression stirps regia, when speaking of Arminius' family. Arminius endeavoured to make himself king (Ann., ii., 88), and Italicus was invited to the throne. Moreover, though eight chiefs of this tribe are mentioned by name, all of them belonged to one or other of two houses—on the one side Arminius, his brother Flavus, his father's brother Inguiomerus, and Flavus' son Italicus; on the other Segestes, his son Segimundus, his brother Segimerus, and Segimerus' son Segithancus. We may compare the case of Gaul. In Cæsar's time the Gallic States were almost entirely 'republican.' Yet in several (e.g., the Bituriges and Aruerni) there is evidence for the former existence of kings.
