might have a high place for the gods, and at the great festivals he who made the feast and was chief had to hallow the toast and all the meat of the sacrifice,[1] a state of partial independence of a priestly order probably not to be found where the druid was in power among the Celts. The same comparative independence of the hierarchy of the Roman Church was no inconsiderable factor in bringing about the Protestant secession in Germany; while in England the King was always very sensitive in respect of any papal interference, and made himself in the person of the second Tudor formally the Head of the Church within the realm; so our Queen is at this moment declared supreme over all British courts, not only civil but ecclesiastical; and, acting through her Ministers, she appoints to the highest offices in the Church. That is the one side of the picture, with the Queen head of one of the two Churches recognized by the State; while the other side displays the Celt in a State of chronic revolt from both the State Churches, and in the attitude either of an adherent of the Church of Rome, as in Ireland, or of a dissenter, as in Cornwall, Wales and the Gaelic districts of Scotland.
Such a difference of temper is often regretted, but nobody can deny its existence; and whatever explanation details the history of many centuries has to offer, the contrast may be said to be as great now as it was in the time of Julius Caesar. But evident as is its persistence, its origin is by no means easy to define. On the one hand, it may be said that the Celts, who delivered religious matters over to their druids, that is, to their
- ↑ Vigfusson and Powell in the Corpus, i. 404, 407.
