Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 3, 1892.djvu/163

Rh fortieth day seems to be a commemorative repetition of this ceremony.

When we set these traditional observances side by side their meaning is transparent. The partaking of food and drink which have been placed upon, or near, the body, or the coffin of the deceased, or are delivered over the coffin to be consumed—an act, in the most elaborate of these rites, distinctly believed to convey to the persons who partake some at all events of the properties of the dead—can only be a relic of a savage feast where the meat consumed was the very body of the deceased kinsman. The solemn eating at the grave of a cake carried in the funeral procession is an analogous rite and points to an identical origin. The eating of the dead, however repulsive to us, is known by the testimony of ancient writers to have been the practice of many barbarous tribes; and travellers have likewise found it among modern savages. In particular, Strabo records it of the ancient Irish, telling us that they considered it praiseworthy to devour their dead fathers. The inhabitants of Britain were at that time, as he expressly says, more civilized than the Irish. They had perhaps already passed beyond the stage at which this rite, in its horrible literalness, was possible. But they came of the same stock as the Irish, in so far at least as they both were of Celtic blood; and it is apposite to my argument to remind you that the latest anthropological investigations seem to point to a large proportion of Celtic blood also in the people of Upper Bavaria. The inference that the ancient cannibalism related only of the Irish was once