Diemand, A. Das Ceremoniell der Kaiserkrönungen von Otto I bis Friedrich II. (München, 1894.)
Heylin, P. Cyprianus Anglicus. (London, MDCLXVIII.)
Leclercq, H. Dictionnaire d’archéologie et de liturgie chrétienne. (Paris. In progress.) Cited as DACL, ‘Charlemagne.’
Liebermann, F. Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen. (Halle, 1903.)
Prynne. Canterburie’s Doome. (London, 1646.)
Wilson, H. A. The English Coronation Orders. J. Th. St. II. 481 ff.
CHAPTER I
EARLY CONCEPTIONS OF KINGSHIP AND RELIGIOUS RITES IN CONNECTION WITH A KING’S ACCESSION
Kingship is one of the most ancient institutions of civilisation. At the very dawn of history the king is not only already existent, but is regarded with a reverential awe that shews that the institution must have had its beginnings in very remote times. His functions are twofold, civil and religious; not only is he set apart from those over whom he rules, but by virtue of his other function, that of mediator between God and his people, we find him invested as it were with a halo of quasi-divinity. And so in early times we find the king possessing certain priestly prerogatives. Pharaoh was not an ordinary man but the son of Horus, and almost as one of the Gods. The kings of the Semites were priest-kings. In Homer the king is Θεῖος[1], he is set upon his throne by Zeus, he is invested with the divine sceptre as in the case of Agamemnon[2] and stands in a very special relation to the Deity. In ancient Rome it was the same; and when in Rome and Athens kingship was abolished, still it was necessary to have an ἄρχων βασιλεύς or a Rex Sacrorum to perform the special priestly functions hitherto belonging to the king.