Holy Smokes – Feng Shui – Anerkennung
Here, you can read the main article about this line.
I bought this roll of Anerkennung [appreciation] along with some others from this line on Kleinanzeigen. Some of the packages still had a label with the original price of €4.20. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find out where they were bought. I haven’t seen them anywhere else at such a low price. Usually, a pack of the Feng Shui line costs between 5 and 7 euros. There is 20g in a roll, but there’d be plenty of space for more.
Ingredients: Myrrh, Costus, Cassia (cinnamon blossom), Sandalwood
Similar to Gesundheit, Anerkennung contains a note that reminds me of animal fur (specifically of lambs in this case). This is probably due to the Costus root, which also brings a certain musk aspect with it. I also detect a specific freshness, which could as well come from Costus.
The cinnamon blossoms make themselves known with their hot, cinnamon-like spiciness, which pairs well with the aforementioned fresh note.
In general, Anerkennung has a rather dry, powdery-soft, and warm scent. The myrrh adds another layer to this but does not stand out as prominently as it does in Ganzheit.
The scent has a very subtle sweetness that feels natural. While the stick is burning, the freshness is quite pronounced; in the after-smell, the dry, warm spiciness takes over, and the scent reminds me even more of lambskin.
I’m not sure if I’d buy Anerkennung again, but I find the scent pleasant, interesting, and well-balanced. However, I could imagine that some people might find its smell somewhat musty or stale.
“Incense sticks, at their core, have always been an Eastern tradition”.
Sticks, as in joss sticks with a bamboo centre, appear to be a recent development in incense culture. My research indicates they were developed in 1900 in Mysore as a quick, easy, and cheap way to make incense. Easier than making dhoop.
Dhoop, from my research, appears to be an Eastern tradition. People say it started with priests or monks in monasteries. Nobody is quite sure.
Of course, pure incense as well as incense blends were known in other ancient cultures around the world, but it does seem to be in the East that incense was mixed into a paste. Blends elsewhere appear to have been burned as loose ingredients.
So, yes, I would agree that if an “incense stick” is a moulded and shaped incense paste, that it is very much an Eastern tradition.
One of the distinct advantages of this Eastern tradition of making an incense paste, is the use of fixatives. I would assume that was done originally to protect the fragrant ingredients while they were being mixed in the wet paste, but it also means that the fragrant ingredients are highlighted when burned, and the scent release can be more measured and controlled than when burning a loose blend.
The earliest use of incense paste I have come across in Europe is in the German cones. It appears that cones were in widespread use in Germany by 1865. One company uses potato starch as a binder. So, unless there is also a culture of using potato starch in Eastern incense making, this seems to be a separate development, rather than Germany copying an Eastern tradition. And my understanding is that cones did not appear in Eastern incense making until around 1893 when a Japanese maker took some cones to the World Fair in Chicago. It is possible that cones were made in Japan before they were made in Germany, but my current hypothesis is that Japan copied Germany.
I believe the earliest incense stick makers in India, particularly from Mysore, drew inspiration from the Southeast Asian incense tradition. This is evident from the use of Joss powder—an essential ingredient that has always been imported from Vietnam. In contrast, dhoop has purely Indian origins.
Modern Indian incense, however, doesn’t quite fit the definition of “Eastern incense” due to its adoption of modern aroma chemicals and influences from French perfumery. Additionally, Indian incenses tend to be more intense rather than subtle, which is characteristic of traditional Eastern incense.
Yeah, that’s also my understanding.
Steve recently mentioned that incense cones have a surprisingly long tradition in Germany.
Do you know when the first cones were made in India?
Hi Irene,
I believe the evolution of dhoop cones in India was a natural progression from the early use of incense powders and coarse blends of herbs, roots, and other aromatic materials. Ancient texts mention dhoop, and there was even a Vedic study called Gandhshastra, which translates to “the science of scent.” While I don’t have concrete research on when dhoop cones first came into existence, based on my experience with Vedic rituals at home and in gatherings, I feel they may have originally been shaped just before a ritual began.
I strongly believe that the ready-to-retail dhoop cones we see today likely originated in southern India, where rituals follow a more structured methodology and dhoop cones are particularly popular. The region’s dense forests also produce natural binders like sticky Halmaddi, rubber, and other resins, which would have made it easier to craft these cones for commercial use.
That said, it’s truly fascinating to hear that incense sticks and cones have such a strong demand in Germany!
I can’t remember where I got that piece of “information” from, but I remember reading (or being told) that cones are a rather recent, 20th century invention, caused by industrialisation of incense production and the need for a form of incense that is robust for world-wide shipping and easy to pack/transport in bulk.
For a long time, I believed that because it felt quite plausible, but I now suspect this can only be true for the very modern types of cones (if at all!), not for this shape of incense in general.
The cone shape is also very intuitive, it’s likely that more than one culture invented it at some point.
Saying there is a “strong demand” feels like quite a stretch, but it has a place in our hearts.
Eastern incenses always have subtle character, and I don’t think that they will borrow materials from modern perfumery.
It’s interesting that you call them “eastern incenses”.
Those type of incense are catering to a set of customers who explicitly want none of those materials from modern perfumery, as they are seen as synthetic here. I’m not sure how the incense culture is in other European countries, but in Germany, raw, loose incense is very popular (within those who use incense), especially in context to esoteric, pagan or Christian religious practices, but also for pure scent appreciation. All with a very naturalist approach.
That being said, “incense culture” is very much a subculture. Most people will know incense only from going to church, or maybe, from Christian-derived family traditions of burning frankincense at home on Epiphany (January 6).
For most (adult) people here, incense cones or sticks is a thing for the Christmas season, which is kind of beyond me. But that might be because I’m not from a Christians Family, so we never had a huge Christmas family tradition.
I called this “Eastern” because, after reading the review, it seems to align with the Eastern philosophy of incense-making, which also includes the Japanese style. This isn’t to say that it’s inferior or less appealing—rather, it reflects a preference for a more raw and natural approach, even when modern perfumery offers a vast array of possibilities. It’s more about philosophy, and I truly respect that. In fact, I believe crafting these types of incense sticks can be even more challenging than the traditional Indian style.
Another reason I used the term “Eastern” is that, in European church traditions, incense was typically burned in the form of resins rather than crafted into sticks or dhoop using multiple ingredients. Incense sticks, at their core, have always been an Eastern tradition.