[ I6 ] 



anachrouifm would then indeed be palpable, and without 

 excufe. 



Such are the conjedlures that have occurred to me upon 

 this very obfcure fubjedl, which however I only mention as 

 fuch. In matters of antiquity fo very remote every poffible 

 guef's may be allowed, and the antiquarian fcience fcems exclu- 

 fively to be entitled to the delightful privilege of building 

 caftles in the air. 



The third aflertion of Herodotus is that Hefiod and Homer 

 diftl?iguiJJjcd the honours and funtftions of the Gods ; for fo I 

 interpret the word SteXovjig. That is to fay, that whereas before 

 the time of thefe bards no fpecific mode of worfhip, or fpecies 

 of facrlficc was allotted to each of the ieveral divinities, and 

 their tutelary powers were mixed and confounded, thef& poets 

 regulated the tutelage and the fundlions of every feveral God, 

 and afligned to each his particular mode of worfliip and of 

 facrifice. And upon this part of our author's opinion I cer- 

 tainly need not dwell, as it is by no means abfurd to fuppofc 

 that fuch was really the fadl. Nothing can be more probable 

 than that in the very early ages fuch confufion exifted in 

 religious worfliip, and no perfoni were more likely, both from 

 their influence and fuperior knowledge, to inculcate and to 

 fettle thefe regulations than the bards in queflion. 



In the lafl place our author afferts that the peculiar forms 

 under which\he Gods were pidured and adored were invented 



by 



