been many "Brians." To give this subject the special attention which it deserves would, however, swell these introductory notes to an intolerable size; and, indeed, their purpose is rather to show what the euhemeristic theory is than what it is not; that is to say, the euhemeristic theory as applied to the traditions relating to dwarf races. In the work to which I have referred, the opinions enunciated by Professor Nilsson and Mr. J.F. Campbell, together with other developments which suggested themselves to me, were duly set forth, and were received, as was to be expected, with every form of comment, from complete approval to entire dissent. Among the adverse criticisms, some arose from a misapprehension of the case, while others were due to the critic's imperfect acquaintance with the subject he professed to discuss. But besides these, there were of course the legitimate objections which can always be urged in matters of a debateable character, where there is no positive evidence on either side. With regard to such I can at least echo the words of one of the most eminent and most courteous of my opponents, M. Charles Ploix, and say for euhemerism what he says for naturalism:--"Tant que la théorie sur laquelle il s'appuie n'aura pas été démontrée fausse par des arguments décisifs, et surtout tant qu'elle n'aura pas été remplacée par une hypothèse plus certaine, il pourra continuer à s'affirmer."[6] It ought to be mentioned that the following paper was written for the Folk-Lore Society, at one of whose meetings (in February 1892) it was subsequently read. As, however, the Council of that Society ultimately decided that the paper was unsuited for publication in a journal devoted to the study of folk-lore, it now appears in a separate form. One advantage to be derived from this is that the illustrations which accompanied the lecture, and which are of much importance in enabling one to understand the argument, can also be reproduced at the same time. It may be added that, while the theme is capable of much amplification,[7] have preferred to print the paper as it was written for the occasion referred to. It states, concisely enough, the leading points of the argument.