Anscar in the ninth; of St. Kentigern in the sixth. In one of his sermons to the pagans of south-eastern Scotland, the last-named saint upbraided them with their folly for worshipping one (Odin or Woden) whom they themselves acknowledged to have lived on earth,—to have been a Saxon king,—to have paid the common debt of nature,—one whose bones had long before been confounded with the dust. Men of learning, who lived so much nearer to the times when the pontiff-king reigned in the north—who, for any thing we know to the contrary, had better evidence than tradition for his actions, young as that tradition was, have thought the same. It has been said, that even the least of those actions were of too superhuman a character ever to have been attributed to a mortal; and that the being concerning whom they were invented, must have been mythologic. But the assertion would not have been made, had the memory been consulted: _it_ would have furnished personages, indisputably historic, concerning whom wilder legends (if legends can be wilder) have been invented than concerning the Asiatic conqueror. What have the ancient Romans or the modern Persians to say of their kings? What has been said of Attila? What of Arthur? What of Macbeth and of Don Sebastian? There are indeed few eminent characters in the history of the middle ages concerning whom supernatural tales have not been invented and believed. Perhaps, however, the term _invented_ may be too severe a one; for in general the actions or qualities of personages much more ancient have been transferred to those of recent date.