Surely it is an error in historical method to reason as if pre-Homeric Greeks were as addicted to divinising men, building their shrines, and sacrificing to them, as the post-Homeric Greeks were in the seventh and all later centuries. We might as well argue that the apostolic Christians practised mediaeval saint-worship, and adored and built innumerable chapels to dead Saints, because this was the custom of mediaeval Christianity. To sum up, we have proved that our Homer, in his treatment of old tradition, is a noble poet, that he stands aloof from all the others of Greece in his refusal (save in the _Odyssey_, a romance) to introduce the wild elements of _Märchen_, the childish miracles; while he is equally remote from the methods of the pseudo-historians like Eumelus as known to us, and all the Hesiodic genealogisers and inventors of eponymous heroes; and from the _manie cyclique_ of the Ionian Cyclic poets. Really no fact can be more certain; and this fact, even if it were not corroborated by all the others, would prove our Homer to be "alone, aloof, sublime." [1] Castren, _Ethnol. Vorlesungen_, pp. 164-169. [2] Von Hahn, _Griechische Märchen_, 1. [3] Pausanias, i. 19, ii. 34. [4] Child, _English and Scottish Ballads_, vol. i., "Riddles wisely Answered." [5] Yen. A., _Iliad_, ii. 336. Rzach, _Hesiod_, p. 326. [6] For many cases in _Märchen_, see Mr. Crookes' _Folk-Lore_, vol. xix. p. 156. [7] Roscher's _Lexikon_, vol ii. p. 2594. [8] _R. G. E._ pp. 161, 162. [9] Textually, for, in _Iliad_, vi. 200, 'Ἀλλ' ὄτε δὴ καὶ κεῑνος ἀπήχθετο πᾱσι θεοῑσιν (referring to Bellerophon), Mr. Murray renders, "But when he also was hated of all the gods," and asks, "Why the phrase, 'when he also'?" Homer is, "one may almost say, quoting from an existing poem." Now I understand Glaucus in this "he also" to refer to the remark of Diomede (vi. 140) on Lycurgus's being "hated of all the gods." He repeats the very words of Diomede. "Here is another man who, like Lycurgus in _your_ story, was _hated of all the gods_." Consulting Mr. Leaf's note (vi. 200), I find that this is also the opinion of Ameis: Mr. Leaf thinks it "too far-fetched." The distance is sixty lines (vi. 140-200). In his translation of the passage in Leaf, Lang, and Myers, Mr. Leaf translates, with Monro, "even he," even Bellerophon, whom the gods had loved. Surely no textual quotations by Homer from the so-called "Eumelus" need be imagined. [10] _R. G. E._ pp. 164, 165. [11] Pausanias, I. I. [12] _Ibid._ iv. 4. 1. [13] Frazer, _Pausanias_, vol. iii. p. 2, citing Clemens, _Strom_. i. 398, ed. Potter. [14] Eumelus in Kinkel, p. 188. [15] Pausanias, ii. 3. 10. [16] Pausanias, ii. i. i. [17] _Ibid_. ii. 3. 10, 11. [18] "Medea," Reseller's _Lexikon_, ii. 2. 2492. [19] Seeliger, Roscher's _Lexikon_, ii. 2. 2496. [20] Roscher, _Lexikon_, vol. i. 342. [21] _Iliad_, vi. 171.