there runs a rivulet with a good quantity of water, forming several cascades, which make a considerable appearance and sound.  The first thing we came to was an earthen mound, or dyke, extending from the one precipice to the other.  A little farther on was a strong stone-wall, not high, but very thick, extending in the same manner.  On the outside of it were the ruins of two houses, one on each side of the entry or gate to it.  The wall is built all along of uncemented stones, but of so large a size as to make a very firm and durable rampart.  It has been built all about the consecrated ground, except where the precipice is steep enough to form an inclosure of itself.  The sacred spot contains more than two acres.  There are within it the ruins of many houses, none of them large,—­a cairn,—­and many graves marked by clusters of stones.  Mr. M’Queen insisted that the ruin of a small building, standing east and west, was actually the temple of the Goddess ANAITIS, where her statue was kept, and from whence processions were made to wash it in one of the brooks.  There is, it must be owned, a hollow road, visible for a good way from the entrance; but Mr. M’Queen, with the keen eye of an antiquary, traced it much farther than I could perceive it.  There is not above a foot and a half in height of the walls now remaining; and the whole extent of the building was never, I imagine, greater than an ordinary Highland house.  Mr. M’Queen has collected a great deal of learning on the subject of the temple of ANAITIS; and I had endeavoured, in my Journal, to state such particulars as might give some idea of it, and of the surrounding scenery; but from the great difficulty of describing visible objects[609], I found my account so unsatisfactory, that my readers would probably have exclaimed

     ‘And write about it, Goddess, and about it[610];’

and therefore I have omitted it.

When we got home, and were again at table with Dr. Johnson, we first talked of portraits.  He agreed in thinking them valuable in families.  I wished to know which he preferred, fine portraits, or those of which the merit was resemblance.  JOHNSON.  ’Sir, their chief excellence is being like.’  BOSWELL.  ’Are you of that opinion as to the portraits of ancestors, whom one has never seen?’ JOHNSON.  ’It then becomes of more consequence that they should be like; and I would have them in the dress of the times, which makes a piece of history.  One should like to see how Rorie More looked.  Truth, Sir, is of the greatest value in these things[611].’  Mr. M’Queen observed, that if you think it of no consequence whether portraits are like, if they are but well painted, you may be indifferent whether a piece of history is true or not, if well told.

Dr. Johnson said at breakfast to-day, ’that it was but of late that historians bestowed pains and attention in consulting records, to attain to accuracy[1].  Bacon, in writing his history of Henry VII, does not seem to have consulted any, but to have just taken what he found in other histories, and blended it with what he learnt by tradition.’  He agreed with me that there should be a chronicle kept in every considerable family, to preserve the characters and transactions of successive generations.