The Welsh name Arthur, strange to Ireland, except during the period in question, is prominent in the third century.
The Druidical religion, which on no unequivocal evidence can be shewn to have been Irish, has the same prominence during the same time.
The Fir-Bolg and Attecheith are also prominent at this time, but not later. Now the Belgæ and Attacotti might easily be got from British or Roman writers. The soil of Ireland, as soon as its records improve, ceases to supply them.[141]
This is as far as it is necessary to proceed in the criticism of our early authorities of British, Irish, and Saxon origin, since it is not the object of the present writer to throw any unnecessary discredit over them, but only to inquire how far they are entitled to the claim of deciding certain questions finally, and of precluding criticism. It is clear that they are only to be admitted when opposed by a very slight amount of conflicting improbabilities, when speaking to points capable of being known, and when freed from several elements of error and confusion. The practical application of this inference will find place in the eleventh chapter.
FOOTNOTES:
[12] This is the year in which Orosius concludes his history. It leaves, as near as may be, a century between the last of the Roman informants and the birth of the earliest British.
[13] The origin of the Picts and Scots.
[14] Vol. iii, pp. 140-147.