Let us look back upon what has been attempted in this respect.
And first in respect to our data. The statements of the early authors, and the value which is due to them, have formed the subject of a separate chapter;[23] and it is hoped, that, without any undue disparagement, they have been shewn[220] to be valid only when they are opposed to a very small amount of either conflicting facts or a priori improbabilities. I also lay but little stress upon them when they assert a negative, and equally little when their apparent testimony may be reduced to an inference. Their absolute testimony, however, must be taken as we find it.
Partly for the sake of recapitulation, and partly with the view to give a further investigation to certain questions which could not well be considered until certain preliminary facts had been laid before the reader, the more important inferences are put in form of the following propositions, to some of which a commentary is attached.
I.
The British Isles were peopled from the Keltic portion of the continent originally and exclusively.
This implies an objection to the doctrine of any pre-Keltic population, and to the inferences deduced from certain real or supposed peculiarities in the shape of the skulls from the tumuli of the Stone period. (See pp. [26-27].)
II.
The Gaels cannot be derived from the Britons,[221] nor the Britons from the Gaels; on the contrary, each branch must have been developed from some common stock.
This rests upon the differences between the British and Gaelic languages. (See [Chapter V].)