the Cimbri and Teutons into Italy; the passage of the Danube by the
Visigoths; and the invasions of Italy first by the Ostrogoths, then
by the Lombards--in which the nations came with men, women, and
children, horses, cattle, and dogs, bag and baggage? May not this
have been the custom of the race, with its strong feeling for the
family tie; and may not this account for no traces of them being left
behind?

Does not Dr. Latham's theory proceed too much on an assumption that
the Sclavonians dispossest the Teutons by force? And is not this
assumption his ground for objecting that the movement was effected
improbably 'by that division of the European population (the
Sclavonic and Lithuanian) which has, within the historic period,
receded before the Germanic'?

Are these migrations, though 'unrepresented in any history' (i.e.
contemporaneous), really 'unrepresented in any tradition'? Do not
the traditions of Jornandes and Paulus Diaconus, that the Goths and
the Lombards came from Scandinavia, represent this very fact?--and
are they to be set aside as naught? Surely not. Myths of this kind
generally embody a nucleus of truth, and must be regarded with
respect; for they often, after all arguments about them are spent,
are found to contain the very pith of the matter.

Are the 'phenomena of replacement and substitution' so very strange--
I will not say upon the popular theory, but at least on one half-way
between it and Dr. Latham's? Namely -

That the Teutonic races came originally, as some of them say they
did, from Scandinavia, Denmark, the South Baltic, &c.