neighbourhood of the modern Odessa, on the Dniepr, it is manifest that at the time when the great inscription was set up, Olbia was inhabited by Gauls; and among them are mentioned the _Sciri_, who afterwards, during the great migration of nations, are spoken of along with the Rugians. Unfortunately the inscription bears no date, though it probably belongs to the end of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh century of Rome: at that time, then, the Gauls extended as far as the Ukraine. The first thirty years of the seventh century must be regarded as the end of that migration; hence the expedition of the Cimbri, that is, Cymri, belongs to that period, for most of those Gallic tribes were, no doubt, Cymri, and the names of their chiefs are Cymric. This supposition also agrees with the account of Posidonius, that the Cimbri (Cymri) came from the Euxine.[74] The Bastarnae remained in the country about the Carpathians until the time of Tacitus, and maintained themselves against the Sarmatian immigration, which first set the Cymri in motion. I have written a separate treatise on the migration of the Sarmatians.[75] In Herodotus we find the Scythians on the Tanais as far as the Banat, all Moldavia and Wallachia was occupied by them, and the Triballians are found in Lower Hungary; but, afterwards, the latter occur in Moldavia, the Getae in Wallachia, and the Celts between these two. The different periods, therefore, must be carefully distinguished. Johannes Müller was the first to propound the correct view about the Cimbri, maintaining that they were not Germans, but Celts, and that they did not come from the north. The work in which he proves this was his earliest production, and at the same time his most critical one, but he does not understand the nature of the Gallic migration. The Teutones were unquestionably Germans. AFRICA. CYRENAICA.