No More Learning

THE
GEOGRAPHY
OF
STRABO.


LITERALLY TRANSLATED, WITH NOTES.

THE FIRST SIX BOOKS

BY H. C. HAMILTON, ESQ.

THE REMAINDER

BY W. FALCONER, M. A. ,

LATE FELLOW OF EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD.


IN THREE VOLUMES

VOL. I.

LONDON:
HENRY G. BOHN, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN.
MDCCCLIV.


JOHN CHILDS AND SON, BUNGAY.




NOTICE.


The present translation of Strabo, the great Geographer of Antiquity, is
the first which has been laid before the English public. It is curious
that a classic of so much renown and intrinsic value should have
remained a comparatively sealed book to this country for so many
centuries; yet such is the fact. It is true that the imperfect state of
the Greek text, and the difficulty of geographical identification, have
always been appalling obstacles; yet, after the acute and valuable
labours of Gossellin, Du Theil, Groskurd, and especially of Gustav
Cramer of Berlin, (whose text is followed in the present volume,) we
might fairly have expected that some English scholar would have ventured
to enter the field. But the task, like many in a similar position, has
been reserved for the publisher of the Classical Library, and he trusts
it will be found conscientiously fulfilled.

The translation was, in the first instance, intrusted to Mr. H. C.
Hamilton, whose knowledge of the subject, and familiarity with the
various languages concerned, peculiarly fitted him for the undertaking.
His official duties, however, added to his anxious examination of every
thing which tended to illustrate his author, prevented his proceeding
with much speed; and it was only after the lapse of three years that he
had reached the end of the sixth book. In the mean time it transpired
that Mr. W. Falconer, son of the editor of the Oxford edition of the
Greek text, had, after several years of care and attention, produced a
very excellent translation, meaning to publish it. Under the
circumstances it was deemed advisable to amalgamate the rival
undertakings, and it is a source of gratification to the publisher that
the respective translators were each so well satisfied with the labours
of the other, that they assented readily to his proposal of associating
their names.

This is all it seems necessary to state here. In the third volume will
be given some account of the life and labours of Strabo, and of the
manuscripts and principal editions; also a complete index of the places
mentioned in the text, accompanied, where possible, by the modern names.

H. G. B.




STRABO’S GEOGRAPHY.


BOOK I.

INTRODUCTION.

SUMMARY.


That geographical investigation is not inconsistent with
philosophy. —That Homer gives proof of it throughout his
poems. —That they who first wrote on the science have omitted
much, or given disjointed, defective, false, or inconsistent
accounts. —Proofs and demonstrations of the correctness of this
statement, with general heads containing a summary description of
the disposition of the whole habitable earth. —Credit to be
attached to the probabilities and evident proofs that in many
regions the land and sea have been shifted, and exchanged places
with each other.




CHAPTER I.


1. [1] If the scientific investigation of any subject be the proper
avocation of the philosopher, Geography, the science of which we propose
to treat, is certainly entitled to a high place; and this is evident
from many considerations. They who first ventured to handle the matter
were distinguished men, Homer, Anaximander the Milesian, and Hecatæus,
(his fellow-citizen according to Eratosthenes,) Democritus, Eudoxus,
Dicæarchus, Ephorus, with many others, and after these for Eratosthenes,
Polybius, and Posidonius, all of them philosophers.

Nor is the great learning, through which alone this subject can be
approached, possessed by any but a person acquainted with both human and
divine things,[2] and these attainments constitute what is called
philosophy. In addition to its vast importance in regard to social life,
and the art of government, Geography unfolds to us the celestial
phenomena, acquaints us with the occupants of the land and ocean, and
the vegetation, fruits, and peculiarities of the various quarters of the
earth, a knowledge of which marks him who cultivates it as a man earnest
in the great problem of life and happiness.

2. Admitting this, let us examine more in detail the points we have
advanced.

And first, [we maintain,] that both we and our predecessors, amongst
whom is Hipparchus, do justly regard Homer as the founder of
geographical science, for he not only excelled all, ancient as well as
modern, in the sublimity of his poetry, but also in his experience of
social life. Thus it was that he not only exerted himself to become
familiar with as many historic facts as possible, and transmit them to
posterity, but also with the various regions of the inhabited land and
sea, some intimately, others in a more general manner. For otherwise he
would not have reached the utmost limits of the earth, traversing it in
his imagination.

3. First, he stated that the earth was entirely encompassed by the
ocean, as in truth it is; afterwards he described the countries,
specifying some by name, others more generally by various indications,
explicitly defining Libya,[3] Ethiopia, the Sidonians, and the Erembi
(by which latter are probably intended the Troglodyte Arabians); and
alluding to those farther east and west as the lands washed by the
ocean, for in ocean he believed both the sun and constellations to rise
and set.

“Now from the gently-swelling flood profound
The sun arising, with his earliest rays,
In his ascent to heaven smote on the fields. ”[4]

“And now the radiant sun in ocean sank,
Dragging night after him o’er all the earth. ”[5]

The stars also he describes as bathed in the ocean. [6]

4. He portrays the happiness of the people of the West, and the
salubrity of their climate, having no doubt heard of the abundance of
Iberia,[7] which had attracted the arms of Hercules,[8] afterwards of
the Phœnicians, who acquired there an extended rule, and finally of the
Romans. There the airs of Zephyr breathe, there the poet feigned the
fields of Elysium, when he tells us Menelaus was sent thither by the
gods:—

“Thee the gods
Have destined to the blest Elysian isles,
Earth’s utmost boundaries. Rhadamanthus there
For ever reigns, and there the human kind
Enjoy the easiest life; no snow is there,
No biting winter, and no drenching shower,
But Zephyr always gently from the sea
Breathes on them, to refresh the happy race. ”[9]

5. The Isles of the Blest[10] are on the extreme west of Maurusia,[11]
near where its shore runs parallel to the opposite coast of Spain; and
it is clear he considered these regions also Blest, from their
contiguity to the Islands.

6. He tells us also, that the Ethiopians are far removed, and bounded by
the ocean: far removed,—

“The Ethiopians, utmost of mankind,
These eastward situate, those toward the west. ”[12]

Nor was he mistaken in calling them separated into two divisions, as we
shall presently show: and next to the ocean,—

“For to the banks of the Oceanus,
Where Ethiopia holds a feast to Jove,
He journey’d yesterday. ”[13]

Speaking of the Bear, he implies that the most northern part of the
earth is bounded by the ocean:

“Only star of those denied
To slake his beams in Ocean’s briny baths. ”[14]

Now, by the “Bear” and the “Wain,” he means the Arctic Circle; otherwise
he would never have said, “It _alone_ is deprived of the baths of the
ocean,” when such an _infinity_ of stars is to be seen continually
revolving in that part of the hemisphere. Let no one any longer blame
his ignorance for being merely acquainted with one Bear, when there are
two. It is probable that the second was not considered a constellation
until, on the Phœnicians specially designating it, and employing it in
navigation, it became known as one to the Greeks. [15] Such is the case
with the Hair of Berenice, and Canopus, whose names are but of
yesterday; and, as Aratus remarks, there are numbers which have not yet
received any designation. Crates, therefore, is mistaken when,
endeavouring to amend what is correct, he reads the verse thus:

Οἶος δ’ ἄμμορός ἐστι λοετρῶν,

replacing οἴη by οἶος, with a view to make the adjective agree with the
Arctic Circle, which is masculine; instead of the Arctic Constellation,
which is feminine. The expression of Heraclitus is far more preferable
and Homeric, who thus figuratively describes the Arctic Circle as the
Bear,—“The Bear is the limit of the dawn and of the evening, and from
the region of the Bear we have fine weather. ” Now it is not the
constellation of the Bear, but the Arctic Circle, which is the limit of
the rising and the setting stars.

By the Bear, then, which he elsewhere calls the Wain, and describes as
pursuing Orion, Homer means us to understand the Arctic Circle; and by
the ocean, that horizon into which, and out of which, the stars rise and
set. When he says that the Bear turns round and is deprived of the
ocean, he was aware that the Arctic Circle [always] extended to the sign
opposite the most northern point of the horizon. Adapting the words of
the poet to this view, by that part of the earth nearest to the ocean we
must understand the horizon, and by the Arctic Circle that which extends
to the signs which seem to our senses to touch in succession the most
northern point of the horizon. Thus, according to him, this portion of
the earth is washed by the ocean. With the nations of the North he was
well acquainted, although he does not mention them by name, and indeed
at the present day there is no regular title by which they are all
distinguished. He informs us of their mode of life, describing them as
“wanderers,” “noble milkers of mares,” “living on cheese,” and “without
wealth. ”[16]

7. In the following speech of Juno, he states that the ocean surrounds
the earth.

“For to the green earth’s utmost bounds I go,
To visit there the parent of the gods,
Oceanus. ”[17]

Does he not here assert that ocean bounds all its extremities, and does
it not surround these extremities? Again, in the

Hoplopœia,[18] he places the ocean in a circle round the border of
Achilles’ shield. Another proof of the extent of his knowledge, is his
acquaintance with the ebb and flow of the sea, calling it “the ebbing
ocean. ”[19] Again,

“Each day she thrice disgorges, and again
Thrice drinks, insatiate, the deluge down. ”[20]

The assertion of thrice, instead of twice, is either an error of the
author, or a blunder of the scribe, but the phenomenon is the same, and
the expression soft-flowing,[21] has reference to the flood-tide, which
has a gentle swell, and does not flow with a full rush. Posidonius
believes that where Homer describes the rocks as at one time covered
with the waves, and at another left bare, and when he compares the ocean
to a river, he alludes to the flow of the ocean. The first supposition
is correct, but for the second there is no ground; inasmuch as there can
be no comparison between the flow, much less the ebb of the sea, and the
current of a river. There is more probability in the explanation of
Crates, that Homer describes the whole ocean as deep-flowing, ebbing,
and also calls it a river, and that he also describes a part of the
ocean as a river, and the flow of a river; and that he is speaking of a
part, and not the whole, when he thus writes:—

“When down the smooth Oceanus impell’d
By prosperous gales, my galley, once again,
Cleaving the billows of the spacious deep,
Had reach’d the Ææan isle. ”[22]

He does not, however, mean the whole, but the flow of the river in the
ocean, which forms but a part of the ocean. Crates says, he speaks of
an estuary or gulf, extending from the winter tropic towards the south
pole. [23] Now any one quitting this, might still be in the ocean; but
for a person to leave the whole and still to be in the whole, is an
impossibility. But Homer says, that leaving the flow of the river, the
ship entered on the waves of the sea, which is the same as the ocean. If
you take it otherwise you make him say, that departing from the ocean he
came to the ocean. But this requires further discussion.

8. Perception and experience alike inform us, that the earth we inhabit
is an island: since wherever men have approached the termination of the
land, the sea, which we designate ocean, has been met with: and reason
assures us of the similarity of those places which our senses have not
been permitted to survey. For in the east[24] the land occupied by the
Indians, and in the west by the Iberians and Maurusians,[25] is wholly
encompassed [by water], and so is the greater part on the south[26] and
north. [27] And as to what remains as yet unexplored by us, because
navigators, sailing from opposite points, have not hitherto fallen in
with each other, it is not much, as any one may see who will compare the
distances between those places with which we are already acquainted. Nor
is it likely that the Atlantic Ocean is divided into two seas by narrow
isthmuses so placed as to prevent circumnavigation: how much more
probable that it is confluent and uninterrupted! Those who have returned
from an attempt to circumnavigate the earth, do not say they have been
prevented from continuing their voyage by any opposing continent, for
the sea remained perfectly open, but through want of resolution, and the
scarcity of provision. This theory too accords better with the ebb and
flow of the ocean, for the phenomenon, both in the increase and
diminution, is every where identical, or at all events has but little
difference, as if produced by the agitation of one sea, and resulting
from one cause.

9. We must not credit Hipparchus, who combats this opinion, denying that
the ocean is every where similarly affected; or that even if it were, it
would not follow that the Atlantic flowed in a circle, and thus
continually returned into itself. Seleucus, the Babylonian, is his
authority for this assertion. For a further investigation of the ocean
and its tides we refer to Posidonius and Athenodorus, who have fully
discussed this subject: we will now only remark that this view agrees
better with the uniformity of the phenomenon; and that the greater the
amount of moisture surrounding the earth, the easier would the heavenly
bodies be supplied with vapours from thence.

10. Homer, besides the boundaries of the earth, which he fully
describes, was likewise well acquainted with the Mediterranean. Starting
from the Pillars,[28] this sea is encompassed by Libya, Egypt, and
Phœnicia, then by the coasts opposite Cyprus, the Solymi,[29] Lycia, and
Caria, and then by the shore which stretches between Mycale[30] and
Troas, and the adjacent islands, every one of which he mentions, as well
as those of the Propontis[31] and the Euxine, as far as Colchis, and the
locality of Jason’s expedition. Furthermore, he was acquainted with the
Cimmerian Bosphorus,[32] having known the Cimmerians,[33] and that not
merely by name, but as being familiar with themselves. About his time,
or a little before, they had ravaged the whole country, from the
Bosphorus to Ionia. Their climate he characterizes as dismal, in the
following lines:—

“With clouds and darkness veil’d, on whom the sun
Deigns not to look with his beam-darting eye,

* * * * *

But sad night canopies the woeful race. ”[34]

He must also have been acquainted with the Ister,[35] since he speaks of
the Mysians, a Thracian race, dwelling on the banks of the Ister. He
knew also the whole Thracian[36] coast adjacent thereto, as far as the
Peneus,[37] for he mentions individually the Pæonians, Athos, the
Axius,[38] and the neighbouring islands. From hence to Thesprotis[39] is
the Grecian shore, with the whole of which he was acquainted. He was
besides familiar with the whole of Italy, and speaks of Temese[40] and
the Sicilians, as well as the whole of Spain[41] and its fertility, as
we have said before. If he omits various intermediate places this must
be pardoned, for even the compiler of a Geography overlooks numerous
details. We must forgive him too for intermingling fabulous narrative
with his historical and instructive work. This should not be complained
of; nevertheless, what Eratosthenes says is false, that the poets aim at
amusement, not instruction, since those who have treated upon the
subject most profoundly, regard poesy in the light of a primitive
philosophy. But we shall refute Eratosthenes[42] more at length, when we
have occasion again to speak of Homer.

11. What we have already advanced is sufficient to prove that poet the
father of geography. Those who followed in his track are also well
known as great men and true philosophers. The two immediately succeeding
Homer, according to Eratosthenes, were Anaximander, the disciple and
fellow-citizen of Thales, and Hecatæus the Milesian. Anaximander was
the first to publish a geographical chart. Hecatæus left a work [on the
same subject], which we can identify as his by means of his other
writings.

12. Many have testified to the amount of knowledge which this subject
requires, and Hipparchus, in his Strictures on Eratosthenes, well
observes, “that no one can become really proficient in geography, either
as a private individual or as a professor, without an acquaintance with
astronomy, and a knowledge of eclipses. For instance, no one could tell
whether Alexandria in Egypt were north or south of Babylon, nor yet the
intervening distance, without observing the latitudes. [43] Again, the
only means we possess of becoming acquainted with the longitudes of
different places is afforded by the eclipses of the sun and moon. ” Such
are the very words of Hipparchus.

13. Every one who undertakes to give an accurate description of a place,
should be particular to add its astronomical and geometrical relations,
explaining carefully its extent, distance, degrees of latitude, and
“climate. ”[44] Even a builder before constructing a house, or an
architect before laying out a city, would take these things into
consideration; much more should he who examines the whole earth: for
such things in a peculiar manner belong to him. In small distances a
little deviation north or south does not signify, but when it is the
whole circle of the earth, the north extends to the furthest confines of
Scythia,[45] or Keltica,[46] and the south to the extremities of
Ethiopia: there is a wide difference here. The case is the same should
we inhabit India or Spain, one in the east, the other far west, and, as
we are aware, the antipodes[47] to each other.

14. The [motions] of the sun and stars, and the centripetal force meet
us on the very threshold of such subjects, and compel us to the study of
astronomy, and the observation of such phenomena as each of us may
notice; in which too, very considerable differences appear, according to
the various points of observation. How could any one undertake to write
accurately and with propriety on the differences of the various parts of
the earth, who was ignorant of these matters? and although, if the
undertaking were of a popular character, it might not be advisable to
enter thoroughly into detail, still we should endeavour to include every
thing which could be comprehended by the general reader.

15. He who has thus elevated his mind, will he be satisfied with any
thing less than the whole world? If in his anxiety accurately to portray
the inhabited earth, he has dared to survey heaven, and make use thereof
for purposes of instruction, would it not seem childish were he to
refrain from examining the whole earth, of which the inhabited is but a
part, its size, its features, and its position in the universe; whether
other portions are inhabited besides those on which we dwell, and if so,
their amount? What is the extent of the regions not peopled? what their
peculiarities, and the cause of their remaining as they are? Thus it
appears that the knowledge of geography is connected with
meteorology[48] and geometry, that it unites the things of earth to the
things of heaven, as though they were nearly allied, and not separated.

“As far as heaven from earth. ”[49]

16. To the various subjects which it embraces let us add natural
history, or the history of the animals, plants, and other different
productions of the earth and sea, whether serviceable or useless, and my
original statement will, I think, carry perfect conviction with it.

That he who should undertake this work would be a benefactor to mankind,
reason and the voice of antiquity agree. The poets feign that they were
the wisest heroes who travelled and wandered most in foreign climes: and
to be familiar with many countries, and the disposition of the
inhabitants, is, according to them, of vast importance. Nestor prides
himself on having associated with the Lapithæ,[50] to whom he went,
“having been invited thither from the Apian[51] land afar. ”

So does Menelaus:—

“Cyprus, Phœnicia, Sidon, and the shores
Of Egypt, roaming without hope I reach’d;
In distant Ethiopia thence arrived,
And Libya, where the lambs their foreheads show
With budding horns defended soon as yean’d. ”[52]

Adding as a peculiarity of the country,

“There thrice within the year the flocks produce. ”[53]

And of Egypt:—“Where the sustaining earth is most prolific. ”[54] And
Thebes,

“the city with an hundred gates,
Whence twenty thousand chariots rush to war. ”[55]

Such information greatly enlarges our sphere of knowledge, by informing
us of the nature of the country, its botanical and zoological
peculiarities. To these should be added its marine history; for we are
in a certain sense amphibious, not exclusively connected with the land,
but with the sea as well. Hercules, on account of his vast experience
and observation, was described as “skilled in mighty works. ”[56]

All that we have previously stated is confirmed both by the testimony of
antiquity and by reason. One consideration however appears to bear in a
peculiar manner on the case in point; viz. the importance of geography
in a political view. For the sea and the earth in which we dwell furnish
theatres for action; limited, for limited actions; vast, for grander
deeds; but that which contains them all, and is the scene of the
greatest undertakings, constitutes what we term the habitable earth; and
they are the greatest generals who, subduing nations and kingdoms under
one sceptre, and one political administration, have acquired dominion
over land and sea. It is clear then, that geography is essential to all
the transactions of the statesman, informing us, as it does, of the
position of the continents, seas, and oceans of the whole habitable
earth. Information of especial interest to those who are concerned to
know the exact truth of such particulars, and whether the places have
been explored or not: for government will certainly be better
administered where the size and position of the country, its own
peculiarities, and those of the surrounding districts, are understood.
Forasmuch as there are many sovereigns who rule in different regions,
and some stretch their dominion over others’ territories, and undertake
the government of different nations and kingdoms, and thus enlarge the
extent of their dominion, it is not possible that either themselves, nor
yet writers on geography, should be equally acquainted with the whole,
but to both there is a great deal more or less known. Indeed, were the
whole earth under one government and one administration, it is hardly
possible that we should be informed of every locality in an equal
degree; for even then we should be most acquainted with the places
nearest us: and after all, it is better that we should have a more
perfect description of these, since, on account of their proximity,
there is greater need for it. We see there is no reason to be surprised
that there should be one chorographer[57] for the Indians, another for
the Ethiopians, and a third for the Greeks and Romans. What use would it
be to the Indians if a geographer should thus describe Bœotia to them,
in the words of Homer:—

“The dwellers on the rocks
Of Aulis follow’d, with the hardy clans
Of Hyria, Schœnus, Scolus. ”[58]

To us this is of value, while to be acquainted with the Indies and
their various territorial divisions would be useless, as it could lead
to no advantage, which is the only criterion of the worth of such
knowledge.

17. Even if we descend to the consideration of such trivial matters as
hunting, the case is still the same; for he will be most successful in
the chase who is acquainted with the size and nature of the wood, and
one familiar with the locality will be the most competent to superintend
an encampment, an ambush, or a march. But it is in great undertakings
that the truth shines out in all its brilliancy, for here, while the
success resulting from knowledge is grand, the consequences of ignorance
are disastrous. The fleet of Agamemnon, for instance, ravaging Mysia, as
if it had been the Trojan territory, was compelled to a shameful
retreat. Likewise the Persians and Libyans,[59] supposing certain
straits to be impassable, were very near falling into great perils, and
have left behind them memorials of their ignorance; the former a
monument to Salganeus on the Euripus, near Chalcis, whom the Persians
slew, for, as they thought, falsely conducting their fleet from the Gulf
of Malea[60] to the Euripus; and the latter to the memory of Pelorus,
who was executed on a like occasion. At the time of the expedition of
Xerxes, the coasts of Greece were covered with wrecks, and the
emigrations from Æolia and Ionia furnish numerous instances of the same
calamity. On the other hand, matters have come to a prosperous
termination, when judiciously directed by a knowledge of the locality.
Thus it was at the pass of Thermopylæ that Ephialtes is reported to have
pointed out to the Persians a pathway over the mountains, and so placed
the band of Leonidas at their mercy, and opened to the Barbarians a
passage into Pylæ. But passing over ancient occurrences, we think that
the late expeditions of the Romans against the Parthians furnish an
excellent example, where, as in those against the Germans and Kelts, the
Barbarians, taking advantage of their situation, [carried on the war] in
marshes, woods, and pathless deserts, deceiving the ignorant enemy as to
the position of different places, and concealing the roads, and the
means of obtaining food and necessaries.

18. As we have said, this science has an especial reference to the
occupations and requirements of statesmen, with whom also political and
ethical philosophy is mainly concerned; and here is an evidence. We
distinguish the different kinds of civil government by the office of
their chief men, denominating one government a monarchy, or kingdom,
another an aristocracy, a third a democracy; for so many we consider are
the forms of government, and we designate them by these names, because
from them they derive their primary characteristic. For the laws which
emanate from the sovereign, from the aristocracy, and from the people
all are different. The law is in fact a type of the form of government.
It is on this account that some define right to be the interest of the
strongest. If, therefore, political philosophy is advantageous to the
ruler, and geography in the actual government of the country, this
latter seems to possess some little superiority. This superiority is
most observable in real service.

19. But even the theoretical portion of geography is by no means
contemptible. On the one hand, it embraces the arts, mathematics, and
natural science; on the other, history and fable. Not that this latter
can have any distinct advantage: for instance, if any one should relate
to us the wanderings of Ulysses, Menelaus, and Jason, he would not seem
to have added directly to our fund of practical knowledge thereby,
(which is the only thing men of the world are interested in,) unless he
should convey useful examples of what those wanderers were compelled to
suffer, and at the same time afford matter of rational amusement to
those who interest themselves in the places which gave birth to such
fables. Practical men interest themselves in these pursuits, since they
are at once commendable, and afford them pleasure; but yet not to any
great extent. In this class, too, will be found those whose main object
in life is pleasure and respectability: but these by no means
constitute the majority of mankind, who naturally prefer that which
holds out some direct advantage. The geographer should therefore chiefly
devote himself to what is practically important. He should follow the
same rule in regard to history and the mathematics, selecting always
that which is most useful, most intelligible, and most authentic.

20.
Not that this latter
can have any distinct advantage: for instance, if any one should relate
to us the wanderings of Ulysses, Menelaus, and Jason, he would not seem
to have added directly to our fund of practical knowledge thereby,
(which is the only thing men of the world are interested in,) unless he
should convey useful examples of what those wanderers were compelled to
suffer, and at the same time afford matter of rational amusement to
those who interest themselves in the places which gave birth to such
fables. Practical men interest themselves in these pursuits, since they
are at once commendable, and afford them pleasure; but yet not to any
great extent. In this class, too, will be found those whose main object
in life is pleasure and respectability: but these by no means
constitute the majority of mankind, who naturally prefer that which
holds out some direct advantage. The geographer should therefore chiefly
devote himself to what is practically important. He should follow the
same rule in regard to history and the mathematics, selecting always
that which is most useful, most intelligible, and most authentic.

20. Geometry and astronomy, as we before remarked, seem absolutely
indispensable in this science. This, in fact, is evident, that without
some such assistance, it would be impossible to be accurately acquainted
with the configuration of the earth; its climata,[61] dimensions, and
the like information.

As the size of the earth has been demonstrated by other writers, we
shall here take for granted and receive as accurate what they have
advanced. We shall also assume that the earth is spheroidal, that its
surface is likewise spheroidal, and above all, that bodies have a
tendency towards its centre, which latter point is clear to the
perception of the most average understanding. However we may show
summarily that the earth is spheroidal, from the consideration that all
things however distant tend to its centre, and that every body is
attracted towards its centre of gravity; this is more distinctly proved
from observations of the sea and sky, for here the evidence of the
senses, and common observation, is alone requisite. The convexity of the
sea is a further proof of this to those who have sailed; for they cannot
perceive lights at a distance when placed at the same level as their
eyes, but if raised on high, they at once become perceptible to vision,
though at the same time further removed. So, when the eye is raised, it
sees what before was utterly imperceptible. Homer speaks of this when he
says,

Lifted up on the vast wave he quickly beheld afar. [62]

Sailors, as they approach their destination, behold the shore
continually raising itself to their view; and objects which had at first
seemed low, begin to elevate themselves. Our gnomons, also, are, among
other things, evidence of the revolution of the heavenly bodies; and
common sense at once shows us, that if the depth of the earth were
infinite,[63] such a revolution could not take place.

Every information respecting the climata[64] is contained in the
“Treatises on Positions. ”[65]

21. Now there are some facts which we take to be established, viz. those
with which every politician and general should be familiar. For on no
account should they be so uninformed as to the heavens and the position
of the earth,[66] that when they are in strange countries, where some of
the heavenly phenomena wear a different aspect to what they have been
accustomed, they should be in a consternation, and exclaim,

“Neither west
Know we, nor east, where rises or where sets
The all-enlightening sun. ”[67]

Still, we do not expect that they should be such thorough masters of the
subject as to know what stars rise and set together for the different
quarters of the earth; those which have the same meridian line, the
elevation of the poles, the signs which are in the zenith, with all the
various phenomena which differ as well in appearance as reality with the
variations of the horizon and arctic circle. With some of these matters,
unless as philosophical pursuits, they should not burden themselves at
all; others they must take for granted without searching into their
causes. This must be left to the care of the philosopher; the statesman
can have no leisure, or very little, for such pursuits. Those who,
through carelessness and ignorance, are not familiar with the globe and
the circles traced upon it, some parallel to each other, some at right
angles to the former, others, again, in an oblique direction; nor yet
with the position of the tropics, equator, and zodiac, (that circle
through which the sun travels in his course, and by which we reckon the
changes of season and the winds,) such persons we caution against the
perusal of our work. For if a man is neither properly acquainted with
these things, nor with the variations of the horizon and arctic circle,
and such similar elements of mathematics, how can he comprehend the
matters treated of here? So for one who does not know a right line from
a curve, nor yet a circle, nor a plane or spherical surface, nor the
seven stars in the firmament composing the Great Bear, and such like,
our work is entirely useless, at least for the present. Unless he first
acquires such information, he is utterly incompetent to the study of
geography. *So those who have written the works entitled “On Ports,” and
“Voyages Around the World,” have performed their task imperfectly, since
they have omitted to supply the requisite information from mathematics
and astronomy. *[68]

22. The present undertaking is composed in a lucid style, suitable alike
to the statesman and the general reader, after the fashion of my
History. [69] By a statesman we do not intend an illiterate person, but
one who has gone through the course of a liberal and philosophical
education. For a man who has bestowed no attention on virtue or
intelligence, nor what constitutes them, must be incompetent either to
blame or praise, still less to decide what actions are worthy to be
placed on record.

23. Having already compiled our Historical Memoirs, which, as we
conceive, are a valuable addition both to political and moral
philosophy, we have now determined to follow it up with the present
work, which has been prepared on the same system as the former, and for
the same class of readers, but more particularly for those who are in
high stations of life. And as our former production contains only the
most striking events in the lives of distinguished men, omitting
trifling and unimportant incidents; so here it will be proper to dismiss
small and doubtful particulars, and merely call attention to great and
remarkable transactions, such in fact as are useful, memorable, and
entertaining. In the colossal works of the sculptor we do not descend
into a minute examination of particulars, but look principally for
perfection in the general _ensemble_. This is the only method of
criticism applicable to the present work. Its proportions, so to speak,
are colossal; it deals in the generalities and main outlines of things,
except now and then, when some minor detail can be selected, calculated
to be serviceable to the seeker after knowledge, or the man of business.

We now think we have demonstrated that our present undertaking is one
that requires great care, and is well worthy of a philosopher.




CHAPTER II.


1. No one can [justly] blame us for having undertaken to write on a
subject already often treated of, unless it appears that we have done
nothing more than copy the works of former writers. In our opinion,
though they may have perfectly treated some subjects, in others they
have still left much to be completed; and we shall be justified in our
performance, if we can add to their information even in a trifling
degree. At the present moment the conquests of the Romans and Parthians
have added much to our knowledge, which (as was well observed by
Eratosthenes) had been considerably increased by the expedition of
Alexander. This prince laid open to our view the greater part of Asia,
and the whole north of Europe as far as the Danube. And the Romans [have
discovered to us] the entire west of Europe as far as the river Elbe,
which divides Germany, and the country beyond the Ister to the river
Dniester. The country beyond this to the Mæotis,[70] and the coasts
extending along Colchis,[71] was brought to light by Mithridates,
surnamed Eupator, and his generals. To the Parthians we are indebted for
a better acquaintance with Hyrcania,[72] Bactriana,[73] and the land of
the Scythians[74] lying beyond, of which before we knew but little. Thus
we can add much information not supplied by former writers, but this
will best be seen when we come to treat on the writers who have preceded
us; and this method we shall pursue, not so much in regard to the
primitive geographers, as to Eratosthenes and those subsequent to him.
As these writers far surpassed the generality in the amount of their
knowledge, so naturally it is more difficult to detect their errors when
such occur. If I seem to contradict those most whom I take chiefly for
my guides, I must claim indulgence on the plea, that it was never
intended to criticise the whole body of geographers, the larger number
of whom are not worthy of consideration, but to give an opinion of those
only who are generally found correct. Still, while many are beneath
discussion, such men as Eratosthenes, Posidonius, Hipparchus, Polybius,
and others of their stamp, deserve our highest consideration.

2. Let us first examine Eratosthenes, reviewing at the same time what
Hipparchus has advanced against him. Eratosthenes is much too creditable
an historian for us to believe what Polemon endeavours to charge against
him, that he had not even seen Athens. At the same time he does not
merit that unbounded confidence which some seem to repose in him,
although, as he himself tells us, he passed much of his time with
first-rate [characters]. Never, says he, at one period, and in one city,
were there so many philosophers flourishing together as in my time. In
their number was Ariston and Arcesilaus. This, however, it seems is not
sufficient, but you must also be able to choose who are the real guides
whom it is your interest to follow. He considers Arcesilaus and Ariston
to be the coryphæi of the philosophers who flourished in his time, and
is ceaseless in his eulogies of Apelles and Bion, the latter of whom,
says he, was the first to deck himself in the flowers of philosophy, but
concerning whom one is often likewise tempted to exclaim, “How great is
Bion in spite of his rags! ”[75] It is in such instances as the following
that the mediocrity of his genius shows itself.

Although at Athens he became a disciple of Zeno[76] of Citium, he makes
no mention of his followers; while those who opposed that philosopher,
and of whose sect not a trace remains, he thinks fit to set down amongst
the [great characters] who flourished in his time. His real character
appears in his Treatise on Moral Philosophy,[77] his Meditations, and
some similar productions. He seems to have held a middle course between
the man who devotes himself to philosophy, and the man who cannot make
up his mind to dedicate himself to it: and to have studied the science
merely as a relief from his other pursuits, or as a pleasing and
instructive recreation. In his other writings he is just the same; but
let these things pass. We will now proceed as well as we can to the task
of rectifying his geography.

First, then, let us return to the point which we lately deferred.

3. Eratosthenes says that the poet directs his whole attention to the
amusement of the mind, and not at all to its instruction. In opposition
to his idea, the ancients define poesy as a primitive philosophy,
guiding our life from infancy, and pleasantly regulating our morals, our
tastes, and our actions. The [Stoics] of our day affirm that the only
wise man is the poet. On this account the earliest lessons which the
citizens of Greece convey to their children are from the poets;
certainly not alone for the purpose of amusing their minds, but for
their instruction. Nay, even the professors of music, who give lessons
on the harp, lyre, and pipe, lay claim to our consideration on the same
account, since they say that [the accomplishments which they teach] are
calculated to form and improve the character. It is not only among the
Pythagoreans that one hears this claim supported, for Aristoxenus is of
that opinion, and Homer too regarded the bards as amongst the wisest of
mankind.

Of this number was the guardian of Clytemnestra, “to whom the son of
Atreus, when he set out for Troy, gave earnest charge to preserve his
wife,”[78] whom Ægisthus was unable to seduce, until “leading the bard
to a desert island, he left him,”[79] and then

“The queen he led, not willing less than he,
To his own mansion. ”[80]

But apart from all such considerations, Eratosthenes contradicts
himself; for a little previously to the sentence which we have quoted,
at the commencement of his Essay on Geography, he says, that “all the
ancient poets took delight in showing their knowledge of such matters.
Homer inserted into his poetry all that he knew about the Ethiopians,
Egypt, and Libya. Of all that related to Greece and the neighbouring
places he entered even too minutely into the details, describing Thisbe
as “abounding in doves,” Haliartus, “grassy,” Anthedon, the “far
distant,” Litæa, “situated on the sources of the Cephissus,”[81] and
none of his epithets are without their meaning. But in pursuing this
method, what object has he in view, to amuse [merely], or to instruct?
The latter, doubtless. Well, perhaps he has told the truth in these
instances, but in what was beyond his observation both he and the other
writers have indulged in all the marvels of fable. If such be the case
the statement should have been, that the poets relate some things for
mere amusement, others for instruction; but he affirms that they do it
altogether for amusement, without any view to information; and by way of
climax, inquires, What can it add to Homer’s worth to be familiar with
many lands, and skilled in strategy, agriculture, rhetoric, and similar
information, which some persons seem desirous to make him possessed of.
To seek to invest him with all this knowledge is most likely the effect
of too great a zeal for his honour. Hipparchus observes, that to assert
he was acquainted with every art and science, is like saying that an
Attic eiresionè[82] bears pears and apples.

As far as this goes, Eratosthenes, you are right enough; not so,
however, when you not only deny that Homer was possessed of these vast
acquirements, but represent poetry in general as a tissue of old wives’
fables, where, to use your own expression, every thing thought likely to
amuse is cooked up. I ask, is it of no value to the auditors[83] of the
poets to be made acquainted with [the history of] different countries,
with strategy, agriculture, and rhetoric, and such-like things, which
the lecture generally contains.

4. One thing is certain, that the poet has bestowed all these gifts upon
Ulysses, whom beyond any of his other [heroes] he loves to adorn with
every virtue. He says of him, that he

“Discover’d various cities, and the mind
And manners learn’d of men in lands remote. ”[84]

That he was

“Of a piercing wit and deeply wise. ”[85]

He is continually described as “the destroyer of cities,” and as having
vanquished Troy, by his counsels, his advice, and his deceptive art.
Diomede says of him,

“Let him attend me, and through fire itself
We shall return; for none is wise as he. ”[86]

He prides himself on his skill in husbandry, for at the harvest [he
says],

“I with my well-bent sickle in my hand,
Thou arm’d with one as keen. ”[87]

And also in tillage,

“Then shouldst thou see
How straight my furrow should be cut and true. ”[88]

And Homer was not singular in his opinion regarding these matters, for
all educated people appeal to him in favour of the idea that such
practical knowledge is one of the chief means of acquiring
understanding.

5. That eloquence is regarded as the wisdom of speech, Ulysses manifests
throughout the whole poem, both in the Trial,[89] the Petitions,[90] and
the Embassy. [91] Of him it is said by Antenor,

“But when he spake, forth from his breast did flow
A torrent swift as winter’s feather’d snow. ”[92]

Who can suppose that a poet capable of effectively introducing into his
scenes rhetoricians, generals, and various other characters, each
displaying some peculiar excellence, was nothing more than a droll or
juggler, capable only of cheating or flattering his hearer, and not of
instructing him.

Are we not all agreed that the chief merit of a poet consists in his
accurate representation of the affairs of life? Can this be done by a
mere driveller, unacquainted with the world?

The excellence of a poet is not to be measured by the same standard as
that of a mechanic or a blacksmith, where honour and virtue have nothing
to do with our estimate. But the poet and the individual are connected,
and he only can become a good poet, who is in the first instance a
worthy man.

6. To deny that our poet possesses the graces of oratory is using us
hardly indeed. What is so befitting an orator, what so poetical as
eloquence, and who so sweetly eloquent as Homer? But, by heaven! you’ll
say, there are other styles of eloquence than those peculiar to poetry.
Of course [I admit this]; in poetry itself there is the tragic and the
comic style; in prose, the historic and the forensic. But is not
language a generality, of which poetry and prose are forms? Yes,
language is; but are not the rhetorical, the eloquent, and the florid
styles also? I answer, that flowery prose is nothing but an imitation of
poetry. Ornate poetry was the first to make its appearance, and was well
received. Afterwards it was closely imitated by writers in the time of
Cadmus, Pherecydes, and Hecatæus. The metre was the only thing dispensed
with, every other poetic grace being carefully preserved. As time
advanced, one after another of its beauties was discarded, till at last
it came down from its glory into our common prose. In the same way we
may say that comedy took its rise from tragedy, but descended from its
lofty grandeur into what we now call the common parlance of daily life.
And when [we find] the ancient writers making use of the expression “to
sing,” to designate eloquence of style, this in itself is an evidence
that poetry is the source and origin of all ornamented and rhetorical
language. Poetry in ancient days was on every occasion accompanied by
melody. The song or ode was but a modulated speech, from whence the
words rhapsody, tragedy, comedy,[93] are derived; and since originally
eloquence was the term made use of for the poetical effusions which were
always of the nature of a song, it soon happened [that in speaking of
poetry] some said, to sing, others, to be eloquent; and as the one term
was early misapplied to prose compositions, the other also was soon
applied in the same way. Lastly, the very term _prose_, which is applied
to language not clothed in metre, seems to indicate, as it were, its
descent from an elevation or chariot to the ground. [94]

7. Homer accurately describes many distant countries, and not only
Greece and the neighbouring places, as Eratosthenes asserts. His
romance, too, is in better style than that of his successors. He does
not make up wondrous tales on every occasion, but to instruct us the
better often, and especially in the Odyssey, adds to the circumstances
which have come under his actual observation, allegories, wise
harangues, and enticing narrations. Concerning which, Eratosthenes is
much mistaken when he says that both Homer and his commentators are a
pack of fools. But this subject demands a little more of our attention.

8. To begin. The poets were by no means the first to avail themselves of
myths. States and lawgivers had taken advantage of them long before,
having observed the constitutional bias of mankind. Man is eager after
knowledge, and the love of legend is but the prelude thereto. This is
why children begin to listen [to fables], and are acquainted with them
before any other kind of knowledge; the cause of this is that the myth
introduces them to a new train of ideas, relating not to every-day
occurrences, but something in addition to these.

A charm hangs round whatever is new and hitherto unknown, inspiring us
with a desire to become acquainted with it, but when the wonderful and
the marvellous are likewise present, our delight is increased until at
last it becomes a philtre of study. To children we are obliged to hold
out such enticements, in order that in riper years, when the mind is
powerful, and no longer needs such stimulants, it may be prepared to
enter on the study of actual realities.

Every illiterate and uninstructed man is yet a child, and takes delight
in fable. With the partially informed it is much the same; reason is not
all-powerful within him, and he still possesses the tastes of a child.
But the marvellous, which is capable of exciting fear as well as
pleasure, influences not childhood only, but age as well. As we relate
to children pleasing tales to incite them [to any course] of action, and
frightful ones to deter them, such as those of Lamia,[95] Gorgo,[96]
Ephialtes,[97] and Mormolyca. [98] So numbers of our citizens are
incited to deeds of virtue by the beauties of fable, when they hear the
poets in a strain of enthusiasm recording noble actions, such as the
labours of Hercules or Theseus, and the honours bestowed on them by the
gods, or even when they see paintings, sculptures, or figures bearing
their romantic evidence to such events. In the same way they are
restrained from vicious courses, when they think they have received from
the gods by oracles or some other invisible intimations, threats,
menaces, or chastisements, or even if they only believe they have
befallen others. The great mass of women and common people, cannot be
induced by mere force of reason to devote themselves to piety, virtue,
and honesty; superstition must therefore be employed, and even this is
insufficient without the aid of the marvellous and the terrible. For
what are the thunderbolts, the ægis, the trident, the torches, the
dragons, the barbed thyrses, the arms of the gods, and all the
paraphernalia of antique theology, but fables employed by the founders
of states, as bugbears to frighten timorous minds.

Such was mythology; and when our ancestors found it capable of
subserving the purposes of social and political life, and even
contributing to the knowledge of truth, they continued the education of
childhood to maturer years, and maintained that poetry was sufficient to
form the understanding of every age. In course of time history and our
present philosophy were introduced; these, however, suffice but for the
chosen few, and to the present day poetry is the main agent which
instructs our people and crowds our theatres. Homer here stands
pre-eminent, but in truth all the early historians and natural
philosophers were mythologists as well.

9. Thus it is that our poet, though he sometimes employs fiction for the
purposes of instruction, always gives the preference to truth; he makes
use of what is false, merely tolerating it in order the more easily to
lead and govern the multitude. As a man

“Binds with a golden verge
Bright silver:”[99]

so Homer, heightening by fiction actual occurrences, adorns and
embellishes his subject; but his end is always the same as that of the
historian, who relates nothing but facts. In this manner he undertook
the narration of the Trojan war, gilding it with the beauties of fancy
and the wanderings of Ulysses; but we shall never find Homer inventing
an empty fable apart from the inculcation of truth. It is ever the case
that a person lies most successfully, when he intermingles [into the
falsehood] a sprinkling of truth. Such is the remark of Polybius in
treating of the wanderings of Ulysses; such is also the meaning of the
verse,

“He fabricated many falsehoods, relating them like truths:”[100]

not _all_, but _many_ falsehoods, otherwise it would not have looked
like the truth. Homer’s narrative is founded on history. He tells us
that king Æolus governed the Lipari Islands, that around Mount Ætna and
Leontini dwelt the Cyclopæ, and certain Læstrygonians inhospitable to
strangers. That at that time the districts surrounding the strait were
unapproachable; and Scylla and Charybdis were infested by banditti. In
like manner in the writings of Homer we are informed of other
freebooters, who dwelt in divers regions. Being aware that the
Cimmerians dwelt on the Cimmerian Bosphorus, a dark northern country, he
felicitously locates them in a gloomy region close by Hades, a fit
theatre for the scene in the wanderings of Ulysses. That he was
acquainted with these people we may satisfy ourselves from the
chroniclers, who report an incursion made by the Cimmerians either
during his lifetime or just before.

10. Being acquainted with Colchis, and the voyage of Jason to Æa, and
also with the historical and fabulous relations concerning Circe and
Medea, their enchantments and their various other points of resemblance,
he feigns there was a relationship between them, notwithstanding the
vast distance by which they were separated, the one dwelling in an
inland creek of the Euxine, and the other in Italy, and both of them
beyond the ocean.

It is possible that Jason himself wandered as far as Italy, for traces
of the Argonautic expedition are pointed out near the Ceraunian[101]
mountains, by the Adriatic,[102] at the Posidonian[103] Gulf and the
isles adjacent to Tyrrhenia. [104] The Cyaneæ, called by some the
Symplegades,[105] or Jostling Rocks, which render the passage through
the Strait of Constantinople so difficult, also afforded matter to our
poet. The actual existence of a place named Æa, stamped credibility upon
his Ææa; so did the Symplegades upon the Planctæ, (the Jostling Rocks
upon the Wandering Rocks,) and the passage of Jason through the midst of
them; in the same way Scylla and Charybdis accredited the passage [of
Ulysses] past those rocks. In his time people absolutely regarded the
Euxine as a kind of second ocean, and placed those who had crossed it in
the same list with navigators who had passed the Pillars. [106] It was
looked upon as the largest of our seas, and was therefore _par
excellence_ styled the Sea, in the same way as Homer [is called] the
Poet. In order therefore to be well received, it is probable he
transferred the scenes from the Euxine to the ocean, so as not to
stagger the general belief. And in my opinion those Solymi who possess
the highest ridges of Taurus, lying between Lycia and Pisidia, and those
who in their southern heights stand out most conspicuously to the
dwellers on this side Taurus, and the inhabitants of the Euxine by a
figure of speech, he describes as being beyond the ocean. For narrating
the voyage of Ulysses in his ship, he says,

“But Neptune, traversing in his return
From Ethiopia’s sons, the mountain heights
Of Solymè, descried him from afar. ”[107]

It is probable he took his account of the one-eyed Cyclopæ from Scythian
history, for the Arimaspi, whom Aristæus of Proconnesus describes in his
Tales of the Arimaspi, are said to be distinguished by this peculiarity.

11. Having premised thus much, we must now take into consideration the
reasons of those who assert that Homer makes Ulysses wander to Sicily
or Italy, and also of those who denied this. The truth is, he may be
equally interpreted on this subject either way, according as we take a
correct or incorrect view of the case. Correct, if we understand that he
was convinced of the reality of Ulysses’ wanderings there, and taking
this truth as a foundation, raised thereon a poetical superstructure.
And so far this description of him is right; for not about Italy only,
but to the farthest extremities of Spain, traces of his wanderings and
those of similar adventurers may still be found. Incorrect, if the
scene-painting is received as fact, his Ocean, and Hades, the oxen of
the sun, his hospitable reception by the goddesses, the metamorphoses,
the gigantic size of the Cyclopæ and Læstrygonians, the monstrous
appearance of Scylla, the distance of the voyage, and other similar
particulars, all alike manifestly fabulous. It is as idle to waste words
with a person who thus openly maligns our poet, as it would be with one
who should assert as true all the particulars of Ulysses’ return to
Ithaca,[108] the slaughter of the suitors, and the pitched battle
between him and the Ithacans in the field. But nothing can be said
against the man who understands the words of the poet in a rational way.

12. Eratosthenes, though on no sufficient grounds for so doing, rejects
both these opinions, endeavouring in his attack on the latter, to refute
by lengthened arguments what is manifestly absurd and unworthy of
consideration, and in regard to the former, maintaining a poet to be a
mere gossip, to whose worth an acquaintance with science or geography
could not add in the least degree: since the scenes of certain of
Homer’s fables are cast in actual localities, as Ilium,[109]
Pelion,[110] and Ida;[111] others in purely imaginary regions, such as
those of the Gorgons and Geryon. “Of this latter class,” he says, “are
the places mentioned in the wanderings of Ulysses, and those who pretend
that they are not mere fabrications of the poet, but have an actual
existence, are proved to be mistaken by the differences of opinion
existing among themselves: for some of them assert that the Sirenes of
Homer are situated close to Pelorus,[112] and others that they are more
than two thousand stadia distant,[113] near the Sirenussæ,[114] a
three-peaked rock which separates the Gulfs of Cumæa and Posidonium. ”
Now, in the first place, this rock is not three-peaked, nor does it form
a crest at the summit at all, but a long and narrow angle reaching from
the territory of Surrentum[115] to the Strait of Capria,[116] having on
one side of the mountain the temple of the Sirens, and on the other
side, next the Gulf of Posidonium, three little rocky and uninhabited
islands, named the Sirenes; upon the strait, is situated the Athenæum,
from which the rocky angle itself takes its name.

13. Further, if those who describe the geography of certain places do
not agree in every particular, are we justified in at once rejecting
their whole narration? Frequently this is a reason why it should receive
the greater credit. For example, in the investigation whether the scene
of Ulysses’ wanderings were Sicily or Italy, and the proper position of
the Sirenes, they differ in so far that one places them at Pelorus, and
the other at Sirenussæ, but neither of them dissents from the idea that
it was some where near Sicily or Italy. They add thereby strength to
this view, inasmuch as though they are not agreed as to the exact
locality, neither of them makes any question but that it was some where
contiguous to Italy or Sicily. If a third party should add, that the
monument of Parthenope, who was one of the Sirens, is shown at Naples,
this only confirms us the more in our belief, for though a third place
is introduced to our notice, still as Naples is situated in the gulf
called by Eratosthenes the Cumæan, and which is formed by the
Sirenussæ, we are more confident still that the position of the Sirenes
was some where close by.

That the poet did not search for accuracy in every minor detail we
admit, but neither ought we to expect this of him; at the same time we
are not to believe that he composed his poem without inquiring into the
history of the Wandering, nor where and how it occurred.

14. Eratosthenes “thinks it probable that Hesiod, having heard of the
wanderings of Ulysses, and of their having taken place near to Sicily
and Italy, embraced this view of the case, and not only describes the
places spoken of by Homer, but also Ætna, the Isle of Ortygia,[117] near
to Syracuse, and Tyrrhenia. As for Homer, he was altogether unacquainted
with these places, and further, had no wish to lay the scene of the
wanderings in any well-known locality. ” What! are then Ætna and
Tyrrhenia such well-known places, and Scyllæum, Charybdis,
Circæum,[118] and the Sirenussæ, so obscure? Or is Hesiod so correct as
never to write nonsense, but always follow in the wake of received
opinions, while Homer blurts out whatever comes uppermost? Without
taking into consideration our remarks on the character and aptitude of
Homer’s myths, a large array of writers who bear evidence to his
statements, and the additional testimony of local tradition, are
sufficient proof that his are not the inventions of poets or
contemporary scribblers, but the record of real actors and real scenes.

15. The conjecture of Polybius in regard to the particulars of the
wandering of Ulysses is excellent. He says that Æolus instructed sailors
how to navigate the strait, a difficult matter on account of the
currents occasioned by the ebb and flow, and was therefore called the
dispenser of the winds, and reputed their king.

In like manner Danaus for pointing out the springs of water that were in
Argos, and Atreus for showing the retrograde movement of the sun in the
heavens, from being mere soothsayers and diviners, were raised to the
dignity of kings. And the priests of the Egyptians, the Chaldeans, and
Magi, distinguished for their wisdom above those around them, obtained
from our predecessors honour and authority; and so it is that in each
of the gods, we worship the discoverer of some useful art.