οὐδὲ τοῦτʼ εὖ Ἐρατοσθένης, ὅτι ἀνδρῶν οὐκ ἐξίων μνήμης ἐπὶ πλέον μέμνηται, τὰ μὲν ἐλέγχων τὰ δὲ πιστεύων καὶ μάρτυσι χρώμενος αὐτοῖς, οἷον Δαμάστῃ καὶ τοιούτοις ἄλλοις. καὶ γὰρ εἴ τι λέγουσιν ἀληθές, οὐ μάρτυσί γε ἐκείνοις χρηστέον περὶ αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ πιστευτέον διὰ τοῦτο· ἀλλʼ ἐπὶ τῶν ἀξιολόγων ἀνδρῶν μόνων τῷ τοιούτῳ τρόπῳ χρηστέον, οἳ πολλὰ μὲν εἰρήκασιν εὖ, πολλὰ δὲ καὶ παραλελοίπασιν ἢ οὐχ ἱκανῶς ἐξεῖπον, οὐδὲν δʼ ἐψευσμένως. ὁ δὲ Δαμάστῃ χρώμενος μάρτυρι οὐδὲν διαφέρει τοῦ καλοῦντος μάρτυρα τὸν Βεργαῖον Εὐήμερον καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους, οὓς αὐτὸς εἴρηκε διαβάλλων τὴν φλυαρίαν. καὶ τούτου δʼ ἕνα τῶν λήρων αὐτὸς λέγει, τὸν μὲν Ἀράβιον κόλπον λίμνην ὑπολαμβάνοντος εἶναι, Διότιμον δὲ τὸν Στρομβίχου πρεσβείας Ἀθηναίων ἀφηγούμενον διὰ τοῦ Κύδνου ἀναπλεῦσαι ἐκ τῆς Κιλικίας ἐπὶ τὸν Χοάσπην ποταμόν, ὃς παρὰ τὰ Σοῦσα ῥεῖ, καὶ ἀφικέσθαι τετταρακοσταῖον εἰς Σοῦσα· ταῦτα δʼ αὐτῷ διηγήσασθαι αὐτὸν τὸν Διότιμον. εἶτα θαυμάζειν εἰ τὸν Εὐφράτην καὶ τὸν Τίγριν ἦν δυνατὸν διακόψαντα τὸν Κύδνον εἰς τὸν Χοάσπην ἐκβαλεῖν.
ERATOSTHENES is guilty of another fault in so frequently referring to the works of men beneath his notice, sometimes for the purpose of refuting them; at others, when he agrees with them, in order to cite them as authorities. I allude to Damastes, and such as him, who even when they speak the truth, are utterly unworthy of being appealed to as authorities, or vouchers for the credibility of a statement. For such purposes the writings of trustworthy men should only be employed, who have accurately described much; and though perhaps they may have omitted many points altogether, and barely touched on others, are yet never guilty of wilfully falsifying their statements. To cite Damastes as an authority is little better than to quote the Bergaean, or Euemerus the Messenian, and those other scribblers whom Eratosthenes himself sneers at for their absurdities. Why, he even points out as one of the follies of this Damastes, his observation that the Arabian Gulf was a lake; likewise the statement that Diotimus, the son of Strombicus and chief of the Athenian legation, sailed through Cilicia up the Cydnus into the river Choaspes, which flows by Susa, and so arrived at that capital after forty days’ journey. This particular he professes to state on the authority of Diotimus himself, and then expresses his wonder whether the Cydnus could actually cross the Euphrates and Tigris in order to disgorge itself into the Choaspes.
οὐ μόνον δὲ ταῦτʼ ἄν τις ἐπισημήναιτο, ἀλλʼ ὅτι καὶ περὶ τῶν τόπων οὐδὲ καθʼ ἑαυτόν πω γνώριμα εἶναί φησι τὰ καθʼ ἕκαστα ἀκριβολογούμενα, καὶ κελεύσας ἡμῖν μὴ ῥᾳδίως τοῖς τυχοῦσι πιστεύειν, καὶ τὰς αἰτίας διὰ μακρῶν ἀποδοὺς διʼ ἃς οὐδὲ πιστευτέον, οἷον περὶ τῶν κατὰ τὸν Πόντον καὶ τὸν Ἀδρίαν, αὐτὸς ἐπίστευσε τοῖς τυχοῦσι. τοιγάρτοι τὸν μὲν Ἰσσικὸν κόλπον ἐπίστευσεν ἑωθινώτατον τῆς καθʼ ἡμᾶς θαλάττης σημεῖον, τοῦ κατὰ Διοσκουριάδα τὴν ἐν τῷ τοῦ Πόντου μυχῷ σχεδόν τι καὶ τρισχιλίοις σταδίοις ἑωθινωτέρου ὄντος καὶ κατʼ αὐτὸν ἐκ τοῦ σταδιασμοῦ οὗ φησί· τοῦ τε Ἀδρίου καὶ τὰ ἀρκτικὰ καὶ τὰ ἔσχατα διεξιὼν οὐδενὸς ἀπέχεται μυθώδους. πεπίστευκε δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἔξω στηλῶν Ἡρακλείων πολλοῖς μυθώδεσι, Κέρνην τε νῆσον καὶ ἄλλους τόπους ὀνομάζων τοὺς μηδαμοῦ νυνὶ δεικνυμένους, περὶ ὧν μνησθησόμεθα καὶ ὕστερον. εἰπών τε τοὺς ἀρχαιοτάτους πλεῖν καὶ κατὰ λῃστείαν ἢ ἐμπορίαν, μὴ πελαγίζειν δέ, ἀλλὰ παρὰ γῆν, καθάπερ τὸν Ἰάσονα, ὅνπερ καὶ μέχρι τῆς Ἀρμενίας καὶ Μηδίας ἐκ τῶν Κόλχων στρατεῦσαι ἀφέντα τὰς ναῦς, ὕστερόν φησι τὸ παλαιὸν οὔτε τὸν Εὔξεινον θαρρεῖν τινα πλεῖν οὔτε παρὰ Λιβύην καὶ Συρίαν καὶ Κιλικίαν. εἰ μὲν οὖν τοὺς πάλαι τοὺς πρὸ τῆς ἡμετέρας λέγει μνήμης, οὐδὲν ἐμοὶ μέλει περὶ ἐκείνων λέγειν, οὔτʼ εἰ ἔπλεον οὔτʼ εἰ μή· εἰ δὲ περὶ τῶν μνημονευομένων, οὐκ ἂν ὀκνήσαι τις εἰπεῖν ὡς οἱ παλαιοὶ μακροτέρας ὁδοὺς φανοῦνται καὶ κατὰ γῆν καὶ κατὰ θάλατταν τελέσαντες τῶν ὕστερον, εἰ χρὴ προσέχειν τοῖς λεγομένοις· οἷον Διόνυσος καὶ Ἡρακλῆς καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἰάσων, ἔτι δʼ οἱ ὑπὸ τοῦ ποιητοῦ λεγόμενοι Ὀδυσσεὺς καὶ Μενέλαος. καὶ Θησέα δὲ καὶ Πειρίθουν μακρὰς εἰκός ἐστι στρατείας ὑπομείναντας καταλιπεῖν δόξαν περὶ ἑαυτῶν ὡς εἰς Ἅιδου καταβάντας, τοὺς δὲ Διοσκούρους ἐπιμελητὰς τῆς θαλάττης λεχθῆναι καὶ σωτῆρας τῶν πλεόντων. ἥ τε Μίνω θαλαττοκρατία θρυλεῖται καὶ ἡ Φοινίκων ναυτιλία, οἳ καὶ τὰ ἔξω τῶν Ἡρακλείων στηλῶν ἐπῆλθον καὶ πόλεις ἔκτισαν κἀκεῖ καὶ περὶ τὰ μέσα τῆς Λιβύης παραλίας μικρὸν τῶν Τρωικῶν ὕστερον. Αἰνείαν δὲ καὶ Ἀντήνορα καὶ Ἐνετοὺς καὶ ἁπλῶς τοὺς ἐκ τοῦ Τρωικοῦ πολέμου πλανηθέντας εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκουμένην ἄξιον μὴ τῶν παλαιῶν ἀνθρώπων νομίσαι; συνέβη γὰρ δὴ τοῖς τότε Ἕλλησιν ὁμοίως καὶ τοῖς βαρβάροις διὰ τὸν τῆς στρατείας χρόνον ἀποβαλεῖν τά τε ἐν οἴκῳ καὶ τῇ στρατείᾳ πορισθέντα· ὥστε μετὰ τὴν τοῦ Ἰλίου καταστροφὴν τούς τε νικήσαντας ἐπὶ λῃστείαν τραπέσθαι διὰ τὰς ἀπορίας καὶ πολὺ μᾶλλον τοὺς ἡττηθέντας καὶ περιγενομένους ἐκ τοῦ πολέμου. καὶ δὴ καὶ πόλεις ὑπὸ τούτων πλεῖσται κτισθῆναι λέγονται κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν ἔξω τῆς Ἑλλάδος παραλίαν, ἔστι δʼ ὅπου καὶ τὴν μεσόγαιαν.
However, this is not all we have to say against him. Of many places he tells us that nothing is known, when in fact they have every one been accurately described. Then he warns us to be very cautious in believing what we are told on such matters, and endeavours by long and tedious arguments to show the value of his advice; swallowing at the same time the most ridiculous absurdities himself concerning the Euxine and Adriatic. Thus he believed the Bay of Issus to be the most easterly point of the Mediterranean, though Dioscurias, which is nearly at the bottom of the Pontus Euxinus, is, according to his own calculations, farther east by a distance of 3000 stadia. In describing the northern and farther parts of the Adriatic he cannot refrain from similar romancing, and gives credit to many strange narrations concerning what lies beyond the Pillars of Hercules, informing us of an Isle of Kerne there, and other places now nowhere to be found, which we shall speak of presently.
Having remarked that the ancients, whether out on piratical excursions, or for the purposes of commerce, never ventured into the high seas, but crept along the coast, and instancing Jason, who leaving his vessels at Colchis penetrated into Armenia and Media on foot, he proceeds to tell us that formerly no one dared to navigate either the Euxine or the seas by Libya, Syria, and Cilicia. If by formerly he means periods so long past that we possess no record of them, it is of little consequence to us whether they navigated those seas or not, but if [he speaks] of times of which we know any thing, and if we are to place any trust in the accounts which have come down to us, every one will admit that the ancients appear to have made longer journeys both by sea and land than their successors; witness Bacchus, Hercules, nay Jason himself, and again Ulysses and Menelaus, of whom Homer tells us. It seems most probable that Theseus and Pirithous are indebted to some long voyages for the credit they afterwards obtained of having visited the infernal regions; and in like manner the Dioscuri gained the appellation of guardians of the sea, and the deliverers of sailors. The sovereignty of the seas exercised by Minos, and the navigation carried on by the Phoenicians, is well known. A little after the period of the Trojan war they had penetrated beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and founded cities as well there as to the midst of the African coast. Is it not correct to number amongst the ancients Aeneas, Antenor, the Heneti, and all the crowd of warriors, who, after the destruction of Troy, wandered over the face of the whole earth? For at the conclusion of the war both the Greeks and Barbarians found themselves deprived, the one of their livelihood at home, the other of the fruits of their expedition; so that when Troy was overthrown, the victors, and still more the vanquished, who had survived the conflict, were compelled by want to a life of piracy; and we learn that they became the founders of many cities along the sea-coast beyond Greece, besides several inland settlements.
εἰπὼν δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁπόσον προὔβη τὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης εἰς γνῶσιν τοῖς μετʼ Ἀλέξανδρον καὶ κατʼ αὐτὸν ἤδη, μεταβέβηκεν ἐπὶ τὸν περὶ τοῦ σχήματος λόγον, οὐχὶ περὶ τοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης, ὅπερ ἦν οἰκειότερον τῷ περὶ αὐτῆς λόγῳ, ἀλλὰ τοῦ τῆς συμπάσης γῆς· δεῖ μὲν γὰρ καὶ τούτου μνησθῆναι, μὴ ἀτάκτως δέ. εἰπὼν οὖν ὅτι σφαιροειδὴς ἡ σύμπασα, οὐχ ὡς ἐκ τόρνου δέ, ἀλλʼ ἔχει τινὰς ἀνωμαλίας, ἐπιφέρει τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ἐν μέρει μετασχηματισμῶν αὐτῆς, οἳ συμβαίνουσιν ἔκ τε ὕδατος καὶ πυρὸς καὶ σεισμῶν καὶ ἀναφυσημάτων καὶ ἄλλων τοιούτων, οὐδʼ ἐνταῦθα τὴν τάξιν φυλάττων. τὸ μὲν γὰρ σφαιροειδὲς περὶ ὅλην τὴν γῆν ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ ὅλου ἕξεως συμβαίνει, οἱ δὲ τοιοῦτοι μετασχηματισμοὶ τὴν μὲν ὅλην γῆν οὐδὲν ἐξαλλάττουσιν· ἐν γὰρ τοῖς μεγάλοις ἐναφανίζεται τὰ οὕτω μικρά· τῆς δὲ οἰκουμένης διαθέσεις ἑτέρας καὶ ἑτέρας τινὰς ἀπεργάζονται καὶ τὰς προσεχεῖς αἰτίας ἄλλας καὶ ἄλλας ἔχουσι.
Again, having discoursed on the advance of knowledge respecting the Geography of the inhabited earth, between the time of Alexander and the period when he was writing, Eratosthenes goes into a description of the figure of the earth; not merely of the habitable earth, an account of which would have been very suitable, but of the whole earth, which should certainly have been given too, but not in this disorderly manner. He proceeds to tell us that the earth is spheroidal, not however perfectly so, inasmuch as it has certain irregularities, he then enlarges on the successive changes of its form, occasioned by water, fire, earthquakes, eruptions, and the like; all of which is entirely out of place, for the spheroidal form of the whole earth is the result of the system of the universe, and the phenomena which he mentions do not in the least change its general form; such little matters being entirely lost in the great mass of the earth. Still they cause various peculiarities in different parts of our globe, and result from a variety of causes.
Cite This Text