portance to ascertain exactly what were the ideas of Herodotus on the figure of the earth, and the relative position of places on its surface; we should, if possible, read his book with the same kind of knowledge with which he wrote it: we must, if we wish to understand him, labour to form that kind of picture of the earth's surface, which he was accustomed to see delineated. Without approximating in some degree at least to the point from whence he surveyed the world, we shall often misunderstand his text, and fail in applying what he tell us to the actual Geography of the earth.

Before entering on a short explanation of his Geographical system, it should be remarked that the ideas of Herodotus as to the figure of the earth, and his general notions on physics, are not to be considered as those of the most enlightened of his countrymen; it would be easy to show that he adopted rather the popular opinions on many topics, than those of profound inquirers. His ignorance of many geographical facts* must not be inferred, because they are not recorded in his book: his main subject was the wars of the Greeks and Persians; and it is only according to their nearer or remoter connection with the great act of the drama that he notices other subordinate facts. It is true that his digressions and episodes are often long, but they are always connected with the developement and progress of the piece.

or

The great internal sea, the Mediterranean, for which Herodotus has no other name, but "our sea, "the north sea,' or "this sea," washed the shores of the largest part of his world. The pleasant coast of Ionia and European Greece lay somewhere about the middle of the world, as we may infer from numerous passages; he assigns, however, no absolute centre, and as little does he give any precise idea of what he considered as the boundary of this earth. It was doubtless in his opinion a plane, but it was unknown beyond certain limits, which he could name: as for Homer's ocean that ran round it, he knew of no river ocean, and seems to be careless about forming theories on matters, which to him were incomprehensible.

He could not help perceiving that the sun was the chief agent in causing diversity of climate; but as Niebuhr remarks, "he derives the nature of the climate from the winds, which he considers as an inherent quality of the air;" and [Book ii. 24.]

*He might have told us much more about Southern Italy, (his own Italia) which he visited, as we know from his history. He might have given that information on more remote towns of Northern Italy, which Hecatæus of Miletus, had embodied in his Europe. But it was foreign from the plan of his work, and therefore he omits it.

he talks of the sun during the winter season being driven by them towards the interior of Libya. As Herodotus was only acquainted with a part of the northern hemisphere, and as in the progress towards the south, the heat, as a general law, increases, we must not be surprised at his considering heat as the special quality of Southern Countries, and warm winds as the only kind known there. Northwards, and beyond the Ister, he places the region of cold; yet the cold and snow beyond Scythia, though perpetual, are less severe in summer, than in winter. There is nothing in Herodotus, [Book iv. 32.] as Niebuhr seems to say, which indicates that he had read in Hecatus of the perpetual spring, and double harvests of the Hyperboreans, who live beyond the Scythians.

The translator, in a note, expresses a doubt if the Hecatæus, to whom Niebuhr refers, and whose works Herodotus had read, be the Hecatæus, who wrote a treatise on the Hyperboreans: the question is not important, for Herodotus says nothing about the climate of this people, but believes that all the Northern Regions are in a cold climate.

Herodotus [Book iv. 41.] considers Europe to extend in a direction parallel to Libya and Asia, and to be equal in length to both of them; in breadth, Europe exceeds either of them. He fixes no limits to Europe on the north or east, remarking that it is not known whether a sea be the boundary in these two directions. On the west, and beyond the Pillars of Hercules, he knew there was the ocean, but he confesses [Book iii. 115.] his ignorance of every thing else connected with this remote region. He mentions the tin islands (kaoσirεpides), but he knows nothing of them; tin as well as amber come from the remotest western parts of Europe, but he can not say if there is a sea in those parts. His Europe, however, extended beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and its most westerly inhabitants were the Cynesii: next to them are the Celta, but still beyond the Pillars of Hercules; and in the country of the Celta the Ister rises. To attempt to fix the position of the Celta in any more definite manner, would be inconsistent with the vagueness of the historian's ideas; nor is it possible to say precisely within what limits we must place the Celta, who, at that time, were the Celta of whom he had heard. Niebuhr, in the small map attached to his essay, places the Iberi near the Pillars of Hercules: Herodotus leaves this to conjecture.

The boundary between Asia and Europe, which Herodotus admits is the Phasis, though other people, he says, make the Tanais the common boundary. Niebuhr remarks that in a

different passage, [Book iv. 40.] he seems to consider the Caspian and the Araxes as the northern boundary of Asia, to the east of the meridian of Persia; this may be admitted without any inconsistency, as the limit must necessarily be somewhat vague and irregular, and the Araxes, with the Caspian would be a continuation of the boundary, commencing with the Phasis. Yet, though the Araxes rises west of the Caspian, and is one of the northern boundaries of Asia, Herodotus [Book i. 202.] attempts to explain how one of its forty mouths flows into the Caspian, the other thirty-nine ending in marshes. Niebuhr in his map supposes (for the sake of explanation) the one branch to join the Caspian, and the other thirty-nine to flow onwards to the

east.

So far, there is no difficulty in comprehending what Herodotus conceived, but the remainder of his general description is not so intelligible. We will begin our examination with Asia, because this order of considering the subject will simplify it.

Niebuhr explains [p. 23.] the word Acte (akтn) as signifying a country that projects into the sea, with two or more sides washed by the waves, and a third connecting it with the mainland. It differs from a Chersonesus; the latter being attached to the mainland by a narrow neck, while the acte has no property in common with a chersonesus, but that of projecting into the sea.

Between the northern sea, (Herodotus means the Euxine in this passage) into which the Phasis falls, and the southern or Erythrean, dwelt four nations in the following order, from south to north; the Persæ extending to the Erythrean sea, the Medi, Saspeires, and the Colchi, the latter extending to the bank of the Euxine. The mouth of the Phasis then, and the Persian gulf (of which Herodotus knew nothing) lie in the same meridian, according to this system.

From this region, occupied by the nations just described, two actes project into the sea, and in opposite directions, (kar' ȧvríns) according to Niebuhr's reading. The MSS., however, have an' avrñç which, if it be genuine, perhaps proves the necessity of adding 'Aoinv to the beginning of the previous chapter, as Schweighæuser has done.

One acte is what we now call Asia Minor; its northern side is defined to extend from the Phasis to Sigeum, and its southern from the Myriandric bay to point Triopium.

The other acte extends into the Erythrean sea, and commences with the Perse; then comes Assyria (in which we must remember that Babylonia is included), then Arabia, and

the acte terminates on this side, at the extremity of the Arabian gulf, now the Red Sea.*

The other side of the acte is on the Mediterranean coast, and extends from Phoenicia, that is, from the neighbourhood of the Myriandric bay to Egypt. The great breadth of this acte lies in the direction between Persia and Phoenicia, from east to west. Niebuhr remarks that the words " from Phoenicia this acte extends through this sea (the Mediterranean), along the shore of Palestine, and to Egypt, where it ends," require explanation. It appears that Herodotus, after describing one side of this acte as formed by the Erythrean sea, mentions another formed by the Mediterranean; just as he has described the two chief lines of coast that bound the first acte (Asia Minor), one line running along the Black Sea, the other along the Mediterranean. The figure of the second acte will depend on the length and direction of the Red Sea, according to the notion of Herodotus. The Persian Gulf was unknown to him, and in delineating our coast according to his map, it must disappear.

It appears that Herodotus [Book ii. 11.1 considered the valley of the Nile as far as Elephantine, and the Red Sea to be nearly parallel; the length of the Red Sea he makes forty days passage for a row-boat. Now Niebuhr remarks that he no where tells us what is the value of this measure of a day's rowing, and that he applies the same measure to the Caspian Sea. Major Rennel considers that Herodotus has assigned the length of the Caspian pretty accurately, [Book i. 202.] by stating it is fifteen days navigation for a swift-oared vessel. Herodotus [Book iv. 86.] says that a vessel can accomplish 700 stadia in a long day, and 600 by night; the length of the Caspian is about 630 miles, which would allow a rate of forty-two miles per day, and this is a fair allowance, though not reconcileable with the dimensions of Herodotus given in stadia. Forty days sail on the Red Sea, which is about 1300 geographical miles long for a ship's course, will allow about thirty-two per day, which is a reasonable rate. But Niebuhr appears to ground his argument on the words rowing-boat, and he estimates the rate of a rowing-boat

* Herodotus says λήγει δ' αὕτη (οὐ λήγουσα εἰ μὴ νόμῳ ἐς τὸν κόλπον τὸν ̓Αράβιον. The meaning of this somewhat obscure passage is made clear by Book iv. 41., and the interpretation which we give to it in a subsequent part of this article. The second acte did not really terminate at the northern extremity of the Red Sea, for an acte can only be terminated by the sea: common usage (vouoc) made it terrminate at Suez, on account of the Isthmus, but its real termination was the Atlantic, Schweighauser's interpretation is the same.

at 200 stadia per day; accordingly he terminates the Red Sea in the latitude of Elephantine [see p. 21.]. This is a

conclusion in which we cannot concur, and one which he acknowledges to involve difficulties.

The country called Arabia is the most southern part of the world known to Herodotus, and its position in Asia corresponds to the opposite southern region of Libya, which he calls Æthiopia. There is a passage in Herodotus, [Book ii. 8. ]which is somewhat obscure; he says that the Mountains of Arabia (he calls the country immediately east of the Nile, Arabia) extend from north to south as far as the Erythrean Sea, and that their greatest length, from west to east is two months journey, or 12,000 stadia; the eastern extremity is the frankincense country. Niebuhr appears to be right in his explanation: he says that Herodotus considers the Red Sea, according to his erroneous notions of its breadth, [see Book ii. 8.] as a mere narrow gulf, and no great boundary, or separating limit; this mountain range of his, then, may be supposed to be continued on the east side of the Red Sea. From his knowledge of the mountains of Arabia Petræa, Herodotus might infer that other parts of Arabia were equally mountainous.

A few more remarks are necessary to complete the outline of Asia. Herodotus says, that the distance across Asia Minor, from Cilicia to Sinope, is five days' journey for a stout pedestrian [Book ii. 34], or one thousand stadia-a monstrous error, as the distance is about three hundred and twenty geographical miles, measured on a meridian. Scylax, as Niebuhr remarks, has the same error; and Q. Curtius [Book iii. 2], at a later age, informs us, that Gordium, on the Sangarius, is equally distant from the Mediterranean and the Euxine, and that the two seas press so far inland as to leave only a narrow neck. Niebuhr suggests a kind of explanation of the blunder of Herodotus; but it is unnecessary to quote it.

From the mountains of the Matieni flows the Araxes towards the East; one branch enters the Caspian, the rest perhaps flow onwards to the East (according to Herodotus) in the way represented in Niebuhr's map. The Gyndes flows from the opposite side of this mountain range, which corresponds to Kurdistan. Whatever river may be the origin of the Araxes of Herodotus, there is no doubt about his meaning. The parts of Asia that lie east of Persia are bounded on the south by the Erythrean Sea (the Indian Ocean), on the north by the Araxes and the Caspian as far as India he knew the country to be inhabited; but east of this country he adds, "all is desolate, and nobody can say what kind of a region it is."-Book iii. 40.