Chapter II (1)

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE PROGRESS OF DISCOVERY AND COMMERCIAL ENTERPRIZE, FROM THE AGE OF HERODOTUS TO THE DEATH OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT, B.C. 324.

From the scanty materials respecting the Phoenicians, with which we are supplied by ancient history, it is evident that they founded several colonies, either for the purpose of commerce, or, induced by other motives, in different parts of Africa. Of these colonies, the most celebrated was that of Carthage: a state which maintained an arduous contest with Rome, during the period when the martial ardour and enterprize of that city was most strenuously supported by the stern purity of republican virtue, which more than once drove it to the brink of ruin, and which ultimately fell, rather through the vice of its own constitution and government, and the jealousies and quarrels of its own citizens, and through the operation of extraneous circumstances, over which it could have no controul, than from the fair and unassisted power of its adversary.

The era of the foundation of Carthage is unknown. According to some writers, it was built so early as 1233 years before Christ; but the more general, as well as more probable opinion, assigns it a much later foundation--about 818 years before the Christian era. If this opinion be correct, Rome and Carthage were founded nearly about the same period. The circumstances which led to and accompanied the foundation of Carthage, though related with circumstantial fulness by the ancient poets, are by no means accurately know to authentic history.

The situation of Carthage was peculiarly favourable to commerce and maritime enterprize; in the centre of the Mediterranean; in reach of the east as well as of the west; the most fertile, and most highly cultivated and civilized part of Africa in her immediate vicinity. Carthage itself was built at the bottom of a gulph, on a peninsula, which was about forty-five miles in circumference; and its strength and security were further aided by the isthmus which connected this peninsula to the main land, as it was little more than three miles broad; by a projection of land on the west side, which was only half a stadium in breadth; and by a lake or morass which lay on the opposite side: this projection, which ran out considerably into the sea, was naturally strong by the rocks with which it was covered, and was rendered still stronger by art. In one point only had this projection been neglected; this was an angle, which from the foundation of the city had been overlooked, advancing into the sea towards the western continent, as far as the harbours, which lay on the same side of the city. There were two harbours, so placed and constructed as to communicate with each other. They had one entrance, seventy feet in breadth, which was shut up and secured by strong chains stretched across it. One of these harbours was exclusively set apart for merchant ships; and in its vicinity were to be found every thing necessary for the accommodation of the seamen. In the middle of the other harbour was an island called Cothon; though, according to some writers, this was the name of the harbour itself. The word Cothon, we are informed by Festus, (and his etymology is confirmed by Bochart and Buxtorf,) signifies, in the oriental languages, a port not formed by nature, but the result of labour and art. The second harbour, as well as the island in it, seems to have been intended principally, if not exclusively, for ships of war; and it was so capacious, that of these it would contain 220. This harbour and island were lined with docks and sheds, which received the ships, when it was necessary to repair them, or protect them from the effects of the weather. On the key were built extensive ranges of wharfs, magazines, and storehouses, filled with all the requisite materials to fit out the ships of war. This harbour seems to have been decorated with some taste, and at some expence; so that both it and the island, viewed at a distance, appeared like two extensive and magnificent galleries. The admiral's palace, which commanded a view of the mouth of the harbour and of the sea, was also a building of considerable taste. Each harbour had its particular entrance into the city: a double wall separated them so effectually, that the merchant vessels, when they entered their own harbour, could not see the ships of war; and though the admiral, from his palace, could perceive whatever was doing at sea, it was impossible that from the sea any thing in the inward harbour could be perceived.

Nor were these advantages, though numerous and great, the only ones which Carthage enjoyed as a maritime city; for its situation was so admirably chosen, and that situation so skilfully rendered subservient to the grand object of the government and citizens, that even in case the accidents of war should destroy or dispossess them of one of their harbours, they had it in their power, in a great measure, to replace the loss. This was exemplified in a striking and effective manner at the time when Scipio blocked up the old port; for the Carthaginians, in a very short time, built a new one, the traces and remains of which were plainly visible so late as the period when Dr. Shaw visited this part of Africa.

Carthage, at a comparatively early period of its history, possessed a very large extent of sea coast, though in it there were but few harbours fitted for commerce. The boundaries of the Carthaginian dominions on the west were the Philænorum Aræ, so called from two brothers of this name, who were buried in the sand at this place, in consequence of a dispute between the Carthaginians and the Cyreneans, respecting the boundaries of their respective countries. On the other, or western side, the Carthaginian dominions extended as far as the Pillars of Hercules, a distance, according to Polybius, of 16,000 stadia, or 2000 miles; but, according to the more accurate observations of Dr. Shaw, only 1420 geographical miles.

Next to Carthage itself, the city of Utica was most celebrated as a place of commerce: it lay a short distance to the west of Carthage, and on the same bay. It had a large and convenient harbour; and after the destruction of Carthage, it became the metropolis of Africa Propria. Neapolis was also a place of considerable trade, especially with Sicily, from which the distance was so short, that the voyage could be performed in two days and a night. Hippo was a frontier town on the side of Numidia; though Strabo says, there were two of the same name in Africa Propria. The Carthaginian Hippo had a port, arsenal, storehouses, and citadel: it lay between a large lake and the sea. We have already noticed the etymological meaning of the word Cothon: that this meaning is accurate may be inferred from the word being applied to several artificial harbours in the Carthaginian dominion, besides that of Cartilage itself: it was applied to the port of Adrumetum, a large city built on a promontory,--and to the port of Thapsus, a maritime town, situated on a kind of isthmus, between the sea and a lake. The artificial nature, of this latter harbour is placed beyond all doubt, as there is still remaining a great part of it built on frames: the materials are composed of mortar and small pebbles, so strongly and closely cemented, that they have the appearance, as well as durability, of solid rock. It is singular, that in the dominions of Carthage, extending, as we have seen, upwards of 1400 miles along the shores of the Mediterranean, there should be no river of any magnitude or importance for commerce: the Bagrada and the Catada alone are noticed by ancient historians, and both of these were insignificant streams.

Having thus pointed out the natural advantages for commerce possessed by the Carthaginians, we shall next proceed to notice such of their laws, and such parts of their political institutions, and features of their character, as either indicated their bias for commerce, or tended to strengthen it. The monarchical government of Carthage was not of long continuance; it afterwards became republican, though the exact form of the republic is not certainly known. As late as the time of Aristotle, there seems to have been such a complete and practical counterpoise of the powers in which the supreme authority was vested, that, according to him, there had been no instance from the foundation of the city, of any popular commotions sufficient to disturb its tranquillity; nor, on the other hand, of any tyrant, who had been able to destroy its liberty. This sagacious philosopher foresaw the circumstance which would destroy the constitution of Carthage; for when there was a disagreement between the two branches of the legislature, the suffetes and the senate, the question in dispute was referred to the people, and their resolve became the law. Till the second and third wars between Rome and Carthage, no fatal effects resulted from this principle of the constitution; but during these, the people were frequently called upon to exercise their dangerous authority and privileges; the senate yielded to them; cabals and factions took place among those who were anxious to please, for the purpose of guiding the people; rash measures were adopted, the councils and the power of Carthage became distracted and weak, and its ruin was precipitated and completed.

But though to this defect in the constitution of Carthage its ruin may partly be ascribed, there can be little doubt that commerce flourished by means of the popular form of its government. Commerce was the pursuit of all ranks and classes, as well as the main concern and object of the government The most eminent persons in the state for power, talents, birth, and riches, applied themselves to it with as much ardour and perseverance as the meanest citizens; and this similarity and equality of pursuit, as it sprang in some measure from the republican equality of the constitution, so also it tended to preserve it.

The notices which we possess respecting the political institutions of the Carthaginians are very scanty, and are almost entirely derived from Aristotle: according to him they had a custom, which must at once have relieved the state from those whom it could not well support, and have tended to enlarge the sphere of their commercial enterprize. They sent, as occasion required, colonies to different parts, and these colonies, keeping up their connection with the mother country, not only drew off her superabundant trade, but also supplied her with many articles she could not otherwise have procured at so easy and cheap a rate.

The fertility and high state of cultivation of those parts of Africa which adjoined Carthage, has already been alluded to; and their exports consisted either of the produce of those parts, or of their own manufactures. Of the former there were all kinds of provisions; wax, oil, honey, skins, fruits, &c.; their principal manufactures were cables, especially those fit for large vessels, made of the shrub _spartum_; all other kinds of naval stores; dressed leather; the particular dye or colour, called from them punic, the preparation of which seems not to be known; toys, &c. &c. From Egypt they imported flax, papyrus, &c.; from the Red Sea, spices, drugs, perfumes, gold, pearls, &c.; from the countries on the Levant, silk stuffs, scarlet and purple dyes, &c.; and from the west of Europe their principal imports seem to have been iron, lead, tin, and the other useful metals.

Such was the commerce by sea, as far as the imperfect notices on this subject, by the ancient historians, instruct us: but they also carried on a considerable and lucrative commerce by land, especially with the Persians and Ethiopians. The caravans of these nations generally resorted to Carthage; the rarest and most esteemed articles which they brought were carbuncles, which, by means of this traffic, became so plenty in this city, that they were generally known by the appellation of Carthaginian gems. The mode of selling by auction seems to have been practised by this nation; at least there are passages in the ancient authors, particularly one in Polybius, which would naturally lead to the conclusion, that in the sale of their merchandize, the Carthaginians employed a person to name and describe their various kinds and qualities, and also a clerk to note down the price at which they were sold. Their mode of trafficking with rude nations, unaccustomed to commerce, as described by Herodotus, strongly resembles that which has been often adopted by our navigators, when they arrive on the coast of a savage people. According to this historian, the Carthaginians trafficked with the Lybians, who inhabited the western coast of Africa, in the following manner: having conducted their vessels into some harbour or creek, they landed the merchandize which they meant to exchange or dispose of, and placed it in such a manner and situation, as exposed it to the view of the inhabitants, and at the same time indicated the purpose for which it was thus exposed. They afterwards lighted a fire of such materials as caused a great smoke; this attracted the Lybians to the spot, who laid down such a quantity of gold as they deemed an adequate price for the merchandize, and then retired. The Carthaginians next approached and examined the gold: if they deemed it sufficient, they took it away, and left the merchandize; if they did not, they left both. In the latter event, the Lybians again returned, and added to the quantity of gold; and this, if necessary, was repeated, till the Carthaginians, by taking it away, shewed that in their judgment it was an adequate price for their goods. During the whole of this transaction, no intercourse or words passed, nor did the Carthaginians even touch the gold, nor the Lybians the merchandize, till the former took away the gold.

The earliest notice we possess of a commercial alliance formed by the Carthaginians, fixes it a very few years before the birth of Herodotus: it was concluded between them and the Romans about the year 503 before Christ. The Carthaginians were the first nation the Romans were connected with out of Italy. Polybius informs us, that in his time (about 140 years before Christ) this treaty, written in the old language of Rome, then nearly unintelligible, was extant on the base of a column, and he has given a translation of it: the terms of peace between the Carthaginians and their allies, and the Romans and their allies, were to the following purport. The latter agreed not to sail beyond the fair promontory, (which lay, according to our historian, a very short distance to the north of Carthage,) unless they were driven beyond it by stress of weather, or by an enemy's vessel. In case they were obliged to land, or were shipwrecked, they were not to take or purchase any thing, except what they might need, to repair their ships, or for the purpose of sacrifice. And in no case, or under no pretext, were they to remain on shore above five days. The Roman merchants were not to pay any higher, or other duty, than what was allowed by law to the common crier and his clerk, already noticed, who, it appears from this treaty, were bound to make a return to government of all the goods that were bought or sold in Africa and Sardinia. It was moreover provided, that if the Romans should visit any places in Sicily, subject to the Carthaginians, they should be civilly treated, and have justice done them in every respect. On the other hand, the Carthaginians bound themselves not to interfere with any of the Italian allies, or subjects of the Romans; nor build any fort in their territory. Such were the principal articles in this commercial treaty; from it, it appears, that so early as the year 503 before Christ, the first year after the expulsion of the Tarquins, and twenty-eight years before the invasion of Greece by Xerxes, the Carthaginians were in possession of Sardinia, and part of Sicily;--that they were also acquainted with, and had visited the coasts of Italy; and there are expressions in the treaty, which render it highly probable that the Carthaginians had, before this period, attempted to establish, either for commerce or conquest, colonies and forts in Italy: it is also evident that they were acquainted with the art of fortification.

Though it will carry us rather out of chronological order, it may be proper to notice in this place a second treaty of commerce between the Carthaginians and Romans, which was entered into about 333 years before Christ, during the consulship of Valerius Corvus, and Popilius Laenas. The Carthaginians came to Rome for the purpose of concluding this treaty: it differed in some particulars from the former, and was to the following effect. The Romans and their allies were to possess the friendship of the people of Carthage, the Tyrians, and the inhabitants of Utica, provided they carried on no hostilities against them, and did not trade beyond the fair promontory, Mastica and Tarseium. In case the Carthaginians should take any town in Italy, not under the jurisdiction of the Romans, they might plunder it, but after that they were to give it up to the Romans. Any captives taken in Italy, who in any Roman port should be challenged by the Romans as belonging to any state in amity with Rome, were to be immediately restored. The Romans, in case they put into the harbours of the Carthaginians, or their allies, to take in water or other necessaries, were not to be molested or injured; but they were not to carry on any commerce in Africa or Sardinia; nor even land on those coasts, except to purchase necessaries, and refit their ships: in such cases, only five days were allowed them, at the expiration of which they were to depart. But, in the towns of Sicily belonging to the Carthaginians, and even in the city of Carthage itself, the Romans were permitted to trade, enjoying the same rights and privileges as the Carthaginians; and, on the other hand, the Carthaginians were to be allowed to traffic in Rome on terms equally favourable.

It is not our intention, because it would be totally foreign to the object and nature of this work, to give a history of Carthage; but only to notice such events and transactions, supplied by its history, as are illustrative of the commercial enterprise of by far the most enterprising commercial nation of antiquity. In conformity to this plan, we shall briefly notice their first establishment in Spain, as it was from the mines of this country that they drew great wealth, and thus were enabled, not only to equip formidable fleets and armies, but also to extend their traffic very considerably.

The city of Cadiz, was founded by the Phoenicians, as well as Carthage; and as there was a close connection between most of the Phoenician colonies, it is probable that some time before the Carthaginians established themselves in Spain, they traded with the people of Cadiz: at any rate it is certain, that when the latter were hard pressed by the Spaniards, they applied to the Carthaginians for assistance: this was readily given, and being effectual, the Carthaginians embraced the opportunity, and the pretext thus afforded for establishing themselves in the part of Spain adjoining Cadiz. It is singular, however, that though the Carthaginians were in possession of Majorca and Minorca from so remote an antiquity, "that their first arrival there is prior to every thing related of them by any historian now extant," yet they do not seem to have established themselves on the main land of Spain till they assisted the people of Cadiz. With respect to the other foreign possessions of the Carthaginians, we have already seen that, at the period of their first treaty with the Romans, they occupied Sardinia and part of Sicily; and there are several passages in the ancient historians, particularly in Herodotus, which render it highly probable that they had establishments in Corsica about the same time. Malta and its dependent islands were first peopled by the Phoenicians, and seem afterwards to have fallen into the possession of the Carthaginians.

Of the particular voyages undertaken by the Carthaginians, for the purpose either of discovery or of commercial enterprise, we possess little information; as, however, these topics are most particularly within the scope of our work, it will be indispensable to detail all the information relating to them which can be collected. The voyages of Hamilcar or Himilco, as he is called by some historians, and of Hanno, are the most celebrated, or, rather, to speak more accurately, the only voyages of the Carthaginians of which we possess any details, either with regard to their object or consequences. Himilco, who was on officer in the navy of Carthage, was sent by the senate to explore the western coasts of Europe: a journal of his voyage, and an account of his discoveries, were, according to the custom of the nation, inscribed in the Carthaginian annals. But the only information respecting them which we now possess, is derived from the writings of the Latin poet Rufus Festus Avienus. This poet flourished under Theodosius, A.D. 450, translated the Phænomena of Aratus, and Dionysius's Description of the World, and also wrote an original poem, on the sea coasts. In the last he mentions Himilco, and intimates that he saw the original journal of his voyage in the Carthaginian annals. According to the account of Festus, the voyage of Himilco lasted four months, or rather he sailed for the space of four months, towards the north, and arrived at the isles Ostrymnides and the coast of Albion. In the extracts given by Avienus from the journal of Himilco, frequent mention is made of lead and tin, and of ships cased with leather (or, more probably, entirely made of that material, like the coracles still used by the Greenlanders, and even in Wales, for crossing small rivers). In these parts, he adds, the East Rymni lived, with whom the people of Tartessus and Carthage traded: we have given this appellation to the inhabitants of the isles Ostrymnides, because in the first part of the latter word, the Teutonic word, OEst, distinctly appears.

Hanno was sent by the senate to explore the western coast of Africa, and to establish Carthaginian colonies wherever he might deem it expedient or advantageous. He sailed from Carthage with a fleet of 60 vessels, each rowed with 50 oars, and had besides, a convoy containing 30,000 persons of both sexes. He wrote a relation of his voyage, a fragment of a Greek version of which is still remaining, and has lately been illustrated by the learning and ingenuity of Dr. Falconer of Bath: his voyage is also cited by Aristotle, Pomponius Mela, and Pliny. The era at which it was performed, and the extent of the voyage, have given rise to much discussion. Isaac Vossius fixes the date of it prior to the age of Homer: Vossius the father, subsequent to it: Wesseling doubts whether it was even prior to Herodotus. Campomanes fixes it about the 93d Olympiad: and Mr. Dodwell somewhere between the 92d and the 129th Olympiad. According to Pliny, Hanno and Himilco were contemporaries; the latter author mentions the commentaries of Hanno, but in such a manner as if he had not seen, and did not believe them.

With respect to the extent of his voyage along the western coast of Africa, some modern writers assert, without any authority, that he doubled the Cape of Good Hope: this assertion is made in direct unqualified terms by Mickle the translator of the Lusiad. Other writers limit the extent of his navigation to Cape Nun; while, according to other geographers, he sailed as far as Cape Three Points, on the coast of Guinea. That there should be any doubt on the subject appears surprising; for, as Dr. Vincent very justly remarks, we have Hanno's own authority to prove that he never was within 40 degrees of the Cape.

That the Carthaginians, before the voyage of Hanno, had discovered the Canary Islands, is rendered highly probable, from the accounts of Diodorus Siculus, and Aristotle: the former mentions a large, beautiful, and fertile island, to which the Carthaginians, in the event of any overwhelming disorder, had determined to remove their government; and Aristotle relates that they were attracted to a beautiful island in such numbers, that the senate were obliged to forbid any further emigration to it on pain of death.

The voyages of the Carthaginians were, from the situation of their territory, and the imperfect state of geography and navigation at that period, usually confined to the Mediterranean and to the western shores of Africa and Europe; but several years antecedent to the date usually assigned to the voyages of Himilco and Hanno, a voyage of discovery is said to have been accomplished by the king of a nation little given to maritime affairs. We allude to the voyage of Scylax, undertaken at the command of Darius the son of Hystaspes, about 550 years before Christ. There are several circumstances respecting this voyage which deserve attention or examination; the person who performed it, is said by Herodotus, (from whom we derive all our information on the subject), to have been a native of Caryandria, or at least an inhabitant of Asia Minor: he was therefore most probably a Greek: he was a geographer and mathematician of some eminence, and by some writers is supposed to have first invented geographical tables. According to Herodotus, Darius, after his Scythian expedition, in order to facilitate his design of conquest in the direction of India, resolved, in the first place, to make a discovery of that part of the world. For this purpose he built and fitted out a fleet at Cespatyrus, a city on the Indus, towards the upper part of the navigable course of that river. The ships, of course, first sailed to the mouth of the Indus, and during their passage the country on each side was explored. The directions given to Scylax were, after he entered the ocean, to steer to the westward, and thus return to Persia. Accordingly, he is said to have coasted from the mouth of the Indus to the Straits of Babelmandel, where he entered the Red Sea; and on the 30th month from his first embarking he landed at Egypt, at the same place from which Necho, king of that country, had despatched the Phoenicians to circumnavigate Africa. From Egypt, Scylax returned to Susa, where he gave Darius a full account of his expedition.

The reality of this voyage, or at least the accuracy of some of the particulars it records, has been doubted. Scylax describes the course of the Indus to the east; whereas it runs to the south-west. It is also worthy of remark, that as Darius, before the voyage of Scylax, was master of the Attock, Peukeli, and Multan, he needed no information respecting the route to India, as every conqueror has followed this very obvious and easy route. Dr. Vincent also objects to the authority of this voyage, or rather to the track assigned to it: "I cannot believe," he observes, "from the state of navigation in that age, that Scylax could perform a voyage round India, from which the bravest of Alexander's navigators shrunk, or that men who had explored the desert coast of Gadrosia, should be less daring than an experienced native of Caryandria. They returned with amazement from the sight of Mussenden and Ras-al-had, while Scylax succeeded without a difficulty upon record. But the obstacles to such a voyage are numerous; first, whether Pactzia be Peukeli, and Caspatyrus, Multan: secondly, if Darius were master of Multan, whether he could send a ship or a fleet down the sea, through tribes, where Alexander fought his way at every step: thirdly, whether Scylax had any knowledge of the Indian Ocean, the coast, or the monsoon: fourthly, if the coast of Gadrosia were friendly, which is doubtful, whether he could proceed along the coast of Arabia, which must be hostile from port to port: these and a variety of other difficulties which Nearchus experienced, from famine, from want of water, from the construction of his ships, and from the manners of the natives, must induce an incredulity in regard to the Persian account, whatever respect we may have to the fidelity of Herodotus."

Such are the objections urged by Dr. Vincent to the authority of this voyage. In some of the particular objections there may be considerable force; but with respect to the general ones, from the manners or hostility of the natives inhabiting the coasts along which the voyage was performed, they apply equally to the voyages of the Carthaginians along the western coasts of Africa and Europe, and indeed to all the voyages of discovery, or distant voyages of the ancients. It may be added, that according to Strabo, Posidonius disbelieved the whole history of Scylax. In the Geographi Minores of Hudson, a voyage ascribed to Scylax is published; but great doubts are justly entertained on the subject of its authenticity. Dodwell is decidedly against it. The Baron de Sainte Croix, in a dissertation read before the Academy of Inscriptions, defends the work which bears the name of Scylax as genuine. Dr. Vincent states one strong objection to its authenticity: mention is made in it of Dardanus, Rhetium, and Illium, in the Troad; whereas there is great doubt whether Rhetium was in existence in the time of the real Scylax: besides, it is remarkable that nothing is said respecting India in the treatise now extant. That the original and genuine work described India is, however, undoubted, on the authority of Aristotle, who mentions that there was such a person as Scylax, that he had been in India, and that his account of that country was extant in his (Aristotle's) time.

In fact, the work which we possess under the name of Scylax, is evidently a collection of the itineraries of ancient navigators: it may have been drawn up by the Scylax whom Darius employed, though, if that were the case, it is very extraordinary he should not have included the journal of his own voyage; or his name, as that of a celebrated geographer may have been put to it; or there may have been another geographer of that name. The collection is evidently imperfect; what is extant contains the coasts of the Palus Maeotis, the Euxine, the Archipelago, the Adriatic, and all the Mediterranean, with the west coast of Africa, as far as the isle of Cerne, which he asserts to be the limit of the Carthaginian navigation and commerce in that direction. The sea, according to him, is not navigable further to the south than this island, on account of the thick weeds with which it was covered. The mention of this impediment is adduced by D'Anville to prove the reality of the Carthaginian voyages to the south: it is not, indeed, true, that the sea is impassable on account of these weeds to modern navigators, but it is easy to conceive that the timidity and inexperience of the ancients, as well as the imperfect construction of their vessels, would prevent them from proceeding further south, when they met with such a singular obstacle. If a ship has not _much way_ through the water, these weeds will impede her course. It has been very justly remarked, that if the latitude where these weeds commence was accurately determined, it would fix exactly the extent of the voyages of the Carthaginians in this direction. The weed alluded to is probably the fucus natans, or gulf-weed.

Hitherto the knowledge that the ancients possessed of the habitable world, had not been collected by any writer, and is to be gathered entirely from short, vague, and evidently imperfect narrations, scattered throughout a great number of authors. Herodotus has been celebrated as the father of history; he may with equal justice be styled the father of geographical knowledge: he flourished about 474 years before Christ. In dwelling upon the advances to geographical knowledge which have been derived from him, it will be proper and satisfactory, before we explain the extent and nature of them, to give an account of the sources from which he derived his information; those were his own travels, and the narrations or journals of other travellers. A great portion of the vigour of his life seems to have been spent in travelling; the oppressive tyranny of Lygdamis over Halicarnassus, his native country, first induced or compelled him to travel; whether he had not also imbibed a portion of the commercial activity and enterprize which distinguished his countrymen, is not known, but is highly probable. We are not informed whether his fortune were such as to enable him, without entering into commercial speculations, to support the expences of his travels; it is evident, however, from the extent of his travels, as well as from the various, accurate, and, in many cases, most important information, which he acquired, that these expences must have been very considerable. From his work it is certain that he was endowed with that faculty of eliciting the truth from fabulous, imperfect, or contradictory evidence, at all times so necessary to a traveller, and indispensably so at the period when he travelled, and in most of the countries where his enquiries and his researches were carried on. His great and characteristic merit consists in freeing his mind from the opinions which must have previously occupied it;--in trusting entirely either to what e himself saw, or to what he learned from the best authority;--always, however, bringing the information acquired in this latter mode to the test of his own observation and good sense. It is from the united action and guidance of these two qualifications--individual observation and experience gained by most patient and diligent research and enquiry on the spot, and a high degree of perspicacity, strength of intellect, and good sense, separating the truth from the fable of all he learnt from the observation and experience of others, that Herodotus has justly acquired so high degree of reputation, and that in almost every instance modern travellers find themselves anticipated by him, even on points in which such a coincidence was the least likely.

His travels embraced a variety of countries. The Greek colonies in the Black Sea were visited by him: he measured the extent of that sea, from the Bosphorus to the mouth of the river Phasis, at the eastern extremity. All that track of country which lies between the Borysthenes and the Hypanis, and the shores of the Palus Maeotis, he diligently explored. With respect to the Caspian, his information affords a striking proof of his accuracy, even when gained, as it was in this instance, from the accounts of others. He describes it expressly as a sea by itself, unconnected with any other: its length, he adds, is as much as a vessel with oars can navigate in fifteen days: its greatest breadth as much as such a vessel can navigate in eight days. It may be added, as a curious proof and illustration of the decline of geographical knowledge, or, at least, of the want of confidence placed in the authority of Herodotus by subsequent ancient geographers, that Strabo, Pomponius Mela, and Pliny, represent the Caspian Sea as a bay, communicating with the great Northern Ocean; and that even Arrian, who, in respect to care and accuracy, bears no slight resemblance to Herodotus, and for some time resided as governor of Cappadocia, asserts that there was a communication between the Caspian Sea and the Eastern Ocean.

But to return from this digression to the geographical knowledge of Herodotus, as derived from his own travels, he visited Babylon and Susa, and while there, or perhaps in excursions from those places, made himself well acquainted with the Persian empire. The whole of Egypt was most diligently and thoroughly explored by him, as well as the Grecian colonies planted at Cyrene, in Lybia. He traced the course of the river Ister, from its mouth nearly as far as its source. The extent of his travels in Greece is not accurately known; but his description of the Straits of Thermopylae is evidently the result of his own observation. All these countries, together with a portion of the south of Italy, were visited by him. The information which his history conveys respecting other parts of the world was derived from others: in most cases, it would seem, from personal enquiries and conversation with them, so that he had an opportunity of rendering the information thus acquired much more complete, as well as satisfactory, than it would have been if it had been derived from their journals.

Herodotus trusted principally or entirely to the information he received, with respect to the interior of Africa and the north of Europe, and Asia to the east of Persia. While he was in Egypt he seems to have been particularly inquisitive and interested respecting the caravans which travelled into the interior of Africa; and regarding their equipment, route, destination, and object, he has collected a deal of curious and instructive information. On the authority of Etearchus, king of the Ammonians, he relates a journey into the interior of Africa, undertaken by five inhabitants of the country near the Gulf of Libya; and, in this journey, there is good reason to believe that the river Niger is accurately described, at least as far as regards the direction of its course.

It is evident from the introduction to his third book that the Greek merchants of his time were eminently distinguished for their courage, industry, and abilities; that in pursuit of commercial advantages they visited very remote and barbarous countries in the north-eastern parts of Europe, and the adjacent parts of Asia; and that the Scythians permitted the Greek merchants of the Euxine to penetrate farther to the east and north "than we can trace their progress by the light of modern information." To them Herodotus was much indebted for the geographical knowledge which he displays of those parts of the world; and it is by no means improbable that the spirit of commercial enterprize which invited the Greek merchants on the Euxine to penetrate among the barbarous nations of the north-east, also led them far to the east and south-east; and that from them, as well as from his personal enquiries, while at Babylon and Susa, Herodotus derived much of the information with which he has favoured us respecting the country on the Indus, and the borders of Cashmere and Arabia. Having thus pointed out the sources from which Herodotus derived his geographical knowledge, we shall now sketch the limits of that knowledge, as well as mention in what respects he yielded to the fabulous and absurd notions of his contemporaries.

He fails most in endeavouring to give a general and combined idea of the earth; even where his separate sketches are clear and accurate, when united they lose both their accuracy and clearness. He seems to doubt whether he should divide the world into three parts; and at last, having admitted such a division, he makes the rivers Phasis and Araxes, and the Caspian Sea, the boundaries between Europe and Asia; and to Europe he assigns an extent greater than Asia and Libya taken together. His knowledge of the west of Europe was very imperfect: in some part he fixes the Cassiterides, from which the Phoenicians derived their tin. The Phoenician colony of Gadez was known to him. His geography extended to the greater part of Poland and European Russia. Such appear to have been its limits with respect to Europe; and such the general notion he entertained of this quarter of the world. As to Asia, he believed that a fleet sent by Darius had circumnavigated it from the Indus to the confines of Egypt; but though his general idea of it was thus erroneous, he possessed accurate information respecting it from the confines of Europe to the Indus. Of the countries to the east of that river, as well as of the whole of the north and southern parts of it, he was completely ignorant. He particularly notices that the Eastern Ethiopians, or Indians, differ from those of Africa by their long hair, as opposed to the woolly head of the African. In his account of India he interweaves much that is fabulous; but in the same manner as modern discoveries in geography have confirmed many things in Herodotus which were deemed errors in his geography, so it has been ascertained that even his fables have, in most instances, a foundation in fact. With regard to Africa, his knowledge of Egypt, and of the country to the north of it, seems to have been very accurate, and more minute and satisfactory than his knowledge of any other part of the world. It is highly probable that he was acquainted with the course of the western branch of the Nile, as far as the 11th degree of latitude. He certainly knew the real course of the Niger. On the east coast of Africa he was well acquainted with the shores of the Arabian Gulph; but though he sometimes mentions Carthage, and describes the traffic carried on, without the intervention of language, between the Carthaginians and a nation beyond the Pillars of Hercules, which we nave already mentioned in treating of the commerce of the Carthaginians, yet he seems to have been unacquainted with any point between Carthage and the Pillars of Hercules.

In the history of Herodotus, there is an account of a map constructed by Aristagoras, tyrant of Miletus, when he proposed to Cleomenes, king of Sparta, to attack Darius, king of Persia, at Susa; from this account, the vague, imperfect, and erroneous ideas entertained in his time of the relative situations and distances of places, as well as of the extremely rude and feeble advances which had been made towards the construction of maps, may be inferred. Major Rennell, in his Illustrations of Herodotus, has endeavoured to ascertain from his history the parallel and meridian of Halicarnassus, the birth-place of the historian. According to him, they intersect at right angles over that town, cutting the 37th degree of north latitude, and the 45-1/2 of east longitude, from the Fortunate Islands.

For a considerable period after the time of Herodotus, the ancients seem to have been nearly stationary in their knowledge of the world. About 368 years before Christ, Eudoxus, of Cnidus, whose desire of studying astronomy induced him to visit Egypt, Asia, and Italy, who first attempted to explain the planetary motions, and who is said to have discovered the inclination of the moon's orbit, and the retrograde motion of her nodes, is celebrated as having first applied geographical observations to astronomy; but he does not appear to have directed his researches or his conjectures towards the figure or the circumference of the earth, or the distances or relative situations of any places on its surface.

Nearly about the same period that Eudoxus died Aristotle flourished. This great philosopher, collecting and combining into one system of geographical knowledge the discoveries and observations of all who had preceded him, stamped on them a dignity and value they had not before possessed, as well as rendered them less liable to be forgotten or misapplied: he inferred the sphericity of the earth from the observations of travellers, that the stars seen in Greece were not visible in Cyprus or Egypt; and thus established the fundamental principle of all geography. But though this science, in its most important branch, derived much benefit from his powerful mind, yet it was not advanced in its details. He supposed the coasts of Spain not very distant from those of India; and he even embraced a modified notion of Homer's Ocean River, which had been ridiculed and rejected by Herodotus; for he describes the habitable earth as a great oval island, surrounded by the ocean, terminated on the west by the river Tartessius, (supposed to be the Guadelquiver,) on the east by the Indus, and on the north by Albion and Ierne, of which islands his ideas were necessarily very vague and imperfect. In some other respects, however, his knowledge was more accurate: he coincides with Herodotus in his description of the Caspian Sea, and expressly states that it ought to be called a great lake, not a sea. A short period before Aristotle flourished, that branch of geography which relates to the temperature of different climates, and other circumstances affecting health, was investigated with considerable diligence, ingenuity, and success, by the celebrated physician Hippocrates. In the course of his journeys, with this object in view, he seems to have followed the plan and the route of Herodotus, and sometimes to have even penetrated farther than he did.

Pytheas, of Marseilles, lived a short time before Alexander the Great: he is celebrated for his knowledge in astronomy, mathematics, philosophy, and geography, and for the ardour and perseverance with which either a strong desire for information, or the characteristic commercial spirit of his townspeople, or both united, carried him forward in the path of maritime discovery. The additions, however, which he made to geography as a science, or to the sciences intimately connected with it, are more palpable and undisputed, than the extent and discoveries of his voyages.

He was the first who established a distinction of climate by the length of days and nights: and he is said to have discovered the dependence of the tides upon the position of the moon, affirming that the flood-tide depended on the increase of the moon, and the ebb on its decrease. By means of a gnomon he observed, at the summer solstice at Marseilles, that the length of the shadow was to the height of the gnomon as 120 to 41-1/5; or, in other words, that the obliquity of the ecliptic was 23:50. He relates, that in the country which he reached in his voyage to the north, the sun, at the time of the summer solstice, touched the northern part of the horizon: he pointed out three stars near the pole, with which the north star formed a square; and within this square, he fixed the true place of the pole. According to Strabo, he considered the island of Thule as the most western part of the then known world, and reckoned his longitude from thence.

With respect to the extent and discoveries of his voyage to the north, there is great difference of opinion. The veracity of Pytheas is utterly denied by Strabo and Polybius, and is strongly suspected by Dr. Vincent: on the other hand, it has found able supporters in D'Anville, Huet, Gessner, Murray of Goettingen, Gosselin, and Malte Brun; and in our opinion, though it may not be easy to ascertain what was really the country which be reached in his voyage, and though some of the particulars he mentions may be fabulous, or irreconcileable with one another, yet it seems carrying scepticism too far to reject, on these accounts, his voyage as altogether a fiction.

The account is, that Pytheas departed from Marseilles, coasted Spain, France, and the east or north-east side of Britain, as far as its northern extremity. Taking his departure from this, he continued his voyage, as he says, to the north, or perhaps to the north-east; and after six days' navigation, he arrived at a land called Thule, which he states to be 46,300 stadia from the equator. So far there is nothing improbable or inconsistent; but when he adds, that being there at the summer solstice, he saw the sun touching the northern point of the horizon, and at the same time asserts that the day and night were each of six months' continuance, there is a palpable contradiction: and when he adds, that millet was cultivated in the north of this country, and wheat in the south, and that honey abounded, he mentions productions utterly incompatible with his description of the climate and latitude.

As, however, this voyage forms an important epoch in the history of discovery, it may be proper to endeavour to ascertain what country the Thule of Pytheas really was. We have already observed, that the day's sail of an ancient vessel was 500 stadia, or 50 miles; supposing the largest stadia of 666-2/3 equal to one degree of the equator, if the vessel sailed during the night as well as day, the course run was, on an average, 1000 stadia, or 100 miles. Now, as the voyage from the extremity of Britain to Thule was of course not a coasting voyage, and as the nights in that latitude, at the season of the year when the voyage was made, were very short, (Pytheas says the night was reduced to two or three hours) we must suppose that he sailed night as well as day; and consequently, that in six days he had sailed 600 miles, either directly north or to east or west of the north, for his exact course cannot well be made out.

What country lies 600 miles to the north or the north-east of the extremity of Britain? None exactly in this direction: if, however, we suppose that Pytheas could not fix exactly the point of the compass which he steered, (a supposition by no means improbable, considering the ignorance of the ancients,) and that his course tended to the west of the north, 600 miles would bring him nearly to Greenland. There were, however, other stadia besides those by which we computed the day's sail of the ancients; and though the stadia we have taken are more generally alluded to by the ancients, yet it may be proper to ascertain what results will be produced if the other stadia are supposed to have been used in this instance. The stadia we have already founded our calculations upon will bring us to the latitude of 69° 27': the latitude of the southernmost point of Greenland is very nearly 70°. But the description given by Pytheas of the productions of the country by no means coincides with Greenland. At the same time, other parts of his description agree with this country; particularly when he says, that there the sea, the earth, and the air, seem to be confounded in one element. In the south of Greenland the longest day is two months which does not coincide with Pytheas' account; though this, as we have already pointed out, is contradictory with itself.

Let us now consider what will be the result if we suppose that a different stadia were employed: the next in point of extent to that on which we have already founded our conjectures, (there being 700 equal to one degree of the equator) will bring him to the latitude of 66° 8'; the latitude of the northernmost part of Iceland is 66° 30', coinciding with this result as nearly as possible. The description of the climate agrees with Pytheas' description; but not his account of the length of the day, nor of the productions of the country. Of the third kind of stadia, 833-1/3 were equal to one degree of the equator; calculating that 1000 of these were sailed during a day and night's voyage, Pytheas would arrive in the latitude of 55° 34', at the end of six days. This, however, is absolutely at variance with the fact, that he took his departure from the northernmost point of Britain, and would in fact bring him back from it to the entrance of the Frith of Forth. It is supposed, however, that this is the real latitude; but that the west coast of Jutland is the country at which he arrived. But this obliges us to believe that his course from the northern extremity of Britain, instead of being north or north-east, or indeed at all to the north, was in fact south-west; a supposition which cannot be admitted, unless we imagine that the ancients were totally ignorant of the course which they steered. On the other hand, Pytheas' description of the productions of Thule agrees with Jutland; the culture of millet in the north, and of wheat in the south, and the abundance of honey: there is also, about a degree to the north of the latitude of 55° 34', a part of the coast still denominated Thyland; and in the ancient language of Scandinavia, Thiuland. The account of Pytheas, that near Thule, the sea, air, and earth, seemed to be confounded in one element, is supposed by Malte Brun to allude to the sandy downs of Jutland, whose hills shift with the wind; the marshes, covered with a crust of sand, concealing from the traveller the gulf beneath, and the fogs of a peculiarly dense nature which frequently occur. We must confess, however, that the course having been north, or north-east, or north-west, for this latitude of course may be allowed in consideration of the ignorance or want of accuracy of the ancients, never can have brought Pytheas to a country lying to the south-west of the extremity of Britain.