Chapter II

THE CONTRIBUTION OF WESTERN CHRISTENDOM BEFORE 1100 A. D.

Footnote 177:

See above, pp. 41–42.

Footnote 178:

On the geographical work of Byzantine writers, see Krumbacher,
_Geschichte_, 1897, pp. 409–427. Krumbacher distinguishes between two
types of Byzantine geographical treatise: (1) scientific or
theoretical, and (2) practical. The first consists almost exclusively
of commentaries on, redactions of, or compilations of excerpts from
earlier Byzantine works. The second type includes lists of
ecclesiastical sees or provinces, statistical lists for the use of
government officials, itineraries, sailors’ manuals, pilgrims’
handbooks, and the like. The _Christian Topography_ of Cosmas
Indicopleustes, with its fantastic description of the world, is of the
first type. It was held in high favor and became a principal source of
geographical “knowledge” among the Slavic people of the early Middle
Ages (_ibid._, p. 35).

With the eleventh and twelfth centuries came a great literary revival
at Constantinople. Michael Psellos (born 1018) besides being a poet
was a prolific writer on philosophy, philology, history, law, and
natural science. Among his works on the last-named subject were a
series of essays on meteorology (_ibid._, pp. 433–444, esp.
bibliography, p. 442). Nikephoras Blemmydes (thirteenth century) also
wrote on matters of geographical interest (_ibid._, p. 448).

Footnote 179:

See above, pp. 48 and 75.

Footnote 180:

Levantine traders were present in no inconsiderable numbers along the
main avenues of commerce and in the larger towns of Italy, France, and
England. The introduction of monachism into the West may be in part
attributed to contacts with the Orient maintained in the early Middle
Ages. Among the marvelous legends transmitted from the Levant to the
Occident were the stories of St. Thomas’ voyage to India and the
Romance of Alexander (see above, pp. 49, 50, 73, 74, and also below,
note 8; see also Bréhier, _Les colonies_, 1903). On diplomatic and
political relations between Constantinople and the West during the
early Middle Ages, see A. Gasquet, _L’Empire byzantin et la monarchie
franque_, Paris, 1888. On Greek settlements in Magna Graecia and their
influence upon Occidental culture, see Pierre Batiffol, _L’Abbaye de
Rossano_, Paris, 1891, Introduction.

Footnote 181:

e. g. in: Müller(us), _Claudii Ptolemaei Geographia_ (under “Ptolemy”
in the Bibliography), atlas, 1901.

Footnote 182:

e. g. St. Sever Beatus map, reproduction accompanying Miller,
_Mappaemundi_, vol. i, 1895 (our Fig. 2, p. 69, above).

Footnote 183:

For example, those of Origen (second century) in the Eastern Church
and of Ambrose (340–397) in the Western. On the hexaemeral exegesis
see Zöckler, _Geschichte_, vol. i, 1877; Duhem, _Système_, vol. ii,
1914, pp. 393–501; Robbins, _Hexaemeral Lit._, 1912.

Footnote 184:

Exodus, xxvi.

Footnote 185:

See above, pp. 72–73, 287–288.

Footnote 186:

The Apocryphal Acts arose out of attempts of early heretical sects to
provide apostolic authority for their beliefs. Ecclesiastical
authorities complained most bitterly of a certain Manichaean, Lucius
(or Leucius) Charinus, as the author of these documents. We do not
possess any of Charinus’ writings in the original. The most important
collection of Apocryphal Acts was probably made in the seventh century
and was commonly, though mistakenly, ascribed to Abdias, said to have
been one of the Apostles who established himself as the first bishop
of Babylon. Pseudo-Abdias drew from Charinus for the Acts of Andrew
and Matthew. See Rudolf Hoffman’s article on the New Testament
Apocrypha in _Realenzyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und
Kirche_, begründet von S. S. Herzog, 3rd edit., by Albert Hauck, vol.
i, Leipzig, 1896, pp. 664–668.

The account of the Acts of St. Thomas in the Pseudo-Abdias version was
probably originally composed in Syriac, translated later into Greek,
and from Greek into Latin. From an analysis of the details of the
story (particularly the plants and animals mentioned in it) Philipps
concludes that the legend originated in the Euphrates valley and that
St. Thomas was apostle of the Parthian empire and of India in the
limited sense of that part of India which includes the Indus valley
only (Philipps, _St. Thomas_, 1903). These conclusions are in the main
borne out by Dahlmann in the latest and most satisfactory examination
of the legend of St. Thomas. Dahlmann believes that within the story,
to which many legendary elements became attached, may be found a
kernel of fact. He maintains that connections by sea were in existence
in the first century after Christ between the Roman province of Syria
and northern India and that by this route St. Thomas reached the court
of Gundophorus, a Parthian king of the Kabul valley and of Peshawar.
The second part of the story relates the martyrdom of Thomas at the
court of a King Mazdai, or Mazdeus. Some have thought that the kingdom
of Mazdeus may have been situated in southern India, where
subsequently there grew up a large colony of Nestorian Christians who
claimed that their church was founded by St. Thomas himself. What
little evidence there is, Dahlmann believes, is against this
identification. He holds that the death of Thomas occurred in
northwestern India (Dahlmann, _Thomas-Legende_, 1912, _passim_).

Footnote 187:

On the influence of the Bible in molding geographical theory and on
the matter of interpretation, see Kretschmer, _Phys. Erdk._, 1889,
Einleitung, pp. 5–9.

Footnote 188:

The great exponents of the allegorical and mystical method of exegesis
during the early centuries of our era were the scholars of Alexandria;
the literal method was primarily that of the Antiochians and Syrians
(_ibid._, pp. 17–20).

Footnote 189:

Literal interpretation led men like Lactantius to the belief that the
earth is flat. The pilgrim Theodosius, about 530 A. D., described the
hills near the River Jordan which skipped like lambs when Christ came
down to be baptized and added that when he was there the hills still
appeared to be jumping (Beazley, _Dawn_, vol. i, 1897, p. 102). Peter
Alphonsi in the twelfth century accused earlier Jewish doctors of
going to extremes in their literal interpretation of Scripture, even
to the extent of taking literally the words of the Psalm: “Flumina
plaudent manibus, montes exsultabunt” (Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. clvii,
col. 553).

Cosmas Indicopleustes’ fantastic system of the world, based on the
account of the Tabernacle of the Lord, is a famous and striking
example of literal interpretation carried to an extreme. Cosmas was
led by the Biblical text (and by his own imagination) to maintain
aggressively that the universe is shaped like a strong-box with a
semi-cylindrical cover.

Footnote 190:

“Cum credimus, nihil desideramus ultra credere. Hoc enim prius
credimus, non esse quod ultra credere debeamus.” Quoted by Kretschmer,
_Phys. Erdk._, 1889, p. 2.

Footnote 191:

_ibid._, p. 22.

Footnote 192:

On Platonism among the Church Fathers, see Duhem, _Système_, vol. ii,
1914, pp. 408–417. The combination of Neoplatonism with Christianity
has been called Augustinianism (_ibid._, vol. ii, p. 417).

Footnote 193:

_ibid._, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 44–47.

Footnote 194:

_ibid._, pp. 62–64.

Footnote 195:

_ibid._, pp. 64–67.

Footnote 196:

_ibid._, p. 9.

Footnote 197:

_ibid._, pp. 44–47. See _De div. nat._, III, 33 (Migne, _Pat. lat._,
vol. cxxii, col. 719). Stegmann, _Anschauungen_, 1913, p. 60,
contrasts the speculative and critical mind of John Scot with the
credulous spirit of Raban Maur, his contemporary.

Footnote 198:

Mori, _Misuraz. eratos._, 1911, p. 391.

Footnote 199:

See Geidel, _Alfred der Grosse_, 1904.

Footnote 200:

Aethicus of Istria was often confused in the Middle Ages with a
so-called Julius Aethicus, who may have written a _Cosmographia_ which
probably dates from the sixth century and was edited in Riese, _Geogr.
lat. min._, 1878, pp. 71–103. See Beazley, _Dawn_, vol. i, 1897, pp.
355–362.

Footnote 201:

The _Orbis descriptio_ of Dionysius and Priscian’s Latin version of it
were edited by Müller in _Geogr. graeci min._, vol. ii, 1882, pp.
103–176, 190–199.

Footnote 202:

The unknown author most frequently cited is a Roman cosmographer of
the name of Castorius. The citations, names, and extracts from
Castorius correspond very closely to the legends on the Peutinger
Table and have led Miller to the conclusion that the latter represents
the work of Castorius. See Miller, _Weltkarte des Castorius_, 1888,
pp. 36–47; the same, _Mappaemundi_, vol. vi, 1898, pp. 36–37; the
same, _Itin. rom._, 1916, pp. xxvi-xxxvi.

Footnote 203:

See above, p. 104.

Footnote 204:

The various Latin versions of the Romance of Alexander were destined
to exert much influence on the form which the legend was to assume in
the twelfth century and later. The earliest version of the Latin
_Pseudo-Callisthenes_ was made in the fourth century of our era by
Julius Valerius; but this was little read in later centuries, and only
three manuscripts of it are now extant. The work upon which most of
the medieval versions of the Romance were based was an _Epitoma_, or
abridgment, of Julius Valerius’ translation, made perhaps in the ninth
century. In addition to Valerius’ version and the _Epitoma_, we have a
_Letter from Alexander to Aristotle_ describing the marvels of India.
Longer, though corresponding essentially to chapter 17 of the third
book of Valerius, it did not form part of the _Epitoma_, but was
widely circulated as an independent booklet. A correspondence between
Alexander and Dindimus concerning the Brahmins is also found in a
ninth-century Latin form, perhaps translated by Alcuin from a Greek
original. See Meyer, _Alexandre le grand_, 1886, vol. ii, _passim_;
Thorndike, _Magic_, 1923, vol. i, pp. 551–557.

In the tenth century a wholly new version of the legend, also derived
from the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_, appeared in the West. This was the
_Historia de praeliis_, the Greek original of which was said to have
been brought from Constantinople by a certain “Leo Archipresbyter” and
translated by him into Latin. See Landgraf, _Die Vita Alexandri_,
1885, and Krumbacher, _Geschichte_, 1897, pp. 849–852.

Footnote 205:

See below, p. 391, note 130.

Footnote 206:

Much has been written on St. Brandan and his wanderings. The
_Peregrinatio Sancti Brandani abbatis_, or Latin version of the legend
(also known as _Navigatio_ or _Narratio_), the date of which is
uncertain, was published by Schröder, _Sanct Brandan_, 1871. See also
Beazley, _Dawn_, vol. i, 1897, pp. 230–240. More recent notable works
dealing with Brandan’s voyages and with other fabulous tales of the
Atlantic are Westropp, _Brasil_, 1912; Babcock, _St. Brendan’s
Islands_, 1919; idem, _Legendary Islands_, 1922, pp. 34–49. That some
of the stories of the St. Brandan legend were derived from Oriental
sources (and not vice versa, as Schröder, _op. cit._, pp. xii-xiii,
attempted to show) was demonstrated by De Goeje, _St. Brandan_, 1890.

Footnote 207:

T. D. Hardy, _Descriptive Catalogue of Materials Relating to the Early
History of Great Britain_, London, 1862, vol. i, p. 159, cites a
ninth-century manuscript in the Vatican (Regin. Christinae, 217).
Hardy mentions five twelfth-century and ten thirteenth-century
manuscripts of the _Vita S. Brendani_. This life of St. Brandan was
printed by Jubinal, _Saint Brendaines_, 1836.

Footnote 208:

Beazley, _op. cit._, vol. i, 1897, pp. 186–188.

Footnote 209:

See above, pp. 13–14.

Footnote 210:

See above, p. 13, and Duhem, _Système_, vol. ii, 1914, pp. 447–449.
Bible references and quotations throughout the present work, except
where otherwise indicated, are based on the Douay and Rheims
translation of the Vulgate.

Footnote 211:

_ibid._, p. 414. The similarities between the accounts of the Creation
in the _Timaeus_ and in Genesis were explained by ascribing to Plato
knowledge of the Bible. Augustine was particularly struck by the
resemblance of the Platonic and Scriptural doctrines. Peter Comestor
in our period actually believed “that Plato read the Mosaic books in
Egypt and confounded the spirit of God (Gen. i, 2) with the World
Soul” (Robbins, _Hexaemeral Lit._, 1912, pp. 12–13).

Footnote 212:

Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. ii, pp. 408, 454–460, 478–487.

Footnote 213:

Augustine, _De civ. Dei_, XII, 13 (as cited by Duhem, _op. cit._, vol.
ii, pp. 452–453).

Footnote 214:

Περὶ ἀρχῶν, II, 3, 4–5 (as cited by Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. ii, p.
449).

Footnote 215:

_ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 462–471.

Footnote 216:

_ibid._, vol. ii, p. 464. It must be pointed out, however, that the
Neoplatonic, as distinguished from the Peripatetic philosophers,
believed in a creation (see above, note 33), even though they denied
that there was a commencement of the world! A discussion of the highly
abstract classical and medieval theories of time and space would lead
us too far astray from the field of geography. Suffice it to remark
that subsequent medieval commentators on the hexaemeron in general
followed Augustine, who adopted the Platonic doctrine that God created
the universe and time simultaneously. Augustine said: “Procul dubio,
non est mundus factus in tempore, sed cum tempore” (_De civ. Dei_, XI,
6, as cited by Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. ii, p. 467; Robbins, _op.
cit._, pp. 7, 65–66, 82–83). See below, p. 418, note 26.

Footnote 217:

See above, p. 145.

Footnote 218:

Zöckler, _Geschichte_, vol. i, 1877, is devoted in the main to this
subject. On Bede, see the same, pp. 246–252. See also Robbins, _op.
cit._, _passim_. For a discussion of theological, as distinguished
from physical, concepts of the Creation among the early Christians,
see A. C. McGiffert, _The God of the Early Christians_, New York,
1924, pp. 146–176.

Footnote 219:

White, _Warfare_, 1920, vol. i, pp. 89–90.

Footnote 220:

Günther, _Kosmogr. Ansch._, 1882, discusses the influence of Jewish
gnosticism and Aristotelianism on scholastic geography. Most of the
early Jews conceived of a flat earth covered by a concave heaven
through a window in which the sun and moon pass out in the west,
whence they return to the east around the outside of the firmament.

Footnote 221:

Sura, ii, 20; clxxi, 18; clxxviii, 6.

Footnote 222:

From the King James version. One form of the Vulgate reads: “Qui sedet
super gyrum terrae, et habitatores eius sunt quasi locustae: qui
extendit velut nihilum caelos, et expandit eos sicut tabernaculum ad
inhabitandum.” The last phrase reads in another form used by the
Church Fathers: “qui statuit velut fornicem coelum, et extendit velut
tentorium” (Marinelli, _Scritti minori_, vol. i, [1908?], p. 326, note
2). The King James version renders the spirit of the Latin more
accurately than the Douay and Rheims version, in which the word
_gyrum_ is translated “globe.”

Footnote 223:

Marinelli, _La geogr._, 1882, p. 534 (also in _Scritti minori_, vol.
i, [1908?], pp. 325–326, where there is an important footnote by Carlo
Errera). See also Beazley, _Dawn_, vol. i, p. 275, note 1, and pp.
328–332.

Footnote 224:

Marinelli, _op. cit._, pp. 538–546 (also in _Scritti minori_, vol. i,
[1908?], pp. 332–343); Beazley, _op. cit._, pp. 273–303.

Footnote 225:

_Div. institut._, III, 24 (as cited by Kretschmer, _Phys. Erdk._,
1889, pp. 37f.). Thorndike, however, believes that the “opposition of
early Christian thought to natural science has been rather unduly
exaggerated” and that Lactantius “should hardly be cited as typical of
early Christian attitude in such matters” (_Magic_, 1923, vol. i, p.
480).

Footnote 226:

The question of exactly what the early medieval thinkers in the West
thought on this subject has been acrimoniously discussed from opposite
points of view by Catholic and Protestant scholars. In the seventies
of the last century Schneid (_Erdrundung_, 1877) defended the science
of the Middle Ages against the attacks of Protestants like Whewell,
Draper, and Günther, who accused the early ecclesiastical writers of
servile dependence upon the letter of Scripture. Schneid’s article is
more particularly an indictment of another article of the same title
by Siegmund Günther in: _Studien_, 1877–1879. Schneid believed that
Günther, through insufficient acquaintance with the literature of the
period, had been led to minimize the achievements and worth of
patristic science. Augustine, declared Schneid, nowhere denied the
sphericity of the earth, and his mention of the antipodes shows that
he was well acquainted with the theory. Isidore, Bede, Raban Maur, and
Adam of Bremen, he maintained, were all firmly convinced that the
earth is a sphere. While we may concede that Schneid was right in the
case of Bede and Adam, that Isidore and Raban Maur held to the
doctrine of a spherical earth is perhaps more doubtful. See below,
note 51, and p. 385, note 53. Furthermore, it is a little difficult to
understand Schneid’s contention (p. 436) that Cosmas did not deny the
sphericity of the earth through religious obscurantism but rather on
the grounds of practical experience. See also below, p. 386, note 64,
and p. 424, note 100.

More recently the Jesuit father, Reverend F. S. Betten, has
contributed an article entitled _Knowledge of the Sphericity of the
Earth During the Earlier Middle Ages_ to the Catholic Historical
Review, vol. iii (N. S.), Washington, D. C., 1923, pp. 74–90. In this
he argues that “we have ... at least one witness in every century to
the tradition of the sphericity of the earth” (p. 86), and he cites as
these witnesses Hilary of Poitiers (died 366), Ambrose of Milan (died
397), Augustine (died 430), Cassiodorus (died 575), and Isidore of
Seville (died 636). Echoes of the Ptolemaic astronomy, to be sure, may
be detected in the writings of these men. On the other hand, no one of
them makes a clean-cut avowal of belief that the earth is a globe, and
the passages quoted by Father Betten are not wholly irreconcilable
with the doctrine of a flat earth. It is not enough, in dealing with
the cosmographical opinions of the Church Fathers, to cite isolated
remnants of classical science scattered through their works. Without
taking into consideration all of a writer’s assertions regarding a
specific topic one can hardly arrive at safe conclusions regarding his
opinions on that topic. Father Betten puts much stock in Isidore’s
supposed “faithful representation of the main tenets of Ptolemy’s
theory” (_ibid._, p. 84). On the other hand he makes no mention of
passages in Isidore which may be reconciled only with belief in a flat
earth (see below, notes 50, and 51). We venture to hold that we are
not as yet in a position to make any definite pronouncements upon the
cosmographical opinions of the other writers cited by Father Betten.
Such pronouncements should be made only after thorough investigation
of _all_ that these writers stated bearing directly or indirectly on
matters of cosmography. Such an investigation has not been made as
yet. Is it not, however, probable that the theories of a flat earth
elaborated by the Eastern Fathers (see above, p. 383, note 45),
theories built upon the interpretation of Scripture, were at least as
influential in molding the early medieval cosmology of the Occident as
the then often discredited relics of Greek science?

Footnote 227:

Kretschmer, _Phys. Erdk._, 1889, p. 50. See also the preceding note.

Footnote 228:

_De nat. rer._, 10. Why this passage should be interpreted to indicate
belief in a flat earth is explained by Brehaut, _Isidore_, 1912, pp.
50–54.

Footnote 229:

“The size of the sun is greater than that of the earth and so from the
moment when it rises it appears equally to east and west at the same
time” (_Etym._, III, 47; translated by Brehaut, _op. cit._, p. 147).
Gribaudi (_Isidoro_, 1905, p. 22) argued that Isidore of Seville held
to the theory of sphericity.

Footnote 230:

Bede, _De nat. rer._, 46. Bede’s proof was derived from Pliny, _Hist.
nat._, II, 64.

Footnote 231:

See Mori, _Misuraz. eratos._, 1911, pp. 390–391. C. B. Jourdain
(_Infl. Arist._, 1861, pp. 6–7) maintained that Raban Maur (_De
universo_, XII, 2) inscribed the circumference of the terrestrial
globe in an ideal cube, the angles of which correspond to the four
cardinal points. Nothing in the text, however, would justify our
supposing that Raban Maur had in mind either a globe or a cube. On the
contrary he was doubtless thinking of the _orbis terrarum_ in the
Roman sense (see below, note 58), that is to say, of the circle of the
known lands. Peschel (_Geschichte_, 1877, p. 100, note 3) and
Marinelli (_La geogr._, 1882, p. 552, note 5; _Scritti minori_, vol.
i, [1908?], p. 352, note 1) tried to interpret the passage to mean
that Raban Maur held that the _orbis terrarum_ was square. Bertolini
(_I quattro angoli_, 1910, pp. 1439–1441), however, has demonstrated
conclusively that the text in question indicates that he thought it
was a circle.

Footnote 232:

_De div. nat._, III, 33, in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxxii, cols.
716–718.

Footnote 233:

_Gerberti opera_, Bubnov’s edit., 1899, p. 362. See the same, pp.
310–313, note 1, for discussion of the reasons why it is not the work
of Gerbert.

Footnote 234:

Kretschmer, _Phys. Erdk._, 1889, p. 61.

Footnote 235:

Santarem, _Essai_, vol. i, 1849, Introduction, pp. 1–56; Simar,
_Afrique centrale_, 1912, _passim_.

Footnote 236:

The idea of antipodes in our modern sense of the term, as referring to
regions on the opposite side of a spherical earth, came from the
Greeks. Notably the doctrine of Crates of Mallos, it was adopted by
Martianus Capella and Macrobius, who passed it on to the medieval West
(see above, p. 18). Lactantius and Augustine argued against the
possibility of such antipodes. The practical spirit of the Romans had
not been interested in theoretical regions on the other side of the
earth (see above, p. 10). Roman maps, we may infer, were usually
circular and showed an ocean stream running around the _orbis
terrarum_, or three known continents (Asia, Europe, Africa). Sometimes
an unknown fourth continent beyond the impassable equatorial ocean was
depicted (see Simar, _op. cit._, p. 150). These Roman maps probably
formed the basis of many maps of the early Middle Ages. But during the
Middle Ages, as has been the case with modern attempts to interpret
these theories, true antipodes became confused with the fourth, or
austral, continent, belief in which did not necessitate belief in a
spherical world. Isidore was probably referring merely to the austral
continent when he wrote: “Extra tres partes orbis, quarta pars trans
Oceanum interior est in meridie quae solis ardore nobis incognita est,
in cujus finibus antipodas fabulose inhabitare produntur” (_Etym._,
XIV, 5).

Arguing thus, Simar contends, in his brilliant study of Central
African geography in antiquity and the Middle Ages, that medieval
discussions of the antipodes referred to the austral continent and did
not necessarily have anything to do with the question of belief in the
sphericity of the earth. While this may be true, he gives, in the
opinion of the writer, a misleading impression that the doctrine of a
spherical earth met with scant favor in the West until as late as the
twelfth century (Simar, _op. cit._, pp. 157–158). He tends to ignore
the important influence of Macrobius and of Martianus Capella in
keeping alive from the time of the Carolingian Renaissance onward the
doctrine that the earth is a globe. On the influence of Macrobius, see
Duhem, _Système_, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 62–71; and on Martianus Capella,
see especially Mori, _Misuraz. eratos._, 1911, pp. 390–391.

Footnote 237:

_Div. instit._, III, 24.

Footnote 238:

_De civ. Dei_, XVI, 9. It should also be pointed out that Augustine
(_loc. cit._), in addition, objects to the possibility of there being
inhabited antipodes on the purely rational grounds that it would be
impossible for men to have reached such distant continents across the
ocean. The Catholic father, P. Mandonnet (_Les idées cosmogr._, 1893,
p. 55), asserted that it was rather on the strength of physical
argument than on that of Scriptural exegesis that Augustine based his
opposition to antipodeans. At all events, Mandonnet admits that it was
largely through Augustine’s immense prestige that the theory of the
possibility of inhabited antipodes was excluded from general
acceptance throughout the Middle Ages (_ibid._, p. 56).

Footnote 239:

_Etym._, IX, 2. See Boffito, _Leggenda_, 1903, p. 592, note 4.

Footnote 240:

_De temporum ratione_, 34.

Footnote 241:

“Absit ut nos quisquam vel hoc contentisse abstruere, vel antipodarum
fabulas recipere arbitretur, quae sunt fidei Christianae omnino
contraria [_sic_]” (_Classicorum auctorum e vaticanis codicibus
editorum series_, vol. iii, edited by A. Mai, Rome, 1831, p. 337). For
John Scot Erigena on the antipodes and for other texts dealing with
the subject see Rand, _Johannes Scottus_, 1906, pp. 20–23.

Footnote 242:

Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. vi, col. 426; vol. xli, col. 487; _Mon. Germ.
hist._, _Script. rerum merovingicarum_, vol. vi, 1913, pp. 517–520.
Much has been written on Virgil of Salzburg and his relations to the
ecclesiastical authorities of his time. Protestants like Draper,
Whewell, White, and Siegmund Günther have looked upon Virgil as more
or less a martyr to the cause of freedom of thought. Catholics, on the
other hand, have tried to demonstrate that Virgil cleared himself of
the charge of heresy and that as a bishop he was able to carry on
valuable work for the church. See Krabbo, _Bischof Virgil_, 1903, and
Van der Linden, _Virgile de Salzbourg_, 1914. The latter maintains
that “contrairement à l’opinion reçue, Virgile de Salzbourg a été très
probablement un simple commentateur et non un novateur.... Sa théorie,
au lieu de marquer le début d’une ère de progrès dans les études
cosmographiques, constitue l’un des derniers reflets de la culture
classique avant la nuit du X^e siècle” (critique of Van der Linden,
_op. cit._, in Isis: International Review Devoted to the History of
Science and Civilization, vol. ii, Brussels, Sept. 1919, pp. 437–438).

Footnote 243:

See Marinelli, _Scritti minori_, vol. i, [1908?], pp. 331–332, note 4.

Footnote 244:

Zöckler, _Geschichte_, vol. i, 1877, p. 340. See also White,
_Warfare_, 1920, vol. i, pp. 106–107.

Footnote 245:

“The influence of the Bible on the meteorological theories of the
Church Fathers was very limited. Even when the attempt was made to
hide the pagan influence in a Biblical shell, a close study reveals to
us a truly pagan philosophical core” (Hoffmann, _Anschauungen_, 1907,
p. 93).

Footnote 246:

For texts of those parts of Isidore’s _De natura rerum_ (chs. 32–41),
Bede’s _De natura rerum_ (chs. 25–36), and Raban Maur’s _De universo_
(IX, 17–20, 25–28) which deal with meteorology, see Hellmann,
_Denkmäler_, 1904, pp. 1–19.

Footnote 247:

_Liber contra insulsam vulgi opinionem de grandine et tonitruis_
(Poole, _Illustrations_, 1920, p. 36).

Footnote 248:

Poole, _loc. cit._

Footnote 249:

See J. C. Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, Part I, _The Magic Art and the
Evolution of Kings_, London, 1911, vol. i, pp. 244–331.

Footnote 250:

Poole, _op. cit._, p. 37.

Footnote 251:

For a discussion of various theories of the Church Fathers regarding
the waters above the firmament, with references to the sources, see
especially Hoffmann, _Anschauungen_, 1907, pp. 5–13.

Footnote 252:

Duhem, _Système_, vol. ii, 1914, p. 489.

Footnote 253:

Zöckler, _Geschichte_, vol. i, 1877, pp. 63, 226; Werner, _Kosm.
Wilhelm von Conches_, 1873, p. 322.

Footnote 254:

On the subject of the waters, Augustine made a statement which
typifies the medieval attitude towards the authority of Scripture:
“Proinde cum de isto fonte quaerimus quomodo id quod dictum est,
_ascendebat de terra, et irrigabat omnem faciem terrae_, non
impossibile videatur; si ea quae diximus impossibilia cuiquam
videatur, quaerat ipse aliud, quo tamen verax ista Scriptura
monstretur, quae procul dubio verax est, etiamsi non monstretur” (_De
Genesi ad litteram_, V, 9, in: _Corpus script. eccles. lat._, vol.
xxviii, sect. 3, pt. 1, p. 152). See also Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. ii,
pp. 491–494.

Footnote 255:

_Hexaemeron_, II, 3, 9–11, in: _Corpus script. eccles. lat._, vol.
xxxii, sect. 1, pt. 1, pp. 47–50.

Footnote 256:

Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. ii, p. 489.

Footnote 257:

This idea was expressed by Basil, Augustine, and by the author of the
_De ordine creatorum liber_, a work sometimes attributed to Isidore
(Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. lxxxiii, cols. 920–921; Robbins, _Hexaemeral
Lit._, 1912, p. 69; Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. iii, 1915, p. 15).

Footnote 258:

This theory “avait été longuement exposée et discutée par Augustin
l’Hibernais” (Duhem, _loc. cit._). See also Duhem, _op. cit._, vol.
iii, 1915, pp. 12–13, and below, p. 432, note 27.

Footnote 259:

_Hexaemeron_, I, in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. xci, col. 20.

Footnote 260:

“Abyssus profunditas aquarum, impenetrabilis, sive speluncae aquarum
latentium, e quibus fontes et flumina procedunt; vel quae occulte
subtereunt, unde et Abyssus dictus. Nam omnes aquae, sive torrentes
per occultas venas ad matricem abyssum revertuntur” (_Etym._, XIII,
20). In the text is given the translation of Brehaut, _Isidore_, 1912,
p. 241.

Footnote 261:

Kretschmer, _op. cit._, pp. 91–105.

Footnote 262:

_De Genesi ad litteram_, V, 9–10, in: _Corpus script. eccles. lat._,
vol. xxviii, sect. 3, pt. 1, pp. 152–154.

Footnote 263:

Kretschmer, _op. cit._, p. 95.

Footnote 264:

_ibid._, pp. 93–94.

Footnote 265:

Isidore, _De nat. rer._, 43.

Footnote 266:

Norlind, _Problem_, 1918, pp. 24–25.

Footnote 267:

_De mens. orb. terr._, Parthey’s edit., p. 76 (as cited by Kretschmer,
_op. cit._, p. 106).

Footnote 268:

_De nat. rer._, 40.

Footnote 269:

Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. ii, 1914, p. 461.

Footnote 270:

Augustine, _De civitate Dei_, V, 6, in: _Corpus script. eccles. lat._,
vol. xl, pt. 1, p. 218; Ambrose, _Hexaemeron_, IV, 7, 29–30, _ibid._,
vol. xxxii, sect. 1, pt. 1, pp. 134–136.

Footnote 271:

Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 13–14. See Migne, _Pat. lat._,
vol. xxxv, col. 2159.

Footnote 272:

Bede, _De nat. rer._, 39; _De temporum ratione_, 28–29.

Footnote 273:

_Hist. gentis Langobard._, I, 6; (Duhem, _op. cit._, vol. iii, pp.
113–115). It has been thought that Paul the Deacon’s theory of the
whirlpools was derived from Norse traditions, but Nansen suggests that
it is just as probable that in this case “southern, originally
classical ideas ... have been localized in the Norse legends.” Virgil
mentions a gulf of the sea “which sucks the water into itself and
sends it up again.” Paul the Deacon speaks of whirlpools “not only in
the north, and off the Hebrides, but also between Britain and Spain,
and in the Strait of Messina.” With Adam of Bremen the whirlpool
becomes “exclusively northern, and later still we shall get it even at
the North Pole itself” (Nansen, _Northern Mists_, 1911, vol. i, p.
159).

Footnote 274:

See above, pp. 192 and 194.

Footnote 275:

Kretschmer, _op. cit._, pp. 133–135.

Footnote 276:

Isidore, _Etym._, XIX, 6; _De nat. rer._, 47 (as cited by Stegmann,
_Anschauungen_, 1913, p. 29).

Footnote 277:

Stegmann, _op. cit._, pp. 15–20.

Footnote 278:

See above, pp. 28 and 29.

Footnote 279:

For data on the Biblical origins of ideas of Hell, for early medieval
conceptions of Hell, and for references on these subjects, see
Stegmann, _op. cit._, pp. 20–27.

Footnote 280:

See Geikie, _Love of Nature Among the Romans_, 1912.

Footnote 281:

Ganzenmüller, _Naturgefühl_, 1914, pp. 9–10.

Footnote 282:

From Claudian’s _Epithalamium_, verses 1 ff., and _De nuptiis Honorii
Augusti_, verse 49 (as cited by Ganzenmüller, _op. cit._, p. 10).

Footnote 283:

Ganzenmüller, _op. cit._, p. 10.

Footnote 284:

_ibid._, pp. 17–19.

Footnote 285:

Dr. R. P. Blake of Harvard, specialist in Russian and Caucasian
history, has been kind enough to furnish the writer with the following
references on the love of nature in the medieval Orient: Krachkovskii,
_The Divan of Abu’l-Wāwā, a Hamdanid Poet of the Eleventh Century_,
text, translation, introduction, and commentary, Academy of Sciences,
Petrograd, 1916 (in Russian); N. I. Marr, _Georgii Merchul, Zhitie sv.
Grigorii Khandzt‘iiskago_ (_George Merchul, Life of St. Gregory of
Khandzt‘a_), text, translation, and introduction, with a diary of a
journey to Klarjet’ia and Shavshet’ia, Teksti i Raziskaniya po
Armyano-Gruzinskoi filologii (Texts and Studies in Armenian and
Georgian Philology), vol. vii, Petrograd, 1911; _Life of St.
Serapion_, published by M. Janashvili K’artuli Mcerloba, in vol. ii of
his _Georgian Literature_, Tiflis, 1909 (in Georgian). Latin
translations of the two latter texts, which testify to the love of
wild nature, have been published by the Bollandist, Paul Peeters, in:
Analecta Bollandiana, vol. xxxvi-xxxvii, for 1917–1919, Brussels and
Paris, 1922, pp. 159–309.

Footnote 286:

Ganzenmüller, _op. cit._, pp. 116–118.

Footnote 287:

_ibid._, pp. 161–162.

Footnote 288:

_Liber de astrolabio_, 19, in: _Gerberti opera_, Bubnov’s edit., 1899,
p. 142.

Footnote 289:

See especially Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. vi, 1898; Beazley, _Dawn_,
vol. i, 1897, pp. 387–391; Vidier, _Mappemonde de Théodulfe_, 1911,
pp. 289–292.

Footnote 290:

See above, pp. 35–36.

Footnote 291:

Among these are notably the crude Albi map dating from the eighth
century (Miller, _op. cit._, vol. iii, 1895, pp. 57–59), the
relatively accurate “Anglo-Saxon,” or “Cotton,” map dating probably
from the mid-tenth but perhaps from as late as the twelfth century
(Miller, _op. cit._, vol. iii, p. 31; Beazley, _Dawn_, vol. ii, 1901,
p. 560), and a map drawn at Ripoll in Catalonia during the eleventh
century (Vidier, _op. cit._, pp. 293–305).

Footnote 292:

Simar, _Afrique centrale_, 1912, pp. 159–169, classifies these early
maps as follows:

A. Maps derived from Roman representations of the _orbis terrarum_, or
circle of known lands, and adapted to serve the immediate purpose of
the cosmographer or historian whose works they were drawn to
illustrate. To this group belong the Sallust maps, the T-O maps, and
many maps in which the influence of Orosius appears to be predominant.
Simar believes that he can detect evidences of Byzantine influence
upon the latter, among which he includes the Albi and Cotton maps (see
the preceding note), and, from the time of the Crusades, the maps of
Guido (see above, p. 124), Henry of Mayence (see above, p. 124), and
the “Jerome” maps (see above, pp. 125–126). To this group also belong
the Psalter map, the Hereford and Ebstorf wall charts, and the maps in
the Chronicle of Ralph Hygden (see above, p. 125)—all dating from the
late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

B. Maps which aim to show the earth in its cosmographical relations,
“the lamentable débris of Greek cosmography.” To this group belong the
Macrobian maps of the zones.

AB. Maps in which the purpose is a combination of the two elements
shown in the maps of classes A and B above. These show the _orbis
terrarum_ but add a fourth, uninhabitable part of the world beyond the
equator. To this class belong the Beatus maps (see above, pp.
122–124), the _mappaemundi_ in Lambert’s _Liber floridus_ (see above,
p. 124), (and, we may add, the Ripoll map described by Vidier, _op.
cit._).

Footnote 293:

Beazley, _op. cit._, vol. ii, 1901, p. 625; Miller, _op. cit._, vol.
iii, 1895, pp. 122–126.

Footnote 294:

Beazley, _ibid._, pp. 627–631; Miller, _ibid._, pp. 116–122. T-O maps
and maps of similar simple diagrammatic character accompany
manuscripts of Isidore’s _Etymologiae_ and show the division of the
countries of the earth among the children of Noah.

Footnote 295:

Beazley, _ibid._, pp. 631–632; Miller, _ibid._, pp. 110–115.

Footnote 296:

Miller, _op. cit._, vol. i, 1895.

Footnote 297:

See Yule, _Cathay_, vol. i, 1915, preliminary essay; Beazley, _op.
cit._, vol. i, 1897, pp. 176–194.

Footnote 298:

See Tiander, _Poyezdki_, 1906.

Footnote 299:

See Coli, _Il paradiso terrestre dantesco_, 1897.

Footnote 300:

This is taken from the King James version, which here follows the
version of the Septuagint. Jerome translated the Hebrew as follows:
“And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the
beginning.” Raban Maur pointed out the divergence between these two
translations; likewise Peter Lombard in the twelfth century. See Coli,
_op. cit._, p. 68, and also below, p. 462, note 35.

Footnote 301:

“Post eosdem montes [i. e. Rhipaean Mountains] trans aquilonem
Hyperborei, apud quos mundi axis continua motione torquetur, gens
moribus prolixitate vitae, deorum cultu, aeris clementia, semenstri
die, fine etiam habitationis humanae praedicanda” (_De nupt. Phil. et
Merc._, VI, 664). “... hinc Attagenus sinus Hyperboreis beatitate
consimilis, quo incolae gratulantur qui circumactu vallium auras
nesciunt pestilentes” (_ibid._, VI, 693).

Footnote 302:

See above, p. 63.

Footnote 303:

Ganzenmüller, _Naturgefühl_, 1914, pp. 9–10, 87–88.

Footnote 304:

Kretschmer, _Phys. Erdk._, 1889, pp. 78–79.

Footnote 305:

From the King James version (see above, note 122).

Footnote 306:

On the river Pison see the description in Epiphanius, _Liber de XII
gemmis rationalis summi sacerdotis Hebraeorum_, in: _Corpus script.
eccles. lat._, vol. xxxv, pt. 2, pp. 747–748.

As this book is in press there has come to the writer’s attention
Lutz’s interesting article, _Geographical Studies Among Babylonians
and Egyptians_, 1924, which shows that some of the cosmographical
ideas prevalent in the Christian Middle Ages may be traced back to
Babylonian origins. The origins of the belief in the four rivers of
Paradise, for instance, is unquestionably to be sought for in
Babylonian astrology and geography, two sciences closely allied. One
group among the Babylonians held that the earth’s surface forms a
quadrilateral, itself an exact counterpart of a portion of the
firmament, Pegasus α-δ. “Andromeda ... was identified with the
Euphrates which flow’s south, while the Tigris was considered to flow
parallel to the line between Pegasus α and δ. Two additional
watercourses, which later tradition designated as Pison and Gihon,
completed the watercourses around the trapezium. This view, however,
must have gone back to a time when conditions as they existed in
Babylonia were, _mutatis mutandis_, transferred to the sky; namely, it
was ultimately based on the cultivated field surrounded by irrigation
ditches” (_ibid._, pp. 168–169).

Footnote 307:

Kretschmer, _op. cit._, pp. 80–91.

Footnote 308:

On the legend of Gog and Magog see: Peschel, _Abhandlungen_, vol. i,
1877, pp. 28–35; Lenormant, _Magog_, 1882; Marinelli, _Gog e Magog_,
1882–1883 (also in _Scritti minori_, vol. i, [1908?], pp. 385–438);
and Graf, _Roma_, vol. ii, 1883, Appendix, pp. 507–563.

Footnote 309:

Lenormant, _Magog_, 1882, p. 10, note 2.

Footnote 310:

Sura xxi, 95, 96; sura xviii. The latter sura describes the deeds of
Alexander Dulkarnein, the two-horned—not Alexander the Great of
Macedon but, according to Arabic tradition, an older Yemenic conqueror
of the world (Peschel, _Abhandlungen_, vol. i, 1877, p. 30).

Footnote 311:

Procopius, _De bello Persico_, I, 10 (complete works of Procopius
edited by J. Haury, Leipzig, 1905).

Footnote 312:

Sackur, _Sibyll. Texte_, 1898, p. 72.

Footnote 313:

See above, p. 381, note 26. The connection of Alexander with Gog and
Magog is found in the _Historia de praeliis_.

Footnote 314:

See above, p. 381, note 26.

Footnote 315:

See above, p. 379, note 8.

Footnote 316:

_Anglo-Saxon Chron._, sub anno 883, in: “Rolls series” edit., no. 23,
edited by Benjamin Thorpe, London, 1861, vol. i, pp. 150–153.

Footnote 317:

Tiander, _Poyezdki_, 1906.

Footnote 318:

See especially the works of E. Bauvois, F. Michel, P. Gaffarel, and T.
Stephens, to which references are given in: Geographisches Jahrbuch,
vol. xviii, Gotha, 1895, pp. 5–10. For a critical study, see Zimmer,
_Früheste Berührungen_, 1891.

Footnote 319:

_De mens. orb. terr._, VII, 2, 6.

Footnote 320:

As is well known, the Icelandic discovery of America has been a
subject of constant discussion throughout the last century.
Innumerable and often incredible theories have been propounded in an
attempt to identify the places mentioned in the Sagas, and a large
library of books, articles, and pamphlets has come into being relating
to this subject. The sole aim in the present work is to give as brief
as possible a statement of what countries the Icelanders of the
twelfth and early thirteenth centuries believed to lie to the
southwest of Greenland.

The sources for the Icelandic discovery of America are collected in:
Rafn, _Antiq. americanae_, 1837, and Supplement, 1841. Icelandic texts
are there given with Danish and Latin translations. For English
translations of the Wineland Voyages, see Reeves, _Wineland_, 1890.
The best bibliography is Hermannsson, _Northmen_, 1909. For references
to recent studies on the subject see Geographisches Jahrbuch, vol.
xxxix (1919–1923), Gotha, 1924, p. 277.

Footnote 321:

Reeves, _op. cit._, p. 11. In some Icelandic texts, _doegr_ indicates
twelve hours’ sailing, though it probably did not always have this
meaning. See _ibid._, pp. 173–174.

Footnote 322:

The Wineland voyages are described in detail in the _Saga of Eric the
Red_ and in the _Flateyjarbók_, dating from the end of the thirteenth
and early fourteenth centuries (Reeves, _op. cit._, _passim_).

NOTES