Chapter 3

“Nine days by cruel storms thence was I borne;”

but at the same time he takes no notice of this expression, which is his as well,

“And now borne sea-ward from the river streamOf the Oceanus;”128

“And now borne sea-ward from the river stream

Of the Oceanus;”128

and this,

“In the island of Ogygia, the centre of the sea,”129

and that the daughter of Atlas130dwells there. And the following concerning the Phæacians,

“Remote amid the billowy deep, we holdOur dwelling, utmost of all human kind,And free from mixture with a foreign race.”131

“Remote amid the billowy deep, we hold

Our dwelling, utmost of all human kind,

And free from mixture with a foreign race.”131

These passages clearly refer to the Atlantic Ocean,132but though so plainly expressed, Polybius slily manages to overlook them. Here he is altogether wrong, though quite correct about the wandering of Ulysses having taken place round Sicily and Italy, a fact which Homer establishes himself. Otherwise, what poet or writer could have persuaded the Neapolitans to assert that they possessed the tomb of Parthenope133the Siren, or the inhabitants of Cumæ, Dicæarchia,134and Vesuvius [to bear their testimony] to Pyriphlegethon, the Marsh of Acherusia,135to the oracle of the dead which was near Aornus,136and to Baius and Misenus,137the companions of Ulysses. The same is the case with the Sirenussae, and the Strait of Messina, and Scylla, and Charybdis, and Æolus, all which things should neither be examined into too rigorously, nor yet [despised] as groundless and without foundation, alike remote from truth and historic value.

19. Eratosthenes seems to have had something like this view of the case himself, when he says, “Any one would believe that the poet intended the western regions as the scene of Ulysses’ wanderings, but that he has departed from fact, sometimes through want of perfect information, at other times because he wished to give to scenes a more terrific and marvellous appearance than they actually possessed.” So far this is true, but his idea of the object which the poet had inview while composing, is false; real advantage, not trifling, being his aim. We may justly reprehend his assertion on this point, as also where he says, that Homer places the scene of his marvels in distant lands that he may lie the more easily. Remote localities have not furnished him with near so many wonderful narrations as Greece, and the countries thereto adjacent; witness the labours of Hercules, and Theseus, the fables concerning Crete, Sicily, and the other islands; besides those connected with Cithærum, Helicon,138Parnassus,139Pelion,140and the whole of Attica and the Peloponnesus. Let us not therefore tax the poets with ignorance on account of the myths which they employ, and since, so far from myth being the staple, they for the most part avail themselves of actual occurrences, (and Homer does this in a remarkable degree,) the inquirer who will seek how far these ancient writers have wandered into fiction, ought not to scrutinize to what extent the fiction was carried, but rather what is the truth concerning those places and persons to which the fictions have been applied; for instance, whether the wanderings of Ulysses did actually occur, and where.

20. On the whole, however, it is not proper to place the works of Homer in the common catalogue of other poets, without challenging for him a superiority both in respect of his other [excellences] and also for the geography on which our attention is now engaged.

If any one were to do no more than merely read through the Triptolemus of Sophocles, or the prologue to the Bacchæ of Euripides, and then compare them with the care taken by Homer in his geographical descriptions, he would at once perceive both the difference and superiority of the latter, for wherever there is necessity for arrangement in the localities he has immortalized, he is careful to preserve it as well in regard to Greece, as to foreign countries.

“TheyOn the Olympian summit thought to fixHuge Ossa, and on Ossa’s towering headPelion with all his forests.”141“And Juno starting from the Olympian heightO’erflew Pieria and the lovely plainsOf broad Emathia;142soaring thence she sweptThe snow-clad summit of the Thracian hills143Steed-famed, nor printed, as she pass’d, the soil,*******From Athos144o’er the foaming billows borne.”145

“They

On the Olympian summit thought to fix

Huge Ossa, and on Ossa’s towering head

Pelion with all his forests.”141

“And Juno starting from the Olympian height

O’erflew Pieria and the lovely plains

Of broad Emathia;142soaring thence she swept

The snow-clad summit of the Thracian hills143

Steed-famed, nor printed, as she pass’d, the soil,

*******

From Athos144o’er the foaming billows borne.”145

In the Catalogue he does not describe his cities in regular order, because here there was no necessity, but both the people and foreign countries he arranges correctly. “Having wandered to Cyprus, and Phœnice, and the Egyptians, I came to the Ethiopians, and Sidonians, and Erembi, and Libya.”146Hipparchus has drawn attention to this. But the two tragedians, where there was great necessity for proper arrangement, one147where he introduces Bacchus visiting the nations, the other148Triptolemus sowing the earth, have brought in juxta-position places far remote, and separated those which were near.

“And having left the wealthy lands of the Lydians and Phrygians, and the sunny plains of the Persians and the Bactrian walls, and having come over the stormy land of the Medes, and the Happy Arabia.”149And the Triptolemus is just as inaccurate.

Further, in respect to the winds and climates, Homer shows the wide extent of his geographical knowledge, for in histopographical descriptions he not unfrequently informs us of both these matters. Thus,

“My abodeIs sun-burnt Ithaca.Flat on the deep she lies, farthest removedToward the west, while situate apart,Her sister islands face the rising day.”150

“My abode

Is sun-burnt Ithaca.

Flat on the deep she lies, farthest removed

Toward the west, while situate apart,

Her sister islands face the rising day.”150

And,

“It has a two-fold entrance,One towards the north, the other south.”151

“It has a two-fold entrance,

One towards the north, the other south.”151

And again,

“Which I alike despise, speed they their courseWith right-hand flight towards the ruddy east,Or leftward down into the shades of eve.”152

“Which I alike despise, speed they their course

With right-hand flight towards the ruddy east,

Or leftward down into the shades of eve.”152

Ignorance of such matters he reckons no less than confusion.

“Alas! my friends, for neither westKnow we, nor east; where rises or where setsThe all-enlightening sun.”153

“Alas! my friends, for neither west

Know we, nor east; where rises or where sets

The all-enlightening sun.”153

Where the poet has said properly enough,

“As when two adverse winds, blowing from Thrace,Boreas and Zephyrus,”154

“As when two adverse winds, blowing from Thrace,

Boreas and Zephyrus,”154

Eratosthenes ill-naturedly misrepresents him as saying in an absolute sense, that the west wind blows from Thrace; whereas he is not speaking in an absolute sense at all, but merely of the meeting of contrary winds near the bay of Melas,155on the Thracian sea, itself a part of the Ægæan. For where Thrace forms a kind of promontory, where it borders on Macedonia,156it takes a turn to the south-west, and projects into the ocean, and from this point it seems to the inhabitants of Thasos, Lemnos, Imbros, Samothracia,157and the surrounding sea, that the west winds blow.158So in regard to Attica, they seem to come from the rocks of Sciros,159and this is the reason why all the westerly winds, the north-west more particularly, are called the Scirones. Of this Eratosthenes was not aware, though he suspected as much, for it was he who described this bending of the land [towards the south-west] which we have mentioned. But he interprets our poet in an absolute sense, and then taxes him with ignorance, because, says he, “Zephyr blows from the west, and off Spain, and Thrace does not extend so far.” Does he then think that Homer was not aware that Zephyr came from the west, notwithstanding the careful manner in which he distinguishes its position when he writes as follows:

“The east, the south, the heavy-blowing Zephyr,And the cold north-wind clear.”160

“The east, the south, the heavy-blowing Zephyr,

And the cold north-wind clear.”160

Or was he ignorant that Thrace did not extend beyond the Pæonian and Thessalian mountains.161To be sure he was well acquainted with the position of the countries adjoining Thrace in that direction, and does he not mention by name both the maritime and inland districts, and tells us of the Magnetæ,162the Malians,163and other Grecian [territories], all in order, as far as Thesprotis;164also of the Dolopes165bordering on Pæonia,and the Sellæ who inhabit the territory around Dodona166as far as the [river] Achelous,167but he never mentions Thrace, as being beyond these. He has evidently a predilection for the sea which is nearest to him, and with which he is most familiar, as where he says,

“Commotion shookThe whole assembly, such as heaves the floodOf the Icarian deep.”168

“Commotion shook

The whole assembly, such as heaves the flood

Of the Icarian deep.”168

21. Some writers tell us there are but two principal winds, the north and south, and that the other winds are only a slight difference in the direction of these two. That is, (supposing only two winds, the north and south,) the south wind from the commencement of the summer quarter blows in a south-easterly direction; and from the commencement of the winter quarter from the east. The north wind from the decline of the summer, blows in a westerly direction, and from the decline of the winter, in a north-westerly direction.

In support of this opinion of the two winds they adduce Thrasyalces and our poet himself, forasmuch as he mentions the north-west with the south,

“From the north-west south,”169

and the west with the north,

“As when two adverse winds, blowing from Thrace,Boreas and Zephyrus.”170

“As when two adverse winds, blowing from Thrace,

Boreas and Zephyrus.”170

But Posidonius remarks that none of those who are really acquainted with these subjects, such as Aristotle, Timosthenes,and Bion the astronomer, entertain so mistaken an opinion in regard to the winds. They say that the north-east (Cæcias) blows from the commencement of summer, and that the south-west wind (Libs), which is exactly opposite to this, blows from the decline of winter. And again, the south-east wind (Eurus), which is opposite to the north-west wind (Argestes), from the commencement of winter. The east and west winds being intermediate.

When our poet makes use of the expression “stormy zephyr,” he means the wind which is now called by us the north-west; and by the “clear-blowing zephyr” our west wind; our Leuconotus is his Argestes-notus, or clearing south wind,171for this wind brings but few clouds, all the other southern winds bringing clouds and rain,172

“As when whirlwinds of the westA storm encounter from the clearing south.”173

“As when whirlwinds of the west

A storm encounter from the clearing south.”173

Here he alludes to the stormy zephyr, which very frequently scatters the feathery clouds brought up by the Leuconotus, or, as it is called by way of epithet, the clearing south.

The statements made by Eratosthenes in the first book of his Geography, require some such correction as this.

22. Persisting in his false views in relation to Homer, he goes on to say, “He was ignorant that the Nile separated into many mouths, nay, he was not even acquainted with the name of the river, though Hesiod knew it well, for he even mentions it.”174In respect of the name, it is probable that ithad not then been given to the river, and as to the mouths, if they were obscure and little known, will not every one excuse him for not being aware whether there were several or merely one? At that time, the river, its rising, and its mouths were considered, as they are at the present day, amongst the most remarkable, the most wonderful, and most worthy of recording of all the peculiarities of Egypt: who can suppose that those who told our poet of the country and river of Egypt, of Egyptian Thebes, and of Pharos, were unaware of the many embouchures of the Nile; or that being aware, they would not have described them, were it not that they were too generally known? “But is it not inconceivable that Homer should describe Ethiopia, and the Sidonians, the Erembi, and the Exterior Sea,175—should tell us that Ethiopia was divided into two parts, and yet nothing about those things which were nearer and better known?” Certainly not, his not describing these things is no proof that he was not acquainted with them. He does not tell us of his own country, nor yet many other things. The most probable reason is, they were so generally known that they did not appear to him worth recording.176

23. Again, they are entirely wrong when they allege as a mark of Homer’s ignorance, that he describes the island of Pharos177as entirely surrounded by the sea. On the contrary, it might be taken advantage of as a proof that our poet was not unacquainted with a single one of the points concerning Egypt which we have just been speaking of: and thus wedemonstrate it:—Every one is prone to romance a little in narrating his travels, and Menelaus was no exception to the rule. He had been to Ethiopia,178and there heard much discussion concerning the sources of the Nile, and the alluvium which it deposited, both along its course and also at its mouths, and the large additions which it had thereby made to the mainland, so as fully to justify the remark of Herodotus179that the whole of Egypt was a gift from the river; or if not the whole, at all events that part of it below the Delta, called Lower Egypt. He had heard too that Pharos was entirely surrounded by sea, and therefore misrepresented it as entirely surrounded by the sea, although it had long ago ceased so to be. Now the author of all this was Homer, and we therefore infer that he was not ignorant concerning either the sources or the mouths of the Nile.

24. They are again mistaken when they say that he was not aware of the isthmus between the sea of Egypt and the Arabian Gulf, and that his description is false,

“The Ethiopians, utmost of mankind,These eastward situate, those toward the west.”180

“The Ethiopians, utmost of mankind,

These eastward situate, those toward the west.”180

Nevertheless he is correct, and the criticism of the moderns is quite out of place: indeed, there is so little truth in the assertion that Homer was ignorant of this isthmus, that I will venture to affirm he was not only acquainted with it, but has also accurately defined it. But none of the grammarians, noteven the chiefs of their number, Aristarchus and Crates, have understood the words of our poet on this subject. For they disagree as to the words which follow this expression of Homer,

“The Ethiopians, utmost of mankind,These eastward situate, those towards the west,”181

“The Ethiopians, utmost of mankind,

These eastward situate, those towards the west,”181

Aristarchus writing,

“These towards the west, and those towards the east,”

and Crates,

“As well in the west as also in the east.”

However, in regard to their hypotheses, it makes no difference whether the passage were written this way or that. One of them, in fact, takes what he considers the mathematical view of the case, and says that the torrid zone is occupied by the ocean,182and that on each side of this there is a temperate zone, one inhabited by us and another opposite thereto. And as we call the Ethiopians, who are situated to the south, and dwell along the shores of the ocean, the most distant on the face of the inhabited globe; so he supposed that on the other side of the ocean,183there were certain Ethiopians dwelling along the shores, who would in like manner be considered the most distant184by the inhabitants of the other temperate zone; and thus that the Ethiopians were double, separated into two divisions by the ocean. He adds, “as well in the west as also in the east,” because as the celestial zodiac always corresponds to the terrestrial, and never exceeds in its obliquity the space occupied by the two Ethiopias, the sun’s entire course must necessarily be within this space, and also his rising and setting, as it appears to different nations according to the sign which he may be in.

He (Crates) adopted this version, because he considered it the more astronomical. But it would have maintained his opinion of the division of the Ethiopians into two parts, andat the same time have been much more simple, had he said that the Ethiopians dwelt on either side of the ocean from the rising to the setting of the sun. In this case what difference does it make whether we follow his version, or adopt the reading of Aristarchus,

“These towards the west, and those towards the east?”

which also means, that whether east or west, on either side of the ocean, Ethiopians dwell. But Aristarchus rejects this hypothesis. He says, “The Ethiopians with whom we are acquainted, and who are farthest south from the Greeks, are those described by the poet as being separated into two divisions. But Ethiopia is not so separated as to form two countries, one situated towards the west, the other towards the east, but only one, that which lies south of the Greeks and adjoins Egypt; but of this the poet was ignorant, as well as of other matters enumerated by Apollodorus, which he has falsely stated concerning various places in his second book, containing the catalogue of the ships.”

25. To refute Crates would require a lengthened argument, which here perhaps may be considered out of place. Aristarchus we commend for rejecting the hypothesis of Crates, which is open to many objections, and for referring the expression of the poet to our Ethiopia. But the remainder of his statement we must discuss. First, his minute examination of the reading is altogether fruitless, for whichever way it may have been written, his interpretation is equally applicable to both; for what difference is there whether you say thus—In our opinion there are two Ethiopias, one towards the east, the other to the west; or thus—For they are as well towards the east as the west? Secondly, he makes false assumptions. For admitting that the poet was ignorant of the isthmus,185and that he alludes to the Ethiopia contiguous to Egypt, when he says,

The Ethiopians separated into two divisions;186

what then? Are they not separated into two divisions, and could the poet have thus expressed himself if he had been in ignorance? Is not Egypt, nay, are not the Egyptians, separatedinto two divisions by the Nile from the Delta to Syene,187

These towards the west, those towards the east?

And what else is Egypt, with the exception of the island formed by the river and overflowed by its waters; does it not lie on either side of the river both east and west?

Ethiopia runs in the same direction as Egypt, and resembles it both in its position with respect to the Nile, and in its other geographical circumstances. It is narrow, long, and subject to inundation; beyond the reach of this inundation it is desolate and parched, and unfitted for the habitation of man; some districts lying to the east and some to the west of [the river]. How then can we deny that it is separated into two divisions? Shall the Nile, which is looked upon by some people as the proper boundary line between Asia and Libya,188and which extends southward in length more than 10,000 stadia, embracing in its breadth islands which contain populations of above ten thousand men, the largest of these being Meroe, the seat of empire and metropolis of the Ethiopians, be regarded as too insignificant to divide Ethiopia into two parts? The greatest obstacle which they who object to the river being made the line of demarcation between the two continents are able to allege, is, that Egypt and Ethiopia are by this means divided, one part of each being assigned to Libya, and the other to Asia, or, if this will not suit, the continents cannot be divided at all, or at least not by the river.

26. But besides these there is another method of dividing Ethiopia. All those who have sailed along the coasts of Libya, whether starting from the Arabian Gulf,189or the Pillars,190after proceeding a certain distance, have been obliged to turn back again on account of a variety of accidents; and thus originated a general belief that it was divided midway by some isthmus, although the whole ofthe Atlantic Ocean is confluent, more especially towards the south. Besides, all of these navigators called the final country which they reached, Ethiopia, and described it under that name. Is it therefore at all incredible, that Homer, misled by such reports, separated them into two divisions, one towards the east and the other west, not knowing whether there were any intermediate countries or not? But there is another ancient tradition related by Ephorus, which Homer had probably fallen in with. He tells us it is reported by the Tartessians,191that some of the Ethiopians, on their arrival in Libya,192penetrated into the extreme west, and settled down there, while the rest occupied the greater part of the sea-coast; and in support of this statement he quotes the passage of Homer,

The Ethiopians, the farthest removed of men, separated into two divisions.

27. These and other more stringent arguments may be urged against Aristarchus and those of his school, to clear our poet from the charge of such gross ignorance. I assert that the ancient Greeks, in the same way as they classed all the northern nations with which they were familiar under the one name of Scythians, or, according to Homer, Nomades, andafterwards becoming acquainted with those towards the west, styled them Kelts and Iberians; sometimes compounding the names into Keltiberians, or Keltoscythians, thus ignorantly uniting various distinct nations; so I affirm they designated as Ethiopia the whole of the southern countries towards the ocean. Of this there is evidence, for Æschylus, in the Prometheus Loosed,193thus speaks:

There [is] the sacred wave, and the coralled bed of the Erythræan Sea, and [there] the luxuriant marsh of the Ethiopians, situated near the ocean, glitters like polished brass; where daily in the soft and tepid stream, the all-seeing sun bathes his undying self, and refreshes his weary steeds.

And as the ocean holds the same position in respect to the sun, and serves the same purpose throughout the whole southern region,194he195therefore concludes that the Ethiopians inhabited the whole of the region.

And Euripides in his Phaeton196says that Clymene was given

“To Merops, sovereign of that landWhich from his four-horsed chariot firstThe rising sun strikes with his golden rays;And which its swarthy neighbours callThe radiant stable of the Morn and Sun.”

“To Merops, sovereign of that land

Which from his four-horsed chariot first

The rising sun strikes with his golden rays;

And which its swarthy neighbours call

The radiant stable of the Morn and Sun.”

Here the poet merely describes them as the common stables of the Morning and of the Sun; but further on he tells us they were near to the dwellings of Merops, and in fact the whole plot of the piece has reference to this. This does not therefore refer alone to the [land] next to Egypt, but rather to the whole southern country extending along the sea-coast.

28. Ephorus likewise shows us the opinion of the ancients respecting Ethiopia, in his Treatise on Europe. He says, “If the whole celestial and terrestrial globe were divided into four parts, the Indians would possess that towards the east, the Ethiopians towards the south, the Kelts towards the west, and the Scythians towards the north.” He adds that Ethiopia is larger than Scythia; for, says he, it appears that the country of the Ethiopians extends from the rising to the setting of the sun in winter; and Scythia is opposite to it.

It is evident this was the opinion of Homer, since he places Ithaca

Towards the gloomy region,197

that is, towards the north,198but the others apart,

Towards the morning and the sun,

by which he means the whole southern hemisphere: and again when he says,

“speed they their courseWith right-hand flight towards the ruddy east,Or leftward down into the shades of eve.”199

“speed they their course

With right-hand flight towards the ruddy east,

Or leftward down into the shades of eve.”199

And again,

“Alas! my friends, for neither westKnow we, nor east, where rises or where setsThe all-enlightening sun.”200

“Alas! my friends, for neither west

Know we, nor east, where rises or where sets

The all-enlightening sun.”200

Which we shall explain more fully when we come to speak of Ithaca.201

When therefore he says,

“For to the banks of the Oceanus,Where Ethiopia holds a feast to Jove,He journey’d yesterday,”202

“For to the banks of the Oceanus,

Where Ethiopia holds a feast to Jove,

He journey’d yesterday,”202

we should take this in a general sense, and understand by it the whole of the ocean which washes Ethiopia and the southern region, for to whatever part of this region you direct your attention, you will there find both the ocean and Ethiopia. It is in a similar style he says,

“But Neptune, traversing in his returnFrom Ethiopia’s sons the mountain heightsOf Solymè, descried him from afar.”203

“But Neptune, traversing in his return

From Ethiopia’s sons the mountain heights

Of Solymè, descried him from afar.”203

which is equal to saying, “in his return from the southern regions,”204meaning by the Solymi, as I remarked before, not those of Pisidia, but certain others merely imaginary, having the same name, and bearing the like relation to the navigators in [Ulysses’] ship, and the southern inhabitants there called Ethiopians, as those of Pisidia do in regard to Pontus and the inhabitants of Egyptian Ethiopia. What he says about the cranes must likewise be understood in a general sense.

“Such clang is heardAlong the skies, when from incessant showersEscaping, and from winter’s cold, the cranesTake wing, and over ocean speed away.Woe to the land of dwarfs! prepared they flyFor slaughter of the small Pygmæan race.”205

“Such clang is heard

Along the skies, when from incessant showers

Escaping, and from winter’s cold, the cranes

Take wing, and over ocean speed away.

Woe to the land of dwarfs! prepared they fly

For slaughter of the small Pygmæan race.”205

For it is not in Greece alone that the crane is observed to emigrate to more southern regions, but likewise from Italy and Iberia,206from [the shores of] the Caspian, and from Bactriana. But since the ocean extends along the whole southern coast, and the cranes fly to all parts of it indiscriminately at the approach of winter, we must likewise believe that the Pygmies207were equally considered to inhabit the whole of it.

And if the moderns have confined the term of Ethiopians to those only who dwell near to Egypt, and have also restricted the Pygmies in like manner, this must not be allowed to interfere with the meaning of the ancients. We do not speak of all the people who fought against Troy as merely Achæans and Argives, though Homer describes the whole under those two names. Similar to this is my remark concerning the separation of the Ethiopians into two divisions, that under that designation we should understand the whole of the nations inhabiting the sea-board from east to west. The Ethiopians taken in this sense are naturally separated into two parts by the Arabian Gulf, which occupies a considerable portion of a meridian circle,208and resembles a river, being in length nearly 15,000 stadia,209and in breadth not above 1000 at the widest point. In addition to the length, the recess of the Gulf is distant from the sea at Pelusium only three or four days’ journey across the isthmus. On this account those who are most felicitous in their division of Asia and Africa, prefer the Gulf210as a better boundary line for thetwo continents than the Nile, since it extends almost entirely from sea to sea, whereas the Nile is so remote from the ocean that it does not by any means divide the whole of Asia from Africa. On this account I believe it was the Gulf which the poet looked upon as dividing into two portions the whole southern regions of the inhabited earth. Is it possible, then, that he was unacquainted with the isthmus which separates this Gulf from the Egyptian Sea?211

29. It is quite irrational to suppose that he could be accurately acquainted with Egyptian Thebes,212which is separated from our sea213by a little less than 5000214stadia; and yet ignorant of the recess of the Arabian Gulf, and of the isthmus there, whose breadth is not more than 1000 stadia. Still more, would it not be ridiculous to believe that Homer was aware the Nile was called by the same name as the vast country [of Egypt], and yet unacquainted with the reason why? especially since the saying of Herodotus would occur to him, that the country was a gift from the river, and it ought thereforeto bear its name. Further, the best known peculiarities of a country are those which have something of the nature of a paradox, and are likely to arrest general attention. Of this kind are the rising of the Nile, and the alluvial deposition at its mouth. There is nothing in the whole country to which travellers in Egypt so immediately direct their inquiries, as the character of the Nile; nor do the inhabitants possess any thing else equally wonderful and curious, of which to inform foreigners; for in fact, to give them a description of the river, is to lay open to their view every main characteristic of the country. It is the question put before every other by those who have never seen Egypt themselves. To these considerations we must add Homer’s thirst after knowledge, and his delight in visiting foreign lands, (tastes which we are assured both by those who have written histories of his life, and also by innumerable testimonies throughout his own poems, he possessed in an eminent degree,) and we shall have abundant evidence both of the extent of his information, and the felicity with which he described objects he deemed important, and passed over altogether, or with slight allusion, matters which were generally known.

30. These Egyptians and Syrians215whom we have been criticising fill one with amazement. They do not understand [Homer], even when he is describing their own countries, but accuse him of ignorance where, as our argument proves, they are open to the charge themselves. Not to mention a thing is clearly no evidence that a person is not acquainted with it.216Homer does not tell us of the change in the current of the Euripus, nor of Thermopylæ, nor of many other remarkable things well known to the Greeks; but was he therefore unacquainted with them? He describes to us, although these men, who are obstinately deaf, will not hear: they have themselves to blame.

Our poet applies to rivers the epithet of “heaven-sent.” And this not only to mountain torrents, but to all rivers alike, since they are all replenished by the showers. But even whatis general becomes particular when it is bestowed on any objectpar excellence. Heaven-sent, when applied to a mountain torrent, means something else than when it is the epithet of the ever-flowing river; but the force of the term is doubly felt when attributed to the Nile. For as there are hyperboles of hyperboles, for instance, to be “lighter than the shadow of a cork,” “more timid than a Phrygian hare,”217“to possess an estate shorter than a Lacedæmonian epistle;” so excellence becomes more excellent, when the title of “heaven-sent” is given to the Nile. The mountain torrent has a better claim to be called heaven-sent than other rivers, but the Nile exceeds the mountain torrents, both in its size and the lengthened period of its overflow. Since, then, the wonders of this river were known to our poet, as we have shown in this defence, when he applies this epithet to the Nile, it must only be understood in the way we have explained. Homer did not think it worth mentioning, especially to those who were acquainted with the fact, that the Nile had many mouths, since this is a common feature of numerous other rivers. Alcæus218does not mention it, although he tells us he had been in Egypt. One might infer the fact of its alluvial deposit, both from the rising [of the river] and what Homer tells us concerning Pharos. For his account, or rather the vulgar reportconcerning Pharos, that it was distant from the mainland a whole day’s voyage, ought not to be looked upon as a downright falsehood.

It is clear that Homer was only acquainted with the rising and deposit of the river in a general way, and concluding from what he heard that the island had been further removed in the time of Menelaus from the mainland, than it was in his own, he magnified the distance, simply that he might heighten the fiction. Fictions however are not the offspring of ignorance, as is sufficiently plain from those concerning Proteus, the Pygmies, the efficacy of charms, and many others similar to these fabricated by the poets. They narrate these things not through ignorance of the localities, but for the sake of giving pleasure and enjoyment. But [some one may inquire], how could he describe [Pharos], which is without water as possessed of that necessary?

Back to Index Next