THE GEOGRAPHY OF HERODOTUS EXAMINED, &c. SECTION I. Preliminary Observations—The Geography of HERODOTUS not intended for a System, but to explain a History-he regarded the whole habitable Earth, as one Continent-his Character for Veracity, on the Increase-has suffered most, through his Readers' Neglect of distinguishing what the Author saw, from what he only heard—was ignorant of abstract Science; and did not believe that the Earth was globular:—but is respectable as a Historian, Geographer, and Moralist—a great Traveller-his Geography consists more in relative Positions, than actual Distances, and Dimensions-Scope of his geographical Knowledge. As the writings of Herodotus furnish the earliest record of history, among the heathen authors whose works have reached us, so they also furnish the earliest known system of geography, as far as it goes'. It may therefore be worth while to examine 1 The late PRINCIPAL ROBERTSON, whose memory the Author venerates, as he esteemed him living, has the following remark, at the opening of his last work, the Disquisition concerning ancient India. What he there says respecting history, is equally applicable to geography. "Whoever attempts to trace the operations of men in remote this system, in order to compare it with the actual geography; as well as in certain cases, with the systems of Eratosthenes, Strabo, Ptolemy, and Pliny. We have said, as far as it goes, because the geography of Herodotus is confined more to ASIA and AFRICA, than to EUROPE and is by no means intended to form an abstract system, but to explain with more effect, the transactions recorded in a history, the theatre of which includes little more in Europe, than the provinces bordering on the Egean sea, the Propontis, Euxine, and Palus Mæotis; and in Africa, the kingdom of Egypt and its dependencies; but almost the whole of the times, and to mark the various steps of their progress in any line of exertion, will soon have the mortification to find, that the period of authentic history is extremely limited. It is little more than 3000 years since the books of Moses, the most ancient and only genuine record of what passed in the early ages of the world, were composed. Herodotus, the most ancient heathen historian whose works have reached us, flourished 1000 years later. If we push our inquiries concerning any point beyond the æra where written history commences, we enter upon the region of conjecture, of fable, and of uncertainty. Upon that ground, I will neither venture myself, nor endeavour to conduct my readers." The materials of our author's geography may be reckoned of a date of 450 to 500 years before our æra. Dr. Usher fixes his birth at 484 before Christ. He also says that he read his books before the council at Athens, in 445; of course, when he was about 39 years of age. This was about 44 years before the expedition of Cyrus, and the retreat of the ten thousand; 111 before Alexander crossed the Hellespont. In order to form an idea in detail of the systems of the three first of these great geographers, the reader is referred to the work of M. GOSSELIN, entitled Geographie des Grecs analysée, 1780. known parts of Asia. Limited, however, as the theatre of war in Europe might be, the brilliancy of the transactions on it, surpassed those throughout all the rest of the space. If it be supposed (as in reason it may) that our Author was master of all the geographical, as well as historical knowledge, of his own times, it may be inferred that the Greeks knew but little concerning the western part of Europe, besides the mere sea coast; and although our Author seems to entertain no doubt of the existence of a Northern ocean, he confesses his ignorance, whether, or not, Europe was bounded on the north and east by the ocean. It is proper to remark, that Herodotus considered, and perhaps rightly, the whole of the earth then known, as ONE SINGLE CONTINENT: regarding Europe, Asia, and Africa, as nothing more than divisions of that continent. In effect, he does not attach any degree of importance to the question concerning the boundaries of these divisions; and therefore speaks of the line of separation between Europe and Asia, Asia and Africa, in a vague way. "I am far," says he, Melpom. 45, " from satisfied why to one continent, three different names, taken from women, have been assigned. To one of these divisions (meaning Asia) some have given as a boundary the Egyptian Nile and the Colchian Phasis; others, the Tanais, the Cimmerian Bosphorus, and the Palus Mæotis." It appears that he adopted for the boundary of Asia, the river Phasis, and not the Tanais: and for that of Africa, the Isthmus of Suez, in preference to |