Lectures on ancient ethnography and geography, volume 1 (of 2) : $b comprising Greece and her colonies, Epirus, Macedonia, Illyricum, Italy, Gaul, Spain, Britain, the north of Africa, etc. — John Shaqi
Lectures on ancient ethnography and geography, volume 1 (of 2) : $b comprising Greece and her colonies, Epirus, Macedonia, Illyricum, Italy, Gaul, Spain, Britain, the north of Africa, etc.Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
History
Lectures on ancient ethnography and geography, volume 1 (of 2) : $b comprising Greece and her colonies, Epirus, Macedonia, Illyricum, Italy, Gaul, Spain, Britain, the north of Africa, etc.
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
Ethnology; Geography, Ancient; History, Ancient
extended to them till a later period. The knowledge of the Romans about
Egypt, though they had ruled over it for upwards of fifty years, was
still very scanty. Strabo is altogether unmathematical, and Eratosthenes
was farther advanced in this respect, so far indeed as it was possible
for him, though he too, in regard to longitudes, was often satisfied with
mere guesses, which sometimes entirely displaced the right point of view.
All that Strabo knows on these points is derived from Eratosthenes, whose
measurements were still highly imperfect. The division of the heavens
into 360 degrees is very ancient, while that of the earth is of a very
late date, Marinus of Tyre, who lived shortly before Ptolemy, being the
first to introduce it into his maps. One great drawback in Strabo is an
ungenerous hostility towards the great Eratosthenes; the cause of this
desire to quarrel is unknown, and his censure is often very foolish.
Since the time that Bochart derived the name of Europe from the
Phoenician ערב, it has been generally assumed by all intelligent
inquirers, that the name of our part of the world actually owes its
origin to some Phoenician division of the countries of the earth; it is
also well known that Europa is called a daughter of the Phoenician king
Agenor. Owing to the ill-use which Bochart often makes of Phoenician
etymologies, this one too has been disputed, but it is only those who
throw away the wheat with the chaff that reject his derivation of the
name Europe. Homer seems to have divided the earth into two parts, viz.,
πρὸς ἠῶ τ’ ἠέλιόν τε, and πρὸς ζόφον, but his not mentioning other parts
may be merely accidental, and I should therefore not like to adopt Voss’
opinion, that Homer knew of no other division. The division, according to
the quarters of the world, into Europe, Asia, Libya and Hesperia, seems
to have been very ancient and general among the Greeks. Eratosthenes
made the division according to the four great nations, which is less
convenient, as these nations become mixed and amalgamated with one other.
The opinion that Asia derived its name from the Asian marshes in Lydia
appears to me unsatisfactory; for it was not customary with the Greeks
first to use a name in a limited sense and afterwards to extend it in
the manner in which the Latins[8] gave the name Italia to the smallest
portion of the country, and afterwards extended it instead of applying it
to the whole country at once. Libya is evidently a Phoenician name, as is
clear from Lilybaeum, which signifies “opposite to Libya,”—a name which
the Carthaginians would not have given to a place unless they had called
Africa Libya. The opinion which regards Hesperia as a fourth part of the
world is only a hypothesis, but it is a fact that the name was applied to
the whole of western Europe. Afterwards it was united with Europe, just
as Libya was for a time treated as a part of Asia, though afterwards it
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account