Obrazy na stronie

case of Ætna, is said to be eighty-one, of which the following may be regarded as an accurate enumeration. Those mentioned by Thucydides amount to three. In 122 B.C. there was one. In 44 A.D. one. In 352 A.D. one. During the 12th century, two hapned. During the 13th, one. During the 14th, two uring the 15th, four. During the 16th, four. During the 17th, twenty-two. During the 18th, thirtytwo. Since the commencement of the 19th, name. |Malte-Brun, Geogr., vol. 4, p. 293, Brussels ed.) That the Greeks did not suffer this mountain to remain unemployed in their mythological legends may easily be imagined, and hence the fable that Ætna lay on part of the giant form of Typhon, enemy of the ods. (Pindar, Pyth., l. c. — Compare AEschylus, }. Vinct., v. 365. — Hyginus, c. 152 – Apollod, 1, 6, 3, and Heyne, ad loc., where the different traditions respecting Typhon are collected.). According to Virgil (Æn, 3, 578), Enceladus lay beneath this mountain. Another class of mythographers placed the Cyclopes of Homeric fable on AEtna, though the poet never dreamed of assigning the island Thrinakia as an abode for his giant creations. (Mannert, vol. 3, p. 9, seqq.) When the Cyclõpes were regarded as the aids of Vulcan in the labours of the forge, they were translated, by the wand of fable, from the surface to the bowels of the mountain, though the Lipari islands were more commonly regarded as the scene of Vulcan's art. (Mannert, 9, pt. 2, p. 297.)—II. A small city on the southern declivity of Ætna. The first name of the place was Inessa, or Inessos, and Thucydides (6, 94) speaks of the inhabitants under the appellation of Inessari ('Ivnagator). The form of the name, therefore, as given by Strabo (268), namely, Innesa ('Ivvmoa), as well as that found in Diodorus Siculus (14, 14), Ennesia ('Evvmata), are clearly erroneous. The name of the place was changed to AEtna by the remains of the colony which Hiero had settled at Catana, and which the Siculi had driven out from that place. Hiero had called Catana by the name of AEtna, and the new-comers applied it to the city which now furnished them with an abode. This migration to Inessa happened Ol. 79, 4. At a subsequent period (Ol. 94, 2) we find the elder Dionysius master of the place, a possession of much importance to him, since it commanded the road from Catana to the western parts of the island. The ancient site is now marked by ruins, and the place bears the name of Castro. (Mannert, 10, pt. 2, p. 291, seqq.) AEtolia, a country of Greece, situate to the east of Acarnania. The most ancient accounts which can be traced respecting this region, represent it as formerly possessed by the Curetes, and from them it first received the name of Curetis. (Strab., 465.) A change was subsequently effected by AEtolus, the son of Endymion, who arrived from Elis in the Peloponnesus, at the head of a band of followers, and, having defeated the Curetes in several actions, forced them to abandon their country (rud. Acarnania), and gave the territories which they had left the name of Ætolia. (Ephos, ap. Strab., 463. — Pausan., 5, 1.) Homer repres&ts the AEtolians as a hardy and warlike race, engaged in frequent conflicts with the Curetes. He informs us, also, that they took part in the siege of Troy, under the command of Thoas their chief, and often alludes to their prowess in the field. (Il., 9, 527; 2, 638, &c.). Mythology has conferred a de#. of celebrity and interest on this portion of Greece, rom the story of the Calydonian boar, and the exploits of Meleager and Tydeus, with those of other Ætolian warriors of the heroic age; but, whatever may have contributed to give renown to this province, Thucydides (1, 5) assures us, that the AEtolians, in general, like most of the northwestern clans of the Grecian continent, long preserved the wild and uncivilized habits of a barbarous age. The more remote tribes

and territory.

were especially distinguished for the uncouthness of their language and the ferocity of their habits. (Thucyd., 3, 94.) In this historian's time they had as yet made no figure among the leading republics of Greece, and are seldom mentioned in the course of the war which he undertook to narrate. From him we learn that the AEtolians favoured the interests of the Lace daemonians, probably more from jealousy of the Athe nians, whom they wished to dislodge from Naupactus than from any friendship they bore to the former. The possession of that important place held out induce. ments to the Athenians, in the sixth year of the war, to attempt the occupation, if not the ultimate conquest, of all AFtolia: the expedition, however, though ably planned, and conducted by Demosthenes himself, pro. ved signally disastrous. We scarcely find any subse. quent mention of the AEtolians during the more important transactions which, for upward of a century, occupied the different states of Greece. We may collect, however, that they were at that time engaged in perpetual hostilities with their neighbours the Acarnanians. On the death of Philip and the accession of Alexander, the AEtolians exhibited symptoms of hostile feelings towards the young monarch (Diod. Suc., 17, 3), which, together with the assistance they afforded to the confederate Greeks in the Lamiac war, drew upon them the vengeance of Antipater and Craterus, who, with a powerful army, invaded their country, which they laid waste with fire and sword. The AEtolians, on this occasion, retired to their mountain-fastnesses, where they intrenched themselves until the ambitious designs of Perdiccas forced the Macedonian generals to evacuate their territory. (Diod. Snc., 18, 25.) If the accounts Pausanias has followed are correct, Greece was afterward mainly indebted to the Ætolians for her deliverance from a formidable irruption of the Gauls, who had penetrated into Phocis and Ætolia. On being at length compelled to retreat, these barbarians were so vigorously pursued by the AEtolians, that scarcely any of them escaped. (Pausan., 10, 23–Polyb., 9, 30.) From this time we find AEtolia acquiring a degree of importance among the other states of Greece, to which it had never aspired during the brilliant days of Sparta and Athens; but these republics were now on the decline, while northern Greece, after the example of Macedonia, was training up a numerous and hardy population to the practice of war. It is rarely, however, that history has to record achievements or acts of policy honourable to the AEtolians: unjust, rapacious, and without faith or religion, they attached themselves to whatever side the hope of gain and plunder allured them, which they again forsook in favour of a richer prize whenever the temptation presented itself. (Polyb., 2, 45 and 46.— Id, 4, 67.) We thus find them leagued with, Alexander of Epirus, the son of Pyrrhus, for the purpose of dismembering Acarnania, and seizing upon its cities (Polyb., 2, 45. —Id., 9, 34.) Again with Cleomenes, in the hope of overthrowing the Achaean confederacy. (Polyb., 2, 45.) Frustrated, however, in these designs by the able counsels of Aratus, and the judicious and liberal policy of Antigonus Doson, they renewed their attempts on the death of that prince, and carried their arms into the Pelopon. nesus; which gave rise to the social war, so ably de. scribed by Polybius. This seems to have consisted rather in predatory incursions and sudden attacks on both sides, than in a regular and systematic plan of operations. The AEtolians suffered severely ; for Philip, the Macedonian king, whose youth they had despised, advanced into the heart of Ætolia at the head of a considerable force, and avenged, by sacking and plundering Thermus, their chief city, the sacrilegious attack made by them on Dodona, and also the capture of Dium in Macedonia. (Polyb., 5, 7, scqq.) When the Romans, already hard pressed by the second Punic war, then raging in Italy, found themselves threatened on the side of Greece by the secret treaty concluded by the King of Macedon with Hannibal, they saw the advantage of an alliance with the Etolians in order to avert the storm; and, though it might reflect but little credit on their policy, in a moral point of view, to form a league is, a people of such questionable character, the soundness of judgment which dictated the measure cannot be doubted; since they were thus enabled, with a small fleet and an army under the command of M. Valerius Laevinus, to keep in check the whole of the Macedonian force, and effectually to preclude Philip from affording aid to the Carthaginians in Italy. (Livy, 26, 24.) The AEtolians also soved very useful allies to the Romans in the Maceonian war, during which they displayed much zeal and activity, particularly in the battle of Cynoscepha: lac, where their cavalry greatly distinguished itself, and contributed essentially to that decisive victory. (Lic., 33, 7.) On the conclusion of peace, the AEtolians flattered themselves that their exertions in favour of the Romans would be rewarded with a share of the provinces taken from the enemy. But the crafty Romans considered Æolia already sufficiently powerful to render any considerable addition to its territory impolitic, and even dangerous. The AEtolians were, at this time, no longer confined within the narrow limits which the early history of Greece assigns to them, but had extended their dominions on the west and northwest as far as Epirus, where they were in possession of Ambracia, leaving to Acarnania a few towns only on the coast: towards the north, they occupied the districts of Amphilochia and Aperantia, a great portion of Dolopia, and, from their connexion with Athamantia, their influence in that direction was felt even to the borders of Macedonia. On the side of Thessaly they had made themselves masters of the country of the AEnianes, a large portion of Phthiotis, with the cantons of the Melians and Trachinians. On the coast they had gained the whole of the Locrian shore to the Crissean Gulf, including Naupactus. In short, they wanted but little to give them the dominion over the whole of Northern Greece. The Romans, therefore, satisfied with having humbled and weakened the Macedonian prince, still left him power enough to check and curb the arrogant and ambitious projects of this #. The AEtolians appear to have keenly felt the isappointment of their expectations. (Lon., 33, 13 and 31.) They now saw all the consequences of the fault they had committed, in opening for the Romans a way to Greece; but, too o: of themselves to eject these formidable intruders, they turned their thoughts towards Antiochus, king of Syria, whom they induced to come over into that country, this monarch havin been already urged to the same course by i.; (Lir., 35, 33.) With the assistance of this new ally, they made a bold attempt to seize at once the three important towgs of Demetrias, Lacedæmon, and Chalcis, in which they partly succeeded; and, had Antiochus prosecuted the war as vigorously as it was commenced, Greece, in all probability, would have been saved, and Italy might again have seen Hannibal in her territories at the head of a victorious army; but a single defeat at Thermopylae crushed the hopes of the coalition, and drove the feeble Antiochus back into Asia. (Lip., 36, 19.) The AEtolians, deserted by their ally, remained alone exposed to the vengeance of the foe. Heraclea, Naupactus, and Ambracia were in turn besieged and taken; and no other resource being left, they were forced to sue for peace. This was #. A.U.C. 563; but on conditions that for ever umbled their pride, crippled their strength, and left them but the semblance of a republic. (Liv., 38, 11. —Polyb., Frag., 22, 13.)—The AEtolian polity appears to have consisted of a federal government, somewhat

several states met in a common assembly, called Pan. aetolium, and formed one republic under the adminis. tration of a praetor. The officer was chosen annually; and upon him devolved more especially the direction of military affairs, subject, however, to the authority of the national assembly. Besides this, there was also a more select council called Apocleti. In addition to the chief magistrate, we hear of other officers, such as a general of cavalry and a po secretary. (Lip., 31, 29.-Polyb., 4, 5.—Id., Frag., 22, 15– Tittmann, Griechisch. Staatsrerfass., p. 386, seqq.)— The following are the limits of Ætolia, according to Strabo (450). To the west it was separated from Acarnania by the Achelous; to the north it bordered on the mountain districts occupied by the Athamanes, Dolopes, and AEnianes; to the east it was contiguous to the country of the Locri Ozolae, and, more to the north, to that of the Dorians; on the south it was washed by the Corinthian Gulf. The same geographer informs us, that it was usual to divide the country within these boundaries into AEtolia Antiqua and Epictetus. The former extended along the coast from the Achelous to Calydon; and included also a considerable tract of rich o country along the Achelous as far as Stratus. his appears to have been the situation chosen by Ætolus for his first settlement. The latter, as its name implies, was a territory subsequently acquired, and comprehended the most mountainous and least fertile parts of the province, stretching towards the Athamanes on the north side, and the Locri Ozolae on the eastern. (Cramer's Ancient Greece, vol. 2, p. 60, seqq.) AEtolia was, in eneral, a rough and mountainous country. (Compare #. Journey, &c., Letter 16, vol. 1, p. 189, Am. ed.—Pouquerille, Voyage, &c., vol. 3, p. 231.) Some parts, however, were remarkable for their fertility; such as, 1. The large Ætolian field (Altoov Teósov uéya—Dionys. Perieg., v. 432). 2. Paracheloitis, or the fruitful region at the mouth of the Achelous, formed from the mud brought down by the river, and drained, or, according to the legend, torn by Hercules from the river-god. (Vid. Achelous.) 3. The Lelantian field, at the mouth of the Evenus. (Kruse, Hellas, vol. 2, pt. 2,o 189, seqq.) AErölus, son of Endymion (the founder of Elis), and of Neis, or, according to others, Iphianassa. Having accidentally killed Apis, son of Phoroneus, he fled with a band of followers into the country of the Curetes, which received from him the name of Ætolia. (Apollod, 1, 7, 5–Vid. Ftolia.) AEx, I. a rocky island between Tenos and Chios, deriving its name from its resemblance to a goat (aiš). * is said by some to have given the appellation of “AEgean” (Aiyaíou) to the sea in which it stood. (Plin., 4, 11.)—II. The goat that suckled Jupiter, changed into a constellation. AFER, Cn. Domitius, an orator during the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. He was born at Nemausus (Nismes), B.C. 15 or 16, of obscure parents, and not, as some maintain (Faydut, Remarques sur Virgile), of the Domitian line. After receiving a good education in his native city, he re. moved, at an early age, to Rome, where he subsequently distinguished himself by his talents at the bar, and rose to high honours under Tiberius. His services as an informer, however, most of all endeared him to the reigning prince, and in this infamous trade he numbered among his victims Claudia Pulchra, the cousin of Agrippina, and Q. Varus, son of the former. A skilful flatterer, he managed to preserve all his favour under the three emperors who came after Tiberius, and finally died of intemperance under the last of the three, Nero, A.D. 59. He was the preceptor of Quintilian, who has left a very favourable account of his oratorical abilities. (Tacitus, Ann., 4, 52.—Id. Afra NIA. Wid. Supplement. AFRANIA GENs. Wid. Supplement. AFRANius, I. a Latin comic poet, who flourished about 100 B.C. Cicero (Brut,45) says that he imitated C. Titius, and praises him for acuteness of perception, as well as for an easy style. (“Homo perargutus, in fabulus quidem etiam, ut scutts, disertus.”) Horace speaks of him as an imitator of Menander. (Epist, 2, 1, 57.-Compare Cuc., de Fin., 1, 3.) Afranius himself admits, in his Computales, that he derived many even of his plots from Menander and other Greek writers. In other instances, however, he made the manners and customs of his own country the basis of his pieces. Quintilian (10, 1, 100) praises the talents of Afranius, but censures him, at the same time, for his frequent and disgusting obscenities. Of all his works, only some titles, and 266 verses remain, which are to be found in the Corpus Poetarum of Maittaire, and have also been published by Bothe and Neukirch. (Bahr, Gesch. Rom. Lat., vol. 1, p. 111.—Schöll, Hist. Lut. Rom., vol. 1, p. 139.)—II. So, a commander who had served *: Pompey, and was named by him consul, A.U.C. 694, a period when Pompey was beginning to dread the power and ambition of Caesar. A franius, however, performed nothing remarkable at this particular time, having a distaste for public affairs. Fourteen years later, when Pompey and Caesar had come to an open rupture, Afranius was in Spain, as the lieutenant of the former, along with Petreius, who held a similar appointment. Caesar entered the country at this period, and the two lieutenants, uniting their forces, awaited his approach in an advantageous position near Ilerda (the modern Leruda). Caesar was defeated in the first action, and two days afterward saw himself blockaded, as it were, in his very camp, by the sudden rise of the two rivers between which it was situate. His genius, however, triumphed over every obstacle, and he eventually compelled the two lieutenants of Pompey to submit without a second encounter. They disbanded their troops and returned to Italy, after having promised never to bear arms against Caesar for the future. Afranius, however, either sorgetful of his word, or having in some way released himself from the obligation he had assumed, took part with Pompey in the battle of Pharsalia, being intrusted with the command of the right wing, although his capitulation in Spain had laid him open to the charge of having betrayed the interests of his chief. After the battle oThapsus, Afranius and Faustus Sylla moved along the coast of Africa, with a small body of troops, in the design of passing over to Spain, and joining the remains of Pompey's party in that quarter. They were encountered, however, by Sittius, one of the partisans of Caesar, who defeated and made them prisoners. It was the intention of Sittius to have saved their lives, but they were both massacred by his soldiers. (Cas., Bell. Cir., 1, 38.-Cuc., ep. ad Att., 1, 18–Plut. Wit. Pomp.—Sueton., Wu. Caes., 34.—Florus, 4, 2.)—III. Potitus, a plebeian, in the reign of Caligula, who, in a spirit of foolish flattery, bound himself by an oath that he would depart from existence in case the emperor recovered from a dangerous malady under which he was labouring. Caligula was restored to health, and Potitus compelled to fulfil his oath. (Dio Cass., 59, 8.—Compare the remarks of Reimar, ad loc., on the belief prevalent throughout the ancient world that the \ife P an individual could be prolonged if another would lay down his own in its stead.) Africa, one of the main divisions of the ancient world, known to history for upward of three thousand years; yet, notwithstanding its ancient celebrity, and notwithstanding its vicinity to Europe, still in a great measure eluding the examination of science. Modern observation and discoveries make it to be a vast peninsula, 5000 miles in length, and almost 4600 in breadth, presenting in an area of nearly 13,430,000 square miles, 70

few long or easily-navigated rivers—The Greeks would seem to have been acquainted, from a very early period, with the Mediterranean coast of this country, since every brisk north wind would carry their vessels to its shores. Hence we find Homer already evincing a knowledge of this portion of the continent. (Od., 4, 84.) A tawny-coloured population roamed. along this extensive region, to whom the name of Libyans (Aíðvec) was given by the Greeks, a corruption, probably, of some native term ; while the country occupied by them was denominated Libya (; Autom). To this same coast belonged, in strictness, the lower portion of Egypt; but the name of this latter region had reached the Greeks as early as, if not earlier than, that of Libya, and the two therefore remained always disunited. Egypt, in consequence, was regarded as a separate country, until the now firmly-established idea of three continents superinduced the necessity of attaching it to one of the three. By some, therefore, it was considered as a part of Asia, while others made the Nile the dividing limit, and assigned part of Libya to Egypt, while the portion east of the Nile was made to belong to the Asiatic continent. As regarded the extent of Libya inland, but little was at that time known. Popular belief made the African continent of small dimensions, and supposed it to be washed on the south by the great river Oceanus, which encircled also the whole of what was then supposed to be the flat and circular disk of the earth. In this state, or very nearly so, Herodotus found the geographical knowledge and opinions of his contemporaries. The historian opposes many of the speculations of the day on this o (4.36, seqq.); he rejects the earth-encompassing Oceanus, as well as the idea that the earth was round as if made by a machine. He condemns also the division into Europe, Asia, and Africa, on account of the great disproportion of these regions. Compelled, however, to acquiesce in the more prevalent opinions of the day, he recognises Libya as distinct from Egypt, or, more properly speaking, makes the Nile the dividing line, though, from his own private conviction, it is easy to perceive that he himself takes for the eastern limit of Africa what is regarded as such at the present day. None of the later geographers, down to the time of Ptolemy, appear to have disturbed this arrangement. Eratosthenes, Timosthenes, and Artemidorus, all adopt it; Strabo also does the same, though he considers the Arabian Gulf, with the isthmus to the north, as af. fording the far more natural boundary on the east. As Alexandrea, however, was built to the west of the mouths of the Nile, the canal which led off to this city was regarded as a part of the eastern boundary of the continent, and hence we find the city belonging on one side to Libya, and on the other to Asia. (Hierocles, Bellum Alexandr., c. 14.) The Romans, as in most of their other geographical views, followed here also the usages of the Greeks, and hence Mela (1, 1) remarks, “Quod terrarum jacct a /reto ad Nilum, Af. rtcam rocamus.” As, however, in their subdivisions of territory, the district of Marmarica was added to the government of Africa, they began gradually to contract the limits of Libya, and to consider the Catabathmus Magnus as the dividing point. Hence we find the same Mela remarking (1, 8), “Calabathmus, rallis derera in AEgyptum, finit Africam.” In consequence of this new arrangement, Egypt on both sides of the Nile began to be reckoned a part of the continent of Asia. (“AEgyptus Asia prima pars, inter Catabath. mum et Arabas.”—Mela, 1, 9.) Ptolemy laid aside, in his day, all these arbitrary points of separation, and, assuming the Arabian Gulf as the true and natural dividing line on the east, made Egypt a part of Africa. and added to the same continent the whole western coast of the same gulf, which had before been regarded as an appendage of Arabia. (Mannert, 10, pt. 2, p. 1, seqq.):-The name of Africa seems to have been originally applied by the Romans to the country around Carthage, the first part of the continent with which they became acquainted, and the appellation is said to have been derived from a small Carthaginian district on the northern coast, called Frugi. (Rutter, Erdkunde, 1, p. 955, 2d ed.) Hence, even when the name had become applied to the whole continent, there still renuained, in Roman geography, the district of Africa Proper, on the Mediterranean coast, corresponding to the modern kingdom of Tunis, with part of that of Tripol. The term Libya, on the other hand, though used by the Greeks to designate the entire country, became limited with the Romans to a part merely; and thus we have with the latter, the region of Libya, extending along the coast from the Greater Syrtis to Egypt, and stretching inland to the deserts.-The knowledge which Herodotus possessed of this continent was far from extensive. He considered Africa as terminating north of the equinoctial line; and, even in these narrow limits, Egypt alone, ranking it as a part of Africa in fact, is clearly described. If we exclude Egypt, the acquaintance possessed by the historian relative to the other parts of the continent, and which is founded on the information imparted by others, follows merely three lines of direction: one proceeds along the Nile, and reaches probably the limit of modern discoveries in that quarter; another, leaving the temple and Oasis of Ammon, loses itself in the great desert; while a third advances along the Mediterranean coast as far as the environs of Carthage. (Malte-Brun, 1, p. 26, Brussels ed.) The natives of Africa are divided by Herodotus into two races, the Africans, or, to adopt the Greek phraseology, Libyans, and the AEthiopians; one possessing the northern, the other the southern W. (4, 197). By these appear to be meant the Moors, and the Negroes, or the darker-coloured nations of the interior. The common boundary of the Africans and AEthiopians in ancient times may be placed at the southern border of the Great Desert. Hanno sound the AEthiopians in possession of the western coast, about the parallel of 19°; and Pliny (5, 31) places them at five journeys beyond Cerne. At present the negroes are not found higher up than the Senegal river, or about 17°, and that only in the inland parts. (Rennell, Geography of Herodotus, p. 427, seqq.) Nothing, however, can be more indeterminate than the terms AEthiopia and AEthiopian; and it is certain that many distinct races were included under the latter denomination. (Vid. AEthiopia.) The whole of Africa, except where it is joined to Asia, was known by the ancients in general to be surrounded by the sea; but of its general figure and extension towards the south they had no accurate knowledge. There is strong reason, however, to believe, that, at an era anterior to the earliest records of history, the circumnavigation of Af. rica was accomplished by the Phoenicians in the service of Necho, king of Egypt. Herodotus, to whom we are indebted for the knowledge of this interesting fact, speaking of the peninsular figure of the continent of Africa, says (4, 42): “This discovery was first made by Necho, king of Egypt, as far as we are able to judge. When he had desisted from opening the canal that leads from the Nile to the Arabian Gulf, he sent certain Phoenicians in ships, with orders to pass by the Columns of Hercules into the sea that lies to the north of Africa, and then to return to Egypt. These Phoenicians thereupon set sail from the Red Sea, and entered into the Southern Ocean. On the approach of autumn, they landed in Africa, and planted some grain in the quarter to which they had come: when this was ripe and they had cut it down, they put to sea again. Ho: spent two years in this way, they in the third passed the Columns of Hercules, and returned to Egypt. Their relation may obtain credit from others. but to me it seems impossible to be believed; for they affirmed, that, as they sailed around

the coast of Africa, they had the sun on their right hand.” Thereport which Herodotus thought so strange as to throw discredit on the whole narrative, namely, that in passing round Africa the navigators had the sun to the right, affords to us, as has been well re. marked, the strongest presumption in favour of its truth, since this never could have been imagined in an age when astronomy was yet in its infancy. The Phoenicians must of course have had the sun on their right after having passed the line. (Larcher, ad Herod., l.c.— vol. 3, p. 458.-Compare Rennell, Geography of He, rodotus, p. 718.) Many writers, however, have laboured to prove that the voyage, in all probability, never took place; that the time in which it is said to have been performed was too short for such an enterprise at that early day; in a word, that the undertaking was altogether beyond any means which navigation at that era could command. (Gossellin, Recherches, &c., vol. 1, p. 199, seqq. Mannert, 1, p. 21, seqq. Malte-Brun, 1, p. 30.) But the learned arguments of Rennell impart to the tradition a strong aspect of probability. (Rennell, Geography of Herodotus, p. 672, seqq. Compare Larcher, ad Herod, l.c., vol. 3, p. 458, seqq. Murray, Account of Discoveries in Africa, 1, p. 10, seqq.) The date of this first circumnavigation of Africa is supposed to be about 600 B.C. In that rude stage of the art of navigation, however, the knowledge of a passage by the Southern Ocean was as unavailable for any mercantile or practical purposes, as the discovery of a northwest passage in modern days. The precarious and tardy nature of the voyage, as well as the great expense attending it, would necessarily preclude its being made the channel of a regular commerce; nor was there any sufficient inducement for repeating the attempt, as the articles of merchandise most in request were to be had much nearer home. Exaggerated representations, moreover, of the frightful coast, and of the stormy and boundless ocean into which it projected, would naturally concur in intimidating future adventurers. Accordingly, we are informed by Herodotus (4,43), that Sataspes, a Persian nobleman, who was condemned by Xerxes to be impaled, had his sentence commuted for the task of sailing round the African continent. He made the attempt from the west, passing the Columns of Hercules, and sailing southward along the western coast for several months; till baffled probably by the adverse winds and currents, or finding himself carried out into an immense and apparently boundless sea, he in despair abandoned the enterprise as impracticable, and returned by the way of the Straits to Egypt; upon which the monarch ordered the original sentence to be executed upon him. These attempts to circumravigate Africa were made under the direction of the most powerful monarchs of the age; the next was undertaken by a private adventurer. We are informed by Strabo (98), who cites Posidonius as his authority, that a certain Eudoxus, a native of Cyzicus, having been deputed by his fellow-citizens to convey their solemn offering to the Isthmian celebration at Corinth, went, after having executed this commission, to Egypt, and had several conferences with the reigning monarch, Euergetes II., and also with his ministers, respecting various topics, but particularly concerning the navigation of the Nile in the upper part of its course. This man was an enthusiastin topographical researches, and not wanting in erudition. It happened that, about this same time, the guard-vessels on the coast of the Arabian Gulf picked up an Indian, whom they found alone in a bark and half dead. He was brought to the king; but no one understanding his language, the monarch ordered him to be instructed in Greek; and when ho could speak the tongue, the Indian stated that, having set sail from the coast of India, he had lost his way, and had'seen all his companions perish through famine.

He promised, if the king would send him back, to show the way to India to those whom the monarch should charge with this commission. Euergetes assented, and Eudoxus was one of those directed to go on this errand. He sailed with a cargo of various articles calculated for presents, and brought back in exchange aromatics and precious stones. He was disappointed, however, in the expectations of profit which he had entertained, since the king appropriated all the returncargo to himself. After the death of Euergetes, Cleopatra, his widow, assumed the reins of government, and sent Eudoxus on a second voyage to India with a richer supply of merchandise than before. On his return, he was carried by the winds to the coast of AEthiopia, where, landing at several points, he conciliated the natives by distributing among them corn, wine, and dried figs, things of which until then they had been ignorant. He received in exchange water and guides. He noted down also some words of their language; and found, moreover, in this quarter, the extremity of a ship's prow, carved in the shape of a horse's head. This fragment, he was told, had belonged to a shipwrecked vessel that came from the west. i. reached Egypt, he sound the son of Cleopatra on the throne, and he was again despoiled of the fruits of his voyage, being charged with having converted many things to his own use. As regards the fragment of the shipwrecked vessel brought home with him, he exposed it in the marketplace for the examination of pilots and masters of vessels, who informed him that it must have belonged to a ship from Gades (Cadiz). The grounds of their belief were as follows: the traders of Gades, according to them, had large vessels; but the less wealthy, smaller ones, which they called horses, from the ornament on their prows, and which they used in fishing along the coasts of Mauritania as far as the river Lixus. Some shipmasters even recognized the fragment as having belonged to a certain vessel of this class, which, with many others, had attempted to advance beyond the Lixus, and had never after been heard of From these statements Eudoxus conceived the possibility of circumnavigating Africa. He returned home, disposed of all his effects, and put to sea again with the money thus obtained, intending to attempt the enterprise in question. Having visited Dicearchia, Massilia, and other commercial cities, he everywhere announced his project, and collected funds and adventurers. He was at length enabled to equip one large and two small vessels, well-stored with provisions and merchandise, manned chiefly by volunteers, and carrying, moreover, a pompous train of artisans, physicians, and young slaves skilled in music. Having set sail, he was carried on his way at first by favourable breezes from the west. The crews, however, became fatigued, and he was compelled, though reluctantly, to keep nearer the shore, and soon experienced the disaster which he had dreaded, his ship grounding on a sandbank. As the vessel did not immediately go to pieces, he was enabled to save the cargo and great part of her timbers. With the latter he constructed another vessel of the size of one of fifty oars. Resuming his route, he came to a part inhabited by nations who spoke the same language, as he thought, with those on the eastern coast whom he had visited in his second voyage from India, and of whose tongue he had noted down some words. Hence he inferred that these were a part of the great Æthiopian race. The smallness of his vessels, however, induced him at length to return, and he remarked on his way back a deserted island, well supplied with wood and water. Having reached Mauritania, he sold his vessels and repaired to the court of Bocchus, and advised the king to send out a fleet of discovery along the coast of Africa. The monarch's friends, however, inspired him with the fear that his kingdom might, in this way, become gradually exposed to the visits and incursions of strangers. He made fair promisès, therefore, to Eudoxus, but secretly intended to have him

[ocr errors]

left on some desert island; and the latter, having dis. covered this, escaped into the Roman province, and thence passed over into Spain. Here he constructed two vessels, one intended to keep near the coast, the other to sail in deep water; and, having taken on board agricultural implements, various kinds of grain, and skilful artificers, he set sail on a second voyage, resolving, if the navigation became too long, to winter in the island which he had previously discovered. At this point, unfortunately, the narrative of Posidonius, as detailed by Strabo, stops short, leaving us totally in the dark as to the result. Pomponius Mela (3, 9, iO) tells us, on the alleged authority of Cornelius Nepos, that Eudoxus actually made the circuit of Africa, adding some particulars of the most fabulous description respecting the nations whom he saw. But no dependance can be placed on this doubtful authority; whereas the narrative of Posidonius bears every mark of authenticity. (Compare Murray, 1, p. 13, seqq., and Malte-Brun, 1, p. 68, where the voyage of Eudoxus is defended against the remarks of Gossellin in his Recherches, &c., 1, p. 217, seqq) These are the only instances on record in which the circumnavigation of Africa was either performed or attempted by the ancients. Other voyages were, however, undertaken with a view to the exploration of certain parts of its unknown coasts. The most memorable is that performed along the western coast by Hanno, about 570 years before the Christian era. The Carthaginians fitted out this expedition with a view partly to colonization and partly to discovery. The armament consisted of sixty ships, of fifty oars each, on board of which were embarked persons of both sexes to the number of 30,000. After two days' sail from the Columns of Hercules, they founded, in the midst of an extensive plain, the city of Thymiaterium. In two days more they came to a wooded promontory, and, after sailing round a bay, founded successively four other cities. They then passed the mouth of a great river, called the Lixus, flowing from lofty mountains inhabited by inhospitable AEthiopians, who lived in caves. Thence they proceeded for three days along a desert coast to a small island, to which they gave the name of Cerne, and where they founded another colony; and afterward sailed southward along the coast, till their farther progress was arrested by the failure of provisions. (Hann. Peripl., in Geogr. Gr. Min., ed. Gail, 1, p. 113, seqq.) With regard to the extent of coast actually explored by this expedition, the brief and indistinct narrative affords ample room for learned speculation and controversy. According to Rennell (Geogr. of Herod., p. 719, seqq), the island of Cerne is the modern Argunn, the Lixus is the Senegal, and the voyage extended a little beyond Sierra Leone. M. Gossellin, on the other hand (Recherches, &c., 1, p. 61, seqq), contends that the whole course was along the coast of Mauritania; that the Lixus was the modern Lucos, Cerne was Fedala, and the voyage extended little beyond Cape

un. Malte-Brun (1, p. 33, Brussels ed.) carries Hanno as far as the bays called the Gulf dos Medamos, and the Gulf of Gonzalo de Cuntra, on the shore of the desert: and he is induced to assume this distance, in some degree, from the fact of Himilco, another Carthaginian, having advanced in the same direction as far to the north as the coasts of Britain, a voyage much longer and more perilous than that said to have been performed by Hanno along the African coast. (Plin., 7, 67. — Fest. Armen. Ora Maru., v. 80, seqq.) A translation of the Periplus, however, will be found under the article Hanno, from which the student may draw his own conclusions.—At a much later period this part of the coast excited the curiosity of the Roman conquerors. Polybius, the celebrated historian, was sent out by Scipio on an exploratory voyage in the same direction; but, from the meager account preserved by Pliny, M. Gossellin infers that he did not

« PoprzedniaDalej »