XIII. CONCLUSION

XIII. CONCLUSION

It now remains for us to give a brief résumé of the outstanding elements which constituted the geographical lore of the time of the Crusades and to draw a few generalizations from the mass of details that have been set forth in the foregoing pages.

THE OUTSTANDING ELEMENTS OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE TIME OF THE CRUSADES

The dangers of attempting to condense the geographical thought of a century and a half into the compass of a few pages are manifest, and yet some of the more significant ideas may perhaps be presented without running an undue risk of over-simplification.

According to the orthodox view of the ecclesiastics, the world was created by an arbitrary act of God at a certain definite point of time. Under the influence of classical thought, writers of the Chartres group of the early twelfth century worked out theories of the Creation according to which, though the initiative was attributed to God’s act, the actual Works of the Six Days were ascribed to the unfolding of physical processes governed by the laws of nature. Such theories did not meet with general acceptance, though they were never wholly lost sight of. The ancient belief in an eternally existent, periodically re-formed universe was not given credence, though it was well known to the readers of the period with which we are concerned through classical works in their libraries and through translations from the Arabic.

It was probably the opinion of most scholars that the universe is a sphere in which the four elements are arranged concentrically. Furthermore, nearly all scholars argued that the earth likewise is a sphere and that they were acquainted with convincing proofs of this. Standing immobile in the center of the universe, the earth was usually supposed to be a small body in proportion to the entire cosmos. The surface of our globe was divided into five zones, two temperate, two polar—uninhabitable on account of the intense cold—and an equatorial zone, uninhabitable by reason of heat. The habitability of the equatorial zone, however, was affirmed by a few writers conversant with Arabic literature.

There was a great deal of speculation regarding the characteristics of those parts of the world which lay beyond the oikoumene, or quarter of the globe known to Europeans. The theories of Macrobius and of Martianus Capella, who had divided the earth’s surface into four equal parts by two encircling bands of ocean, strongly influenced the thought of many. Macrobius and Martianus Capella had also believed that all of these quarters of the earth were inhabited but that three of them were unknown to members of our human race, who could not visit them owing to the heat of the equatorial zone and the terrors of the ocean. Though this theory could not be reconciled with Christian teachings and was strongly controverted, it nevertheless persisted, and many of the writers of the Crusading age undoubtedly shared it.

Something was known of the atmosphere. William of Conches wrote of its decreased density and temperature with increased altitude. Rainfall was explained as the result of many causes, among them evaporation of sea water and condensation of water vapor in the air, and topographic influences on rainfall were recognized by Giraldus Cambrensis. The winds, defined as air in motion, were also occasionally ascribed to the influence of topography. William of Conches worked out an elaborate theory of a general circulation of the atmosphere produced by the circulation of ocean currents. The impressions made upon men by the climatic conditions of various parts of the earth found expression in many passages. The cold of the North was contrasted with the heat of the South, and Giraldus Cambrensis gives a colorful comparison of the damp climate of Ireland with the noxious dryness of the East.

The aqueous element was supposed to be divided into two parts, the waters above and the waters below the firmament. Theodoric of Chartres and William of Conches tried to explain the waters above the firmament on rational grounds; others were inclined to take the Biblical assertions absolutely literally. The waters below the firmament were believed to form one unit or congregation of waters, and an unceasing circulation was thought to be maintained from the seas and oceans through subterranean channels and cavities of the earth to the sources of streams. As to the seas themselves, many ingenious explanations were brought forward to account for their salinity. It was understood that the tides are caused by the moon, though subsidiary causes, such as whirlpools and ocean currents, were also adduced to explain them. The most interesting tidal studies of the period, made by Giraldus Cambrensis on the shores of the Irish Sea and Bristol Channel, were undoubtedly the results of careful synchronous observations of the times of high and low water in different localities. Something of the spirit of the North Atlantic is conveyed through the pages of the legend of St. Brandan. Of the waters of the lands, rainfall was not usually thought sufficient to account for the flow of rivers, which were supposed to be fed by underground channels from the seas. Springs, wells, and fountains attracted much attention, and many are the marvels related about them in the literature of the age. Giraldus Cambrensis describes marvelous lakes in Ireland, and strange tales were told of lakes of Italy, Spain, and elsewhere, which, together with the Dead Sea and volcanic craters, were objects of fear, because some men believed them to be ways of ingress to the infernal regions.

The lands of the earth’s surface were classified in various manners. The author of the De imagine mundi mentions no less than six types of land surface. Different regions were supposed to have different effects on life: Ireland was thought to be remarkably healthful, and its earth to have the property of destroying venomous reptiles; the East, Giraldus Cambrensis would have us believe, is a fountain of poisons. Many medieval writers had an eye for the spiritual and esthetic beauties of landscape, and picturesque descriptions of rich cultivated scenes are not rare. It is doubtful, however, to what extent the grandeur of wild nature and of mountains was appreciated. The great majority of men certainly regarded mountains as grim and horrible. Mountain climbing was not indulged in for pleasure, though we have an account of an ascent of Etna in the Image du monde. On the other hand, there date from this age several extremely vivid descriptions of the hardships encountered during journeys over the Alps, one of which was made in midwinter. Alfred of Sareshel gives in a translation from the Arabic a clear account of geologic processes by which mountains were formed. Volcanoes impressed the men of the Middle Ages. The volcanic regions of southern Italy and Sicily and of Iceland are frequently described, and St. Brandan’s legend contains what can be nothing else than an account of a volcanic isle. Fiery mountains were associated in the popular mind with entrances to Hell. Scientific investigators usually attributed their fires to burning beds of sulphur and bitumen within the mountains or else to the outbursting of imprisoned winds. To the action of winds in subterranean caverns classical authorities had ascribed the cause of earthquakes, and this view was accepted throughout the Middle Ages. Other features of the land that attracted attention were the deserts of the East, vividly described by the historians of the Crusades and in the Letter of Prester John, and the fabulous islands of the sea, especially of the unknown Atlantic. Some peculiarities of the movement of ice in glaciers were noted by Saxo Grammaticus.

The influence of geographical environment on animals and on man was sometimes commented upon. Bernard Sylvester emphasizes the control of terrain over plant and animal life. Giraldus Cambrensis attributes the independence and audacity of the Welsh to the rugged character of their country. A fatalistic idea is expressed in the writings of Hugh of St. Victor and of Otto of Freising, to the effect that the course of science, empire, and civilization proceeds with the heavenly bodies across the surface of the earth from east to west and that, as it has reached the uttermost confines of the West, the power of the kingdom of the Franks is soon destined to disappear.

Within the field of astronomical geography several methods were known whereby latitudes may be determined, and also the use of observations of eclipses for ascertaining longitude was understood. Figures indicating the positions of points in many parts of the known world had been introduced to Western knowledge through the Moslems. It seems likely, furthermore, that not only were the Arabic figures borrowed by the astrological writers of our age but also that a new series of observations was made by which the latitudes as well as the longitudes of several stations in Western Europe were found with no small degree of accuracy. These figures, however, were intended to serve as aids for astrologers and astronomers in making their calculations, and we have no evidence that they were put to geographical use.

The cartography shows little originality. It was in no way corrected or checked up with reference to astronomical observations. Most of the maps were based on earlier models, and it is perhaps possible to trace their origins back to maps of the Roman Empire. Cartographic accuracy was not the aim of the map maker of the time, and we are not justified in criticizing his maps in the light of modern standards. They should be regarded rather as diagrammatic approximations. A number of conventions were followed, the most important of which was the representation of the east at the top. The maps were vividly colored; and mountains, rivers, and the works of man were shown by pictorial symbols.

We may conceive of the regional geographic knowledge of the age as comprised within two concentric circles: a very broad outer circle, which includes all those lands of which knowledge had been derived at second hand through literary sources; and a smaller inner circle including those lands which were known at first hand through actual travel.

The outer circle took in to the east the land of the Seres, or China, and the lost Atlantis to the west; to the north the regions of the Hyperboreans and the semi-mythical Rhipaean Mountains; and to the south the Mons Climax of Ptolemy and the mysterious upper reaches of the Nile. Nearly all that lies between the two circles was a vague region of fancy and fable, though ideas that were more or less correct prevailed about some parts of Western Asia, familiar ground to the men of ancient Greece and Rome.

The inner circle included on the east the shores of the Black Sea and the Holy Land; on the south, the Mediterranean fringe of Africa; westward it was bounded by the Atlantic coast; north-westward, warped somewhat out of shape, it enclosed Iceland and even the icy coasts of Greenland. To the north, it ran through Scandinavia and the Baltic. Within these bounds there were many gaps that were still utterly unknown; but, in general, politics, pilgrimage, war, and commerce had familiarized the men of the West with most parts of this tract. It seems a small area indeed compared with what is now known of the world’s surface and small even compared with what Ptolemy and earlier Greeks had known. Only in the age that immediately follows ours was the circle enlarged, at first to the eastward by the great overland journeys of Marco Polo and the other Asiatic travelers of the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and then westward, southward, and northward during the Age of Discovery. Not until our own day has it at last come to comprise the entire earth.

CHARACTER OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE TIME OF THE CRUSADES

Men have always respected tradition and learning inherited from former ages, but in some periods dependence on earlier authority has been more unquestioning than in others. In the Middle Ages, especially, an immense mass of knowledge and belief was handed down from generation to generation.

A portion of this inherited mass of knowledge and belief constituted the recognized and orthodox geographical lore of the Crusading age. This body of teachings—to be sure, not altogether uniform or consistent—had been built largely on a foundation of Biblical and classical doctrine. The early Church Fathers, taking the Bible as their authority, had leveled destructive criticism against those ideas of the Greeks and Romans which appeared to go counter to Scriptural texts, but in the course of time reconciliation of ancient science with Christianity was partly achieved and, as a consequence, the accepted scientific lore of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries was only to a limited extent drawn from a literal interpretation of the Bible. Nevertheless, those theories of antiquity that were too diametrically hostile to the words of Scripture still remained tabooed, and, when Manegold, Peter Lombard, or Peter Comestor inveighed against belief in hyle, the Great Year, or the antipodes, they were merely echoing the arguments of their early Christian predecessors. Classical learning and Christian doctrine were sufficiently at one by the opening of the twelfth century to make it no longer heretical to believe in the sphericity of the earth, in the existence of antipodal regions (if not inhabitants), and in a physical explanation of many geographical processes that an earlier age might have ascribed to the direct intervention of the divine will.

The works of our period show all too plainly that they were written in a credulous age, for credulity is an inevitable concomitant of the undue respect for authority. Credulity and love of the marvelous—which is much the same thing—are in many ways the most characteristic and entertaining qualities of the geographical writers of the Middle Ages. Marvels of all kinds, located in all countries, are solemnly described as if they were truth. India, especially, was the scene of fabulous monsters and prodigies; but no country, no matter how well known, was wholly without them. Even the most serious writers mention them, and they enliven all the maps.

In contrast with this geography based on authority and tradition stood another great body of geographical lore derived not from books or tradition but from observation by eyewitnesses of the countries of the earth and the physical features of its surface. We may style this second body of geographical lore the “geography of observation.” It is represented almost universally in the literature of the period, for no writer was so completely immersed in the learning of the past that he failed altogether to respond to the world of his day. Even in the most learned works there are occasional passages drawn from contemporary observation; but it is especially in histories, chronicles, letters, and other less formal writings that the “geography of observation” finds unhampered expression. The latter are among the most illuminating documents of the age, for they reveal to us those things which above all interested the average man in the material world around him.

Measured by modern standards, this “geography of observation” is the only kind of geography that rests on a sound and scientific footing. Modern science rejects theories, however old and hallowed they may be, which cannot stand the test of an appeal to Nature herself. Precisely the opposite seems to have been the normal intellectual habit of the Middle Ages, when the prevailing tendency was if anything to put aside the evidence of Nature when contradicted by the classics, by the Church Fathers, or especially by the Bible. Logical impossibility or rational improbability did not usually bear much weight against a belief that had been approved by time.

And yet there were in the age of the Crusades numerous exceptions to this general rule. Never has there been a time when a few fore-reaching and individualistic spirits have not tried to search and see and think for themselves, to confront older teachings with new, to criticize established beliefs in the light of observed facts and reason. In the ardent, enthusiastic society of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries there was no lack of such spirits. Among the writers on geographical subjects we need but recall the names of the scholars of Chartres: Theodoric, who undertook to explain the Creation according to physical principles and specifically excluded from his discussion all moral and allegorical interpretations of the text of Genesis; or William of Conches, who argued that we may avoid irrational deductions from Scripture by an appeal to our own reason and who maintained that the animals of the earth and also Adam and Eve were produced through the interaction of the elements of fire, earth, air, and water. And this critical, inventive attitude reappears in the thirteenth century in the work of such men as Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, and even Albertus Magnus.

We gain a deeper and more sympathetic understanding of the devious workings of the human mind when we trace in the geographical lore of the Middle Ages the persistence of old ideas and the transfer of prejudices and beliefs from age to age; but at best this is a disheartening study. On the other hand, there is always fascination in coming across oases of fresh observation and clear reason in the midst of the arid deserts of plagiarism that constitute so much of medieval literature. These oases mark the pathway of the history of science.

NOTES

NOTES

The numbers at the top of the inner margin of each page indicate on which pages of the text (pp. 1–361) the passages occur to which the notes on a given page refer.

For the works here cited in abbreviated form refer to the Bibliography. Works not listed in the Bibliography (these are relatively few) are here given with their full titles.

As a rule a work will be found in the Bibliography under its own author or, if anonymous, its own title. If not, the entry under which it will be found is generally here indicated. In the few cases where it is not the work should be looked for under the ancient or medieval author or title to which the work sought for relates.

Bible references and quotations throughout the present work, except where otherwise indicated, are based on the Douay and Rheims translation of the Vulgate.

NOTES CHAPTER I THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE ANCIENT WORLD

Footnote 2:

The De caelo et mundo should not be confused with the De mundo (Περὶ κόσμου), a spurious work ascribed to Aristotle and dating from about 100 B. C. See preface to E. S. Forster’s translation of the De mundo in the Oxford translation of the works of Aristotle, vol. iii, 1914.

Footnote 3:

On the geography of Posidonius see below, p. 371, note 55, and also the two important recent studies: Wilhelm Capelle, Die griechische Erdkunde und Posidonius, in: Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Altertum, Jahrgang 23, vol. liv, Leipzig, 1920, pp. 305–323, and Karl Reinhardt, Poseidonios, Munich, 1921, especially pp. 59–135 for the geography and pp. 135–176 for the meteorology.

Footnote 4:

For a brief general outline of the main trend of Greek geography see Berger, Geschichte, 1903, Überblick, pp. 1–24. See also Bunbury, Ancient Geogr., 1879; Tozer, Ancient Geogr., 1897; Tillinghast, Geogr. Knowl., 1889. An extensive recent treatment of ancient geography has come to the attention of the writer as this book is going to press: Gisinger’s article “Geographie” in Paulys Real-Encyclopädie, 1924. This contains many references to secondary works; it is particularly valuable as a synthesis of recent German research in the field.

Footnote 5:

That Pliny’s Natural History was extensively read in the Middle Ages is proved by the large number of times its title appears in medieval library catalogues. For example, in twelfth-century French catalogues alone it occurs in no less than six different places; in German catalogues in five different places before the twelfth century. Though at first glance these figures do not appear large, when compared with similar figures for the works of other writers they show that, relatively speaking, Pliny was very popular. We are also confirmed in this opinion by the frequency of citations of Pliny (M. Manitius, Philologisches, 1892, pp. 59–60; idem, Römische Prosaiker, 1890, pp. 380–384). Furthermore, we have in manuscripts dating from the eighth century and onward a series of excerpts from Books II, III, IV, VI, and XVIII of the Natural History. These contain the outstanding geographical elements of Pliny’s work and attest to its great popularity (see Rück, Auszüge, 1888; idem, Exzerpt, 1902; idem, Naturalis Historia, 1898, pp. 203–318). On p. 287 of the Exzerpt Rück writes that the existence of these excerpts forms “a weighty literary-historical proof of the continued life of Pliny in later centuries.”

Footnote 6:

The Collectanea is mentioned in France in one catalogue from before the twelfth century, in five from the twelfth, and in four from the thirteenth. In Germany it is mentioned in six catalogues from before the twelfth century, in four from the twelfth, and in two from the thirteenth. It is also mentioned in catalogues of British and Italian libraries. Its popularity was equal to that of Pliny and was perhaps even greater (see M. Manitius, Philologisches, pp. 78–79).

Footnote 7:

Columba (Questione soliniana, 1920) holds that the materials in Solinus’ Collectanea came in large part from a common source of Pliny’s Natural History and Pomponius Mela’s Corographia. This was a lost work which Columba styles Corographia Varro-Sallustiana. It was worked over (according to his theory) by an unknown compiler and reduced by Solinus into the form of a compendium, with borrowings here and there direct from Pliny. See note on Columba’s monograph in Bollettino della Reale Società Geografica Italiana, vol. lviii, Rome, 1921, p. 44.

Footnote 8:

Seneca’s popularity as shown by the library catalogues was less than that of Pliny, though the Quaestiones naturales were read rather extensively in France in the twelfth century (M. Manitius, Philologisches, p. 42; idem, Geschichte, 1911, vol. i, p. 38).

Footnote 9:

Capella merely followed the Latin tradition, which tended to restrict the field of geography and at the same time to limit the science of geometry to the art of measurements. The De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii served to pass on to the Middle Ages this attitude in regard to geography and geometry (Mori, Misuraz. eratos., 1911, pp. 186–187; see also Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 89).

Footnote 10:

M. Manitius, Philologisches, p. 112, informs us that, next to Virgil and the Vulgate, the De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii was the most popular book of the Middle Ages. References to copies of it are found in nearly all medieval library catalogues. See also Mori, Misuraz. eratos., pp. 388–391.

Footnote 11:

Macrobius seems to have come next to Martianus Capella in popularity, particularly in the twelfth century, when his book finds mention more than a dozen times in the catalogues of both French and German libraries of the period. It was also read in Italy, Spain, and Great Britain. In the latter country there are five entries from the early thirteenth century (M. Manitius, Philologisches, p. 106).

Footnote 12:

Aristotle, De caelo, I, 3; Duhem, Système, vol. i, 1913, p. 173.

Footnote 13:

Aristotle, Meteor., I, 2; Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, p. 164.

Footnote 14:

These ideas are developed in Plato’s Timaeus and in Aristotle’s De generatione et corruptione, II, 11. See Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 164–169.

Footnote 15:

Berosus in the third century before Christ described Chaldean theories regarding the Great Year (Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, p. 69).

Footnote 16:

ibid., vol. i, pp. 70–71.

Footnote 17:

Notably Philolaus (ibid., vol. i, p. 77).

Footnote 18:

Seneca, Quaest. nat., III, 28–29; Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, p. 70.

Footnote 19:

For example, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Empedocles (Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 70–71, 167).

Footnote 20:

Aristotle, De caelo, I, 10; Meteor., I, 14, as interpreted by Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 167–168.

Footnote 21:

Günther, Apokatastasis, 1916, p. 85.

Footnote 22:

See E. S. McCartney, Fossil Lore in Greek and Latin Literature, in: Proceedings of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, vol. iii, New York, 1924, pp. 23–38, especially pp. 37–38.

Footnote 23:

Aristotle, Meteor., I, 14; Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, p. 167. In the important paper cited in note 20 above, Günther traces the development in antiquity and during the Middle Ages of (1) theories of astronomical periods and (2) theories of the apokatastasis, or restoration of the earth to its previous condition after destruction by fire or by water. He shows that the ancient and medieval philosophers conceived of a complete parallelism between these two sets of phenomena. It is, however, difficult to follow his argument that they failed to recognize any causal relation whatsoever between the astronomical periods and the apokatastasis, although it is doubtless true that no attempt was made to explain in detail the manner in which celestial circumstances operated to produce effects upon the earth.

Footnote 24:

See Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 65–85, 275–297.

Footnote 25:

Cumont, After Life, 1922, pp. 12–13.

Footnote 26:

Al-Masʿūdī and Al-Bīrūnī describe the theory as it prevailed in India (Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 67–69; vol. ii, pp. 213–220).

Footnote 27:

Plato gives a formula from which it has been deduced that he believed the duration of the Great Year to be 760,000 terrestrial years. Aristotle explained that the figure could be found by determining the least common multiple of the periods of revolution of the various celestial bodies. Cicero calculated it at 12,954, and Macrobius at 15,000 years. See Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 84, 165, 283, 288.

Footnote 28:

Ptolemy describes Hipparchus’ discovery of the precession of the equinoxes in the Almagest, VII, 2–3 (as cited by Duhem, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 180–185).

Footnote 29:

Almagest, VII, 2 (Duhem, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 185).

Footnote 30:

Duhem, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 212–223.

Footnote 31:

“... l’évolution de la science hellène révèle non pas l’existence de luttes perpétuelles pour ou contre la sphéricité mais au contraire un accord, en somme assez rapide, établi avant la fin du v^e siècle entre les penseurs de toutes écoles” (Thalamas, Géogr. d’Ératosthène, 1921, p. 103; see also the same, p. 99, note 3).

Footnote 32:

Berger thinks that Anaximander may well have believed in a spherical earth (Geschichte, 1903, p. 32, note 2, and p. 34); this opinion has not been accepted by recent students, who ascribe to Anaximander participation in the older doctrine of a disk-shaped earth (Stegmann, Anschauungen, 1913, pp. 14–15; Heidel, Anaximander, 1921, p. 246; Gisinger, “Geographie” in: Paulys Real-Encyclopädie, 1924, p. 543). See also below, p. 372, note 61.

Footnote 33:

Phaedo, 109. Plato thought that the universe, as well as the earth, is a sphere because the sphere is the most perfect of forms (Timaeus, 33). An obscure mathematical passage, Timaeus, 55, seems to liken the universe to a dodecahedron. See the Dialogues, Jowett’s transl., 1892, vol. iii, p. 363, and Boffito, Leggenda, 1903, p. 584.

Footnote 34:

These proofs were worked out by Aristotle in two ways (De caelo, II, 14). First he explained that physical laws require that the earth must be spherical; then he demonstrated that observation shows that it actually is a globe. Aristotle’s physics were built upon a theory that superficially has been compared with the Newtonian theory of gravitation, although fundamentally it is entirely different. A principal law of Aristotelian physics is that all heavy bodies seek the center of the universe, whereas Newton’s law is that all bodies, whether heavy or light, attract each other (see Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 210). Aristotle (De caelo, II, 4) showed by mathematical argument that water, in obedience to his physical law, will, if unhindered, become a perfect sphere, with the center of the universe as its center, and that land, though it cannot become a perfect sphere owing to its rigidity, will tend to assume such a form.

That the earth actually is a globe, the Stagirite maintained, is revealed by the circular shadow it casts upon the moon in an eclipse. Furthermore, a traveler journeying from north to south sees new constellations appear above the southern horizon and vice versa, constellations that could only be hidden from him at his starting point by the curvature of a spherical earth (Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 211–215).

Adrastias of Aphrodisias, one of the Peripatetic school, adduced proofs similar to those of Aristotle (Duhem, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 473–474), although he presented them with greater clarity. He showed by the argument of the appearance of new constellations to a traveler journeying north or south that the earth is convex from north to south. That it is also convex from east to west he proved from the observation that the same celestial body rises sooner in the eastern parts of the habitable world than it does in the western. This could be demonstrated by any eclipse of the moon: the eclipse appears at a later hour of the night and higher in the heavens to an observer in the east than it does to one in the west. As both observers see the same eclipse, it follows that the moon must in reality rise in the east before it rises farther west. If the earth were flat both observers would necessarily see the eclipse at the same hour of local time.

Footnote 35:

De motu corp. cael., I, 8 (as cited by Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 471).

Footnote 36:

Hist. nat., II, 64. Both Cleomedes and Pliny demonstrated the sphericity of the sea by noting that mountains may be seen when the lower parts of the land are invisible and that shores become visible from the masthead of a ship before persons on deck can see them. Pliny (op. cit., II, 65) had a theory to explain the sphericity of the sea that differed widely from that of Aristotle. The gist of this was that it is in the inherent nature of water to assume a spherical form. Traces of this view are to be found in the writings of Alexander Neckam in the thirteenth century. See below, p. 438, note 34.

Footnote 37:

Ptolemy, Almagest, I, 4. Ptolemy’s proofs were similar to those of Aristotle and Adrastias (see above, note 33). He neglected arguments of the physical necessity of a globular earth (Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 480).

Footnote 38:

De nupt. Phil. et Merc., VI, 590–598. Martianus Capella brought together and vigorously presented many of the arguments of his predecessors: that of Aristotle that the shadow of the earth on the moon is curved, the argument of the different appearance of the heavens in different latitudes, and the argument from the eclipses (see above, note 33).

Footnote 39:

On the heliocentric theory in antiquity see Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 399–426, and Heath, Aristarchus, 1913.

Footnote 40:

Philolaus worked out an elaborate hypothesis which placed an immobile fire, the Hearth of the Universe, the seat of divinity, in the center of the cosmic system. Around this fire revolves our earth; an anti-earth counterbalances our earth on the opposite side of the fire, but man can never see either the Hearth or the anti-earth because he dwells on the side of our earth that is always turned outward from the center. See Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 11–21. Hicetas and Ecphantus modified the system of Philolaus by doing away with the anti-earth and placing our earth in the middle of the universe, enclosing the central fire within it. They accounted for day and night by a diurnal rotation of the earth around its axis (ibid., vol. i, pp. 21–27).

Footnote 41:

Some thought in antiquity that a passage in the Timaeus, 40, shows that Plato believed that the earth rotates on its axis; but this interpretation of the passage was disputed even in classical times, and other passages in Plato’s works seem to confirm us in holding that he thought that the earth stands immobile (Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 86). It should be noted that though Plato placed the World Soul in the center of the earth and of the universe, he was also convinced that great fires exist in the earth’s interior. See above, p. 32.

Footnote 42:

Timaeus, 34. See also Lutz, Geographical Studies, 1924, pp. 166–167.

Footnote 43:

Aristotle’s abstruse reasoning about the immobility of the earth is interpreted by Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 219–230. Duhem clarifies the arguments of the Stagirite by resolving them into four main propositions:

(1) “The movement of the heavens requires the existence of an immovable body distinct from the heavens at the center of the universe” (Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 220). Why such an immovable body is necessary is explained in De caelo, I, 8, and in Physics, IV, 4 (cited by Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 198–210, 221). Later writers and commentators confused Aristotle’s views here set forth with a theory which the philosopher—if he wrote it—presents in the De motu animalium and which is, in brief, as follows. “For every animal that moves there must be without it something immovable, but supporting itself upon which that which is moved moves. For were that something always to give way (as it does for mice walking in grain, or persons walking in sand) advance would be impossible, and neither would there be any walking unless the ground were to remain still” (De motu anim., 2; translated by A. S. L. Farquharson in the Works of Aristotle, 1913, p. 698b). Although the writer of this passage expressly states that he does not intend this simple theory to be applied to the movements of the heaven in relation to the earth, it was, none the less, passed on by way of the Moslems to the West as an argument in favor of the immobility of the earth.

(2) “Physical reasons prove that it is not possible for the earth to move” with a circular motion. The normal motion of the particles which compose the earth is in a straight line toward the earth’s center. Correspondingly “the movement which is natural to each part must also be natural to the whole, in such a way that the earth taken as a whole certainly has for its natural motion that movement in a straight line and directed toward the center which characterizes heavy bodies” (Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 226). Any other movement, such as a movement of rotation, “being, then, constrained and unnatural ... could not be eternal. But the order of the universe is eternal” (De caelo, II, 14; translated by J. L. Stocks in the Works of Aristotle, 1922, p. 296a).

(3) “Experiments show that as a matter of fact the earth does not move at all.” If the earth moved “there would have to be passings and turnings of the fixed stars. Yet no such thing is observed” (De caelo, II, 14; Stocks’s translation, p. 296b). In other words, if the earth moved one would expect to observe parallaxes of the fixed stars (Duhem, Système, vol. i, p. 227). “It is clear, then, that the earth must be at the center and immovable, not only for the reasons already given, but also because heavy bodies thrown quite straight upward return to the point from which they started, even if they are thrown to an infinite distance” (De caelo, II, 14; Stocks’s translation, p. 296b).

(4) “Physics teaches us the cause of the immobility of the earth.” As all heavy bodies tend to seek the center of the universe, the various parts of the earth have arranged themselves around the center in such a manner that an equilibrium is established, and this equilibrium produces immobility (De caelo, II, 14, Stocks’s translation, p. 297a; Duhem, Système, vol. i, pp. 216, 228–229).

Footnote 44:

Hist. nat., II, 5.

Footnote 45:

Ptolemy (Almagest, I, 7) discussed the immobility of the earth in much the same manner as Plato and Aristotle. From Aristotle he derived the argument of the heavy body thrown into the air. See above, note 42, paragraph (3) and Duhem op. cit., vol. i, pp. 480–484.

Footnote 46:

De caelo, II, 14.

Footnote 47:

Hist. nat., II, 108.

Footnote 48:

De architectura, I, 6 (edited by F. Krohn, Leipzig (Teubner), 1912; English translation by M. H. Morgan, Cambridge, Mass., 1914).

Footnote 49:

De nupt. Phil. et Merc., VI, 596.

Footnote 50:

In som. Scip. comm., I, 20, 20.

Footnote 51:

De motu corp. cael., I, 10.

Footnote 52:

See Thalamas, Géogr. d’Ératosthène, 1921, pp. 162–163. Konrad Miller, Erdmessung, 1919, pp. 5–6, argued that Eratosthenes calculated the circumference at 252,000 stades, not 250,000. Even if, as Cleomedes tells us, he calculated it at 250,000 stades, it seems probable that it was Eratosthenes himself and not some later scientist who arbitrarily raised it to 252,000 in order to obtain a figure divisible by 60 or perhaps by 360.

Footnote 53:

De motu corp. cael., I, 10.

Footnote 54:

Strabo, Geogr., II, 2 (edited by A. Meineke, 3 vols., Leipzig (Teubner), 1904–1909; English translation by H. L. Jones, 2 vols., London, 1917–1923); Berger, Geschichte, 1903, pp. 579–582.

Footnote 55:

Thalamas, op. cit., p. 151.

Footnote 56:

Miller, Erdmessung, pp. 12–14. For other possible explanations of Posidonius’ figures, see Berger, op. cit., pp. 579–582, and Oscar Viedebantt, Eratosthenes, Hipparchos, Poseidonios: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Erdmessungsproblems im Altertum, in: Klio: Beiträge zur alten Geschichte, vol. xiv, Leipzig, 1914, pp. 208–256; idem, Poseidonios, Marinos, Ptolemaios: Ein weiterer Beitrag zur Geschichte des Erdmessungsproblems im Altertum, in: ibid., vol. xvi, 1920, pp. 94–108.

Footnote 57:

De motu corp. cael., I, 10. See Thalamas’ clear and reasonable discussion of Eratosthenes’ measurement, op. cit., pp. 128–164.

Footnote 58:

De nupt. Phil. et Merc., VI, 596. Capella’s account of Eratosthenes’ measurement differs slightly from that of Cleomedes (Mori, Misuraz. eratos., 1911, p. 584; Thalamas, op. cit., pp. 140–141).

Footnote 59:

Miller, op. cit., p. 7.

Footnote 60:

Thalamas, op. cit., pp. 158–159.

Footnote 61:

ibid., p. 170.

Footnote 62:

See White, Warfare, 1920, vol. i, pp. 89–90. Lutz, Geographical Studies, 1924, p. 168, holds that “the fundamental notions of the Homeric poems, of Hesiod and Aeschylus regarding the earth [a disk surrounded by an ocean stream] are Babylonian in origin.”

Footnote 63:

Thales thought that the earth was created out of water (Norlind, Problem, 1918, p. 8).

Footnote 64:

Berger, Geschichte, 1903, p. 285.

Footnote 65:

Pliny gives details of explorations which he believed had proved the existence of connections between the Caspian Sea, the Atlantic, and the Indian Ocean (Hist. nat., II, 167).

Footnote 66:

Probably the best treatment of the history of theories of the antipodes is to be found in Rainaud, Le continent austral, 1893.

Footnote 67:

Meteor., II, 5. Pliny also thought that the polar and equatorial regions are uninhabitable, although he was aware of the fact that the northern boundary of the uninhabitable part of the equatorial regions must be well south of the Tropic of Cancer (Hist. nat., II, 68, 74, 76, 108). See also below, p. 377, note 172.

Footnote 68:

De caelo, II, 14.

Footnote 69:

Meteor., II, 5.

Footnote 70:

“Quantum est enim, quod ab ultimis litoribus Hispaniae usque ad Indos iacet? Paucissimorum dierum spatium, si navem suus ferat ventus implebit” (Quaest. nat., I, praef., 13). Doubt has been expressed by critics as to whether or not Seneca had in mind a passage westward across the Atlantic. See Edward Channing, A History of the United States, vol. i, New York, 1905, p. 31. Strabo discussed Eratosthenes’ views on the possibility of sailing from Spain to India in his Geography, I, 64, 65. See Channing, op. cit., p. 30.

Footnote 71:

See Tillinghast, Geogr. Knowl., 1889, pp. 6–12; Berger, Geschichte, 1903, p. 625; Norlind, Problem, 1918, passim, for discussions of the continental and oceanic theories in antiquity and in the Middle Ages. Roger Bacon (Opus majus, Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, p. 290) states that “Ptolemaeus vero in libro de dispositione sphaerae vult quod fere sexta pars terrae est habitabilis propter aquam, et totum residuum est coopertum aqua.” That this should have been the opinion of Ptolemy is difficult to reconcile with his advocacy of unknown lands beyond the oikoumene enclosing the Indian and Atlantic Oceans (Geogr., I, 17, 6; VII, 3, 6; VII, 5, 2; see Berger, Geschichte, pp. 625, 627, 629).

Footnote 72:

See above, p. 187.

Footnote 73:

For a summary of Aristotle’s theories in regard to the elements, see Lippmann, Chemisches, 1910.

Footnote 74:

Gilbert, Meteorol. Theorien, 1907.

Footnote 75:

“Causas autem illi mutationis et inconstantiae alias terra praebet, cuius positiones, hoc et illo versae, magna ad aeris temperiem momenta sunt....” (Quaest. nat., II, 11). Possibly “temperiem” should be translated “quality” rather than “temperature.”

Footnote 76:

Meteor., I, 4; I, 7; II, 4. See Lones, Arist. Researches, 1912, pp. 30–33.

Footnote 77:

Meteor., I, 9–12. See also Lones, op. cit., pp. 32–33, 42–45.

Footnote 78:

See above, pp. 99–101, and below, p. 406, note 93.

Footnote 79:

Quaest. nat., V. See Gilbert, Meteorol. Theorien, 1907, pp. 537–539.

Footnote 80:

Aristotle, Meteor., II, 4–5; Seneca, Quaest. nat., V, 7–14; Pliny, Hist. nat., II, 44.

Footnote 81:

Capelle, Berges- und Wolkenhöhen, 1916, pp. 1–2.

Footnote 82:

ibid., pp. 16–17, 28.

Footnote 83:

ibid., pp. 26–27.

Footnote 84:

Posidonius understood, from observation of differences between the Indians and Ethiopians dwelling in the same latitude, that latitude was not the only determining element in the distribution of natural products and races of man but that other factors should also be given consideration (Berger, Geschichte, 1903, p. 557). Peschel, Geschichte, 1877, p. 226, wrote that in the Middle Ages Jordanus of Severac was the only man to recognize the fact that a meridian may mark the boundary between dissimilar areas of plant or of animal life. See, however, Giraldus Cambrensis’ observations on this matter (see above, p. 177).

Footnote 85:

For further discussion of ancient climata, see above, pp. 242–243.

Footnote 86:

Quaest. nat., III, 6; IVa, 2.

Footnote 87:

The voyage of Pytheas of Marseilles was the source of the greater part of ancient beliefs in regard to high northern latitudes.

Footnote 88:

Hist. nat., II, 78.

Footnote 89:

Octavius, 18. Minutius Felix was a Roman advocate, probably a contemporary of Marcus Aurelius. His dialogue Octavius (edited by C. Halm in: Corpus script. eccles. lat., vol. ii; also in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. iii, cols. 231–360) is a defense of Christianity.

Footnote 90:

Meteor., II, 5.

Footnote 91:

Hist. nat., VI, 23.

Footnote 92:

Meteor., II, 4–5.

Footnote 93:

Quaest. nat., V, 18.

Footnote 94:

Hist. nat., II, 43–47.

Footnote 95:

Modern meteorological studies would seem to show that the ancients were not far astray in associating the etesians of Greece with the monsoons of the Indian Ocean: “the etesiens [sic] are not local winds, due to limited and local causes; they belong to the great system of the proasiatic low pressure and are connected with the Indian monsoons” (J. S. Paraskévopoulos, The Etesiens, in: Monthly Weather Review, vol. 50, Washington, D. C., 1922, p. 420).

Footnote 96:

Quaest. nat., III, 22.

Footnote 97:

Meteor., II, 3.

Footnote 98:

Hist. nat., II, 100.

Footnote 99:

Meteor., II, 1.

Footnote 100:

Hist. nat., II, 102.

Footnote 101:

loc. cit.

Footnote 102:

Meteor., I, 13.

Footnote 103:

The Coraxi inhabited the rugged coast where the Caucasus Mountains run parallel to the Euxine north of Colchis. Modern soundings show that the sea attains an average depth of 3000 feet within a dozen miles of the shore.

Footnote 104:

Tillinghast, Geogr. Knowl., 1889, p. 28.

Footnote 105:

Meteor., II, 1.

Footnote 106:

In som. Scip. comm., II, 9.

Footnote 107:

Tozer, Anc. Geogr., 1897, p. 185.

Footnote 108:

Probably the best work on ancient and medieval tide theories is Almagià, Dottrina, 1905. See also Duhem, Système, vol. ii, 1914, pp. 267–390. On the earliest Greek observations of the tides in the Mediterranean see Giorgio Pasquali, Ἄμπωτις und die ältesten Beobachtungen der Gezeiten im Mittelmeer, in: Festschrift für Wackernagel, Göttingen, 1924, pp. 326–332 (not seen, title from review in: Rivista geografica italiana, voi. xxxi, Florence, 1924, pp. 86–88).

Footnote 109:

Strabo, Geogr., I, 3.

Footnote 110:

Duhem, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 269–271.

Footnote 111:

Our knowledge of Posidonius’ theory of the tides, which was explained in a treatise on the ocean, is derived from extracts from this treatise given in Strabo, Geogr., III, 5, and from a Latin translation of Priscian of Lydia’s Solutiones (citations from Duhem, Système, vol. ii, p. 280).

Footnote 112:

Strabo, loc. cit., quotes Posidonius as stating that the ebb and flood are greatly increased at the time of the summer solstice, which, of course, is not so. Priscian, op. cit., quaest. vi, gives a truer statement, that the greatest tides are those at the equinoxes (citations from Duhem, Système, vol. ii, p. 282).

Footnote 113:

Hist. nat., II, 97.

Footnote 114:

Duhem, Système, vol. ii, p. 286.

Footnote 115:

Pliny, loc. cit., also notes that there may be local differences in the period of the tides in different estuaries, although he explains this by differences in the times of the rising of the stars rather than as resulting from the influence of the configuration of the coast.

Footnote 116:

Quaest. nat., III, 28.

Footnote 117:

In som. Scip. comm., II, 9.

Footnote 118:

Meteor., II, 2.

Footnote 119:

Hist. nat., II, 65.

Footnote 120:

Meteor., I, 13; II, 8; Seneca, Quaest. nat., III, 15; III, 26; VI, passim. See Gilbert, Meteorol. Theorien, 1907, pp. 399–402.

Footnote 121:

Seneca, Quaest. nat., III, 15. On the springs and fountains of the ancient world, many of which were believed to be the outlets of subterranean water courses, see J. R. Smith, Springs and Wells in Greek and Roman Literature: Their Legends and Locations, New York and London, 1922 (on the Arethusa and Alpheus myth see pp. 669–672).

Footnote 122:

Cumont, After Life, 1922, p. 78.

Footnote 123:

ibid., p. 79.

Footnote 124:

ibid., pp. 80–81.

Footnote 125:

ibid., pp. 7–12.

Footnote 126:

ibid., pp. 87–89.

Footnote 127:

ibid., p. 90.

Footnote 128:

See above, p. 227, and below, p. 450, note 80.

Footnote 129:

Phaedo, 112.

Footnote 130:

Meteor., I, 13.

Footnote 131:

Quaest. nat., III, 9–10.

Footnote 132:

Meteor., loc. cit.

Footnote 133:

See Capelle, Berges- und Wolkenhöhen, 1916, pp. 2–12, for a full discussion of the sources of Aristotle’s statements regarding the connection between mountains and the sources of rivers.

Footnote 134:

Seneca, Quaest. nat., III, 10. On Gregory’s theory see Kretschmer, Phys. Erdk., 1889, p. 93.

Footnote 135:

See Khvostov, Istoriya, 1907, pp. 53–56; Langenmaier, Alte Kenntnis, 1916, passim.

Footnote 136:

Quaest. nat., IV, passim.

Footnote 137:

These proofs were of two sorts: first, those which were intended to demonstrate the physical impossibility of there being any snow in Ethiopia; and, secondly, those which were intended to show that river floods actually known to be caused by melting snow do not come in midsummer but earlier in the year.

Footnote 138:

See above, pp. 206–207.

Footnote 139:

Hist. nat., V, 9.

Footnote 140:

ibid., II, 86–92.

Footnote 141:

ibid., II, 90. Plato describes the disappearance of Atlantis in the Timaeus and in the Critias; he states that the story came from an Egyptian priest at Sais (Dialogues, Jowett’s transl., 1892, vol. iii, pp. 429–433).

Footnote 142:

Phaedo, III. On ancient and medieval theories regarding the interior of the earth, see Stegmann, Anschauungen, 1913, passim.

Footnote 143:

Meteor., II, 7–8. “Aristotle sums up his views of the causes of winds, earthquakes, lightning, and thunder towards the end of Meteor., II, 9, where he says that they all are essentially the same, viz. a dry exhalation which produces earthquakes when operating within the earth, winds when operating about the surface of the earth, and lightning and thunder when operating among the clouds” (Lones, Arist. Researches, 1912, p. 45).

Footnote 144:

Quaest. nat., VI, is devoted almost entirely to earthquakes.

Footnote 145:

Hist. nat., II, 79–80.

Footnote 146:

Meteor., II, 8.

Footnote 147:

Hist. nat., II, 106.

Footnote 148:

See especially Capelle, Berges- und Wolkenhöhen, 1916. See also below, p. 447, note 27a.

Footnote 149:

Meteor., I, 13; Capelle, op. cit., p. 3. See also Günther, Optische Beweisung, 1920, p. 374, note.

Footnote 150:

“Dicaearchus, vir in primis eruditus, regum cura permensus montes, ex quibus altissimum prodidit Pelium MCCL passuum ratione perpendiculari” (Hist. nat., II, 65). Dicaearchus also wrote a treatise on the mountains of the Peloponnesus and of other parts of Greece. See Günther, Bergbesteigungen, 1896.

Footnote 151:

Capelle, op. cit., p. 16.

Footnote 152:

ibid., p. 17.

Footnote 153:

ibid., pp. 19–20. See also Thalamas, Géogr. d’Ératosthène, 1921, pp. 104–110.

Footnote 154:

See above, p. 214.

Footnote 155:

Capelle, op. cit., p. 24. For discussion of other figures regarding the heights of mountains as they were estimated in antiquity, see the same, pp. 30–31.

Footnote 156:

Berger, Geschichte, 1903, p. 640.

Footnote 157:

ibid., p. 407.

Footnote 158:

Peschel, Geschichte, 1877, pp. 43–44.

Footnote 159:

The sun and the moon appear to revolve around the earth every twenty-four hours more or less. If the same eclipse of the moon is seen at A (to the west of B) one hour earlier than at B, obviously the difference in longitude between A and B will be 1/24 of the circumference of the earth, or 15°.

Footnote 160:

Berger, op. cit., pp. 18, 468–476.

Footnote 161:

Hist. nat., II, 70.

Footnote 162:

Geogr., I, 4.

Footnote 163:

A useful general history of ancient cartography (i. e. of the Egyptians, Hebrews, Babylonians, Assyrians, and Greeks), though sometimes misleading in details, is Cebrian, Geschichte der Kartographie, 1923. This includes an appendix by Joseph Fischer, Ptolemaios als Kartograph, pp. 113–129. See also Kubitschek’s important article “Karten” in Paulys Real-Encyclopädie, 1919.

Footnote 164:

So called because it was discovered by Conrad Peutinger in 1507. Reproduced on two-thirds the scale of the original in colors by Konrad Miller in Weltkarte des Castorius, 1888; also a photographic reproduction by the Imperial Library, Vienna, 1888. See also more especially Miller, Itin. rom., 1916. Miller (Itin. rom., pp. xxvi-xxxvi) ascribes its composition to a certain Castorius of the fourth century of our era.

Footnote 165:

The questions of whether or not Ptolemy drew maps to accompany the text of his Geography, whether or not the existing maps in Greek manuscripts and in printed fifteenth-century texts of Ptolemy’s Geography can really be ascribed to Ptolemy, and whether they are more, or less, authentic than the texts of the Geography are the subject of bitter controversies in the history of geography. For further discussion of this matter and for references to the literature dealing with it, see the works of Dinse, Schütte, Tudeer, and Fischer, cited in the Bibliography.

Footnote 166:

See Detlefsen, Ursprung, 1906; Lessert, L’oeuvre géogr., 1909.

Footnote 167:

See Beazley, Dawn, vol. i, 1897, p. 379, note 2.

Footnote 168:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, pp. 66–70, and vol. ii, 1895, passim; Beazley, op. cit., vol. i, p. 378. The Roman maps would seem to be in turn related to Greek maps of the Eratosthenic school in general form and extent. Some of them showed, doubtless, in addition to the orbis terrarum, an austral continent beyond the equator (see below, p. 385, note 58). While in a broad way we may accept Miller’s main conclusions that the cartography of imperial Rome exerted some influence over medieval cartography, it is not impossible that Miller is occasionally over-ingenious in his attempt to demonstrate specific relationships. See below, p. 458, note 17.

Footnote 169:

These were the invention of Hipparchus (Avezac, Projection, 1863, pp. 16–20). The stereographic projection, called planisphere, was described by Ptolemy in a treatise entitled Planisphere which was translated into Latin from the Arabic during the time of the Crusades. See below, p. 398, note 36.

Footnote 170:

Eratosthenes placed Meroë at 10,000 stades south of Alexandria and the limit of the oikoumene at 3400 stades south of Meroë (Strabo, Geogr., I, 4, 2). He placed the tropic at Syene 5000 stades south of Alexandria (Cleomedes, De motu corp. cael., I, 10). Therefore the limit of the oikoumene according to Eratosthenes must have been 10,000 + 3400 − 5000 = 8400 stades south of the tropic. As Eratosthenes reckoned the circumference of the earth at 252,000 stades (see above, p. 371, note 51), 1° must have contained 700 stades, and the limit of the oikoumene must have fallen in his opinion 8400 ÷ 700 = 12° south of the tropic, or at approximately latitude 11° 30′ N.

Footnote 171:

See Barthold, Erforschung des Orients, 1913, p. 10.

Footnote 172:

On ancient theories regarding the sources of the Nile see Khvostov, Istoriya, 1907, pp. 53–68, and Langenmaier, Alte Kenntnis, 1916, pp. 1–144.

Footnote 173:

Pliny says (Hist. nat., II, 108) that the distance from the southernmost limits of the habitable world to Meroë in Ethiopia is 1000 Roman miles and that the distance by river from Syene, on the tropic, to Meroë was found by an expedition sent out by Nero to be 871 miles. If we make this arbitrarily 700 miles in order to take into account the windings of the river, we get a total of 1700 miles. In the same passage Pliny states that Eratosthenes found the circumference of the earth to be 252,000 stades, or 31,500 Roman miles. The 1700 miles which represent the distance south of the tropic at which Pliny places the Ethiopian Ocean are therefore equivalent to 13,600 stades, and these, in turn, to 19³⁄₇° (see above, note 169, for method of calculating this figure). The southern limit of the oikoumene thus falls at about latitude 4° N. (23½°–19³⁄₇°).

Footnote 174:

See Langenmaier, op. cit., pp. 6–37, for the most recent and thorough attempt at an interpretation of the Ptolemaic geography of these parts of Africa.

Footnote 175:

That Ptolemy’s knowledge of the Central African lake region was derived from the east coast of Africa rather than from the upper Nile valley is shown by Langenmaier, op. cit., and by Khvostov, Istoriya, 1907. pp. 65–66.

Footnote 176:

“Nam Syene sub ipso tropico est, Meroe autem tribus milibus octingentis stadiis in perustam a Syene introrsum recedit, et ab illa usque ad terram cinnamoni feracem sunt stadia octingenta, et per haec omnia spatia perustae licet rari tamen vita fruuntur habitantes. Ultra vero jam inaccessum est propter nimium solis ardorem” (Macrobius, In som. Scip. comm., II, 8, 3). In other words, the border of the habitable part of the world was placed by Macrobius 3800 + 800 = 4600 stades, or about 6½°, south of the tropic, that is to say at about latitude 17° N.

NOTES 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 CHAPTER III THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MOSLEMS

Footnote 323:

Duhem, Système, vol. ii, 1914, pp. 146–157.

Footnote 324:

See above, pp. 98–102.

Footnote 325:

On what follows concerning Moslem knowledge of Ptolemy’s Almagest see the introduction to Karl Manitius’ German translation of the Almagest, 1912. See also Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 103–104.

Footnote 326:

See above, p. 96.

Footnote 327:

Al-Battānī’s Astronomy, Nallino’s edit., pt. i, 1903, pp. 166–167; pt. ii, 1907, pp. 210–211; Al-Khwārizmī’s Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ, Nallino’s edit., 1894, p. 6. Ptolemy’s Geography was translated into Arabic at least three times: (1) by Ibn Khurdādhbeh not earlier than about 846–847 A. D., but for private use alone; (2) by Yaʿqūb ibn Isḥāq al-Kindī, before 874 A. D.; and (3) by Thābit ibn Qurra (826–901 A. D.).

Footnote 328:

Al-Khwārizmī’s Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ and its origins are of interest to us in view of the fact that certain of the figures there given for latitude and longitude found their way into the Toledo Tables, which were translated into Latin and enjoyed wide use in the West during the twelfth century and later (see above, pp. 243–244). Various figures given in the Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ were quoted by later Mohammedan writers, among them the fourteenth-century geographer Abū-l-Fidā. These formed the basis of the discussion of Al-Khwārizmī’s work in Lelewel’s Géographie du moyen âge, vol. i, 1852, pp. 21–29; epilogue, 1857, pp. 47–60. A manuscript of the Ṣūrat al-arḍ, the only one in existence, was discovered by Wilhelm Spitta in Cairo in 1878 and described by him in an article entitled Die Geographie des Ptolemäus bei den Arabern, 1882. Spitta’s article was completely superseded by Nallino’s more critical study (Al-Ḫuwârizmî e il suo rifacimento, 1894). Nallino shows that Lelewel’s theory, that the Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ is a translation of a work called Oresmos by a seventh-century Greek geographer, will not hold water. He suggested that the work was not a direct translation from Ptolemy but was composed to elucidate and explain a map which itself was compiled directly from a Greek, not Greco-Syrian, version of the Geography. The fact that Al-Khwārizmī’s figures in many cases diverge slightly from those of Ptolemy may be explained by the supposition that they were reconstructed from data given on a map, rather than copied from the text of Ptolemy’s Geography. Later and more thorough investigations into the Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ by Hans von Mžik confirm Nallino’s opinion that the treatise was based upon a map but show that the map itself must have been compiled from a Syrian text. Al-Khwārizmī’s work embodies the results of Moslem geographical calculations which had tended to correct Ptolemy’s overestimate of the length of the Mediterranean Sea (von Mzik, Ptolemaeus, 1915, pp. 152–176; idem, Afrika, 1916).

Footnote 329:

The Astronomy contains: (1) in the preamble, a chapter describing the world, first the earth as a whole and then the various seas; (2) among the astronomical tables, a table of the latitudes and longitudes of places in the oikoumene. The geographical chapter was edited and translated into French by Reinaud in the introduction to his Géogr. d’Aboulféda, vol. i, 1848 (pp. cclxxxiii-ccxc), and more recently into Latin by Nallino in his great edition of Al-Battānī’s Astronomy. Nallino contends that it was drawn from a much altered version of a Greco-Syrian Ptolemy and that Lelewel and Reinaud were mistaken in thinking that its origin was non-Ptolemaic.

Al-Battānī says that he drew on a certain Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ for his astronomical tables. This was not the work of the same title by Al-Khwārizmī (see the preceding note), though its author undoubtedly derived some of his data from Al-Khwārizmī’s Kitāb as well as from the Greco-Syrian version of Ptolemy (Al-Battānī’s Astronomy, Nallino’s edit., pt. ii, 1907, pp. 209–211).

Footnote 330:

See above, pp. 97 and 244, and below, note 11.

Footnote 331:

See Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 3–19.

Footnote 332:

The standard work on Az-Zarqalī is Steinschneider, Études sur Zarkali, 1881–1887, which deals almost exclusively with manuscripts, texts, and translations.

Footnote 333:

Steinschneider, op. cit., in: Bollettino, vol. xx, 1887, p. 1.

Footnote 334:

The writer has been unable to find that any detailed study has been made of the sources of the Toledo Tables and of the Canons of Az-Zarqalī. Though these Spanish works in their geographical aspects undoubtedly owe much to Al-Khwārizmī, the exact relationship between them is an unsolved problem. As is explained in Chapter X, p. 244, above, most of the Latin translations of the Toledo Tables dating from the twelfth century and later are accompanied by a list of geographical coördinates obviously copied from a similar list in the original Arabic and Hebrew texts of the Tables. So far as the writer is aware no manuscripts of the original Arabic list are known. Consequently, if this is true, we can obtain no precise information regarding the connection between the earlier Arabic figures and those known in the West in our period. A superficial comparison, however, of the Latin list with the figures in Al-Khwārizmī’s Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ suffices to show that there are many figures common to each and to establish the general thesis that the figures of the Toledo Tables are based on earlier Moslem figures, especially those of Al-Khwārizmī, which, in turn, were derived ultimately, though with many alterations, from Ptolemy’s Geography.

Footnote 335:

See above, pp. 97–98, and below, p. 400, note 45.

Footnote 336:

Amari, Musulmani di Sicilia, vol. ii, 1858, ch. 13.

Footnote 337:

This quotation is from the preface of Edrisi’s Geography, Jaubert’s translation (under Idrīsī in the Bibliography), p. xx.

Footnote 338:

Dozy and De Goeje, Description, 1866 (under Idrīsī in the Bibliography), pp. ii, iv.

Footnote 339:

1154 is the date given in Edrisi’s preface. See, however, note by G. Pardi in: Rivista geografica italiana, vol. xxiv, Florence, 1917, pp. 380–382.

Footnote 340:

De La Roncière, Marine française, vol. i, 1909, p. 136.

Footnote 341:

ibid., pp. 136–137.

Footnote 342:

See above, p. 95.

Footnote 343:

It is uncertain whether the original tables of Al-Khwārizmī were known as the Little Sindhind or whether this title was given to another related work by the same author. See Suter, Astron. Tafeln, 1914, p. viii (under Khwārizmī, Al-, in the Bibliography), and also Nallino, Al-Ḫuwârizmî e il suo rifacimento, 1894, p. 10.

Footnote 344:

Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 45. This was published under the title Introductorium in astronomiam in Venice in 1506. See Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 174, note 6. This work was also translated by John of Seville (Haskins, loc. cit.).

Footnote 345:

Duhem, op. cit., vol. ii, 1914, p. 226.

Footnote 346:

See above, pp. 14–15.

Footnote 347:

Duhem, ibid., p. 216.

Footnote 348:

ibid., pp. 218–220.

Footnote 349:

See the German translation in Friedrich Dieterici’s Die Philosophie der Araber im ix. und x. Jahrhundert n. Chr., vol. v, Leipzig, 1876. The “Brothers of Piety and Sincerity” made some noteworthy contributions to the science of geographical meteorology, but these were not passed on to the Western world. They understood, among other phenomena, the warming of the atmosphere by radiation from the earth’s surface and its connection with the angle of incidence of the sun’s rays; the influence of mountains upon precipitation; and the origin of springs and rivers (Hellmann, Denkmäler, 1904, pp. (18), 23–41).

Footnote 350:

Dieterici, op. cit., p. 100.

Footnote 351:

Gregorius’ edit., fol. 467 (367) (cited by Duhem, ibid., p. 227).

Footnote 352:

ibid., p. 369.

Footnote 353:

Introductorium, III, 4–9 (cited by Duhem, ibid., pp. 377–386).

Footnote 354:

Calonymos’ edit. fol. 5 (cited by Duhem, ibid., p. 154).

Footnote 355:

Duhem, ibid., p. 388, cites this chapter as: Averroes Cordubensis, In Aristotelis Meteora expositio media, II, 1. This work was published in Venice in 1488.

Footnote 356:

Moses Maimonides, the great Jewish astrologer of the twelfth century, on the other hand, ascribed the causes of the tides wholly to the moon (Duhem, ibid., p. 388).

Footnote 357:

Ibn Yūnūs, Abū-l-Fidā, and other Moslem geographers tell how, in the time of the Caliph Al-Maʾmūn, geographers were instructed to carry out this measurement on the plain of Sinjār, north of the Euphrates, and also in Syria near Tadmor (Palmyra) and that their results gave 57, 56¼, 56⅔, etc., Arabic miles for a degree. For translation of text of Ibn Yūnūs see Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibl. Natle., vol. vii, Paris, An XII [1803–1804], pp. 94, 96 footnote (2); for Abū-l-Fidā see Reinaud, Géogr. d’Aboulféda, vol. ii, pt. i, 1848, p. 17. See also Miller, Erdmessung, 1919, pp. 30–36, and Schoy, Erdmessungen, 1917, for other figures given by the Moslems and for a recent critical discussion of their measurement. Al-Bīrūnī describes a method of determining an arc of meridian by measuring the curvature of the earth from a mountain of known height. See Schoy, Originalstudien aus “Al-Qânûn al-Masʿûdî,” 1923, pp. 69–74. See also Carra de Vaux, Penseurs de l’Islam, vol ii, 1921, p. 30.

Footnote 358:

Miller, Erdmessung, 1919, p. 33.

Footnote 359:

See above, pp. 243–246. On Moslem methods of determining latitude see Schoy, Polhöhenbestimmung, 1911; the same, Über eine arabische Methode, die geographische Breite aus der Höhe der Sonne im I. Vertikal (“Höhe ohne Azimut”) zu bestimmen, in: Annalen der Hydrographie und maritimen Meteorologie, vol. xlix, Hamburg, 1921, pp. 124–133; on longitudes, see the same, Längenbestimmung, 1915; Originalstudien aus “Al-Qânûn al-Masʿûdî,” 1923; Geography of the Moslems, 1924, pp. 265–267.

Footnote 360:

See above, p. 244.

Footnote 361:

See J. K. Wright, Knowledge of Latitudes and Longitudes, 1923, pp. 89–91, and especially note (1) on p. 91.

Footnote 362:

On Kang-Diz see Schoy, Längenbestimmung, 1915, pp. 47–48.

Footnote 363:

Reinaud, Géogr. d’Aboulféda, vol. i, 1848, pp. ccxxxiii-ccxlvi. Schoy, Längenbestimmung, 1915, pp. 45–57, discusses the question of the origins of the use of a central meridian for the measurement of longitude.

Footnote 364:

See Schoy, Geography of the Moslems, 1924, for a general review of Arabic geography in the Middle Ages.

Footnote 365:

Josef Marquart, Osteuropäische und ostasiatische Streifzüge, Leipzig, 1903, gives much important material, with excerpts from texts and translations, regarding Moslem descriptions of Slavic, Magyar, and Russian peoples in the ninth and tenth centuries of our era. There is included (ibid., pp. 206–270) an Arabic description of Constantinople, of the road thence to Rome, and of Rome itself.

Footnote 366:

Marquart, op. cit., pp. 102, 145.

Footnote 367:

Though the great, formal Arabic geographical works were not known in the West in the Middle Ages, legendary lore of the Moslems influenced European legends. The story of St. Brandan, for instance, undeniably owes much to Moslem romance. See De Goeje, St. Brandan, 1890.

NOTES CHAPTER IV THE SOURCES FOR THE PERIOD 1100–1250 A. D.

Note: See the Bibliography for references to editions of the original sources mentioned in the text of this chapter.

Footnote 368:

De Wulf, Medieval Philosophy, 1909, p. 126.

Footnote 369:

See above, pp. 2 and 52–53.

Footnote 370:

Zöckler, Geschichte, vol. i, 1877, pp. 407–408.

Footnote 371:

De Wulf, op. cit., pp. 216–218.

Footnote 372:

Hauréau, Hugues de Saint-Victor, 1886, p. vi.

Footnote 373:

Hauréau (op. cit., pp. 78–93) believed that these were all the work of Hugh.

Footnote 374:

Another mystic of the early twelfth century was Rupert of Deutz, whose De sancta trinitate et operibus eius was written, according to Zöckler (op. cit., vol. i, p. 393), about 1117.

Footnote 375:

Some scholars, notably Singer, Visions of Hildegard, 1917, pp. 12–15, have cast doubt upon the genuineness of the Subtilitates and Causae et curae. See, however, Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 128–129. See also below, pp. 423–424, notes 91–93.

The Causae et curae is the only one of the works which cannot be dated with considerable accuracy (see Thorndike, op. cit., p. 127). The present writer, who has not studied the writings of Hildegard in any detail, hazards the following suggestion for what it is worth. Two passages in the Causae et curae can only be explained on the supposition that its author believed in a flat earth (see below, p. 425, note 101). Passages in the Scivias (written between 1141 and 1150) and in the Liber divinorum operum (written after 1163) speak explicitly of the earth as a globe (see below, p. 423, note 92). May it not be possible that the Causae et curae is an early work and that in the course of her subsequent life Hildegard gained a wider knowledge of current views of cosmology, which found their expression in the records of her visions?

Footnote 376:

Thorndike, op. cit., p. 131.

Footnote 377:

See Masson, Biblical Literature, 1865.

Footnote 378:

Clerval, Écoles de Chartres, 1895.

Footnote 379:

The archives at Chartres show that a certain Bernard was magister scholae in 1119 and that a Bernard, chancellor in 1124, had been replaced by Gilbert de la Porrée in 1126 (C. V. Langlois, Maître Bernard, 1893, p. 242).

Footnote 380:

“Perfectissimus inter Platonicos seculi nostri” (John of Salisbury, Metalogicus, iv, 35, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcix, col. 938). See also Metalogicus, I, 24, in: Migne, op. cit., cols. 853–856.

Footnote 381:

See above, p. 93.

Footnote 382:

Hauréau, Thierry de Chartres, 1890, p. 50.

Footnote 383:

Clerval, Écoles de Chartres, 1895, p. 172.

Footnote 384:

Hauréau, op. cit., pp. 52–70.

Footnote 385:

Haskins, Adelard, 1911, pp. 491–498; Studies, 1924, pp. 20–42.

Footnote 386:

Duhem at the time of the publication of vol. iii of Le système du monde, 1915, knew the text of the Quaestiones naturales only at second hand. (On the uncertainty of the date of the Quaestiones naturales see Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 26–27.) Adelard was also the author of De eodem et diverso, written probably in his youth (before 1109).

Footnote 387:

The De eodem et diverso indicates that Adelard had already visited Salerno and Sicily at the time that it was written. In the Quaestiones naturales he mentions Tarsus and Antioch as places where he had been (Haskins, Adelard, 1911, pp. 492–493; Studies, 1924, p. 26).

Footnote 388:

See above, pp. 95–96.

Footnote 389:

See above, p. 97.

Footnote 390:

Poole, The Masters, 1920, p. 330.

Footnote 391:

This work consists of two parts, Megacosmus and Microcosmus. For an analysis of it see Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. xii, Paris, 1763, pp. 261–273, especially p. 267.

Footnote 392:

The principal arguments against the identification of the two Bernards have been set forth by Hauréau (Mémoire, 1883, pp. 99–104), Clerval (Écoles de Chartres, 1895, pp. 158–163), and Sandys (Hist. of Class. Schol., vol. i, 1921, p. 534, note 2). Hauréau and Clerval were followed by De Wulf, Duhem, and others. C. V. Langlois (Maître Bernard, 1893) championed the identification of the two. The most recent discussion of the problem, by R. L. Poole (The Masters, 1920), is convincing in so far as it demonstrates that the evidence now available tends to show that the two Bernards were not the same.

Footnote 393:

Poole, op. cit., pp. 333–335; Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 92.

Footnote 394:

Hauréau, Singularités, 1861, p. 249.

Footnote 395:

This work, written some time before 1145—for at about this date William, in a treatise called Dragmaticon philosophiae, retracted certain heretical doctrines which he had expressed in it—has been falsely attributed to Bede, to William of Hirschau, and to Honorius of Autun (see Poole, Illustrations, 1920, pp. 338–352, and Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 90–93) and printed among the works of each of these. The text attributed to William of Hirschau was printed by Henricus Petrus at Basel in 1531 under the title Philosophicarum et astronomicarum institutionum libri tres; that attributed to Bede, under the title Περὶ διδαξέων sive elementorum philosophiae libri IV, in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xc, cols. 1127–1182; and that attributed to Honorius, under the title De philosophia mundi, in Migne, op. cit., vol. clxxii, cols. 39–102.

On William of Conches as a scientist see especially Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873.

Footnote 396:

See above, p. 143, and below, p. 419, note 38.

Footnote 397:

See the preface to Thomas Wright’s edition of the works of Neckam, 1863, pp. ix-xii, for a brief life of Alexander Neckam.

Footnote 398:

On these and other works of Neckam, see Esposito, Unpublished Poems, 1915, pp. 460–471.

Footnote 399:

On translators from the Greek, see Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 141–241. Shortly after the middle of the twelfth century a certain Sicilian, Henricus Aristippus, brought from Constantinople a copy of a Greek text of Ptolemy’s Almagest as a present from the Byzantine Emperor for the Norman king, William I. Subsequently an anonymous medical student of Salerno made a Latin version of this work. Aristippus also distinguished himself at about the same time by turning into Latin from the Greek the fourth book of Aristotle’s Meteorology (Haskins and Lockwood, Sicilian Translators, 1910, pp. 75–102; Haskins, Further Notes, 1912—under Haskins and Lockwood in the Bibliography—pp. 155–166; Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 155–168; on Aristippus’ translation of the fourth book of the Meteorology, see also below, p. 401, note 60). A second translation of the Meteorology was made from Greek into Latin before 1260 (see Grabmann, Forschungen, 1916, p. 182; Fobes, Mediaeval Versions, 1915, p. 297). Translations from the Greek of the Physics, De caelo, and De generatione et corruptione were also known by the early thirteenth century (Grabmann, op. cit., p. 178; Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 149, 224, and 225, note 8).

Footnote 400:

On translators from the Arabic, see Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 3–140.

Footnote 401:

See above, p. 82.

Footnote 402:

Haskins, Adelard, 1911, pp. 493–494; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 22–23. There are at least five manuscripts of Adelard’s translation.

Footnote 403:

See Suter, Astron. Tafeln, 1914 (under Khwārizmī, Al-, in the Bibliography).

Footnote 404:

This is indicated in the following note appended to a Latin translation of Ptolemy’s Planisphere made by Hermann the Dalmatian in 1143: “Quem locum a Ptolomeo minus diligenter perspectum cum Albateni miratur et Alchoarismus, quorum hunc quidem ope nostra Latium habet, illius vero comodissima translatione Roberti mei industria Latine orationis thesaurum accumulat nos discutiendi veri in libro nostro de circulis rationem damus” (Ptolemaei opera omnia, Heiberg’s edit., vol. ii: Opera astronomica minora, 1907, p. clxxxvii). Some have sought to ascribe this Latin translation of the Planisphere to Rudolph of Bruges, a disciple of Hermann. Reasons why it cannot be the work of Rudolph are given by A. A. Björnbo in: Bibliotheca mathematica, 3rd series, vol. iv, Stockholm, 1903, pp. 130–133. See also Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 173. The note quoted above shows that a certain Robert (undoubtedly Robert of Chester—or, of Retines—whom we know to have been an associate of Hermann) had translated Al-Battānī’s Astronomy. See also Suter, Astron. Tafeln, 1914 (under Khwārizmī, Al-, in the Bibliography), p. xiii.

Footnote 405:

It is probable that the author of the Dialogus was also the writer of certain astronomical works from about the same period. On Peter Alphonsi see Haskins, Reception, 1915, pp. 60–61; the same, Studies, 1924, pp. 111–119.

Footnote 406:

See above, p. 78. On the name “Johannes Hispanensis” see Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 177–179. Duhem gives the date of the translation as 1134. He was apparently unfamiliar with Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds St. Victor, no. 848, which establishes the date as March 11, 1135, and with an article on the subject by Woepcke: Notice, 1862, pp. 116–117. John of Seville’s translation is found in many manuscripts and was printed at Nuremberg in 1537. John of Seville also translated Abū Maʿshar’s The Great Book of the Introduction (see Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 45).

Footnote 407:

Gerard’s translation was entitled Liber de aggregationibus scientiae stellarum (Boncompagni, Della vita, 1851, fol. 442 (separate, pp. 58–59); Woepcke, op. cit., p. 118).

Footnote 408:

On the date of Plato of Tivoli, see C. H. Haskins, The Translations of Hugo Sanctelliensis, in: Romanic Review, vol. ii, New York, 1911, p. 2, note 5. On Al-Battānī, see above, p. 78.

Footnote 409:

Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 14704, fol. 110, col. a, to fol. 135vo. For the establishment of the date of these tables see Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 203–204, and Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 96–98. The latter supplies the author’s name from a fifteenth-century manuscript in Oxford of which Duhem was ignorant.

Footnote 410:

See above, p. 79.

Footnote 411:

See above, p. 244.

Footnote 412:

Steinschneider, Études sur Zarkali, 1881–1887, discusses the various versions of Az-Zarqalī’s Canons and of the Toledo Tables. The former were put into Hebrew, Spanish, Italian, and Latin; of the Latin versions, the manuscripts are more numerous in England than elsewhere, but there are no fewer than nine in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. The Toledo Tables probably did not become well known in the Latin West until the first half of the thirteenth century (see Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 287–290), although they were probably known to Roger of Hereford (see Haskins, Reception, 1915, p. 66; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 95; and Duhem, op. cit., pp. 520–521).

Footnote 413:

Steinschneider (op. cit., in: Bollettino, vol. xx, 1887, pp. 3–6) believed that there were two translations of the work of Az-Zarqalī because the manuscripts fall into two groups that differ markedly from each other. The manuscripts of one of these groups bear the name of Gerard of Cremona. Unfortunately, we lack confirmation of the attribution of this translation to Gerard in the list of seventy-four works of the great Cremonese discovered by Boncompagni in the Vatican (see Boncompagni, Della vita, 1851). Nevertheless it is highly probable that this list is incomplete, and there is no really good reason for supposing that Gerard was not the translator of the version in question.

Footnote 414:

See above, p. 398, note 36.

Footnote 415:

Haskins, Reception, 1915, p. 64; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 122.

Footnote 416:

On the De essentiis see Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 48–49, 56–66. On pages 62–65 Haskins publishes for the first time the texts of two interesting geographical passages.

Footnote 417:

Haskins, Reception, 1915, pp. 64–65; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 123.

Footnote 418:

Haskins, Reception, 1915, p. 66; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 125; British Museum MSS., Arundel, no. 377.

Footnote 419:

Haskins, Reception, 1915, pp. 67–68; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 126–127. On Daniel of Morley, see also Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 171–181.

Footnote 420:

Duhem (Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 219–223) shows, conclusively the writer believes, both from external and internal evidence, that this work was by the twelfth-century Gerard of Cremona and not by the thirteenth-century Gerard of Sabbionetta, with whom the former was often confused. Boncompagni in his important work on Gerard (cited above, p. 399, note 39) made the mistake of attributing the Theorica planetarum to Gerard of Sabbionetta, in which error he was followed by the writer of the article on Gerard of Cremona in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edit.

Footnote 421:

See Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 104–110.

Footnote 422:

Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 7272, fol. 60, col. a to fol. 67, col. d; Duhem, op. cit., p. 234.

Footnote 423:

There is no modern critical edition of the De sphaera. Duhem (op. cit., p. 239, note 4) cites seventeenth-century editions. The title of the fifteenth-century edition which has been used by the writer is given in the Bibliography.

Footnote 424:

On the introduction of the writings of Aristotle to Western knowledge during the Middle Ages, see the modern works to which cross-references are given in the Bibliography under Aristotle. In the present work the attempt is merely made to indicate the dates at which those writings of Aristotle which contained materials of geographic importance became known in Western Europe.

Footnote 425:

Steinschneider, Europ. Übersetz., in: Sitzungsber., vol. cxlix, 1905, pp. 32, 42, 43. See also below, p. 402, note 61.

Footnote 426:

Duhem, Du temps, 1909, pp. 163–178; idem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 181–193.

Footnote 427:

Grabmann (Forschungen, 1916, pp. 16–17) argues that “this ‘reflet de la Physique d’Aristote’ which Duhem sees is in no way demonstrated by actual citations of Aristotle” but that it results from a general similarity of thought and ideas only. Grabmann believes that Alan of Lille, who appears to have known Aristotle’s books on logic only, could not possibly have been ignorant of the Physics and De caelo if these two works had been known in the West before his time. While we may agree with Grabmann that it cannot be proved definitely that the Chartres scholars made direct use of Aristotle’s Physics, his arguments should not be interpreted to mean that the scholars of the Chartres school were altogether uninfluenced by Peripatetic physical doctrines. Schneider (Abendländische Spekulation, 1915), though he holds that Duhem was mistaken in his interpretation of William of Conches’ views regarding the Peripatetic physics (see below, p. 418, note 28), supports the French savant in maintaining that there was in existence “a specific Aristotelian trend in astronomic and cosmologic thought” at this period and that Theodoric and Gilbert may not have been uninfluenced by it. He maintains that the latter may well have been familiar with Aristotelian theories introduced through new Oriental sources and suggests as evidence of the probability of this the connections established by Hermann the Dalmatian and Rudolph of Bruges between the Chartres scholars and the group of translators at Toledo. He even goes so far as to add (p. 40): “Nicht ausgeschlossen ist, dass ihnen [Theodoric and Gilbert] als solche indirekte Quellen für die Kenntnis der aristotelischen Naturphilosophie die kurz gefassten und verhältnissmässig leicht verständlichen Paraphrasen Avicennas zur Physik und zur De caelo et mundo des Aristoteles gedient haben.” See below, p. 419, note 32.

Aristotelian influence seems also to have been apparent in the Quaestiones naturales of Adelard of Bath (see above, p. 154–155, and below, p. 426, notes 110, 111). Adelard even cites “Aristoteles in phisicis et alii in tractatibus suis,” though Grabmann and Haskins claim that this reference is too indefinite to be used to identify any particular works of the Stagirite or to indicate first-hand acquaintance with them (Grabmann, op. cit., p. 16; Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 38–39).

Footnote 428:

See Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 87, for references on Gerard.

Footnote 429:

A marginal note in a Nuremberg manuscript of the Meteorology indicates that the first three books were translated by Gerard of Cremona from the Arabic, the fourth by Henricus Aristippus (see above, p. 398, note 32) from the Greek, and the last three chapters by Alfred the Englishman (Alfred of Sareshel) from the Latin. See V. Rose, in: Hermes: Zeitschrift für classische Philologie, vol. i, Berlin, 1866, p. 385.

Another translation of the Meteorology was done entirely from the Greek and is dated 1260. See Fobes, Mediaeval Versions, 1915, pp. 297–314.

It is very doubtful whether the fourth book is really the work of the Stagirite. Hammer-Jensen (Das sogenannte IV. Buch, 1915) attributes it to Strato, a Greek Peripatetic philosopher of the third century before Christ. The last three chapters (those translated from the Arabic by Alfred of Sareshel) were referred to as Liber de congelatis by their translator and in printed editions (see Bibliography under Alfred of Sareshel, II, below) were ascribed either to Avicenna or to Geber (see Baeumker, Alfred von Sareshel, 1913, p. 26, note 2, and Hammer-Jensen, op. cit., p. 131). These three chapters deal with: (1) the origins of stones, (2) the growth of mountains through earthquakes and through the influence of water and winds (see above, pp. 213–214), and (3) minerals.

Alfred of Sareshel was one of the most enthusiastic Aristotelians of the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. His De motu cordis “shows a wealth of Aristotelian citation such as we cannot find in any other Latin author of its time.” Alfred was active in introducing a knowledge of Aristotle’s natural science and metaphysics into England. See Haskins, Reception, 1915, pp. 68–69; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 129.

Footnote 430:

De caelo et mundo was the title usually applied in the Middle Ages to the treatise in four books known in the Greek as Περὶ οὐρανοῦ (De caelo). It does not include the De mundo referred to above, p. 365, note 1. In the earlier part of the twelfth century Avicenna’s version of the De caelo et mundo was translated into Latin by Dominicus Gondisalvi (Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant, vol. i, 1911, p. 15, note 1). The fifth book had been translated by Gerard of Cremona. On the work of Dominicus Gondisalvi and John of Seville (Johannes Hispanensis), see Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 177–183; Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 73–82. Versions of the De caelo from the Greek were also in existence before 1200 (Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 149).

Footnote 431:

On the manuscript list of the translations of Gerard of Cremona, see above, p. 400, note 45.

Footnote 432:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 250–275; idem, Science, 1922, pp. 672, 684–686; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 276.

Footnote 433:

See Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 268–270, and the same, Studies, 1924, pp. 292–294, for the Latin text of the questionnaire; the same, Science, 1922, pp. 689–691, Studies, 1924, pp. 266–267, for translation.

Footnote 434:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 270; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 294.

Footnote 435:

In the same, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 272–275, and Studies, 1924, pp. 296–297, will be found the Latin text of the part dealing with hot springs and volcanoes.

Footnote 436:

Stange, Arnoldus Saxo, 1885, pp. 26–31.

Footnote 437:

Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant, vol. i, 1911, p. 17, note 1; Grabmann, Forschungen, 1916, p. 18.

Footnote 438:

On Averroës, on his influence upon European thought, and on his various medieval adherents and opponents, see Renan, Averroès, 1866. As a general rule the great Dominican scholars of the thirteenth century (as Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas) were determined opponents of the Averroïstic theology and philosophy. The Franciscans, on the other hand, were more ready to adopt these heretical teachings.

Footnote 439:

Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 251.

Footnote 440:

See below, p. 408, note 97.

Footnote 441:

See especially C. V. Langlois, La connaissance, 1911, introduction.

Footnote 442:

In the earliest printed editions the De imagine mundi is attributed to “Honorius Inclusus.” In an edition of 1497 we are told that the work is sometimes ascribed to St. Anselm and sometimes to Honorius Inclusus. For the first time in 1544 it was attributed to the well-known Honorius of Autun and included among his works. This was also done subsequently in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxii, cols. 115–188. The attribution to Honorius of Autun was based on a note in the last chapter of that author’s De luminaribus ecclesiae which gives a list of his writings: among them Imago mundi de dispositione mundi. It can be shown, however, that this chapter was added to the De luminaribus ecclesiae by a later compiler, who may well have confused Honorius of Autun with Honorius Inclusus. On an extremely shaky foundation the German scholar, J. A. Endres, in his Honorius Augustodunensis: Beitrag zur Geschichte des geistigen Lebens im 12. Jahrhundert, Kempten and Munich, 1906, has erected a theory that the author was a German, who lived at Ratisbon. For the whole question, see the clear and just discussion by Duhem (Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 24–31), who tends to favor the attribution of the work to the virtually unknown Honorius Inclusus and who says of the elaborate German argument: “Un loyal et modeste aveu d’ignorance ne vaudrait-il pas mieux que de tels raisonnements?” (ibid., p. 31).

Footnote 443:

“Hic nihil autem in eo pono, nisi majorum commendat traditio” (Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxii, cols. 119–120).

Footnote 444:

For a full discussion of the De imagine mundi, its sources, and its influence upon future literature, see Doberentz, Erd- und Völkerkunde, 1881–1882.

Footnote 445:

ibid., in: Zeitschrift, vol. xiii, 1881, p. 54.

Footnote 446:

ibid., p. 41.

Footnote 447:

In the prologue of the Liber floridus the author refers to himself as “Lambert, son of Onulph, canon of St. Omer.” See Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxiii, col. 1003.

Footnote 448:

See Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, pp. 43–53.

Footnote 449:

Six manuscripts of Guido’s work are known (Miller, ibid., p. 54).

Footnote 450:

Doberentz, op. cit., in: Zeitschrift, vol. xii, 1880, pp. 392–393.

Footnote 451:

Hellmann, Denkmäler, 1904, p. (23). Hellmann warns against confusion of the German Lucidarius and its translations, on the one hand, with the French popular encyclopedia Lucidaire and the English Lucydary, on the other. The two latter are not translations from the German but are independent works.

Footnote 452:

Le Noble, Notice, 1839, p. 243. The only known manuscript of the Hortus deliciarum, which contained a large number of magnificent miniatures, was destroyed during the bombardment of Strasburg in 1870. See, however, the edition of Straub and Keller, 1879–1899.

Footnote 453:

The Otia imperialia is divided into three parts, or “decisiones.” The first deals with theological and cosmological questions and is in the main derived from Peter Comestor. The second treats of geography, and the third of “mirabilia uniuscuiusque provinciae, non omnia, sed ex omnibus aliqua.”

Footnote 454:

See Doberentz, ibid., vol. xii, pp. 412–419. Miller implies that the general description of the geography of the world which Gervase of Tilbury gives at the beginning of Decis. II was taken from a map drawn by Gervase himself (Itin. rom., 1916, p. xxxvii).

Footnote 455:

Doberentz, ibid., vol. xii, pp. 426–428.

Footnote 456:

C. V. Langlois, La connaissance, 1911, pp. 49–113. On the sources of the Image du monde, see the works of Fant, Fritsche, and Le Clerc, referred to in the Bibliography under these names. The poem in the first redaction was divided into three main parts: first, the part dealing with cosmogony, in fourteen chapters; second, that dealing with geography, in eighteen chapters; third, that dealing with astronomy, in twenty-two chapters. The second part, on geography, follows the De imagine mundi very closely, with additions from Jacques de Vitry. Fritsche, Untersuchung, 1880, gives an analysis of the work chapter by chapter. The “mediocrity” of Fritsche’s book, which Langlois asserts, is illustrated by its author’s inability to identify the city of “Aaron”—obviously the world center, Arin (Fritsche, op. cit., p. 23).

Footnote 457:

According to Prior (L’Image du monde, 1913) the first verse redaction dates from 1246. To this 4000 verses were later added, including a life of St. Brandan, an account of Seth’s visit to Paradise, and details of the author’s journey to Sicily and Syria and of his ascent of Mount Etna. The original poem with these additional parts constituted the second redaction, dating from 1248. A prose redaction was apparently composed on the basis of the first verse redaction but before the second verse redaction was made. See the discussion of the problem of dates by Prior, op. cit. (under “Image du Monde” in the Bibliography), pp. 7–9.

Footnote 458:

Three manuscripts of the poem contain the assertion that its author was one Gossouin of Metz; only one manuscript of the poem complete with all the additions, alterations, etc., of the second verse redaction mentions Walter of Metz as the author. C. V. Langlois (op. cit., pp. 63–65) believed that both verse redactions must have been the work of Gossouin; Prior (op. cit., pp. 12–15) that the first verse redaction and the prose form were the work of Gossouin and that the second verse redaction may well have been the work of Walter. Uncertainty still prevails regarding the whole matter.

Footnote 459:

The King’s Mirror treats, among many other subjects, of the following matters of geographical interest: the moon, the ebb and flood, streams, climates, differences in the length of days and of summer and winter in northern Norway, marvels of India, marvels of Norway, snowshoes, Iceland, Greenland, whales, earthquakes and ice fields in Iceland, flora and fauna of Greenland, volcanic phenomena in Iceland and Sicily, subterranean fire in Iceland, the small extent of habitable land in Greenland, climatic phenomena, the northern lights and noises accompanying them, a cooler zone to the south of the hot equatorial zone where it is summer during our winter. This synopsis is based on portions of the King’s Mirror as given in translation in Nansen’s In Northern Mists, 1911.

Another Icelandic geographical description of the world, which probably dates from our period, besides drawing on well-known earlier authorities, also gives some idea of the Icelandic conception of geography and furnishes details of the itinerary of a certain Abbot Nicholas to Rome and the Holy Land. See above, p. 115, and also, Nansen, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 237 and reference in note 1 regarding the identity of the author of this work, probably Abbot Nikulás Bergsson of Thverá (died 1159), though believed by Storm to be an Abbot Nikulás of Thingeyre. See also K. Kålund, En islandsk vejviser for pilgrimme fra 12. århundrede, in: Aarböger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie, series 3, vol. iii, Copenhagen, 1913, pp. 51–105.

Footnote 460:

In addition to the general works discussed above, mention must be made of a geographical treatise of minor importance dating from our period. Book III of the Tractatus excerptionum, printed among the works of Hugh of St. Victor in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxvii, cols. 209–216, is entitled De situ terrarum. This contains chapters on the three parts of the earth, on Asia, Africa, and Europe, on mountains, rivers, islands, and cities. Its attribution to Hugh of St. Victor is extremely doubtful. See Santarem, Essai, vol. i, 1849, p. 66, note 2.

Footnote 461:

The monumental Speculum mundi of the Dominican, Vincent of Beauvais, which probably cannot have been written much before 1250, is divided into three parts: Speculum naturale, Speculum doctrinale, and Speculum historiale. There is no complete modern edition. Copies of incunabula and of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century editions are not rare. The work is a gigantic compilation drawn from a great multitude of sources, all of which were carefully indicated by the diligent compiler, together with additions by the compiler himself. Most novel from the geographical point of view are the data on Asia taken from Simon of St. Quentin and from John of Pian de Carpine, which are to be found in Speculum historiale (see above, pp. 269–270). Speculum naturale discusses the various features of the world in the order of their creation. It is in the nature of a vast commentary on the first chapter of Genesis. The following books are of especial geographical significance: II, consisting of metaphysical and theological material on the Creation; IV, dealing with the firmament, and the heavens; V, with meteorology; VI, with the waters; VII, with the lands; XXXIII, with regions habitable by man. The last is a typical cosmography, made up largely of fragments from Isidore, in which chapters are devoted to a discussion of the tripartite division of the earth, Asia and Paradise, India and its marvels, Asia Minor, Europe, Greece, other parts of Europe, Africa, the islands of the ocean which encircles the earth, the islands of the Mediterranean Sea, the Cyclades, etc.

Footnote 462:

Most of Albertus Magnus’ (1193–1280) many and voluminous works, the greatest repertory of Aristotelian science of the Christian Middle Ages, constitute an immense paraphrase of and commentary on all the writings of Aristotle that were available in the mid-thirteenth century. Albert used many of the titles that were applied in the period to Aristotle’s works and the customary division into books and chapters. Of particular interest from the geographical point of view are: De caelo et mundo (Jammy edit., 1651, vol. ii); Libri meteorum (ibid., vol. ii); De natura locorum (ibid., vol. v), and De proprietatibus elementorum (ibid., vol. v). Kretschmer, Phys. Erdk., 1889, passim, and Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873, passim, give a fairly satisfactory general idea of the more important contributions of Albert to cosmology and physical geography.

In the second book of the De caelo et mundo Albert declares that the earth is spherical because the particles which compose it are drawn toward the center of the universe and, in striving to attain that point, arrange themselves symmetrically in the form of a sphere. He gives as proofs of the sphericity of the earth arguments that were familiar to writers of antiquity (see above, p. 368, note 33).

In the Libri meteorum (Meteorology) much material will be found on the atmosphere, on the waters, and on earthquakes. Albert thought that the winds are caused by an earthy humor raised by the sun (Werner, op. cit., pp. 351–352; compare this theory with the theory of Seneca and of William of Conches, pp. 171–172, above). He thought that the areas of the earth’s surface covered by water are much more extensive than those represented by land and that large rivers spring from great cavities in the interior of the earth. These cavities, he maintained, usually correspond in position to the major mountain ranges.

Points of physical geography are also treated at some length in the De proprietatibus elementorum (based upon the pseudo-Aristotelian work of the same title): hot springs, volcanoes, tides, the Deluge, the origin of mountains by earthquakes and by erosion. Albert expresses vigorous opposition to the theory of the periodic rotation of land and sea around the earth’s surface under astrological influences (see above, pp. 14 and 83), but he believed, none the less, that the heavenly bodies through their varying motions and conjunctions may bring to bear powerful local changes in conditions of dampness and dryness which in turn may even produce interchanges of areas of land and sea. He refers to the discovery of the rudder of a great ship when a certain well was dug in muddy ground as evidence of gradual alterations in the relative level of land and sea (Kretschmer, op. cit., p. 125).

In a great many respects the De natura locorum is the most valuable of Albert’s books from the geographical point of view. Kretschmer goes so far as to declare that this work reveals to us in Albert the first great geographer since antiquity (ibid., p. 139). Tractatus I treats, among other matters, of latitudes and longitudes, of the habitable and uninhabitable parts of the earth’s surface, and of climates. Albert denies the older view that the equatorial regions are totally uninhabitable on the ground that people were actually known to dwell therein. Moreover, he was inclined to the belief that the countries near the equator are more temperate and pleasant than those nearer the tropics (see above, p. 164). Albert’s “climatic observations in the Liber de natura locorum have at all times aroused undivided admiration, and we find in them the first attempt at a comparative geography” (Kretschmer, op. cit., p. 139). This applies more especially to his observations regarding the influences of mountains, seas, woods, and other topographic features upon climate. These would well repay careful comparison with the views of William of Conches upon the same topics (see above, p. 178). Tractatus III of the De natura locorum is a “cosmographia,” or description of the regions of the world, following the usual medieval scheme.

Footnote 463:

Bartholomew Anglicus, author of the De proprietatibus rerum, “belonged probably to the circle of insular [British] clerics who were ardently interested in experimental researches and in natural history; of whom the encyclopedist Alexander Neckam was in a measure the precursor, and of whom the Franciscan Roger Bacon was the most illustrious representative” (C. V. Langlois, La connaissance, 1911, p. 117). It has so far been impossible accurately to determine the date of the De proprietatibus rerum, though it falls probably before the middle of the thirteenth century (ibid., p. 118, note 2). This work was a compilation from many different sources and was intended for less educated readers. Book XI is devoted to the phenomena of the air, XIII to the waters, XIV to the earth, and XV to a mappamundi, or description of the various “provinces” of the earth in alphabetical order. There is no modern edition. A summary of the contents will be found in C. V. Langlois, op. cit., pp. 128–179, and a discussion of Bartholomew’s geography is given by Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 424–429. Extracts from an English translation of Berthelet, 1535, are given in Steele, Mediaeval Lore, 1907 (under Bartholomew Anglicus in the Bibliography). The future influence of the work was very far-reaching, especially upon English literature of the Elizabethan period (see Steele, op. cit., pp. 2–4; C. V. Langlois, op. cit., pp. 126–127).

Footnote 464:

The Florentine Brunetto Latino died in 1295. He composed his great Livre du trésor in French during a period of exile in France between 1260 and 1266 (C. V. Langlois, op. cit., p. 328). This work met with a wide success. It is divided into three parts, the first of which is devoted to geography and cosmography. Much of the material here was derived ultimately from Solinus. The Trésor was edited by P. Chabaille in 1863, but a definitive critical edition has not yet appeared. For a criticism of Chabaille’s edition and for a summary of the contents of the first part, see C. V. Langlois, op. cit., pp. 333–391.

Footnote 465:

Among these must be mentioned the following:

1. An unpublished encyclopedia by an otherwise unknown Arnold the Saxon. This dates from between 1210 and 1250 and is preserved in a manuscript in Erfurt. Rose’s edition, 1875, pp. 447–454, gives a summary of the titles of chapters and prints the prologues of each book. Some idea of the character of the work may be gained from Stange’s dissertation and article, both listed in the Bibliography. The first book, entitled De caelo et mundo, and the fourth, De virtute universali, include data on physical geography, meteorology, earthquakes, the sea, rivers, hot springs, and mineralogy (Stange, Arnoldus Saxo, 1885, p. 18) derived in part from Aristotle’s Meteorology (ibid. and Rose, op. cit., p. 450). It has been claimed that Arnold the Saxon’s encyclopedia was used by Vincent of Beauvais, Albertus Magnus, and Bartholomew Anglicus, but this is probably erroneous (see Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 430).

2. The De natura rerum of Thomas of Cantimpré, in twenty books, written between 1228 and 1244 and as yet unedited in a modern edition. Thomas’ work was especially popular in Germany (see C. V. Langlois, op. cit., p. 118, note 2; also Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 372–398).

3. A work of encyclopedic scope entitled Summa philosophiae, which has erroneously been attributed to Robert Grosseteste but which cannot possibly date from before 1250 and may be as late as 1270. It contains chapters on meteorology, tides, and minerals. The full text is given in Baur, Philos. Werke Grossetestes, 1912, pp. 275–643, with a critical discussion of its authorship, pp. 126*-141*.

Footnote 466:

Roger Bacon, one of the most original thinkers of the entire medieval period in matters of natural science, was the last of a series of Englishmen who devoted themselves to these interests. In this group may be counted Adelard of Bath and, at a much later date, Alexander Neckam, Alfred of Sareshel, Daniel of Morley, and Robert Grosseteste (see above, p. 407, note 94). For the last-named, whose teachings in many particulars he adopted and elaborated upon, Bacon had the highest admiration.

Born about 1210–1215, Roger Bacon became a Franciscan between 1245 and 1250. His more important works were completed before 1266 and were condemned as heretical in 1278. He died in the last decade of the century. See Bridges, Life of Bacon, 1914, and Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 616–691.

From the geographical point of view beyond all question the most important of Bacon’s writings was the Opus majus, which sets forth his fundamental ideas in the realms of natural and physical science. Bridges’ edition of this contains a full introduction and a detailed analysis of the text, chapter by chapter. The geographical material will be found in Part IV, on mathematical science. Distinctio ii of Part IV (Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, pp. 109–119) is devoted to the subject of rays of light and emanations from the heavenly bodies and to the problem of the sphericity of the universe. Elsewhere in Part IV the influences of the heavenly rays upon the earth, especially in respect to zones, tides, and the healthfulness of situations, are brought out. Bacon here is largely indebted to Robert Grosseteste (see above, pp. 163–165). These theories are also worked out in some detail in the chapters of Part V (on optics) devoted to the multiplication of species (Bridges’ edit., vol. ii, 1897, pp. 539–543; Werner, Kosm. Roger Baco, 1879, pp. 597–599).

The last portion of Part IV (Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, pp. 175–404), not divided into chapters, is a treatment of two broad subjects:

1. The importance of mathematics in relation to theology. Under this heading, among other points, there is given an explanation of how mathematics aids us in acquiring knowledge of the heavens, of the location of Paradise and of Hell, of sacred geography (that is of the positions and physical conditions of places spoken of in Scripture), of geometry (here the influence of mountains in reflecting the sun’s rays is elucidated; see above, pp. 179–180; Werner, op. cit., p. 599; Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 418), and of numbers (here are explained the size, distance, and relative magnitude of the heavenly bodies in relation to the earth and to the heavenly spheres).

2. The influence of the heavens on things terrestrial (Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, pp. 286–403). According to Bacon geographic conditions are governed by astronomical and astrological forces. This part of the Opus majus shows first how the latter are effective in determining the conditions of habitability on the earth’s surface; it closes with a general description of the habitable earth (see especially Werner, op. cit., p. 545, note 4, and pp. 546–550, on Bacon’s astrological geography, and pp. 600–606, on Bacon’s regional geography). Climata and the practical utility of knowledge of geography and of climates to the missionary are discussed. The description of the habitable earth is particularly full for Egypt, the Holy Land, India, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and Cathay. Much fresh material regarding the Mongols and the Far East was derived from Bacon’s contemporaries, the Franciscan travelers John of Pian de Carpine and William Rubruck (see above, pp. 269–270). Bacon dismisses the geography of Western Europe as too familiar to require special treatment.

Besides the Opus majus, Bacon’s Communia naturalium and commentary on the Secretum secretorum include a few passages of interest to us. In the former the finite character of the universe is explained (Oxford edit., fasc., iv, pp. 369–373; see also, Opus tertium, Brewer’s edit., pp. 140–141), together with some consideration of the dimensions of heaven and of earth (Oxford edit., fasc. iv, pp. 414–418). In the latter (a book of miscellaneous precepts for the guidance of human affairs, which was many times translated from the Arabic during the Middle Ages and which was altered, augmented, and edited by Bacon) there is material on astronomy, on the size and sphericity of the earth, and on the relative extent of land and sea (Oxford edit., fasc. v).

Footnote 467:

Dante treats incidentally of the traditional geography and astronomy of his period in the Convito and in numerous references in the Divine Comedy. His sources were mainly Orosius, Isidore, Albertus Magnus, and Brunetto Latino (see Moore, Studies in Dante: Third Series, 1903, pp. 110–111). A most interesting and original discussion of linguistic geography will be found in the De vulgari eloquentia (see Mori, La geogr., 1922, pp. 289–292; Andriani, La carta dialettologica, 1923, pp. 255–263). The Quaestio de aqua et terra, frequently ascribed to Dante, is of doubtful authenticity. Moore, Studies in Dante: Second Series, 1899, pp. 303–374, Shadwell in his edition of the Quaestio de aqua et terra, 1909, and Mori, op. cit., p. 285, hold it to be a genuine work of the poet; Boffito, Intorno alla “Quaestio de aqua et terra,” Memoria I, 1902, believed it to be spurious; serious objections to Boffito’s arguments, however, were raised by V. Biagi in a review of the former’s work (Bollettino della Società Dantesca, vol. x, Florence, 1903) with the “result that Boffito himself appears to be less resolved to maintain his thesis in his latest publication, La “Quaestio de aqua et terra” di D. A., ed. principe del 1508 riprod. in facsimile, etc., Florence, 1905” (Marinelli, Scritti minori, vol. i, [1908?], p. 196, note 3, p. 219, note 1). See also Arnold Norlind: Dante som geograf och medeltidens behandling av frågan on vatten och land, in: Ymer: Tidskrift utgiven av Svenska Sällskapet för Antropologi och Geografi, vol. xliv, Stockholm, 1924, pp. 260–278.

For references to an edition of the text of Dante and to English translations of his various works see the Bibliography under Dante.

Footnote 468:

For the latest and most authoritative study of Otto, his works and his place among the literary men of the period, see Hofmeister, Otto von Freisingen, 1911–1912.

Footnote 469:

The continuation to 1160 is surely, and that from 1160 to 1170 possibly, the work of Ragewin, Otto’s pupil and notary (Potthast, Wegweiser, vol. ii, 1896, p. 886).

Footnote 470:

Gesta Frid., II, 13, 43. See Hofmeister, op. cit., p. 734.

Footnote 471:

The genuineness of the Ligurinus, which had long been suspected of being an imposture, was established after 1870 by two scholars working simultaneously and independently, Pannenborg and Gaston Paris. Pannenborg, who at first thought that the author of this poem was an Italian, was subsequently converted to the opinion that he was a German by the arguments of Paris. In 1883 Pannenborg definitely established the thesis that the Ligurinus was the work of Gunther of Pairis. See Pannenborg, Über den Ligurinus, 1871; the same, Magister Guntherus, 1873; the same, Der Verfasser, 1884; Gaston Paris, Dissertation critique, 1872; Vulpinus, Der Ligurinus, 1889 (under Gunther of Pairis in the Bibliography), introduction.

Footnote 472:

Pannenborg, Über den Ligurinus, 1871, p. 254.

Footnote 473:

See, for example, the description of the spring, Bk. VI, lines 481–485.

Footnote 474:

Gaston Paris, op. cit., pp. 85–86.

Footnote 475:

See below, p. 412, note 13.

Footnote 476:

See Delaborde’s introduction to the Philippis in: Oeuvres de Rigord, vol. i, 1882, pp. lxxii-lxxiii (under William the Breton in the Bibliography).

Footnote 477:

A thorough study of the geographical ideas expressed in the historical epics of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries would undoubtedly yield fruitful results.

Footnote 478:

The Nearer East as pictured in the old French Crusading literature is discussed by Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901.

Footnote 479:

ibid., pp. 69–73.

Footnote 480:

ibid., p. 70.

Footnote 481:

See preface to Stubbs’s edition of the works of Benedict of Peterborough, vol. i, 1867, pp. ix-lxvii.

Footnote 482:

ibid., vol. ii, p. 122.

Footnote 483:

Chronica, Stubbs’s edit., vol. iii, 1870, pp. 47–55.

Footnote 484:

Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901, pp. 73–75.

Footnote 485:

ibid., pp. 79–83.

Footnote 486:

ibid., pp. 88–89.

Footnote 487:

See Hermannsson, Bibl. Icelandic Sagas, 1908; the same, Northmen, 1909; the same, Bibl. Sagas Kings, 1910.

Footnote 488:

See the same, Bibl. Eddas, 1920.

Footnote 489:

On the Saga of Eric the Red and on the Flateyjarbók, see Reeves, Wineland, 1890, passim.

Footnote 490:

Virtually nothing is known of Ari Frodhi. The Íslendingabók was “written probably shortly after 1134” (Hermannsson, Bibl. Icelandic Sagas, 1908, p. 56).

Footnote 491:

The discovery of Iceland is also described in a Latin work written by “Theodricus monachus,” probably toward the close of the twelfth century and bearing the title Historia de antiquitate regum norwagiensium. Nansen dates this work about 1180 (Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, p. 254). See Hermannsson, Bibl. Sagas Kings, 1910, p. 67.

Footnote 492:

Hermannsson, Northmen, 1909, pp. 5–6; Reeves, op. cit., pp. 79–83.

Footnote 493:

Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 263. The Greenland Annals were compiled by Björn Jonsson (1574–1656).

Footnote 494:

Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, p. 517.

Footnote 495:

This manuscript was discovered in Scotland in 1849. See Hermannsson, Bibl. Sagas Kings, 1910, p. 31.

Footnote 496:

See above, pp. 49–50 and 73–74.

Footnote 497:

The fundamental work on the Romance of Alexander during our period is Meyer, Alexandre le Grand, 1886.

Footnote 498:

The Historia de praeliis, for instance, the tenth-century work of Leo Archipresbyter (see above, p. 381, note 26), was the text from which Frutolf of Michaelsberg derived the version of the Romance of Alexander which he inserted in his chronicle and which thus found its way to the chronicle of Otto of Freising (Meyer, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 39). That the chronicle from which Otto drew was by Frutolf and not by Ekkehard of Aura was shown by Bresslau, Die Chroniken, 1895.

Footnote 499:

This probably dates from the beginning of the twelfth century (Meyer, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 49).

Footnote 500:

On the sources of the Alexandreis, see Francke, Geschichte, 1879, pp. 89–107, and Giordano, Alexandreis, 1917, passim.

Footnote 501:

Meyer, op. cit., pp. 69–101.

Footnote 502:

ibid., pp. 102–132.

Footnote 503:

ibid., pp. 133–253.

Footnote 504:

Meyer, loc. cit., has worked out the probable authorship and derivation of the various parts of the poem. He divides the work as a whole into four consecutive sections or “branches.” Of these the oldest is the third in order and is by Lambert li Tors; this branch contains those parts of the Romance which are concerned with Alexander’s adventures in the heart of Asia and in India; in fact those parts of the work which contain the majority of the elements of geographic interest. To this third branch, the first, second, and fourth were added at a later date. These were the work of Alexandre de Bernai and Pierre de St. Cloud. There are also a number of interpolations into the body of the poem which may not be attributed to any of the three writers named.

Footnote 505:

This poem was entitled Le Roman de toute chevalerie. Meyer (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 275) knew of four manuscripts. In one of these, in Paris, the Roman is ascribed to Thomas of Kent, and in a manuscript in Cambridge it is attributed to Eustace of Kent—Meyer holding that the latter is correct. There is much of geographical interest in the poem. The following are some of the chapter headings of parts dealing with material of geographic significance (from a manuscript in Durham, Library of the Chapter of Durham, C. iv, 27b, as cited by Meyer, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 177–190).

“.i. Le proloug

\.ij. La descripcion del mond....”

“.lxxxiiij. De genz de grant age en Inde.

\.lxxxv. De Gangarides l’idle e de son poeple.

\.lxxxvj. De Polibatre e de son poeple.

\.lxxxvii. Del mont Malens le plus haut del mond.

\.lxxxviij. De genz qe vivent de veneison et de pesson....”

[Further details of races and marvels of India follow.]

“.cxlviij. De Gog et Magog qui mangerent la gent....”

“.ccxxxij. Del pople qu’est apellés Serres et de lur dreiture.”

Footnote 506:

Zarncke, Priester Johannes (under Prester John in the Bibliography), in: Abhandl., vol. vii, 1879, pp. 832–846.

Footnote 507:

Zarncke, op. cit., p. 878. In some manuscripts this Letter is said to be a Latin translation by Archbishop Christian of Mainz; Thorndike, however, observes that it seems “even in its earliest and briefest form without doubt a Western forgery and bears the marks of its Latin origin” (Thorndike, Magic, vol. ii, 1923, p. 240).

Footnote 508:

Edited by Zarncke, op. cit., pp. 872–934.

Footnote 509:

Zarncke, op. cit., in: Abhandl., vol. viii, 1876, pp. 120–127.

Footnote 510:

See Zarncke’s observations regarding the French text (Berichte, vol. xxix, 1877, p. 135) and his edition of the English text (Berichte, vol. xxx, 1878, pp. 41–46). French, English, and Italian texts are addressed to the Emperor Frederick and not to Manuel.

Footnote 511:

See above, p. 50; also pp. 381–382, notes 28, 29.

Footnote 512:

Beazley (Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 112–217) gives an excellent summary of the history of pilgrim travel throughout the Middle Ages, with a résumé of the most important sources. For the bibliography of this subject see especially Röhricht, Bibliotheca, 1890. For English translations of the pilgrims’ accounts of the Holy Land see the publications constituting The Library of the Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, 1897 (see the Bibliography under Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society).

Footnote 513:

Beazley, op. cit., pp. 139–155. See also Bibliography under Saewulf.

Footnote 514:

ibid., pp. 190–195. See also Bibliography under John of Würzburg.

Footnote 515:

ibid., pp. 195–199. See also Bibliography under Theoderic (Pilgrim).

Footnote 516:

From internal evidence the itinerary of Abbot Nikulás can be shown to date from the twelfth century. See above, p. 405, note 90.

Footnote 517:

Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, p. 184.

Footnote 518:

ibid., pp. 186–189. See also Bibliography under Fetellus.

Footnote 519:

ibid., pp. 203–207.

Footnote 520:

See especially Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, pp. 202–216, for citations and translations (into German) of portions of letters which throw light on the medieval feeling for nature.

Footnote 521:

Wattenbach, Guido von Bazoches, 1891 (under Guy of Bazoches in the Bibliography). Wattenbach (op. cit., p. 71) refers to a Libellus de regionibus mundi by Guy of Bazoches now in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 4998.

Footnote 522:

Chronica Slavorum, V, 19, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xxi, pp. 192–196.

Footnote 523:

See Carmoly, Itinéraires, 1847, pp. 115–168, for text and commentary on the itinerary of Samuel bar Simson, 1211, and pp. 171–216, for Jacob of Paris’ description of the holy tombs, 1258. The other itineraries in Carmoly’s volume fall in a period later than that covered by the present study.

Footnote 524:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., 1907, p. xiii.

Footnote 525:

On Benjamin of Tudela, see Adler’s edition of the Itinerary and Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 224–264. For a useful general introduction to the geographical literature of the Jews, see Zunz, Essay, 1841.

As the manuscript of this book is about to go to press there has come to the writer’s attention the brief note by Paul Borchardt, L’itinéraire de Rabbi Benjamin de Tudèle, 1924. Borchardt writes (p. 31): “En différents travaux j’ai prouvé que le célèbre Rabbi Benjamin ne mérite pas le reproche d’inexactitude, même en ce qui concerne la route de Chine.... J’espère prouver par ce qui suit que R. Benjamin mérite comme Marco Polo le nom d’un homme digne de foi.” References are given in footnote 1, p. 31, of Borchardt’s note to other studies by Borchardt relating to Benjamin. Unfortunately the present writer has been unable to consult these. The references follow as given by Borchardt: “Conférence de la Soc. d’Anthrop. de Munich: Reiseweg des R. Benjamin von Tudela und des R. Petachia von Regensburg in Mesopotamien, 3, III. 22., Karawanenstrassen in Arabien nach R. Benjamin von Tudela, Anthropos Wien 1922/23 (4–6), p. 1066 ss., 1923/24 (1–3) et Zur Frage der Falaschajuden in Abessinien, Anthropos, Wien 1923/24 (1–3), carte.” See also below, p. 474, note 237a.

Footnote 526:

Petachia of Ratisbon, Travels, Benisch and Ainsworth’s transl., 1856; Beazley, op. cit., pp. 264–274.

Footnote 527:

This poem is inserted at fol. 13 of Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, nouvelles acquisitions, no. 299, in the midst of the Speculum regum of Godfrey of Viterbo. Delisle, its editor, explains why it should be attributed to Godfrey (Littérature latine, 1890, p. 41; listed under Godfrey of Viterbo in the Bibliography).

Footnote 528:

“Praelia regnorum non hic, set fastus eorum Scribitur, aut fluvius, orbes speciesque locorum Aut series morum, norma colenda, forum.” —Denumeratio, Delisle’s edit., p. 44.

Footnote 529:

Stubbs’s edition of the works of Gervase of Canterbury, vol. i, 1879, p. xxi.

Footnote 530:

On the dimensions of Britain he quotes from Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, I.

Footnote 531:

On the work of Giraldus as a whole see preface to vol. i (pp. i-xcv) of the Rolls Series edition (no. 21), London, 1861, and Lloyd, History of Wales, 1911, vol. i, pp. 554–564.

Footnote 532:

Giraldi Cambrensis opera (Rolls Series No. 21), vol. i, edited by J. S. Brewer, London, 1861, Introduction, p. xl.

Footnote 533:

ibid., vol. vi, edited by J. F. Dimock, London, 1867, pp. xlvi-xlvii.

Footnote 534:

In addition to the Mirabilia, there was written, probably in the twelfth century, a short tract by one Master Gregory, on the marvels of Rome, much of which was copied by Ranulph Higden in his Polychronicon. This appears to have been composed independently of the Mirabilia, although it deals with the same subject. The author may have been an Englishman. See James, Magister Gregorius, 1917 (under Gregory, Master, in the Bibliography), pp. 531–554.

Footnote 535:

Miller’s Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, deals with the Beatus maps and is accompanied by a colored reproduction of the St. Sever Beatus map (our Fig. 2, p. 69). Vol. ii, 1895, is an atlas of photographic reproductions of the Beatus and other maps of the world of the period. Vol. iii, 1895, contains explanatory text on the more important earlier maps, together with photographs and cuts. Vol. iv, 1896, and vol. v, 1896, are devoted to the Hereford and Ebstorf maps of the world from after our period, and vol. vi, 1898, to attempts at the reconstruction of lost mappaemundi. A word of caution is perhaps necessary against too ready acceptance of all of Miller’s theories regarding the connections between maps and the influence of one type upon others. See above, p. 377, note 167, and below, p. 458, note 17.

Footnote 536:

Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 549–642.

Footnote 537:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, pp. 123–126. On p. 124 Miller states that “in the manuscript of the Magna de naturis philosophia of William of Conches ... in the Stuttgart Library, three maps are included, described by Santarem.” See Santarem, Essai, vol. iii, 1852, pp. 499–505. Beazley (Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, p. 626), following Miller, also ascribes these maps to a manuscript of the Magna de naturis philosophia. The manuscript in question, however, is of no other work than William of Conches’ De philosophia mundi, which Santarem (op. cit., pp. 499–500) ascribed wrongly to William of Hirschau (see above, p. 398, note 28). No manuscripts or copies of the Magna de naturis philosophia are extant, and Poole believes that if such a work ever existed it has been wrongly attributed to William of Conches (Poole, Illustrations, 1920, pp. 306–310).

Footnote 538:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, 1895, pp. 126–128.

Footnote 539:

ibid., pp. 118–120.

Footnote 540:

ibid., pp. 110–115.

Footnote 541:

See above, p. 68. See also Miller, op. cit., vol. i, 1895, passim.

Footnote 542:

ibid., vol. iii, 1895, pp. 43–53 and pl. 4.

Footnote 543:

In this respect Lambert’s map resembles a mappamundi made in the eleventh century at Ripoll in Catalonia. On this interesting map see Vidier, Mappemonde de Théodulfe, 1911, pp. 285–315.

Footnote 544:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, pp. 54–57.

Footnote 545:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 21–29 and pl. 2; vol. ii, pl. 13.

Footnote 546:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 71–73.

Footnote 547:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 37–43 and pl. 3; vol. ii, pl. 1.

Footnote 548:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 1–21 and pl. 1; vol. ii, pls. 11 and 12.

Footnote 549:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 61–68.

Footnote 550:

ibid., pp. 68–94.

Footnote 551:

Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, p. 585.

NOTES CHAPTER V THE PLACE OF GEOGRAPHY IN THE MEDIEVAL CLASSIFICATION OF KNOWLEDGE

Footnote 552:

Adam of Bremen, however, used the term “geography,” applying it to the fourth section of his Gesta Hammenburgensis ecclesiae pontificum.

Footnote 553:

Parker, Seven Lib. Arts, 1890, pp. 417–461.

Footnote 554:

See above, p. 366, note 9.

Footnote 555:

Fons philosophiae, Charma’s edit., 1868, Introduction, p. 11.

Footnote 556:

De eodem et diverso, p. 28.

Footnote 557:

“... qua ratione regulam omnibus saeculis perennam de terrae mensura habere posset” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 558:

“Subsequenter ergo orbem in partes, partes in provincias, provincias in regiones, regiones in loca, loca in territoria, territoria in agros, agros in centurias, centurias in iugera divisit” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 559:

De nupt. Phil. et Merc., VI, 580, 587. See Mâle, Religious Art, 1913, p. 78.

Footnote 560:

Anticlaudianus, III, 6.

Footnote 561:

Mâle, op. cit., p. 114.

Footnote 562:

De div. phil., pp. 115–116.

Footnote 563:

“Tercia vero inquirit de terra, de eo quod ipsa inhabitatur et quod non habitatur; et ostenditur quantum est illud, quod inhabitatur et quot sunt partes eius magne, que sunt climata; et comprehendit habitaciones, quas contingit esse in unaquaque illarum in illa hora, et ubi sit locus cuiusque habitacionis, et ordinem eorum ex mundo; inquirit de eo, quod sequitur necessario ut accidat unicuique climatum habitacionum de revolucione mundi continenti totio et est revolucio diei et noctis propter situm terre in loco, in quo sunt sicut ortus et occasus et longitudo diei et noctis et brevitas et alia hiis similia” (ibid.). This passage, together with the greater part of the De divisione philosophiae, is drawn from Al-Fārābī’s book On the Enumeration of the Sciences. Al-Fārābī was a Moslem philosopher and Aristotelian of the tenth century. See Baur’s edition of the De div. phil., 1903, pp. 160, 314.

Footnote 564:

See H. O. Taylor, The Mediaeval Mind: A History of the Development of Thought and Emotion in the Middle Ages, 2 vols., New York, 1914, vol. ii, pp. 312–313.

NOTES CHAPTER VI COSMOGONY, COSMOLOGY, AND COSMOGRAPHY

Footnote 565:

On this rational spirit, see C. B. Jourdain, Dissertation, 1838, pp. 20ff.

Footnote 566:

Poole, Illustrations, 1920, p. 148.

Footnote 567:

“... secundum physicam et ad litteram” (De sex d. op., p. 52).

Footnote 568:

“Causas ex quibus habeat mundus existere et temporum ordinem in quibus idem mundus conditus et ornatus est rationabiliter ostendit” (ibid.). See C. B. Jourdain, loc. cit. On Adelard’s rationalism, see the same, pp. 1O4ff.

Footnote 569:

Hauréau, Thierry de Chartres, 1890, p. 51.

Footnote 570:

Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 40–41.

Footnote 571:

Quaest. nat., ch. 6 in printed edit.; fol. 25v. in Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds lat., no. 6415 (as cited by Haskins, loc. cit.).

Footnote 572:

ibid., ch. 1 in printed edit.; fol. 24 in MS.

Footnote 573:

ibid., ch. 4 in printed edit.; fol. 25 in MS.

Footnote 574:

De phil. mundi, II, 3.

Footnote 575:

“... principium a magistro, sed perfectio debet esse ab ingenio” (ibid., I, 21; quoted by Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 99).

Footnote 576:

Entheticus, 601–624, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcix, col. 978. See Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, p. 227.

Footnote 577:

Translation from Moffat, Complaint of Nature, 1908 (in the Bibliography under Alan of Lille), p. 27. See also Ganzenmüller, loc. cit.

Footnote 578:

See above, p. 223.

Footnote 579:

Historia Norwegiae, Storm’s edit., p. 95.

Footnote 580:

ibid., p. 96.

Footnote 581:

Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 69.

Footnote 582:

Symb. elect., II, 1.

Footnote 583:

Topog. Hiber., I, 13.

Footnote 584:

De laud. div. sap., III, 97–98, 123–124. This point of view was also that of William the Breton, who, in more than one place in his Philippis, writes that it is enough for us to know the facts of such natural phenomena as tides, miraculous springs, and the like, but that the causes of them will forever remain hidden from men (Philippis, VI, 550–551; VIII, 82–90; see above, pp. 193–194).

Footnote 585:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 271–272; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 295.

Footnote 586:

Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 885–890.

Footnote 587:

See K. Werner, Wilhelms von Auvergne Verhältniss zu den Platonikern des XII. Jahrhunderts, in: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Sitzungsberichte, Philosophisch-historische Classe, vol. lxxiv, Vienna, 1873, pp. 119–172.

Footnote 588:

De mundi univ., I, passim.

Footnote 589:

De sex d. op., pp. 52–54.

Footnote 590:

ibid., p. 60.

Footnote 591:

Sententiae, II, 12, 1.

Footnote 592:

Zöckler, Geschichte, vol. i, 1877, pp. 415–421.

Footnote 593:

Hist. schol., Gen. 1.

Footnote 594:

Though Comestor here denies the teachings of Plato in regard to the existence of matter prior to the “Creation,” he adopted a traditional medieval view based on the Timaeus of Plato and given expression by Augustine: that God created time and the universe simultaneously (see above, p. 52). How these two conceptions were reconciled is shown by Daniel of Morley where he writes: “Primus mundus est in eternitate figuratus, secundus cum tempore creatus, tercius in tempore formatus” (De philosophia, Sudhoff’s edit., p. 8). (For Daniel of Morley’s views on hyle see Singer, Daniel of Morley, 1920, p. 267.) Essentially the same Platonic doctrine was shared by Hugh of Amiens, archbishop of Rouen, who wrote in his Tractatio in hexaemeron that God precedes the world by eternity, not by time (Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcii, col. 1249). The De imagine mundi (II, 1) applied the term aevum to God alone; tempora aeterna, beginning before the world and continuing with and after it, to the architypus mundus and to the angels; and tempus to the world (Robbins, Hexaemeral Lit., 1912, p. 7, note 1).

Footnote 595:

De phil. mundi, I, 21.

Footnote 596:

Bede and Hugh of St. Victor also held that the elements were thus segregated at the moment they were called into existence by God (Zöckler, op. cit., vol. i, 1877, pp. 248, 401).

William of Conches argues specifically against the Aristotelian doctrine of a fifth element of which the heavenly bodies are composed (Dragmaticon philosophiae, III, 80–83, cited by Schneider, Abendländische Spekulation, 1915, p. 40, note 1). Duhem (Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 105, 194) saw in William’s De philosophia mundi what seemed to be a remarkable analogy between the ideas there expressed and those expressed by Aristotle in the fourth book of his Physics. Schneider (op. cit., pp. 40–42) points out that Duhem, through failure to take into account the passage in the Dragmaticon to which we have just referred, was led to think that William was actually a believer in the main theories set forth in the Physics. On the contrary, in referring to the elements in the Dragmaticon William merely adopted the traditional Platonic doctrine, and he went on to explain Aristotle’s theory of the fifth element and vigorously to denounce it. Though this shows that William may not have agreed with Aristotle in essentials, it would seem to be, nevertheless, an argument in favor of the existence of an Aristotelian trend of thought in William’s time. See above, p. 401, note 58.

Footnote 597:

Though William denied the possibility of chaos preëxisting the “Creation,” he was none the less accused of heresy by Walter, prior of St. Victor in Paris during the last part of twelfth century, because of his failure to make it clear that God created everything out of nothing. William’s atomic theories suggest the possibility of belief in his mind that matter in the form of atoms had coexisted with God and that at the so-called “Creation” God had merely organized and arranged these atoms. See Hauréau, Singularités, 1861, p. 258; Poole, Illustrations, 1920, pp. 300–301.

Footnote 598:

De sex d. op., p. 62.

Footnote 599:

See above, pp. 15–16. Belief in the World Soul (anima mundi) was a doctrine of Platonism. Theodoric of Chartres (De sex d. op., pp. 60–62), Bernard Sylvester (De mundi univ., passim), and William of Conches (see Poole, op. cit., p. 151) shared it with Peter Abelard (Hauréau, op. cit., p. 253). The two latter, like Theodoric, identified this mysterious unifying conscious spirit of all things with the Holy Ghost and maintained that belief in the World Soul was not inconsistent with the Christian teaching that each individual has a personal soul of his own. The personal soul in some way was thought to be merged with and to form a portion of the World Soul. The theory of the World Soul, however, could not be purged of an heretical taint. At the very beginning of our period Manegold argued as vigorously against it (Contra Wolfelmum Coloniensem opusculum, 1–3) as he argued against the possibility of antipodeans (see above, p. 161). It was also severely condemned by other defenders of more old-fashioned and orthodox beliefs. Peter Comestor says, for example: “Hunc locum male intellexit Plato, dictum hoc putans de anima mundi” (Hist. schol., Gen. 1, 2), and Peter Lombard’s whole treatment of the question of the Trinity in the Sententiae (II, 17) precludes the possibility of a World Soul. Peter Lombard specifically states that the soul of man is not of the same substance as the soul of God.

Footnote 600:

Theodoric adduced various reasons for the rotary motion of the heavens and gave explanations of this phenomenon which so closely resembled the arguments given by Aristotle in his De caelo (I, 8; II, 3), Physics (IV, 4), and De motu animalium (II, 698b) (see above, p. 370, note 42) that Duhem was led by them to the opinion that the Chartres scholar must have had direct access to Arabic translations of versions of Aristotle. See above, p. 154, and p. 401, notes 57, 58.

Footnote 601:

De sex d. op., p. 54.

Footnote 602:

ibid., p. 55.

Footnote 603:

ibid., p. 57.

Footnote 604:

See above, p. 141.

Footnote 605:

De phil. mundi, I, 23; Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873, p. 320.

Footnote 606:

This curious opinion is expressed in De phil. mundi, I, 23. William retracted it in the preface to the sixth book of his Dragmaticon philosophiae on the ground that it contradicts the Scriptural account according to which Eve was made from Adam’s rib. See above, p. 398, note 28.

Footnote 607:

De civitate Dei, XI, 33, in: Corpus script. eccl. lat., vol. xl, pt. 1, pp. 562–564. See also Zöckler, Geschichte, vol. i, 1877, p. 238.

Footnote 608:

Hexaemeron, I, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xci, cols. 17–18. See also Zöckler, op. cit., pp. 247–248.

Footnote 609:

De sacramentis, bk. I, pt. 1, ch. 11, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxvi, col. 195. See also Zöckler, op. cit., vol. i, p. 401.

Footnote 610:

Hist. schol., Gen. 1, 3. See also Zöckler, op. cit., vol. i, p. 417.

Footnote 611:

So Rupert of Deutz, Arnold of Chartres, Hugh of Rouen (ibid., pp. 395, 405, 406).

Footnote 612:

Sententiae, II, 13, 2–6. See also Zöckler, op. cit., pp. 413–414.

Footnote 613:

See Bauer, Philos. Werke des Grosseteste, 1912 (under Grosseteste in the Bibliography), p. 76*.

Footnote 614:

De luce seu de inchoatione formarum, Baur’s edit., pp. 51–59.

Footnote 615:

See Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 284–287, and vol. v, 1917, pp. 356–358.

Footnote 616:

De sex d. op., pp. 53–54.

Footnote 617:

Adnotat. elucidat. in Pentateuchon, Gen. 6, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxv, cols. 34–37; De sacramentis, I, pt. 1, 1–16, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. clxxvi, cols. 187–199. See also Zöckler, op. cit., vol. i, p. 401.

Footnote 618:

De Genesi ad litteram, V, 5, in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xxxiv, cols. 325–327. See also other passages in Augustine’s works cited in Zöckler, op. cit., pp. 236–237.

Footnote 619:

Zöckler, op. cit., p. 406.

Footnote 620:

See above, p. 366, note 7.

Footnote 621:

See above, p. 9.

Footnote 622:

See above, p. 401, note 60.

Footnote 623:

See above, p. 99.

Footnote 624:

See above, p. 82.

Footnote 625:

See above, p. 82.

Footnote 626:

De phil. mundi, III, 19.

Footnote 627:

Zöckler, Geschichte, vol. i, 1877, pp. 429–430. Averroës discussed the origin of matter in his commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, XII (Renan, Averroès, 1866, pp. 108–115). On medieval opposition to the Averroïstic doctrine of the eternity of the world, see the same, pp. 258, 274. On Michael Scot’s denial of this doctrine see Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 260–261; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 285.

Footnote 628:

Duhem, Système, vol. v, 1917, p. 277.

Footnote 629:

Notably in the De finitate motus et temporis and in the unpublished Hexaemeron; see Baur, Philos. Werke des Grosseteste, 1912 (under Grosseteste (under Grosseteste in the Bibliography), pp. 19*-24*—especially p. 23*—93*-95*, 101–106). Robert Grosseteste’s pupil, Roger Bacon, “believed that he was in a position to demonstrate by philosophical proofs that the world had a beginning; and besides he maintained that Aristotle never maintained a contrary doctrine” (Duhem, op. cit., vol. v, p. 402). Albertus Magnus, on the other hand, did not categorically deny the truth of the Aristotelian teaching, “but rather treated it as a theory that must be accepted from the philosophical point of view but rejected from the theological” (Zöckler, op. cit., vol. i, p. 439). Bacon discussed this matter in an unpublished work now preserved in the Bibliothèque Municipale at Amiens, MS. no. 406, fol. 69, col. a; see Duhem, op. cit., vol. iii, 1915, pp. 260–277. Albertus Magnus discussed the same subject in Summa theologiae, pt. II, tract. 11, and in De quattuor coaevis, both cited by Zöckler, op. cit., vol. i, p. 436.

Footnote 630:

See the summary of the De mundi univ. in: Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. xii, Paris, 1763, pp. 267–269.

Footnote 631:

See Anderson, Younger Edda, 1880 (under Snorri Sturluson, II, in the Bibliography).

Footnote 632:

Ginungagap may be related to the great “northerly gulf” referred to above, p. 349.

Footnote 633:

Quotation is here from Anderson’s paraphrase of the leading ideas of the Edda of Snorri Sturluson (Anderson, op. cit., Preface, p. 5).

Footnote 634:

Quod homo sit minor mundus, Baur’s edit., p. 59. See also Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 446.

Footnote 635:

See above, pp. 213–214.

Footnote 636:

Cumont, After Life, 1922, p. 12.

Footnote 637:

See above, p. 185, and also below, p. 436, note 17.

Footnote 638:

It is to be recalled that the De mundi universitate is divided into two books, Megacosmus and Microcosmus. See above, p. 146.

Footnote 639:

There are marked analogies between the theory of the microcosm as expounded by Herrad and by Hildegard of Bingen. Singer believes that “the theory, in the form in which these writers present it, reached the upper Rhineland somewhere about the middle or latter half of the twelfth century” (Singer, Visions of Saint Hildegard, 1917, p. 20).

Footnote 640:

See Singer, op. cit., pp. 30–43, for a discussion of the theory of the macrocosm and microcosm according to Hildegard and for highly interesting reproductions of miniatures illustrating this theory. Singer, believing that the Causae et curae and Subtilitates are spurious (see above, p. 396, note 8), omits consideration of these works in this connection.

Footnote 641:

“In creatione hominis de terra alia terra sumpta est, quae homo est, et omnia elementa ei serviebant, quia eum vivere sentiebant, et obviam omnibus conversationibus ejus cum illo operabantur et ipse cum illis” (Subtilitates, I, praefatio, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 1125).

Footnote 642:

Causae et curae, I (Kaiser’s edit., p. 2).

Footnote 643:

Thorndike, Magic, vol. ii, 1923, pp. 153–154.

Footnote 644:

Subtilitates, praef., in: Migne, op. cit., vol. cxcvii, cols. 1125–1128.

Footnote 645:

“Terram centrum idest punctum vocamus eo quod sit media in spera.” “Terra autem in medio celestris circuli per quem sol currit ut centro locata est” (Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 8865, fol. 55vo).

Footnote 646:

Grosseteste, De sphaera, Baur’s edit., pp. 12–13.

Footnote 647:

Im. du monde, I, 13. See above, p. 15.

Footnote 648:

John of Holywood, De sphaera, 1.

Footnote 649:

Translation of Al-Farghānī’s Astronomy by John of Seville (or Johannes Hispanensis, or John of Luna), Nuremberg edit., diff. iv, fol. 4ro. In the De sphaera, loc. cit., John of Holywood stated that Ptolemy and all philosophers had declared that six signs and the middle of the heaven (medietas caeli)—by which he probably meant the celestial equator—were visible from any place whatsoever to which a man might go on the surface of the earth. If the earth were not at the center of the universe it would be impossible, he argued, to see the medietas caeli from those parts of the earth nearest the firmament: “aliquis existens in illa parte superficiei terrae quae magis accederet ad firmamentum non videret caeli medietatem.”

Figure 10 illustrates what appears to have been John’s line of reasoning as well as the flaws in it. With the earth in position I, not in the center of the universe, the celestial equator (E-E′) is invisible from all points between x and y through N (the north pole), x and y being points at which tangents E-x and E′-y touch the earth’s surface. If the earth is in the center of the universe and the sphere of the universe is incomparably great in relation to the size of the earth—something which John believed to be true (see above, p. 155)—the area between x′ and y′ will be reduced to a very small area around N′. John seems to have assumed that the universe is large enough to make this area negligible. Such an area must exist, nevertheless, with all but an infinitely great celestial sphere. But if the universe were of infinite dimensions, John’s entire argument based on the invisibility of E-E′ from an earth not in the center would fall to the ground, for all points may be deemed the center of an infinite universe. See also below, p. 426, note 118.

Ptolemy’s Almagest, I, 4, contains an argument aimed to demonstrate why the earth must be at the center of the universe. John of Holywood’s reasoning is a confused attempt to condense the argument of Ptolemy into a short space.

Footnote 650:

De imag. mundi, I, 5.

Footnote 651:

ibid., I, 1.

Footnote 652:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 885.

Footnote 653:

Hist. schol., Gen. 1, 4.

Footnote 654:

Im. du monde, I, 10.

Footnote 655:

Expos. in hex., cols. 735–736.

Footnote 656:

De phil. mundi, IV, 1.

Footnote 657:

Abelard (loc. cit.) and William of Conches (loc. cit.) compare the shell of the egg to the fire, the skin to the air, the white to the water, and the yolk to the earth. Daniel of Morley makes the same comparison, as follows: “Mundus vero ad similitudinem ovi factus est vel dispositus. Terra est in medio ut vitellum in ovo; circa hanc est aqua ut circa vitellum album; circa aquam aer ut panniculus continens album. Extra vero cetera concludens est ignis ad modum teste ovi” (De philosophia, Sudhoff’s edit., p. 20).

Footnote 658:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 271–272; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 295–296.

Footnote 659:

“Et terra modica est et prope fundum firmamenti est, quod si in medio firmamenti esset, tunc eam oporteret maiorem esse et tunc etiam facile caderet et dirumperetur, si tantam amplitudinem aeris sub se haberet, quantam super se habet. Sed et ipsa ad meridiem quasi descensus montis est, unde etiam ibi maiorem calorem de sole habet, quia sol et firmamentum ipsi viciniora ibi sunt. Ad aquilonem vero alta est adversum poenas, et etiam ibi maius frigus est, quia nec firmamentum nec sol ibi prope terram sunt, sed quaedam maior amplitudo firmamenti” (Causae et curae, II, Kaiser’s edit., p. 49).

Footnote 660:

Liber div. op., pars I, visio II, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, cols. 751–755, 759–760. In a previous vision referred to in the passage just cited and described in Scivias, I, visio III (Migne, op. cit., col. 405), Hildegard saw the universe as an egg, in which the earth appeared as follows: “Et in medio istorum elementorum quidam arenosus globus plurimae magnitudinis erat; quem eadem elementa ita circumdederant, quod nec hac nec illac dilabi poterat. Sed dum interdum eadem elementa cum praedictis flatibus se invicem concuterent, eumdem globum sua fortitudine aliquantulum moveri. Et vidi inter aquilonem et orientem velut maximum montem, qui versus aquilonem multas tenebras et versus orientem multam lucem continebat; ita tamen quod nec lux illa ad tenebras, nec tenebrae ad lucem pertingere poterant.”

Singer in his Visions of Saint Hildegard, 1917, pp. 22–30, discusses Hildegard’s theories of the structure of the material universe as revealed in the records of her visions. Particularly striking are the colored illustrations taken from miniatures in manuscripts of her works. Singer asserts (p. 22) that “the concentric structure of the universe is a commonplace of mediaeval science, and is encountered, for instance, in the works of Bede, Isidore, Alexander of Neckam, Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, and Dante. To all these writers, however, the universe is spherical. The egg-shape is peculiar to Hildegard. Many of the Mappaemundi of the Beatus and other types exhibit the surface of the habitable earth itself as oval, and it was from such charts that Hildegard probably gained her conception of an oval universe. In her method of orientation also she follows these maps, placing east at the top of the page where we are accustomed to place the north.” This statement would seem to be misleading if it means that the comparison of the universe with an egg is peculiar to Hildegard. As is shown by the texts cited above, p. 151, and below, note 100, ad fin., this comparison was a frequent one throughout our period. It does not, however, necessarily imply belief that the universe is shaped like an egg, but merely that its concentric structure corresponds with that of the egg. Furthermore, in the opinion of the present writer, the fact that the Beatus and other maps of the period show the surface of the habitable earth as an oval or rectangle should not necessarily be taken as meaning that the draftsmen of the maps believed that the earth was oval or rectangular. The maps were highly conventionalized, and their shape was often determined by the shape of the page upon which they were drawn. On the other hand, Hildegard in her Scivias unquestionably meant to describe an egg-shaped universe. Otherwise she would not have been so careful to point out at the opening of the Liber divinorum operum that in the earlier vision described in Scivias the universe had appeared as an egg whereas in the vision she was about to describe it appeared as a wheel.

Footnote 661:

“In medio quoque aeris terra posita est, ita scilicet ut aer aequali mensura super terram, ac sub terra, et in utraque partes terrae sit” (Liber div. op., pars I, visio IV, cap. 63).

Doubts have been thrown on the authenticity of the Causae et curae as a work of Hildegard (see above, p. 396, note 8). The three passages quoted in this and the two preceding notes show that in both phrasing and substance the passage from the Causae et curae bears marked resemblances to the passages from the two other known works of Hildegard, even though there is inconsistency in regard to the central issue relating to the position of the earth. If the Causae et curae were not written by Hildegard, it was assuredly the work of someone thoroughly familiar with her writings.

Footnote 662:

De imag. mundi, I, 5.

Footnote 663:

De phil. mundi, IV, 2–3.

Footnote 664:

See above, p. 368, note 33.

Footnote 665:

John of Holywood, De sphaera, 1.

Footnote 666:

Similar arguments are set forth in Robert Grosseteste’s De sphaera, Baur’s edit., p. 13.

Footnote 667:

See Alexander Neckam, De nat. rer., II, 14, where much the same argument is given. Neckam adds that the roundness of drops of dew is proof of the inherent tendency of water to assume a spherical shape.

Footnote 668:

The text upon which this accusation is based is from Otia imper., II, 2, where Gervase says: “Nos tamen assignantes orbis divisionem distributioni filiorum Noë, a quibus summa totius orbis coepit partitio, orbem totius terrae Oceani limbo circumseptum et quadratura statuimus secundum Pauli Orosii sententiam, eiusque tres partes Asiam, Europam et Africam nominamus.” This was interpreted by Daunou (Discours, 1824, p. 120)—who was followed by Santarem (Essai, vol. i, 1848, p. 107), C. B. Jourdain (Infl. d’ Arist., 1861, pp. 19–20), and others—as implying that Gervase believed the earth to be square. On the other hand, Lecoy de La Marche rallied to the defense of Gervase (Connaiss. géogr., 1884, p. 208). He argued that the passage should be rendered thus: “Nous calculons, nous pensons, que le monde terrestre est entouré et encadré (quadratum) par une ceinture de mers” and that elsewhere Gervase asserts definitely that the earth is a sphere: “Forma eius (terrae) rotunda est ad modum pilae” (Otia imper., vol. i, p. 885). As a matter of fact Gervase was speaking of the universe and not of the earth when he made this comparison with a ball, and Lecoy de La Marche would have been more correct if he had inserted mundi after eius instead of terrae. It seems, nevertheless, that we are justified in rejecting the text first quoted as furnishing any sure evidence that Gervase believed the earth to be square, especially since he also adopted the old comparison of the universe to an egg (Otia imper., loc. cit.) with which it would have been difficult, though not impossible, to reconcile a theory of a square earth. Gervase, however, had an uncritical mind. His work was in large measure one of compilation from the writings of others, and it would not be surprising to find contradictory statements in it. Quite as contradictory passages on the same subject occur in Isidore and in most medieval writings of a similar encyclopedic character. See above, p. 54. Lecoy de La Marche, it would seem, tried to do the impossible when he attempted to show that Gervase had clear and consistent ideas of a scientific nature.

There is no question, however, but that belief in the sphericity of the earth was well grounded in the consciousness of many Western Europeans of the late twelfth century. Other evidence of this beside that already cited is furnished by the fact that in an ecstasy Alpis (or Alpäis) of Cudot, of the diocese of Sens, was said to have seen the entire world in the form of a globe, compact and united. The sun was larger than the earth; and the latter was suspended in the midst of the air like an egg surrounded by water on all sides (Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. ix, 1750, p. 155). This vision was much like those of Hildegard of Bingen; see above, p, 423, note 92.

Footnote 669:

Causae et curae, II; Kaiser’s edit., p. 49, quoted above, p. 423, note 91. The fact that Hildegard here states that if the earth were in the middle of the firmament it would have to be larger or else it would fall, would seem to necessitate belief in a flat earth contiguous with the firmament. The passage from Causae et curae, I, Kaiser’s edit., p. 23, translated above, pp. 183–184, would also seem to require the same belief.

Footnote 670:

See above, p. 54.

Footnote 671:

See passages quoted above, p. 423, notes 91 and 92.

Footnote 672:

Scivias, I, visio III, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 405; Liber div. op., pars I, visio II, in: Migne, op. cit., cols. 751–755, 759–760; pars I, visio IV, in: Migne, op. cit., col. 869.

Footnote 673:

De arca Noë myst., 14. For a similar text see Daniel of Morley’s De philosophia, Sudhoff’s edit., pp. 9–10.

Footnote 674:

See above, p. 369, notes 39 and 40.

Footnote 675:

De imag. mundi, I, 5.

Footnote 676:

De sex d. op., p. 58.

Footnote 677:

See above, p. 370, note 42; p. 401, note 58; p. 419, note 32.

Footnote 678:

Quaest. nat., 48 (49). Adelard’s arguments resemble those of Aristotle in the De caelo. See above, p. 370, note 42; p. 401, note 58.

Footnote 679:

Similar Aristotelian arguments are to be found in Alexander Neckam’s De nat. rer., I, 16. Neckam cites Aristotle as his authority.

Footnote 680:

De sphaera, 1.

Footnote 681:

“Haec [i. e. terrae] centrum in medio mundi ut punctus in medio circuli aequaliter collocatur ...” etc. (De imag. mundi, I, 5). “Tanta est firmamenti quantitas ut ipsi totalis terra collata quasi punctum esse videatur” (Alexander Neckam, De nat. rer., I, 5). Michael Scot, however, believed that “the distance to the extreme of the waters beneath the earth equals the distance to the moon” (Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 272; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 295–296).

Footnote 682:

“Cum ergo corpus solis et terrae aequalia non sunt, quippe cum sit sol octies major quam terra, umbram terrae κυλίνδρος esse non potest” (De phil. mundi, II, 32).

Footnote 683:

Im. du monde, I, 14. This is based on Neckam, loc. cit.

Footnote 684:

Im. du monde, III, 16. Neckam (De nat. rer., I, 8), with whose text the Image du monde here corresponds, borrowed from Ptolemy certain details in regard to the relative sizes of sun, earth, planets, and stars. The sun is by far the largest body in the universe, 166 and a fraction times larger than the earth. Next after the sun rank fifteen of the largest fixed stars; Jupiter ranks in the third place, Saturn in the fourth, the remainder of the fixed stars in the fifth, Mars in the sixth, the earth in the seventh, Venus in the eighth, the moon in the ninth, and Mercury in the tenth. See Ptolemy, Almagest, V, 16.

Footnote 685:

De sphaera, 1.

Footnote 686:

“Item si intelligatur superficies plana super centrum terrae dividens eam in duo aequalia, et per consequens ipsum firmamentum, oculus igitur existens in centro terrae videret medietatem firmamenti; idemque existens in superficie terrae videret eandem medietatem. Ex his colligitur quod insensibilis est quantitas terrae quae est a superficie ad centrum et per consequens quantitas totius terrae insensibilis est respectu firmamenti” (loc. cit.).

John of Holywood’s argument is here closely related to that employed by him to prove that the earth must be in the center of the universe as set forth above, p. 422, note 81. It would seem probable that by “an eye stationed in the center of the earth” he means an eye on a line between the center of the earth and the medietas firmamenti, and by “the same (eye) stationed on the surface of the earth” he means on the surface at a point where a line at right angles to the line from the center of the earth to the medietas firmamenti cuts the surface of the earth. Referring, then, to Figure 10, p. 422, above, let us assume that line E-E′ represents the plane through the medietas firmamenti and the center of the earth (C). When the earth is at the center of the universe line C-N′ will represent the line drawn at right angles to this plane. With a universe of infinite dimensions obviously N′-E and N′-E′ would be parallel to E-E′, and the medietas firmamenti would be visible from N′. John assumes that the universe is so large in relation to the earth that the area around N′ whence E-E′ would be invisible is negligible.

Footnote 687:

Almagest, I, 5.

Footnote 688:

De imag. mundi, I, 5.

Footnote 689:

Im. du monde, III, 15.

Footnote 690:

Liber floridus, Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 8865, fol. 55vo. A note illustrating a diagram on the same page of the same manuscript gives 240,000 stades for the circumference, one of the two figures of Posidonius. See above, p. 16.

Footnote 691:

De sphaera, 1.

Footnote 692:

See the various works referred to on pp. 95–98, above. Robert Grosseteste’s De sphaera includes a very clear discussion of the main elements of geocentric astronomy as taught in the early thirteenth century.

Footnote 693:

See above, pp. 17–18.

Footnote 694:

De mundi univ., p. 17.

Footnote 695:

De imag. mundi, I, 6.

Footnote 696:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 892.

Footnote 697:

Etym., XIII, 6.

Footnote 698:

De phil. mundi, III, 2–3.

Footnote 699:

“Extra tres autem partes orbis, quarta pars trans oceanum interior est in meridie, quae solis ardore incognita nobis est. In cuius finibus antipodas fabulosae inhabitare produntur.” Text (not legible on our Fig. 2, p. 69) from Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, p. 58. See Isidore, Etym., XIV, 5, 17. Gervase of Tilbury describes the austral continent in similar terms: “Porro inter mare rubrum et Oceanum plaga torrida est, propter calorem nobis incognita, in cuius finibus antipodes esse dicuntur” (Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 760).

Footnote 700:

See above, p. 385, note 58.

Footnote 701:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, 1895, p. 50.

Footnote 702:

“Hic antipodes nostri habitant, sed noctem diversam diesque contrarios perferunt ...” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 703:

See above, p. 185.

Footnote 704:

Microcosmus, Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds St. Victor, no. 738, fol. 18vo.

Footnote 705:

De sphaera, Baur’s edit., pp. 24–25. Amphitrite is also discussed in the Liber de essentiis of Hermann the Dalmatian, dating from 1143, in a geographical passage published recently by Haskins (Studies, 1924, pp. 62–64): “Hinc vero per Amphitritis sinus ab Athlante Libico Strixisque inflexu per littora Gaditana per confinia Thiles proprie Temiscirios campos e vicino portibus Caspiis usque ad Caucason et Ethiopici Gangis effluxus.” In another passage of the same work quoted by Haskins (op. cit., p. 64) Hermann indicates that in the latitude of Lisbon and Toledo eight equal land stages are the equivalent of 4° of longitude, that the width of Amphitrite is 44°, or the equivalent of eighty-eight equal land stages, and that there is an opinion that paradise lies beyond this ocean. “... spatium ... dierum 44 que secundum quod ratio tribuit est dimidia latitudo Amphitritis, tota (totam) videlicet itineris terrestris equabilis dierum fere 88. Tantum ergo spatii vel etiam aliquanto plus que ratio hucusque transnatari prohibuit nondum audivimus nisi forte illa quam (que) exposuimus. In ea tamen parte non modica est opinio eam esse regionem quam paradisum vocant, cuius indicio sunt signa tam ab oriente quam ab occidente.” In this same passage Hermann states that Toledo is 62° west of Arin (see above, p. 86). One would therefore expect the width of Amphitrite to be 44° in order to bring to 90° the total distance from Arin to the prime meridian in the midst of Amphitrite (Haskins, op. cit., p. 64, note 202).

Footnote 706:

Im. du monde, II, 1.

Footnote 707:

“Quid significat globus aureus, qui regum manibus gestatur? Aureus ille globus pomum vel palla vocatur, Unde figuratum mundum gestare putatur, Quando coronatur, palla ferenda datur. Significat mundum forma peribente rotundum, Intus habet plenum terrestri pondere fundum, Quem tenet archanum palla ferenda manu. Hec fuit ex terris mundi collecta quaternis; Ut foret imperii manibus gestenda supernis. Hac tulit imperium Iulius arte suum. Taliter hunc mundum gestat manus una rotundum, Regius includit sic omnia climata pugnus, Taliter omne quod est regia pompa tenet.” —Pantheon, particula xxvi, 4; in: _Mon. Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol. xxii, pp. 274–275; pars 19 in Herold’s edit., 1559, col. 620.

Footnote 708:

Eugen Oberhummer, Das britische Weltreich und die imperialistischen Staatenbildung früherer Zeit, in: Mitteilungen der Geographischen Gesellschaft in Wien, vol. lxiii, 1920, pp. 108–109. See also Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, pp. 129–131.

Footnote 709:

“In den bûchen vant er ouch dô, daz eine werlt wêre sô gelegen under dirre erde: swen ez hie naht werde, daz ez danne dort tac sî.” Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871, p. 51.

Footnote 710:

De nupt. Phil. et Merc., VI, 602–608.

Footnote 711:

The word antipodes as we employ it at the present time refers rather to the antichthones of Capella. These terms, however, were not used with consistency by classical and medieval writers.

Footnote 712:

In som. Scip. com., II, 5.

Footnote 713:

De phil. mundi, IV, 3. Alexander Neckam also did not deny the abstract possibility of the existence of antipodeans: “Nonne enim et antipodes sub pedibus nostris esse dicuntur. Si tamen philosophice loqui volueris, non magis sunt sub pedibus nostris quam nos sub pedibus eorum. Sed numquid de primis parentibus descenderunt antipodes? Secundum Augustinum non sunt antipodes, sed doctrinae causa aut figmenti ita dici solet” (De nat. rer., pp. 159–160).

Footnote 714:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 975.

Footnote 715:

“Mira res a messibus subterraneis veniens hyemalia frigora videt in nostro haemispherio perseverare, quod utique solis absentiae ac vicariae praesentiae merito adscribendum duxi” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 716:

Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 64–65. For data relating to another attack on Macrobius’ cosmography preserved in a twelfth-century manuscript in Cambrai see Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 98–103.

Footnote 717:

The Latin text of the passage of which this is a free paraphrase, runs as follows: “Suscepto enim semel, quatuor habitationes hominum esse, quorum ad se invicem nulla penitus possit esse per naturam commeandi licentia, dic age, quomodo verum erit, quod Sancta, & Apostolica rationalibiliter confitetur Ecclesia, Salvatorem videlicet, per primos Patres ab ipsis, ut ita dicam, huius Mundi cunabulis praesignatum, & a Patriarchis, & Prophetis consequenter multifarie, & multis evidentibus modis praefiguratum, tandem in plenitudine temporis, ineffabilibus humilitatis, & caritatis suae operibus cognitum, ac clarificatum, in salutem totius humani generis advenisse, si tria hominum genera excepta sunt, quae praedictus Macrobius praeter hanc habitabilem, quam incolumus, secundum zonarum Coeli, & terrae temperiem, posse esse persuadet, ad quae tantae salubritatis notitia pervenire non potuit? Ubi est, quod ille fidelis, quem invenit Dominus virum secundum cor suum, in spiritu veritatis clamat: ‘Ante conspectum gentium revelavit justitiam suam Deus.’ Et ibidem: ‘Videbunt omnes fines terrae salutare Dei nostri,’ si aliqui fines terrae sunt ab hominibus inhabitati, ad quos sonus Prophetarum, & Apostolorum nostrorum prohibente natura per inaccessibiles aquarum, frigorum, calorumve distantias transire nequivit?” (Manegold, Opusculum, Muratori’s edit., 1713, pp. 175–176.)

Footnote 718:

Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 14704, fol. 114vo. See also above, p. 96.

Footnote 719:

Dialogus, I, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clvii, col. 547. Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 10722, fol. 77ro, gives a diagram illustrating the eccentricity of the sun’s orbit. In accord with the Moslem cartographic tradition, south is at the top.

Footnote 720:

Plato of Tivoli’s translation of Al-Bāttanī’s Astronomy, Bologna edit., 1645, p. 26 (from Opus astron., 6, Nallino’s edit., pt. i, 1903, p. 14). Essentially the same ideas, though expressed in somewhat different terms, are to be found in the Liber de essentiis of Hermann the Dalmatian. See above, p. 400, note 48.

Footnote 721:

De lineis angulis, etc., Baur’s edit., p. 64. Roger Bacon’s views on the influence of pyramidal rays as set forth in Opus majus (Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, pp. 117–143) are discussed in Werner, Kosm. Roger Baco, 1879, pp. 597–600. Bacon’s indebtedness to Grosseteste, however, does not seem to be sufficiently emphasized by Werner. See above, pp. 179–180 and p. 408, note 97.

Footnote 722:

De natura locorum, Baur’s edit., pp. 66–67.

Footnote 723:

De sphaera, Baur’s edit., pp. 20–24.

Footnote 724:

De natura locorum, Baur’s edit., p. 69.

Footnote 725:

Emmanuel de Martonne, Traité de géographie physique, 3rd edit., Paris, 1920, p. 40.

Footnote 726:

De sphaera, Baur’s edit., p. 25.

Footnote 727:

Opus majus, Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, p. 192. See Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, pp. 416–419.

Footnote 728:

De natura locorum, Baur’s edit., pp. 68–69.

Footnote 729:

See above, pp. 179–180, and below, p. 431, note 7.

NOTES CHAPTER VII THE ATMOSPHERE

Footnote 730:

Those parts of the Dragmaticon philosophiae and of the De philosophia mundi which deal with meteorology are conveniently available in Hellmann, Denkmäler, 1904, pp. 42–54, 69–75. See also the extensive discussion in Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873.

Footnote 731:

De phil. mundi, I, 21; III, 1; III, 14. See also Werner, op. cit., p. 318.

Footnote 732:

De phil. mundi, I, 21. See also Werner, op. cit., pp. 316–317.

Footnote 733:

De phil. mundi, I, 17–21. See also Werner, op. cit., pp. 313–315.

Footnote 734:

These five regions were: (1) the celestial region, or sphere of the fixed stars; (2) the region of ether, which reaches from the sphere of the fixed stars down to that of the moon; (3) the upper air, clear and lucid; (4) the lower air, turbid and cloudy; and (5) the earth. (De phil. mundi, I, 16–21). See Werner, loc. cit., for discussion of these ideas, of their derivation from Plato’s Timaeus and from later Platonists, and of the “demons” associated with each of the five regions.

Footnote 735:

De phil. mundi, IV, 5: III, 5, 6.

Footnote 736:

Robert Grosseteste believed that if you take into account the theoretical principles of the “pyramids” of rays alone (see above, pp. 163–164), mountain heights should be hotter than valleys because the pyramids striking the crests of mountains are shorter than those striking the floors of valleys (De natura locorum, Baur’s edit., p. 66). In other words, mountain summits theoretically ought to be warmer because they are nearer the sun. In the De natura locorum Robert explains that accidental circumstances frequently cause a reversal of these conditions in such a way that the heights may be dominated by cold. Among these accidental circumstances are the winds and also the fact that peaks rise to the “middle space of the air or of the sphere where there is the greatest cold (medium interstitium aeris vel sphaerae, ubi est maxima frigiditas).”

Footnote 737:

“... calor non provenit ex corpore solari, sed ex reflexione et condensatione radiorum” (De impressionibus elementorum, Baur’s edit., p. 88).

Footnote 738:

ibid., pp. 87–88.

Footnote 739:

See above, p. 23.

Footnote 740:

“Triplex est universa dimensio, in longum, latum, et altum. Quoniam igitur omnis corporis sedes in fundamento suo terra vero tocius mundi fundamentum, multo pocius mundane prolis ex substantia collecte sedem terram esse necesse est. Eius pars quedam a terra in altum crescit, alia vero super terram in altum elevatur tocius fomentum hic spiritus terreni vapores pinguedine crassus, sine quo nulla huius geniture vita per aliquot horarum spacia possibilis. Hic autem vapor, ut per altitudinem Olimpi concipit Aristotiles, a terre superficie non plus quam .xvi. stadiis exaltatur. Hic ergo terminus videtur in altum omnis nostre habitabilis. Videtur fortasse huius altitudinis mensura sumi posse vel per arcum yris que secundum Ipparci descriptionem ab ipsis nubibus usque in superficiem terre perveniat. Sed quoniam nec ipsa descriptio constans nec ipsius arcus ad semicirculum habitudo, propterea nos id cuilibet probandum relinquimus” (Liber de essentiis, text from Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 62, where variant readings from different manuscripts are given). Haskins points out that Aristotle (Meteor., I, 13) omits Olympus from his list of the highest mountains.

Footnote 741:

See above, p. 169, and below, p. 432, note 16.

Footnote 742:

Hist. schol., Gen. 34; copied in Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imper., vol. i, p. 893.

Footnote 743:

The origin of this story has not been traced by the present writer. It would certainly seem to be based on some actual knowledge of the physiological effects of lower air pressure at great heights.

According to Benini (Origine del Monte del Purgatorio, 1917, p. 1085) Dante (Purgatorio, XXVIII, 103–112; see also Inferno, IV, 26–28, 149–150) held that the Mount of Purgatory reaches above the lower levels of the atmosphere, which are corrupted by the earth and where winds, clouds, rain, hail, and rainbows are to be found, into a realm of motionless air. The very summit of the mountain where the Terrestrial Paradise is situated is in a belt of air which moves from east to west with the motion of the ninth sphere.

Footnote 744:

“Nos vero dicimus quod ille aer non spissatur, sed fumus humidus qui ex convallibus ascendit, ex frigiditate superiorum in nubes et nives constringitur” (De phil. mundi, IV, 5).

Footnote 745:

Dialogus, IX, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clvii, col. 631.

Footnote 746:

De phil. mundi, III, 4–8.

Footnote 747:

Of the water drawn up by the sun, the lighter or “more liquid” (liquidius) portions were supposed actually to have been turned into fire and in this way to have served as a replenishment for the solar fires. The coarser portions fell back to the earth. A blood rain was caused by great heat.

Footnote 748:

See E. W. Gudger, Rains of Fishes, in: Natural History: The Journal of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. xxi, 1921, New York, pp. 607–619.

Footnote 749:

De sex d. op., p. 54.

Footnote 750:

William of Conches follows Theodoric in this explanation of snow and hail (De phil. mundi, III, 4, 8, 9). In the epic poem, Philippis (IX, 672–682), of William the Breton there is a remarkable description of a nocturnal fog lying over the humid and fertile ground near Lille, so thick that a rider could scarcely discern the ears of his horse in front of him. William attributed the fog to damp vapors rising from beneath the muddy surface of the plain rather than to a more probable cause: the cooling and condensation of water vapor in the lower strata of the atmosphere as a result of active radiation from the earth’s surface.

Footnote 751:

Top. Hiber., I, 6. On the miraculous production of rain, see above, pp. 203–204, and below, p. 433, note 31.

Footnote 752:

De phil. mundi, III, 7 (cited by Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873, p. 375). William discusses opposing views as to the end of the world, whether it will come by flood or by fire (see above, pp. 13–14). William himself was inclined to believe that it would be by fire.

Footnote 753:

See above, p. 184.

Footnote 754:

Hist. schol., Gen. 34.

Footnote 755:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 907. See below, p. 446, note 18.

Footnote 756:

The presence of fossils on mountains was cited by early Christian writers as proof that the Deluge rose higher than the highest mountains. See references in E. S. McCartney, Fossil Lore in Greek and Roman Literature, in: Proceedings of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, vol. iii, New York, 1924, pp. 23–38, references on p. 35.

Footnote 757:

Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 893–894.

Footnote 758:

“‘Non maledicam ultra terram, propter homines. Tempus sementis et messis, frigus et aestas, nox et dies requiescent.’ Forte nondum ita plene distincta erant tempora quatuor, quia nec usque ad diluvium aquae collectae fuerant in nubes” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 759:

Liber div. op., pars III, visio VII, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 966. Quotation from Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 136.

Footnote 760:

On the supernatural production of storms and wind, and on the belief that they are caused by magic and by evil spirits in the air, see White, Warfare, 1920, vol. i, pp. 336–350; Hoffmann, Anschauungen, 1907, PP· 85–91; and, especially, J. G. Frazer, The Golden Bough, Part I, The Magic Art and the Evolution of Kings, London, 1911, vol. i, pp. 244–331. See also above, pp. 203–204 and 209.

A characteristic story of this sort is related in the Gesta regis Ricardi, falsely ascribed to Benedict of Peterborough. Here we are told that a huge black dragon raises waterspouts in the Gulf of Satalia on the south coast of Asia Minor. The author adds, however: “Quidem autem dicunt quod hoc non est draco sed sol qui attrahit aquas maris ad se, quod plus verum videtur” (Gesta regis Ricardi, vol. ii, p. 197). The author is also skeptical towards a fantastic story of how storms are produced in the same gulf by the rising to the surface of the head of an abortive child that had been thrown into its waters (ibid., p. 196).

Footnote 761:

De imag. mundi, I, 54.

Footnote 762:

“Ventus ... est ... aer commotus et agitatus” (Otia imper., vol. i, p. 889).

Footnote 763:

“Est igitur ventus aer densus usque ad offensionem (quidem) motus. Esse enim venti genus aerem estimo” (Quaest. nat., 59 (60)). On references to the Quaestiones naturales, see the Bibliography under Adelard of Bath.

Footnote 764:

“Ventus igitur est aer in unam partem flans” (Dragmaticon philosophiae, in: Hellmann, Denkmäler, 1904, p. 42).

Footnote 765:

Liber div. op., pars I, visio II, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 762; Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 132.

Footnote 766:

Causae et curae, I, Kaiser’s edit., p. 4.

Footnote 767:

ibid., p. 5.

Footnote 768:

De phil. mundi, III, 15.

Footnote 769:

Quaest. nat., 59 (60); quotation is from Gollancz’s translation, p. 145.

Footnote 770:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 922.

Footnote 771:

De phil. mundi, III, 15.

Footnote 772:

See above, pp. 192–193.

Footnote 773:

De phil. mundi, III, 15.

Footnote 774:

Gilbert, Meteorol. Theorien, 1907, pp. 539–557.

Footnote 775:

Quaest. nat., V, 17.

Footnote 776:

On the names of the winds in medieval French literature, see Frahm, Das Meer, 1914, pp. 78–82.

Footnote 777:

Liber floridus, Ghent MS., fol. 24, as cited in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxiii, col. 1009.

Footnote 778:

Einhard, the Frankish scholar, contemporary and biographer of Charlemagne, in his Vita Caroli magni so designates the winds (Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. ii, p. 459).

Footnote 779:

Bertolini, L’orologio, 1916, p. 977.

Footnote 780:

Cusa, Denom. dei venti, 1884, pp. 375–415.

Footnote 781:

Alexander Neckam makes Boreas a bringer of hail and Auster a rainy wind (De laud. div. sap., II, 85–92).

Bernard Sylvester writes:

“Obriguit Boreas, maduit Notus, Auster et Eurus: Hic tempestates, ille serena facit.” —De mundi univ., p. 19.

Classical tradition, however, was apparently uniform in conceiving of Notus and Auster as the same. See table in Gilbert, op. cit., pp. 550–551. William of Conches describes Boreas as a dry, as well as cold, wind “because it drives the clouds before it toward the mid region of the earth.” But also, because of the very fact that it does so drive the clouds before it, it is a producer of rain along the borders of the torrid zone. “Siccus vero, quia nubes de hoc angulo terrae ad medium fugat, estque pluviosus juxta fines torridae zonae” (De phil. mundi, III, 15).

Footnote 782:

loc. cit.

Footnote 783:

“Arthous, Boreas, Boreae contrarius Auster, Sol oriens Eurum, vespera dat Zephyrum. Constringit Boreas, pluvius fert humidus Auster, Clara dies Euro, flos alitur Zephyro. Auctumno Boreas, aestati convenit Eurus; Auster hyemsque madent; ver Zephyrusque tepent.” —Symbolum electorum, II, 1.

See also Giraldus Cambrensis, Top. Hiber., I, 3, on Zephyr and Eurus, and I, 6, on Corus, the violent northwester which uproots or bends over trees in the west of Ireland. Corus was the favoring wind for voyagers from England to France, according to Willibald, an eighth century ecclesiastic, associate of Boniface, in his Vita Bonifatii, 5 (Migne, Pat. lat., vol. lxxxix, col. 613). Alexander Neckam (loc. cit.) and Bernard Sylvester (loc. cit.) make Eurus a stormy wind. Neckam says that it disturbs the waters and is unwelcome to travelers; Zephyr, on the other hand, spreads the fields with flowers.

Footnote 784:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 922.

Footnote 785:

ibid., p. 972.

Footnote 786:

Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 112.

Footnote 787:

Historia, XIX, 16 (in medieval French transl., edited by Paulin Paris, vol. ii, 1880, p. 275; see also Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901, p. 29). Walter of Châtillon describes vividly the drought, whirlwinds, and sand storms of the Libyan desert (Alexandreis, III, 374). See Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, p. 201.

Footnote 788:

De imag. mundi, I, 31.

Footnote 789:

Collectanea, Mommsen’s edit., p. 236, translated in: Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, p. 193.

Footnote 790:

Top. Hiber., I, 3.

Footnote 791:

Dreesbach, op. cit., pp. 19–24.

Footnote 792:

Ambroise, Estoire de la guerre sainte, verses 10610–10612, in: Gaston Paris’ edit., col. 284; see also the same, verses 6303–6306 (Paris’ edit., col. 168), and Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 20. The last four words may be translated by “as is its wont.”

Footnote 793:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s transl., p. 81.

Footnote 794:

ibid., p. 64.

Footnote 795:

ibid., p. 38.

Footnote 796:

De phil. mundi, IV, 3.

Footnote 797:

De prop. rerum, XI, 3.

Footnote 798:

Top. Hiber., I, 33–40.

Footnote 799:

ibid., I, 35.

Footnote 800:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), p. 22.

Footnote 801:

Top. Hiber., I, 3, 6, etc.

Footnote 802:

ibid., I, 33.

Footnote 803:

See above, p. 167.

Footnote 804:

De phil. mundi, IV, 6.

Footnote 805:

Ligurinus, II, 61–66, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. ccxii, cols. 350–351.

Footnote 806:

Top. Hiber., I, 4.

Footnote 807:

Itin. Kamb., I, 2.

Footnote 808:

ibid., I, 3.

Footnote 809:

De natura locorum, Baur’s edit., pp. 68–69. See above, p. 165.

Footnote 810:

De natura locorum, Baur’s edit., pp. 68–69.

Footnote 811:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 912.

Footnote 812:

ibid., p. 922.

Footnote 813:

Gesta Frid., II, 13.

Footnote 814:

Top. Hiber., I, 35–37.

Footnote 815:

Gesta Frid., II, 34.

Footnote 816:

Ligurinus, IV, 179–220, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. ccxii, cols. 381–382.

Footnote 817:

Referring to Capua, Benjamin of Tudela wrote: “It is a fine city, but its water is bad and the country is fever-stricken” (Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s transl., p. 7).

NOTES CHAPTER VIII THE WATERS

Footnote 818:

Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, cols. 741–747.

Footnote 819:

De sex d. op., pp. 54–55.

Footnote 820:

De phil. mundi, II, 2.

Footnote 821:

William of Conches went on to explain in this connection (De phil. mundi, II, 4) why the heavens are blue, a phenomenon which some observers had attributed to the presence of waters. “What do we see up there, dense and the color of water? It is not fire, for if the air is invisible because of its great rarity (subtilitas), so also must fire be invisible, fire which is so much more rare than air. Furthermore, it is not the color of fire.” William asserted that you see nothing at all and that the impression of seeing water is an optical illusion. Unless some other color interposes, a ray of light on entering the eye takes the color of water from the aqueous humor contained in the eye.

Footnote 822:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 272; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 296.

Footnote 823:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 894.

Footnote 824:

Paraphrase by White, Warfare, 1920, vol. i, p. 95, note.

Footnote 825:

De universo, I, 38 (Orléans edit., 1674, p. 598, col. 2G, as cited and translated by Stegmann, Anschauungen, 1913, p. 19, note 3).

Footnote 826:

Causae et curae, I (Kaiser’s edit., p. 23). See above, p. 425, note 101.

Footnote 827:

Solutiones, quaest. 2, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, cols. 1040–1041.

Footnote 828:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 893.

Footnote 829:

Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, cols. 743–744.

Footnote 830:

Psalm cxlviii, 4–5.

Footnote 831:

See above, pp. 186–187.

Footnote 832:

Hist. schol., Gen. 5. See Norlind, Problem, 1918, p. 39.

Footnote 833:

De sacramentis, bk. I, pt. I, ch. 22. See Norlind, op. cit., p. 44.

Footnote 834:

De imag. mundi, I, 5. See also Im. du monde, II, 9; Bartholomew Anglicus, De prop. rerum, VIII, 3. The symbolism of the microcosm is in one instance curiously inverted in the Causae et curae, I (Kaiser’s edit., p. 23) of Hildegard of Bingen, who compares the water with the body and the earth with the heart of man. On the other hand, in Subtilitates, II, 3 (in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 1212) she asserts that “rivers are sent forth from the sea like the blood in the veins of the human body” (Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, p. 132). See also above, pp. 147–150.

Footnote 835:

De imag. mundi, I, 45.

Footnote 836:

De phil. mundi, III, 14. See also Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873, p. 374.

Footnote 837:

Dialogus, IX, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clvii, col. 631.

Footnote 838:

Hist. schol., Gen. 14.

Footnote 839:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 892.

Footnote 840:

See above, p. 60, and Norlind, Problem, 1918, pp. 38–40.

Footnote 841:

Norlind, op. cit., p. 38, notes, gives the following interesting quotations: “Quae videlicet aquae circumfusae globo terrae ipsum quodammodo sustentant, quod est mirabile in oculis nostris” (Gerhohus, Expos. in psalmos, ad Ps. cxxxv, 6, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. cxciv, col. 901). “Quod autem terra super aquas fundata esse dicitur, nostram scientiam excedit. Mihi autem non videtur mirabilius, terram super aquas esse fundatam, quam aquas, quae eiusdem ponderis sunt, super terras in aere volare” (Bruno Astensis, Expos. in psalmos, cxxxv, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. clxiv, col. 1194). Bruno adds an allegorical explanation (loc. cit.): “Possumus autem per terram Ecclesiam intelligere quae super multos populos fundata est, qui per aquas significantur, etc.”

Footnote 842:

“Movebitur aliquis super hoc quod dicit propheta ‘Dominum firmasse terram super aquas.’ Ex hoc enim videbitur haberi posse aquas esse inferiores terra, cum tamen Alfraganus dicat, unam esse sphaeram aquarum et terrae. Sancti igitur expositores referunt illud prophetae ad cotidianum usum loquendi quo dici solet Parisius fundatam esse super Secanam. Rei tamen veritas est, quod paradisus terrestris superior est aquis, cum etiam lunari globo superior sit” (De nat. rer., II, 49). See also below, p. 462, note 34.

Footnote 843:

Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, col. 748.

Footnote 844:

See above, p. 151.

Footnote 845:

“Verumtamen ut animalia terrena habitaculum et receptaculum haberent, aqua in concavitates terrae recessit et apparuit superficies terrae arida et separata. Estque terra cum aquis in se contentis sicut sphaera terrae solum” (De sphaera, Baur’s edit., p. 12). Günther, Studien, vol. iii (?), 1879, p. 160, interpreted the last sentence to indicate that Robert believed that waters were contained in the interior of the earth and that it was to these waters that he here refers. Though this is possible, it is more likely from the context that the words “aquis in se contentis” are a reference to the seas (Stegmann, Anschauungen, 1913, p. 15).

Footnote 846:

Livre du trésor, I, 35, 36, 39, as cited by Boffito, Intorno alla “Quaestio de aqua et terra,” Memoria I, La controversia, 1902, pp. 113–114.

The fact that the waters do not completely cover the lands also had puzzled the Moslems, who anticipated Robert Grosseteste in ascribing this apparent reversal of the normal operation of the laws of nature to God’s wish to preserve a dry area whereon man and animals might thrive. Averroës had given a more proximate cause, maintaining that the stars are more numerous in the northern hemisphere than in the southern and that through their attraction of the land, as well as through the evaporative power of their heat and of that of the sun, the lands were uncovered. On the theory of eccentric spheres of earth and water see Kretschmer, Phys. Erdk., 1889, pp. 67–74; Norlind, Problem, 1918, pp. 48–54; and more especially Boffito’s elaborate discussion of the history of this theory and of ancient, Arabic, and Christian doctrines of the relations of land and water in general (Boffito, op. cit.). For the theory as developed in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries see Wisotzki, Zeitströmungen, 1897, pp. 39–57. The matter was discussed in a small treatise, Quaestio de aqua et terra, which has been attributed to Dante but is of doubtful authenticity (see above, p. 410, note 98). This is an argument against the possibility of eccentric spheres; the “emergent land” of the northern hemisphere is ascribed to the attractive force of the stars of that hemisphere.

Footnote 847:

In De imag. mundi, I, 39, we find a definition of the word ocean: “Oceanus dicitur, quasi ocior annis, vel quasi zonarum limbus.”

Footnote 848:

II Esdras, vi, 42, 47, 50, 52.

Footnote 849:

Roger Bacon, Opus majus, Bridges’ edit., pt. iv, vol. 1, 1897, p. 291. See Kretschmer, Phys. Erdk., 1889, pp. 141–142, for an explanation of Bacon’s theory of the distribution of land and water.

Footnote 850:

De nat. rer., II, 16.

Footnote 851:

Neckam believed that the level of the sea is higher than that of the lands, upon which the waters are prevented from encroaching only by the divine power. “Mare vero superius est litoribus, ut visus docet. Unde divinae jussioni attribuendum est, quod metas positas a Domino non transgreditur mare” (De nat. rer., II, 49; De laud. div. sap., III, 127–142). This curious doctrine persisted until the eighteenth century; see Wisotzki, op. cit., pp. 39–57. “Mare etiam e litoribus ascendere videtur, secundum judicium visus. Fidem etiam facit proposito, videlicet quod aqua in sphericam formam tendat, guttae pluvialis concavatio in petra. Nisi enim rotunda esset gutta, non esset concavatio rotunda. Ros enim matutinus, qui rotundus est, verum esse docet quod diximus. Per rotunditatem autem perfectio intelligitur. Unde mens humana, per aquam designata, tendere habet ad perfectionem” (De nat. rer., II, 14). See above, p. 369, note 35.

Footnote 852:

Adelard of Bath, Quaest. nat., 53 (54); De imag. mundi, I, 45, 47; Peter Alphonsi, Dialogus, IX, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clvii, col. 631.

Footnote 853:

Quaest. nat., 53 (54).

Footnote 854:

De imag. mundi, I, 45.

Footnote 855:

loc. cit.

Footnote 856:

Im. du monde, II, 13.

Footnote 857:

“Salsuginis causam in calore solis planetarumque pono. Cum enim per torridam mediamque zonam verus feratur occeanus perque eandem licet indirectus versetur cursus planetarum a tanto stellarum calore ipsum mare calefieri necesse est, ex quo et eiusdem caloris effectivam salsuginem accipere consequens est. Quod autem hec ita se habeant illud asserit quod in maritimis illis quae illi occeano propinquiora sunt, sine omni artificio aqua marina ad solem super rupes siccata in sal convertitur. In longinquioribus vero maribus ut sal habeas ipsam aquam marinam utpote iam a vi caloris remotam; ideoque minus coctam [decoctam in MS] igni adhibere et recoquere necesse est. Sed et dulces quasdam aquas in sal verti caloris artificiosa decoctione sepe visum est. Huc etiam [Hinc et in MS] illud accedit quod estate quidem omnis aqua [aqua omitted in MS] marina salsior est quam hyeme quod si quis operam dederit re ipsa experiri potit” (Quaest. nat., 51 (52)).]

Footnote 858:

De phil. mundi, III, 16.

Footnote 859:

De nat. rer., II, 1; De laud. div. sap., III, 75–80.

Footnote 860:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 974.

Footnote 861:

C. B. Jourdain, Dissertation, 1838, p. 75. Hildegard of Bingen speaks of the tides thus: “Et quoniam in oriente magna profunditas arenae et litoris est, idcirco mare superhabundando et se dilatando ibi non effluit; in occidente autem et in austro ac in aquilone tanta profunditas arenarum et litoris non est. Ideo ibi multotiens effluit magnas et latas effusiones ibi faciens, cum ab igne procellarum in insaniam commovetur, ut praedictum est. Unde ibi multa inutilia et sordida in se colligit atque putredines hominum, pecorum, avium et vermium sibi attrahit. Et idcirco fontes et flumina, quae de partibus istis de mari effluunt, tam sana et tam bona non sunt sicut illa, quae de orientali mari effluunt” (Causae et curae, I, Kaiser’s edit., p. 24).

Footnote 862:

In this connection it is interesting to note that the Chinese in antiquity and during the Middle Ages had developed an understanding of the tides “in advance of anything that seems to have been known at that time in Europe” (A. C. Moule, The Bore on the Ch’ien-T’ang River in China, in: T’oung Pao, ou archives concernant l’histoire, les langues, la géographie, et l’ethnographie de l’Asie orientale, vol. xxii, Leiden, 1923, pp. 135–188, reference on p. 173).

Footnote 863:

De mundi univ., p. 19.

Footnote 864:

ibid., p. 46.

Footnote 865:

ibid., p. 47.

Footnote 866:

Robert’s theories of the tides are interpreted by Almagià, Dottrina, 1905, pp. 456–457. Almagià’s exposition, though probably essentially correct, seems more clean-cut than the original upon which it is based.

Footnote 867:

See above, p. 163.

Footnote 868:

De nat. locorum, Baur’s edit., pp. 69–70.

Footnote 869:

De impress. element., Baur’s edit., p. 88.

Footnote 870:

“Cuius summae difficultatis rationem multi astruere conantur per hoc, quod quartae mundi oppositae sunt eiusdem commixtionis, et ideo faciunt eosdem effectus. Sed ista ratio deficit tamen, quia falsa est, eo quod aliquae sunt imagines stellarum in una quarta et in alia, quoniam, quando planeta est super unam quartam mundi, tunc terra interponitur inter corpus eius et aliam quartam. Propterea, si hoc esset verum, peteretur principium. Quaeritur enim causa, quare sunt oppositae quartae eiusdem commixtionis et per consequens eiusdem effectus. Et ideo reflexio radiorum solvit istud, quoniam radii lunares multiplicantur ad caelum stellarum, quod est corpus densum. Ideoque per medium eius non possumus videre caelum, quod est valde luminosum, sicut dicit Alpetragius et Messalahe. Et alii radii reflexi cadunt in quartam oppositam ad angulos aequales” (De nat. locorum, Baur’s edit., p. 70).

Footnote 871:

See above, pp. 18–19 and, on William of Conches’ related views, p. 173.

Footnote 872:

Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 8865, fol. 55vo.

Footnote 873:

In the dialogue constituting the Quaestiones naturales Adelard’s nephew asks if the following theory is true: “Aiunt enim verum occeanum per torridam fluentem brachia immense quantitatis fluentia ab orientali et occidentali plaga in articam et in antarticam refundere regionem. Illis igitur vi magna confluentibus redundationem hanc fieri dicunt ut ictus nobis accessum pariat, cessio vero recessum.” To this Adelard replies: “Philosophorum dictis invidere non ausim; illud tamen audacter affirmem: si ita ut aiunt maxima conveniunt brachia, semel comixtis undis secundo ictum non fieri neque enim convenit iterum eas separari; vel certe si iterum collidantur minor erit secundus ictus quam primus et tertius quam secundus itaque et quandoque minimus, deinde nullus. Videant igitur illi quid dixerint; ego pro me breviter respondebo. Recursus itaque brachiorum colligo; eorundem etiam obviationibus non contradico; non tamen ea conflui vel collidi concedo. Impotentie autem huius causam in ipsius terre situ facio. Cum enim ipsa brachia sibi obviare atque confluere impetuose festinent, fit tandem cum montium interpositione tum ipsius terre situ quodam elatiore ut ab eodem cursu dum deficiunt referantur. Itaque fit ut quo ea paternus motus ac naturalis impellit, ab eodem loci ipsius reducat situs. Licet non ignorem quosdam esse qui hunc motum nili mari idest caribdi dicant estuare. Quod si verum esset in maribus illis que torride zone viciniora sunt vis talis nec minus valeret; nunc vero illa omni fere tali carent agitatione; eo videlicet quod ab illa causa quam supra scripsimus procul remota sunt” (Quaest. nat., 52 (53)).

It is not altogether clear as to what is meant by the last two sentences of this quotation, which is here given as in the printed text (see the Bibliography under Adelard, II) without collation from the manuscripts (see Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 26). If the word nili is a corruption of lunae, they may possibly be interpreted as a denial of the lunar control theory of the tides. A passage from the Disputationes adversus astrologos of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola according to Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 116, cites a certain “Adelandus” as giving expression to views closely allied to those expressed in the preceding quotation. If Adelard is meant by “Adelandus,” as Duhem assumes (ibid., pp. 116–117), Pico’s citation may well refer to this chapter of the Quaestiones naturales. Adelandus, in any case, is made categorically to deny the possibility of lunar control over the tides. Incidentally, it may be added that Duhem was unfamiliar with the text of the Quaestiones naturales at the time that he wrote the third volume of his Système du monde and that Almagià’s otherwise exhaustive monograph on the history of theories of the tides gives us nothing on Adelard. Examination of the manuscripts (Haskins, loc. cit.) might throw light on the problem. The phrase “mari idest caribdi,” in the next-to-the-last sentence of the quotation above, is not found in the manuscript copy of the Quaestiones naturales referred to in the Bibliography under Adelard, II. Gollancz’s translation of this phrase, “one sea, the Caribbean” is an obvious absurdity (Gollancz, Dodi ve-Nechdi, 1920, p. 141).

Footnote 874:

De phil. mundi, III, 14.

Footnote 875:

See above, pp. 84–85.

Footnote 876:

De nat. rer., II, 17.

Footnote 877:

In the De imagine mundi, I, 40, there is extraordinary confusion regarding the entire subject of the tides. There are said to be two tides daily, corresponding to the rising and setting of the moon. When the moon waxes, the height of the tides becomes greater; when it wanes, the height diminishes. When the moon at the time of the equinoxes is nearest to the earth, the floods rise to their highest; at the time of the solstices they rise less high on account of the distance of the moon. There is also said to be a tidal cycle of nineteen years. So far, these ideas were drawn from Bede; but in the succeeding chapter (41) there comes an echo of Paul the Deacon’s description (Hist. gentis Langobard., I, 6, as cited by Almagià, La dottrina, 1905, p. 51) of the great whirlpool, which “in exortu lunae majori aestu fluctus involvit et revomit.”

Footnote 878:

Philippis, VI, 500–551. See above, pp. 137–138.

Footnote 879:

“Nobis humanam qui sortem vivimus infra, Rem satis est sciri, nesciri causa sinatur.” —Philippis, VI, 550–551.

William the Breton in another connection (Philippis, VIII, 43–99) discusses the tides near Mont St. Michel in Brittany. His information appears to have been fairly correct, and he notes among other details that there is exceptionally high water at the times of the vernal and autumnal equinoxes. He makes no attempt to explain the cause of the ebb and flood, asserting that this transcends the knowledge of man. He puts forth, however, the singular suggestion that it is just as likely that the tides may cause the motion of the moon as vice versa, because the sea was created before the moon:

“Rursus an a luna maris hec inflatio fiat, An magis a pelago fluat hec variatio lune, Cum pelagus luna constet prius esse creatum, Posteriusque sui nunquam sit causa prioris, Nullaque res habitum trahat a non ente vel actum.” —Philippis, VIII, 73–77.

Footnote 880:

Top. Hiber., II, 3.

Footnote 881:

ibid., II, 14.

Footnote 882:

ibid., II, 1–2.

Footnote 883:

See United States Tide Tables for 1919, also British Islands Pilot, U. S. Hydrographic Office [Publications] nos. 145, 146, Washington, D. C., 1917. See also: A. Defant, Die Gezeiten und Gezeitenströmungen im Irischen Kanal, Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Sitzungsberichte, mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Klasse, Abteilung IIa, vol. cxxix, 1920, pp. 253–308.

Footnote 884:

Top. Hiber., II, 2.

Footnote 885:

ibid., II, 3.

Footnote 886:

“In the British Museum (Cotton MS. Julius D. 7, fol. 45vo) there is a tide table of the thirteenth century giving the time of ‘fflod at london brigge’ for each day of the lunar month, and the hours of moonlight (quantum luna lucet in nocte)” (A. C. Moule, The Bore on the Ch’ien-T’ang River in China, in: T’oung Pao, ou archives concernant l’histoire, les langues, la géographie, et l’ethnographie de l’Asie orientale, vol. xxii, Leiden, 1923, pp. 135–188, reference on p. 155).

Footnote 887:

Top. Hiber., II, 3.

Footnote 888:

ibid., II, 28.

Footnote 889:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 1003.

Footnote 890:

See above, p. 279.

Footnote 891:

Expug. Hiber., I, 36.

Footnote 892:

See above, p. 351.

Footnote 893:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), p. 19.

Footnote 894:

For references to the Liver Sea and to classical allusions to a clotted sea, see Moritz, Geogr. Kenntnis, 1904, p. 24, note 2; Konrad Kretschmer, Die Entdeckung Amerika’s in ihrer Bedeutung für die Geschichte des Weltbildes, Berlin, 1892, p. 85, note 1; and more especially the full data in Graf, Miti, leggende, vol. i, 1892, p. 106 and notes on pp. 186–187, and in Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, pp. 181–182 and p. 182, note 1. Benjamin of Tudela places the clotted sea in the Far East (Itinerary, Adler’s transl., 1907, p. 66, and above p. 272). In early French literature the sea is often referred to as la mer betée (see Frahm, Das Meer, 1914, pp. 76–77).

Many theories have been adduced to explain the origins of this persistent rumor of a clotted sea. It may have arisen through distorted reports of floating masses of seaweed or of the Sargasso Sea. It has also been suggested that experiences in dead water such as that described by Fridtjof Nansen (Farthest North, New York, 1897, vol. i, p. 196) may have contributed to the formation of the legend. Such dead water, Nansen explains, is caused by the presence of a layer of fresh water from melted ice over the surface of the sea water. See Frahm, loc. cit.; Koch, Das Meer, 1910, pp. 21–22. For another explanation see Paul Masson, Pythéas et le poumon marin, in: Bulletin de la Section de Géographie, vol. xxxvii, Paris, 1923, pp. 55–66.

Footnote 895:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), p. 27.

Footnote 896:

Ezekiel, xl, xli.

Footnote 897:

Revelation, xxi, 11.

Footnote 898:

Schröder, op. cit., p. 26.

Footnote 899:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 921.

Footnote 900:

Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 94, note 24. Later tradition sometimes had it that the Emperor Frederick II was the king who sent Nicholas the Fish to explore these waters. See Haskins, Science, 1922, p. 686; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 262; and Liebrecht, loc. cit.

Footnote 901:

Romans d’Alix., Michelant’s edit., 1846, pp. 259–260. This is an interpolation into the part of the poem called by Meyer the “third branch.” It is not by Lambert li Tors, author of the “third branch,” but was derived from the Historia de praeliis (Meyer, Alexandre le Grand, 1886, vol. ii, p. 216). See above, p. 381, note 26. Alexander Neckam (De nat. rer., II, 21) and Roger Bacon also refer to Alexander’s visit to the sea floor. See Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 263–264, 654–655.

Footnote 902:

De mundi univ., p. 22.

Footnote 903:

De phil. mundi, III, 17–18.

Footnote 904:

Quaest. nat., 56 (57), 57 (58).

Footnote 905:

Sermones in cantica, xiii; translation from Eales, Life and Works of St. Bernard, vol. iv, 1896, p. 67.

Footnote 906:

Haskins, Science, 1922, p. 690; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 267. See above, p. 100 and p. 402, note 64.

Footnote 907:

Causae et curae, I (Kaiser’s edit., pp. 24–30).

Footnote 908:

See above, pp. 185 and 326–327, p. 436, note 17, p. 439, note 44; also Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 132–133.

Footnote 909:

See above, p. 439, note 44.

Footnote 910:

See above, pp. 211–212.

Footnote 911:

De phil. mundi, III, 19. See also De imag. mundi, I, 47. Hildegard of Bingen also believed that the interior of the earth is warmer in winter than in summer. She attributed this circumstance, however, to the fact that “in hieme sol supra terram sterilis est et sub terram calorem suum figit, quatinus terra diversa germina servare possit” (Causae et curae, I, Kaiser’s edit., p. 30). See also Subtilitates, II, 9, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 1213.

Footnote 912:

De imag. mundi, I, 48.

Footnote 913:

ibid., I, 49.

Footnote 914:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 272–273; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 296–297.

Footnote 915:

Top. Hiber., II, 7.

Footnote 916:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 6.

Footnote 917:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 961.

Footnote 918:

Top. Hiber., II, 7.

Footnote 919:

loc. cit.

Footnote 920:

Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 987, 990.

Footnote 921:

J. G. Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion, Part I, The Magic Art and the Evolution of Kings, London, 1911, vol. i, p. 301.

Footnote 922:

De nat. rer., II, 3–7; see also De laud. div. sap., III, 171–328.

Footnote 923:

“Sic et sapientia hujus saeculi mentes candore innocentiae fulgentes nonnunquam in pejus commutat, sapientia autem vera mentes tenebris vitiorum involutas reddit serenas” (De nat. rer., II, 3).

Footnote 924:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 6.

Footnote 925:

Letter of Prester John, 27–30, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 912–913.

Footnote 926:

Romans d’Alix., Michelant’s edit., 1846, p. 350.

Footnote 927:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 974.

Footnote 928:

ibid., p. 892.

Footnote 929:

Top. Hiber., I, 7. See above, p. 339.

Footnote 930:

On another unusual type of river, the gold-bearing stream, as understood in the Middle Ages (but not discussed by Giraldus Cambrensis), see below, p. 479, note 318.

Footnote 931:

Top. Hiber., II, 2.

Footnote 932:

Itin. Kamb., I, 8.

Footnote 933:

ibid., I, 2.

Footnote 934:

ibid., II, 11.

Footnote 935:

The British Islands Pilot, United States Hydrographic Office [Publication] no. 145, Washington, D. C., 1917, p. 375, testifies to the changeable character of the sands and channels of the Dee estuary.

Footnote 936:

See above, pp. 235–237.

Footnote 937:

Isidore, De nat. rer., 43, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. lxxxiii, col. 1013.

Footnote 938:

Bede, De nat. rer., 43 (Giles’s edit., p. 117).

Footnote 939:

Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, cols. 779–780.

Footnote 940:

Sermo XXI in Feria quarta Pentecostes, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, cols. 518–521.

Footnote 941:

On the flood of the Nile see also above, p. 300.

Footnote 942:

Top. Hiber., I, 8.

Footnote 943:

ibid., III, 2.

Footnote 944:

ibid., III, 3.

Footnote 945:

Itin. Kamb., I, 1.

Footnote 946:

ibid., I, 2.

Footnote 947:

loc. cit.

Footnote 948:

ibid., II, 9.

Footnote 949:

Top. Hiber., II, 9.

Footnote 950:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 1001.

Footnote 951:

“Navim non patitur, quinimo tota supereminet nisi sit bituminata, et hoc forte propter homines intus viventes. Siquis vivum aliqua arte immiserit statim super exilit” (loc. cit.). Gervase seems here to have derived from Bede (De locis sanctis, 12, in Tobler, Itinera, vol. i, 1877, pp. 227–228) a hazy conception of the actual properties of the waters of the Dead Sea. The opposite theory, however, had been expressed by Antonius Martyr two centuries earlier than Bede: “Nor do sticks float, nor can a man swim, but whatever is cast into it sinks to the bottom” (White, Warfare, 1920, vol. ii, p. 228).

Footnote 952:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 966.

Footnote 953:

ibid., p. 982. See below, p. 449, note 49.

NOTES CHAPTER IX THE LANDS

Footnote 954:

De eodem et diverso, p. 28.

Footnote 955:

Etym., XIV, 1.

Footnote 956:

De imag. mundi, I, 4.

Footnote 957:

Peter Comestor stated that on the third day of the Creation the earth appeared and that it bears five names, the derivation of which he explained as follows: (1) arida, because the earth appeared (quia apparuit); (2) humus, because it was still humid; (3) terra, because it was trodden upon (quia teritur) by the feet of animals; (4) solum, because, of the four elements, it forms the one that is solid; and, finally, (5) tellus, because it endures (quia tolerat) the labors of man (Hist. schol., Gen. 5). See Zöckler, Geschichte, vol. i, 1877, p. 418. These are typical examples of free etymology. For Hildegard of Bingen on qualities of different kinds of earth or soil, see above, p. 232.

Footnote 958:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 966.

Footnote 959:

ibid., p. 895.

Footnote 960:

Peter Comestor speaks of islands with the same characteristics: “Cum adhuc sint quedam insule viventium, in quibus nullus moretur” (Hist. schol., Gen. 3, cited by Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 62, note 6**).

Footnote 961:

Im. du monde, I, 6.

Footnote 962:

Top. Hiber., II, 4.

Footnote 963:

See above, p. 177; for Hildegard’s corresponding views see above, p. 201.

Footnote 964:

Top. Hiber., I, 28.

Footnote 965:

ibid., I, 29.

Footnote 966:

ibid., I, 30. This legend regarding the properties of the earth of Ireland was very widespread in the Middle Ages. It is found in Bede’s Historia ecclesiastica, I, 1 (Giles’s edit., vol. ii, p. 34), which Giraldus goes on to quote at length on the subject (Top. Hiber., I, 31). It also appears in Gervase of Tilbury’s Otia imperialia, vol. i, p. 917 (see Liebrecht, op. cit., p. 88, note 21). Solinus, Collectanea, 22 (Mommsen’s edit., p. 101), and Isidore, Etym., XIV, 6, ascribe similar properties to the earth of the Isle of Thanet. In his Letter, Prester John boasts that some of his territories are proof against poisonous snakes and animals. See Letter of Prester John, 21, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, p. 912.

Footnote 967:

Top. Hiber., I, 39.

Footnote 968:

ibid., I, 34–40.

Footnote 969:

Benl, Frühere und spätere Hypothesen, 1905, pp. 1–14, discusses the origin and development in antiquity and the Middle Ages of theories regarding the distribution of the principal mountain systems of the known world, the Taurus-Caucasus-Imaus range of Asia, the Rhipaean Mountains of the far north, and the Mountains of the Moon of Africa. The subsequent elaboration of these theories between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, when the conception was developed by some geographers of a symmetrical, rectilinear arrangement of the mountain ranges of the entire globe is treated by Wisotzki, Zeitströmungen, 1897, pp. 131–192, and by Benl, op. cit., pp. 15–50.

Footnote 970:

Hist. schol., Gen. 34.

Footnote 971:

Gervase said that the waters for the Flood came from the bowels of the earth and from the air above. They rose to a level of fifteen cubits above the summits of the mountains which are now in existence, “quia tunc terram dicunt in planitie factam” (Otia imper., vol. i, p. 907). See above, pp. 170–171.

Footnote 972:

De prop. rerum, XIV, 1.

Footnote 973:

Liber de congelatis, 2. For the Latin text of this passage see Hammer-Jensen, Sogen. IV. Buch, 1915, pp. 132–133. See the next note and also above, p. 401, note 60.

Footnote 974:

This translation is from Geikie, Founders of Geology, 1905, p. 43. The processes of erosion by winds and water as a cause for the inequalities of the earth’s surface are much more in evidence in arid regions than in regions of dense vegetation. It is therefore not surprising that these processes were recognized by Moslems like Avicenna (if it be he from whom Alfred of Sareshel translated the above quotation) and Ḥamd-Allāh Mustaufī, a Persian writer of the early fourteenth century, who dwelt in the arid countries of the East. The latter writes: “... the sun’s heat ... beginning to act on the stone, this loses its hardness and is broken up; which process continually accelerated by the succession of many nights and days, cracks appear, splitting the rocks, which same are thus again turned to earth. Then by the action of earthquakes mountain peaks are demolished, while by the blowing of the winds and the running waters the soft earth is carried from one place to another, yet all that is rock and hard soil will remain fixed, whereby heights and hollows are formed, and it is these heights that are mountain ranges” (Guy Le Strange, transl., The Geographical Part of the Nuzhat-al-Qulūb Composed by Ḥamd-Allāh Mustawfī of Qazwīn in 740 (1340), London and Leiden, 1919, p. 180).

Footnote 975:

De sancta trinitate, Gen. I, 34; see also Zöckler, Geschichte, vol. i, 1877, p. 396. That teleological reasoning of this sort was not confined to the medieval period may be seen from the following paragraph from R. J. Sullivan, A View of Nature in Letters to a Traveller Among the Alps, London, 1794, vol. I, p. 105: “On a cursory view it must be acknowledged, the surface of our earth exhibits no great regularity or order. In its outward appearance it strikes us with heighths, depths, plains, seas, marshes, rivers, caverns, gulfs, volcanoes, and a vast variety of other discordant objects;... Yet all these apparent deformities are absolutely necessary to vegetation and animal existence. Were the earth’s surface smooth and regular, we should not have those beautiful hills which furnish water. A dreary ocean would cover the globe, which would in such case be suited only for the habitation of fishes. As it is, the motions of the sea and the currents of the air are regulated by fixed laws. The returns of the seasons are uniform, and the rigour of Winter invariably gives place to the verdure of Spring. Men, animals, and plants consequently succeed one another, and flourish in their destined soils.”

Footnote 976:

De imag. mundi, I, 5.

Footnote 977:

Hist. schol., Gen. 34 (Gervase in: Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 893, 972).

Footnote 978:

De phil. mundi, IV, 5.

Footnote 979:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 972. Gervase also said that Mount Atlas was so high that it was inaccessible (ibid., p. 986).

Footnote 980:

Dialogus, I, 17, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xx, col. 194.

Footnote 981:

Roger Bacon (Opus majus, part iv, Bridges’ edit., vol. i, pp. 229–230) discusses classical and Arabic estimates of the heights of mountains. His own opinion was that the maximum height is eight miles. See the discussion of this topic included in Benini’s interesting treatment of the altitude of Dante’s Mount of Purgatory (Origine del Monte del Purgatorio, 1917, pp. 1056–1072, especially pp. 1057–1058).

Footnote 982:

Itin. Kamb., II, 7.

Footnote 983:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 982. See Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 139.

Footnote 984:

Romans d’Alix., Michelant’s edit., pp. 70–71. This story is found in the “first branch” of the Romance. See above, p. 412, note 135. Meyer, Alexandre le Grand, 1886, vol. i, p. 151, did not know the origin of it.

Footnote 985:

Romans d’Alix., Michelant’s edit., pp. 320–330. This story is an interpolation into the “third branch” (Meyer, op. cit., pp. 172–174).

Footnote 986:

De mundi univ., p. 20.

Footnote 987:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 986.

Footnote 988:

Descr. Kamb., I, 5.

Footnote 989:

Itin. Kamb., II, 5.

Footnote 990:

De mundi univ., p. 20.

Footnote 991:

“Hic claustrales, in claustro sedentes, cum respirandi gratia forte suspiciunt, ad quascunque partes trans alta tectorum culmina, montium vertices quasi coelum tangentes, et ipsas plerumque feras, quarum hic copia, in summo pascentes, tamquam in ultimo visus horizonte prospiciunt. Hora vero diei quasi circa primam, vel parum ante, super montium cacumina vix emergens, etiam sereno tempore, corpus hic solare primo conspicitur” (Itin. Kamb., I, 3).

Footnote 992:

Alexandreis, I, 427–441. See Giordano, Alexandreis, 1917, pp. 40–41; Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, pp. 199–200.

Footnote 993:

See above, p. 236.

Footnote 994:

Vita Altmanni, 39, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xii, p. 238. See also Vita Altmanni, 26–29, for a vivid description of a mountain. See Ganzenmüller, op. cit., p. 143.

Footnote 995:

Eadmer, Vita Sancti Anselmi, II, 4, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clviii, col. 100. See Ganzenmüller, op. cit., p. 173. Eadmer (1060–1124) was bishop of St. Andrew’s in Scotland early in the twelfth century.

Footnote 996:

For an article on the Casentino, with photographs of La Verna, see Fulberto Vivaldi, Casentino ignorato, in: Le vie d’Italia: Rivista mensile del Touring Club Italiano, vol. xxx, Rome, 1924, pp. 1073–1082.

Footnote 997:

Gesta Frid., II, 40.

Footnote 998:

Ligurinus, IV, 432–447.

Footnote 999:

Gesta abbatum trudonensium, xii, 6, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. x, p. 307.

Footnote 1000:

“In quo loco tamquam in mortis faucibus coagulati, manebant nocte et die sub pericula mortis. Angustia villulae tota completa erat peregrinorum multitudine. Ex altissimis et scopulosis rupibus ruebant frequenter intolerabiles omni opposito nivium aggeres, ita ut aliis iam collocatis, aliis adhuc supersedentibus mensis domos iuxta, eos prorsus obruerent, et inventos in eis quosdam suffocarent, quosdam contritos inutiles redderent” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 1001:

Gribble, Early Mountaineers, 1899, p. 4. Quotation from John of Bremble’s letter as translated by Gribble, loc. cit.

Footnote 1002:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 7.

Footnote 1003:

See Thoroddsen, Gesch. isländ. Geogr., vol. i, 1897, p. 63.

Footnote 1004:

Peter Comestor speaks of certain philosophers who made the ascent of Mount Olympus (see above, p. 168). We have already mentioned St. Francis’ visit to the mountain of La Verna (see above, p. 217).

Though not falling strictly within our period, several other medieval mountaineering exploits deserve notice. The anonymous Chronicon novaliciense, 5, written in the eleventh century, describes unsuccessful attempts at the ascent of the Rochemelon, near Susa in the Dora Riparia valley, in search of the treasure of a mythical King Romulus (from whom the mountain takes its name) supposed to be hidden there. In the fourteenth century the Rochemelon (11,605 feet high) was a place of pilgrimage (Gribble, op. cit., pp. 5–13).

The Heimskringla (under Snorri Sturluson in the Bibliography) describes King Olaf Trygvasson’s ascent of the Smalserhorn, now probably the Hornelen, in the year 1000. The feat was accomplished in a sporting, athletic spirit, and Olaf is said to have left his shield at the summit (H. Raeburn, Mountaineering Art, London, 1920, p. 6). Of this mountain, which overlooks the Fröj Fiord, Karl Baedeker’s Norway and Sweden, Leipzig, 1909, p. 160, says: “Soon ... to the left is seen the huge Hornelen (3002 feet) towering almost sheer, ascended on the E. side by K. Bing in 1897.”

The Chronicle of Fra Salimbene of Parma (Salimbene parmensis chronica, Parma, 1857, p. 354, cited in: Geographisches Jahrbuch, vol. xviii, Gotha, 1895, p. 12) describes the ascent of Mount Canigou (9135 feet) in the latter half of the thirteenth century by Peter III of Aragon. This mountain lies “on the borders of the province of Spain,” and the king found upon the summit a lake into which he threw a stone, whereupon “a horrible dragon of enormous size came out of it, and began to fly about in the air, and to darken the air with its breath” (Gribble, op. cit., pp. 14–17, 262–263). Canigou is probably the Mount “Cavagum” described by Gervase of Tilbury as an abode of devils (see above, pp. 209 and 214). Curiosity as to what was on the top seems to have impelled Peter to make the climb.

S. Günther, in writing of scientific mountaineering before 1600 (Wiss. Bergbesteigungen, 1896), gives no details on mountaineering in the period between the ascent by Philip III of Macedon (181 B. C.) of a peak in the Rhodope Range and Petrarch’s famous ascent of Mont Ventoux in 1336.

Footnote 1005:

Haskins and Lockwood, Sicilian Trans., 1910, pp. 80, 89; Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 159, 191.

Footnote 1006:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), p. 29.

Footnote 1007:

The passage describing the ascent of Etna is given in full by C. V. Langlois, La connaissance, 1911, pp. 57–58. We heartily agree with Langlois’ view that this passage could only have been written by one who had personally visited the Sicilian volcano: “Aucun doute ne peut subsister sur ce point après avoir lu sa description, certainement directe et d’après nature.” On the other hand, Fant, L’image du monde, 1886, p. 33, calls the assertions in the narrative “tout-à-fait fantastiques.” See note in Langlois, op. cit., p. 58.

Footnote 1008:

Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 964–965.

Footnote 1009:

Virgil, about whom a cycle of legends grew up in the Middle Ages, was regarded as a prophet. Gervase of Tilbury tells of many marvels performed by him (Gregorovius, City of Rome, vol. iv, 1896, pp. 670–677).

Footnote 1010:

Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 107, note, shows that this story and others like it were common in the Middle Ages. He cites an analogous South Russian legend of twelve miraculous wind-blown horns which keep Gog and Magog at bay and will continue to do so until the horns shall have been silenced either by birds building nests in them or else by falling to the ground. When this occurs the hordes of Gog and Magog will come forth and destroy the world.

Footnote 1011:

Conrad of Querfurt, Letter, in: Arnold of Lübeck, Chron. Slavorum, V, 19.

Footnote 1012:

Wattenbach, Guido von Bazoches, 1891 (under Guy of Bazoches in the Bibliography), p. 106.

Footnote 1013:

ibid., p. 108.

Footnote 1014:

Second verse redaction of Im. du monde, in: C. V. Langlois, La connaissance 1911, p. 57.

Footnote 1015:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 273; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 296–297.

Footnote 1016:

Top. Hiber., II, 13.

Footnote 1017:

Collectanea, Mommsen’s edit., p. 236. Translated in: Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, p. 193, note 1.

Footnote 1018:

Gesta Hammenb. eccles. pont., IV, 35.

Footnote 1019:

Nansen, loc. cit.

Footnote 1020:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 6.

Footnote 1021:

Hist. Norweg., Storm’s edit., pp. 93–95.

Footnote 1022:

Thoroddsen, Gesch. isländ. Geogr., vol. i, 1897, p. 65.

Footnote 1023:

Konungs-Skuggsjá, 8 (Brenner’s edit., pp. 30–31). See also Thoroddsen, op. cit., p. 66.

Footnote 1024:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), pp. 28–29.

Footnote 1025:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 274; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 298. See below, note 80.

Footnote 1026:

Schröder, op. cit., p. 30. This incident is the subject of Matthew Arnold’s poem of St. Brandan.

Footnote 1027:

Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 965–966.

Footnote 1028:

Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, pp. 108–109.

Footnote 1029:

Konungs-Skuggsjá, 9 (Brenner’s edit., pp. 32–34). See also Thoroddsen, op. cit., p. 66; Stegmann, Anschauungen, 1913, p. 38.

Footnote 1030:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 7.

Footnote 1031:

De imag. mundi, I, 35.

Footnote 1032:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 922.

Footnote 1033:

Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, pp. 272–274; idem, Studies, 1924, pp. 296–297. See also Geographical Review, vol. xiii, New York, 1923, pp. 141–142.

Footnote 1034:

“Vulcanus est iste ignis inferior, qui ideo dicitur claudus, quia quasi uno pede materiae adhaeret, altero quasi in altum prout flammae natura desiderat nititur” (De nat. rer., I, 17; Stegmann, op. cit., p. 39).

Footnote 1035:

See Stegmann, op. cit., p. 22, note 5, for references to texts demonstrating the widespread belief in the Middle Ages that Hell is at the center of the earth. On the topography of Dante’s Inferno, see Benini, Origine del Monte del Purgatorio, 1917, pp. 1080–1129.

Footnote 1036:

Hildegard of Bingen in the passage quoted above, p. 423, note 92, would seem to refer to blasts of wind as a cause of earthquakes.

Footnote 1037:

Other explanations of earthquakes were sometimes given. It was occasionally argued that seismic disturbances are not the result of purely physical causes but are punishments sent by God. It was also held by some that they are due to movements in the mass of waters which was thought to permeate the earth, or else to the collapse of subterranean cavities as a result of the erosion caused by these waters. See Stegmann’s elaborate discussion of this matter and his many references, op. cit., pp. 44–73.

Footnote 1038:

In the De philosophia, p. 21, Daniel of Morley expresses the same idea, that in earthquakes the earth moves particulariter, not universaliter.

Footnote 1039:

Quaest. nat., 50 (51). See above, pp. 31–32.

Footnote 1040:

De imag. mundi, I, 42; Im. du monde, II, 12; De prop. rerum, XIV, 1.

Footnote 1041:

Dragmaticon philosophiae, Hellmann’s edit., p. 43; De phil. mundi, III, 15. See also Werner, Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches, 1873, p. 35.

Footnote 1042:

De nat. rer., II, 48.

Footnote 1043:

Gesta regis Henrici Secundi, Stubbs’s edit., vol. i, p. 220 (in the Rolls Series, no. 49, 1867).

Footnote 1044:

ibid., p. 337.

Footnote 1045:

See passages cited by Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901, pp. 28–29.

Footnote 1046:

Letter of Prester John, 31–41, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 914–915.

Footnote 1047:

Top. Hiber., II, 16.

Footnote 1048:

“... longe post diluvium, terra multiplicatis jam animantibus ubique repleta, non violenter et subito, sed paulatim et tamquam per eluvionem insulas natas fuisse” (loc. cit.).

Footnote 1049:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 983.

Footnote 1050:

Itin. Kamb., II, 9.

Footnote 1051:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), pp. 3–36.

Footnote 1052:

See below, p. 487, note 463.

Footnote 1053:

Top. Hiber., II, 12.

Footnote 1054:

De mundi univ., pp. 46–47.

Footnote 1055:

“Cepit enim fructosa lupos, deserta leones, Arida serpentes, pars nemoralis apros.” —ibid., p. 21.

Footnote 1056:

“Fronduit in plano platanus, convallibus alnus, Rupe rigens buxus, littore lenta salix, Monte cupressus olens, sacra vitis colle supino Inque laborata Palladis arbor humo.” —ibid., p. 23.

Footnote 1057:

De nat. rer., II, 57.

Footnote 1058:

Subtilitates, I, 9; in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcvii, col. 1214. See also above, p. 211.

Footnote 1059:

Gesta Frid., II, 13.

Footnote 1060:

Descr. Kamb., I, 6.

Footnote 1061:

Ligurinus, VI, 24–34, based on Ragewin’s continuation of Otto of Freising, Gesta Frid., III, 1.

Footnote 1062:

Descr. Kamb., I, 1.

Footnote 1063:

ibid., II, 8.

Footnote 1064:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 986.

Footnote 1065:

Top. Hiber., I, 8.

Footnote 1066:

Ragewin’s continuation of Otto of Freising, Gesta Frid., IV, 12.

Footnote 1067:

De mundi creatione, 5, in: Maxima bibliotheca veterum patrum, vol. xxvii, Lyons, 1577, p. 118.

Footnote 1068:

De arca Noë morali, IV, 9.

Footnote 1069:

“In hoc spatio mappa-mundi dipingitur ita ut caput arcae ad orientem convertitur, et finis ejus occidentem contingat, ut mirabile dispositione ab eodem principe decurrat situs locorum cum ordine temporum, et idem sit finis mundi, qui est finis saeculi” (De arca Noë mystica, 14).

Footnote 1070:

De vanitate mundi, II.

Footnote 1071:

On the relations of this theory to Otto’s philosophy of history, on its origins, and on the bibliography of the subject, see I. Schmidlin, Die geschichtsphilosophische und kirchenpolitische Weltanschauungen Ottos von Freisingen, in: Studien und Darstellungen auf dem Gebiete der Geschichte, vol. iv, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1906, pts. 2 and 3; see especially pp. 20, 35ff.

Footnote 1072:

Here he explains that science, invented in the East among the Babylonians, passed first to the Egyptians, thence to the Greeks, and thence to the Romans, notably Scipio, Cato, and Tully. Finally it was brought to the West, that is to Gaul and Spain, by Berengar, Manegold, and Anselm (of Canterbury).

Neckam (De nat. rer., II, 174) traces the course of learning—i. e. the study of the liberal arts—among the Egyptians and Greeks and, in later days, in Italy and Spain, but he draws no moral from it as did Hugh of St. Victor and Otto of Freising.

Footnote 1073:

Chron., V, 36.

Footnote 1074:

See above, p. 64. On this subject see Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, passim. Many of the references in this section are derived from Ganzenmüller’s book.

Footnote 1075:

ibid., pp. 163–182.

Footnote 1076:

Epistola CVI ad Magistrum Henricum Murdach, in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxxii, col. 242. Translation from Eales, Life and Works, vol. i, 1889, p. 353.

Footnote 1077:

Sermo in natali sancti Benedicti abbatis, in Migne, op. cit., vol. clxxxiii, col. 377.

Footnote 1078:

Sermo XIII in Cantica, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. clxxxiii, cols. 833–834; Ganzenmüller, op. cit., pp. 170–171. See also above, p. 200.

Footnote 1079:

See above, pp. 206–207.

Footnote 1080:

See especially Ganzenmüller, op. cit., pp. 182–241.

Footnote 1081:

From a letter of Guy of Bazoches to his uncle, in: Wattenbach, Guido von Bazoches, 1891 (under Guy of Bazoches in the Bibliography), p. 78.

Footnote 1082:

Carmina varia, xxviii, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. clxxi, cols. 1665–1666; Ganzenmüller, op. cit., pp. 224–225.

Footnote 1083:

Ganzenmüller, op. cit., p. 225.

Footnote 1084:

Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901, pp. 24–36.

Footnote 1085:

Historia, IV, 10; Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. i, pp. 134–135.

Footnote 1086:

ibid., XVII, 3; Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, p. 141.

Footnote 1087:

ibid., XIX, 15–16, 24; XIX, 14–15, 23, in: Paulin Paris’ edit., vol ii, pp. 273–275, 288–289.

Footnote 1088:

Gesta Frid., II, 46.

Footnote 1089:

Chron., V, 24.

Footnote 1090:

Itin. Kamb., II, 1.

Footnote 1091:

Top. Hiber., I, 5.

Footnote 1092:

ibid., I, 4.

Footnote 1093:

Itin. Kamb., II, 1.

Footnote 1094:

ibid., II, 7.

NOTES CHAPTER X THE ASTRONOMICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE KNOWN WORLD

Footnote 1095:

Etym., XIV, 6.

Footnote 1096:

De imag. mundi, I, 11.

Footnote 1097:

Im. du monde, II, 2.

Footnote 1098:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 911.

Footnote 1099:

De sphaera, 3.

Footnote 1100:

De imag. mundi, I, 31.

Footnote 1101:

Collectanea, 22.

Footnote 1102:

Etym., XIV, 6.

Footnote 1103:

Top. Hiber., II, 17.

Footnote 1104:

See above, p. 23.

Footnote 1105:

Hist. nat., VI, 33–34.

Footnote 1106:

De nupt. Phil. et Merc., VIII, 876.

Footnote 1107:

Almagest, II, 6.

Footnote 1108:

Geogr., I, 23.

Footnote 1109:

The relation between the parallels as given in the Almagest, loc. cit. and in the Geography, loc. cit., are shown graphically in the adjoining table (Fig. 11, cols. I and II). In the text of the Almagest the parallels are not specifically named beyond the twenty-sixth. Each paragraph, however, is numbered to correspond to the parallel which it describes through the thirty-eighth. The thirty-ninth paragraph describes conditions at the pole.

Footnote 1110:

See Fischer, Ptolemäus und Agathodämon, 1916, pp. 89–93.

Footnote 1111:

On the famous Vatopedi manuscript map of the world ascribed to Agathodaemon by Fischer but, as Fischer claims, directly based upon material furnished by Ptolemy, the boundaries of the climates are expressly defined in relation to Ptolemy’s parallels, as set forth in the Geography. The first climate begins with the parallel of Meroë, latitude 16°25′N., and extends to that of Syene, 23°50′N., there being a difference of half an hour between the length of the longest day at its northern and at its southern edge. The other six climates follow as shown on Figure 11, col. III. The same correlation is made in the anonymous Greek treatise Διάγνωσις ἐν ἐπιτομῇ τῆς ἐν τῇ σφαίρᾳ γεωγραφίας in: Müller, Geogr. graeci min., 1882, vol. ii, pp. 491–493. See Fischer, op. cit., pp. 90–91. See Figure 11, cols. III and IV.

It may be added that in a work entitled Preceptum canonis Ptolemei, preserved in Chartres, Bibliothèque Publique, MS. No. 214, fol. 1ro., and dating perhaps from the sixth century, the writer found a description of the division of the world in seven climates. No mention is made of the parallels by number, but the boundaries of the climates, as there defined and as is shown on Figure 11, col. V, correspond to the figures for latitude assigned to the fifth, seventh, ninth, eleventh, thirteenth, fifteenth, and seventeenth parallels of Ptolemy’s Almagest.

Footnote 1112:

The figures as given in Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 16658, fol. 50ff., are shown in Figure 11, col. VI.

Footnote 1113:

Rudimenta astronomica, Nuremberg edit., 1537, fol. 8vo.

Footnote 1114:

De sphaera, 3. After giving a brief definition of the climates, John says: “Dicitur autem clima tantum spacium per quantum sensibiliter variatur horologium.” In practice, this was always taken to be a difference of a half hour up to and including the sixth climate.

Footnote 1115:

The boundaries of Al-Farghānī’s and John of Holywood’s climates are one parallel south of those indicated in the various works referred to in note 17, p. 453, above, and those of the Toledo Tables; that is to say, the centers of the former are at the parallels of the northern borders of the latter (see Fig. 11, col. VII). According to Al-Khwārizmī, the figures for the parallels bounding the climates appear to have been derived from the Almagest; Al-Khwārizmī’s second climate, however, corresponds to the first climate of Agathodaemon’s map and of the other works derived from Ptolemy (see above, p. 453, note 17, and Fig. 11, cols. III-VI). The third climate of Al-Khwārizmī corresponds to the second climate in the works derived from Ptolemy, and so on. See Fischer, op. cit., p. 92, and footnotes 1 and 2. See Figure 11, col. VIII.

Footnote 1116:

This subject has been discussed by me in greater detail in: J. K. Wright, Knowledge of Latitudes and Longitudes, 1923.

Footnote 1117:

Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 14704, fol. 119vo. At the time of the publication of the article referred to in the preceding note, the writer was not aware of Professor Haskins’ discovery of the name of the author of the Marseilles Tables (see Haskins, Studies, 1924, pp. 96–97).

Footnote 1118:

See, for example, Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, nos. 7198, fol. 90ro., 7406, fol. 58vo., 7421, fol. 203vo., 16211, fol. 93vo., 16658, fol. 113ro.

Footnote 1119:

J. K. Wright, op. cit., pp. 84–85.

Footnote 1120:

See above, p. 86.

Footnote 1121:

J. K. Wright, op. cit., pp. 91–96.

Footnote 1122:

ibid., pp. 77–84.

Footnote 1123:

For texts illustrating this see Haskins, Reception, 1915, p. 57; the same, Studies, 1924, pp. 114–115. See also Peter Alphonsi, Dialogus, I, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clvii, cols. 543–547.

Footnote 1124:

See J. K. Wright, op. cit., p. 85.

Footnote 1125:

Theorica planetarum, Renner’s edit., fourth page before explicit. See also Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 7421, fol. 133.

Footnote 1126:

See J. K. Wright, op. cit., pp. 91–96, for discussion of the interpretation of these figures. In Figure 12 the circles show the relative positions of certain points in Europe as they actually are; the stars show them as given in the tables and referred to the meridian of Marseilles. It will readily be seen that the relative longitudes of all the points except London and Toledo are remarkably accurate when we consider the rough means of calculation at the disposal of twelfth- and thirteenth-century observers. London and Toledo are placed accurately in relation to each other though far astray in relation to Marseilles, probably as a result of a single initial error in the estimation of the number of degrees between the meridian of Toledo and that of some intermediate station (perhaps Marseilles) from which the positions of the remaining stations were calculated. The highly erroneous latitudes of Toulouse, Florence, and Naples are probably attributable to clerical errors. For a fuller discussion of this map see work cited, p. 95.

NOTES CHAPTER XI CARTOGRAPHY

Footnote 1127:

For facsimiles and texts of legends of the maps referred to in this chapter, see Miller, Mappaemundi, vols, i and ii, 1895, for the Beatus group, and vols. ii and iii, 1895, for other small maps of the world. Specific references are given in the notes that follow.

Footnote 1128:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 11; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 1.

Footnote 1129:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 12; vol. iii, p. 14.

Footnote 1130:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 85–89.

Footnote 1131:

ibid., pp. 91–92.

Footnote 1132:

ibid., pp. 62–65.

Footnote 1133:

ibid., vol. ii, p. 10; vol. iii, p. 33.

Footnote 1134:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. 3a, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Footnote 1135:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 74, 76, 77.

Footnote 1136:

ibid., p. 78.

Footnote 1137:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. 3b (our Fig. 4, p. 123, above), 8, 9. See also Figure 2, p. 69, above.

Footnote 1138:

ibid., vol. iii, p. 46 and pl. 4.

Footnote 1139:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 13; vol. iii, pl. 2.

Footnote 1140:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 2; vol. i, p. 31.

Footnote 1141:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 10; vol. iii, p. 33.

Footnote 1142:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. 3–9.

Footnote 1143:

Notably Miller, op. cit., vol. vi, 1898, pp. 143–145. Detlefsen, Ursprung, 1906, pp. 106–107, argues against this theory of Miller. See above, p. 377, note 167, p. 415, note 166.

Footnote 1144:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 23.

Footnote 1145:

On the Paris map (ibid., p. 45). The St. Sever Beatus map shows some mountains in green and others in a dark tint, in both cases outlined with red (see reproduction, ibid., vol. i, reduced in our Fig. 2, p. 69, above, where of course the difference in color cannot be distinguished).

Footnote 1146:

ibid., vol. iii, p. 31.

Footnote 1147:

ibid., vol. iii, p. 74.

Footnote 1148:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 8.

Footnote 1149:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 11; vol. iii, pl. 1.

Footnote 1150:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. 2, 3b; vol. i, pp. 31, 35.

Footnote 1151:

ibid., vol. iii, p. 56.

Footnote 1152:

loc. cit.

Footnote 1153:

The immense size of rivers and seas was characteristic of Moslem cartography. Pullé, La cartog. antica, pt. 2, 1905, pp. 21–22, points out the striking resemblances in this respect of the Guido map to contemporary specimens of Moslem cartography.

Footnote 1154:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, pls. 3a, 4–9.

Footnote 1155:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 10; vol. iii, p. 33.

Footnote 1156:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. 11, 12; vol. iii, pl. 1 and p. 14.

Footnote 1157:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. 3–9. See also Figure 2, p. 69, above.

Footnote 1158:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 10; vol. iii, p. 33.

Footnote 1159:

ibid., vol. iii, p. 76.

Footnote 1160:

ibid., vol. i, pp. 53, 56, 58.

Footnote 1161:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 78–79.

Footnote 1162:

ibid., vol. i, p. 32; see also reproductions, vol. i, p. 31, vol. ii, pl. 2.

Footnote 1163:

On the general arrangement of the mountains of the known world as shown on medieval maps see Benl, Frühere und spätere Hypothesen, 1905, pp. 8–14. See also above, p. 445, note 16.

Footnote 1164:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, pls. 3–9. See also Figure 2, p. 69, above, where Mount Sinai (the black pinnacle in the southern part of the map) and Mount Olympus (the wooded pyramid in the northeastern part) are so represented.

Footnote 1165:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 12; vol. iii, pp. 13, 14.

Footnote 1166:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 11; vol. iii, p. 8 and pl. 1.

Footnote 1167:

The lighthouse of Alexandria is shown on the Jerome map of Palestine (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 12; vol. iii, pl. 1), the columns of Alexander and Hercules on the same map and on the Henry of Mayence map (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 13; vol. iii, pl. 2), the tower of Babel on the Psalter map (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 1; vol. iii, pl. 3) and the Ebstorf and Hereford maps (reproductions accompanying ibid., vols. v and iv respectively).

Footnote 1168:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 5, 13.

Footnote 1169:

ibid., vol. i, p. 35; vol. ii, pl. 3b.

Footnote 1170:

On Paris No. II (Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, pl. 2; vol. i, p. 31), and on Osma (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 3b; vol. i, p. 35).

Footnote 1171:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 74, 76, 77.

Footnote 1172:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 10; vol. iii, pp. 29–37.

Footnote 1173:

ibid., vol. iv, 1896, with reproduction in colors accompanying the volume. Two sections are reproduced in Figure 8, pp. 276–277, above.

Footnote 1174:

ibid., vol. v, 1896, with facsimile in colors accompanying the volume.

NOTES CHAPTER XII REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY

Footnote 1175:

See above, p. 19 and p. 372, note 69.

Footnote 1176:

Opus majus, Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, p. 292. Pierre d’Ailly (1350–1420), the famous French theologian, in his Imago mundi, an encyclopedic compilation of the same sort as the De imagine mundi of our period, plagiarized the work of Roger Bacon in this connection. The Imago mundi was read and annotated by Columbus, and in this way the idea that the eastern shores of Asia lie not far to the west of Spain was brought to the attention of the discoverer of America. See Henry Vignaud, Histoire critique de la grande enterprise de Christophe Colomb, 2 vols., reference in vol. i, Paris, 1911, pp. 315–316; Edward Channing, A History of the United States, vol. i, New York, 1905, p. 15.

Footnote 1177:

The Cratesian or Macrobian theory (see above, p. 18) would seem to have been accepted by William of Conches (De phil. mundi, IV, 3) and by Giraldus Cambrensis (Top. Hiber., II, 3) as the basis of their explanation of the tides. See also Im. du monde, II, 1. The theory was set forth by Macrobius and by Martianus Capella and, as a result of the great popularity of both of these writers throughout the Middle Ages, was undoubtedly entirely familiar to scholars.

Footnote 1178:

See above, pp. 186–187.

Footnote 1179:

De mundi univ., p. 48.

Footnote 1180:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2, 1.

Footnote 1181:

Chron., I, 1.

Footnote 1182:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 910.

Footnote 1183:

Tractatus excerptionum (under Hugh of St. Victor in the Bibliography), III, 1, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxvii, col. 209.

Footnote 1184:

See above, pp. 66, 121–122, and Fig. 1 on p. 67.

Footnote 1185:

Etym., XIV, 2.

Footnote 1186:

De imag. mundi, I, 7, I, 34; Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imper., vol. i, p. 908; Rudolf of Hohen-Ems, Weltchronik, cited by Doberentz, Erd- und Völkerkunde, in Zeitschr., vol. xiii, 1881, p. 171; Im. du monde, II, 5.

Footnote 1187:

Beazley, Dawn, vol. i, 1897, pp. 133, 338–339.

Footnote 1188:

Jerusalem is not at the center in the Beatus maps. Probably the earliest map now known which so places it is the T-O map of 1110 at Oxford, upon which a cross on “Mons Syon” marks the exact spot (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 119). Jerusalem is at the center of the oikoumene on the Psalter (ibid., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 1; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 3), Hereford, and Ebstorf maps (ibid., accompanying vols. iv, 1896, and v, 1896, respectively) of the late thirteenth century. See below, p. 463, note 38.

Footnote 1189:

“Ista est Hierusalem, in medio gentium posui eam et in circuitu ejus terrae” (Ezekiel, v. 5). See also Ezekiel, xxxviii, 12. Jerome, Commentarius in Ezechielem, II (Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xxv, col. 54), gives proofs that Jerusalem is the center of the earth. The Jews also identified Bethel and Mount Moriah, and the Samaritans Mount Gerizim with the center (Roscher, Omphalos, 1913, p. 27).

Footnote 1190:

On ancient and Scriptural theories concerning the center of the earth, see Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 54, note 3a; Roscher, Omphalos, 1913, pp. 20–36; the same, Neue Omphalosstudien, 1915, pp. 12–28, 73–75; and A. I. Wensinck, The Ideas of the Western Semites Concerning the Navel of the Earth, in Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen te Amsterdam, Afdeeling Letterkunde, N. S., vol. xvii, No. 1, 1916.

Footnote 1191:

White, Warfare, 1920, vol. i, p. 98.

Footnote 1192:

Liebrecht, loc. cit.

Footnote 1193:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 892. Gervase, loc. cit., gives the following proof that there is as much land to the east as there is to the west of Jerusalem: “Unde tradunt, tantam terram a Jerusalem protendi ad Orientem, quantam ad Occidentem, quod probant ex eo, quod legitur: ‘Deus ab austro veniet et sanctus de monte Pharaan’ [Habakkuk, iii, 3]. Auster enim et Aquilo, qui pro Borea scribitur, ut ibi: ‘ab Aquilone pandetur omne malum.’ Et alibi: ‘Ponam sedem meam ab aquilone, & ero similis altissimo.’ Per contrapositionem oppositi per effectum, & locorum distantiam objecti, aequaliter distant a centro, quod est inter Orientem et Occidentem.” See below, p. 463, note 38.

Footnote 1194:

See above, p. 460, note 14.

Footnote 1195:

De situ Hierusalem, d’Avezac’s edit., 1839, pp. 841–842; Wright’s translation, 1848, p. 38.

Footnote 1196:

The cross of Calvary was usually supposed to mark the navel of the earth (White, Warfare, 1920, vol. i, p. 100).

Footnote 1197:

The manuscript in which the passage telling of this experiment is found is described in Sir G. F. Warner and J. P. Gilson’s Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Old Royal and King’s Collections [British Museum], vol. i, London, 1921, p. 193, under MS 7 D xxv (saec. xii). It is there suggested that the author may have been Adelard of Bath; Professor Haskins (Studies, 1924, p. 31) states that the manuscript “clearly represents Adelard’s generation and circle of interests” and gives (ibid., pp. 31–32) the following transcription of the text of the passage (from folio 66): “Mons Amor reorum est locus medius mundi, ubi apposui mensuras et probavi per multa loca et posui lignum rea [sic] rotundum habens. xii. cubitos longitudinis et grossitudo illi cubitus unus et suspendi illum per funem et tantum commutavi eum de loco in locum in medio eius. vii. kal. Iulii donec suspendi illud in loco medii diei et residit suum cum splendor solis ex omnibus partibus et facta est umbra ipsius subtus cum rotunda sicut rotunditas ipsius ligni quod suspenderam; et de ipsa mensura cognovi quod medius mundus est in Monte Amor reorum. Et tempore quo mensuravi hoc est annus .xxxviiii. et vinum non bibi, oculi mei somno satiati non fuerunt, ne exuperaveram in eo quod inquirebam.” Haskins (loc. cit.) suggests that “.vii.” should read “.xi.” and “exuperaveram” should read “exuperarer.”

Footnote 1198:

“Hoc autem circumferentiae centrum arbitrantur quidam in illo loco esse, ubi Dominus locutus est ad Samaritanam ad puteum, illic enim in solstitio aestivo monstrans, meridiana hora sol recto transite descendit in aquam putei umbram nullam aliqua parte monstrans, quod apud Syenem fieri tradunt philosophi....” (Otia imper., vol. i, p. 892; Liebrecht, Gervasius von Tilbury, 1856, p. 1).

Footnote 1199:

This would seem to place the center of the earth, not at Jerusalem, but at Jacob’s well on Mount Gerizim in Samaria. See John, iv, 6, 20, and above, p. 460, note 15.

Footnote 1200:

The most elaborate and scholarly monograph on the Terrestrial Paradise as it was conceived in the Middle Ages is Coli, Il paradiso terrestre dantesco, 1897. This treats in great detail the history of the legends of Paradise and the development of theories concerning the nature and location of the Garden of Delights. Special attention is given to the Terrestrial Paradise of Dante.

Footnote 1201:

On the St. Sever Beatus map, Paradise is enclosed by mountains, its northern border by the Montes Ceraunes, a continuation of the Taurus (see Fig. 2, p. 69, above). On the Beatus maps Paradise is rectangular (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pls. 2–9); on the Psalter (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 1; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 3) and Lambert mappaemundi (ibid., vol. iii, p. 46 and pl. 4) it is circular; and on the Henry of Mayence map (ibid., vol. iii, pl. 2) it is more or less circular and is placed on an island in the Eastern Sea. A few maps do not show it at all; as the Cotton, Jerome, Guido, some of the Sallust maps, and the Matthew Paris map of the world (ibid., vol. ii, pls. 10, 11, 12; vol. iii, pp. 56, 70–71, 110–113).

Footnote 1202:

Paraphrased from De imag. mundi, I, 8, from Isidore, Etym., XIV, 3.

Footnote 1203:

Paraphrased from De imag. mundi, I, 10; Im. du monde, II, 2.

Footnote 1204:

Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, cols. 775–776.

Footnote 1205:

Tractatus excerptionum (under Hugh of St. Victor in the Bibliography), III, 2, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. clxxvii, cols. 209–210.

Footnote 1206:

Im. du monde, II, 2.

Footnote 1207:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 911.

Footnote 1208:

ibid., p. 892.

Footnote 1209:

See also Alexander Neckam, De nat. rer., II, 49: “Rei tamen veritas est, quod paradisus terrestris superior est aquis, cum etiam lunari globo superior sit. Unde et aquae cataclysmi paradiso nullam intulere molestiam. Enoc, qui in paradiso jam tunc erat collocatus, aquarum non sensit diluvii incrementa.” See above, p. 437, note 25.

Footnote 1210:

Sententiae, II, 17, 5. Peter Lombard maintains that there were three sententiae concerning Paradise: (1) that of those who conceived of it in a spiritual sense, (2) that of those who conceived of it in a corporeal sense, and (3) that of those who conceived of it in both senses. The third method was the most pleasing to Peter, who says: “ut homo in corporali paradiso sit positus, qui ab illo principio plantatus accipi potest, quo terram omnem remotis aquis herbas et ligna producere jussit. Qui etsi praesentis Ecclesiae vel futurae typum tenet, ad litteram tamen intellegendum est esse locum amoenissimum fructuosis arboribus, magnum et magno fonte foecundum. Quod dicimus ‘a principio,’ antiqua translatio dicit ‘ad Orientem.’ Unde volunt in orientali parte esse paradisum, longo interjacente spatio vel maris vel terrae a regionibus quas incolunt homines, secretum, et in alto situm, usque ad lunarem circulem pertingentem, unde nec aquae diluvii illuc pervenerunt.” The older translation referred to may have been the “Old Latin” translation of the Septuagint. See above, p. 390, note 122.

Footnote 1211:

The Beatus (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pls. 3a, 3b—our Fig. 4 on p. 123, above—4–9; vol. i, 1895, pp. 35, 39, and accompanying reproduction—our Fig. 2 on p. 69 above) and Psalter (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 1; vol. iii, pl. 3) maps show Paradise in Asia; those of Henry of Mayence (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 13; vol. iii, pl. 2) and of Lambert (ibid., vol. iii, pl. 4) place it on an island. On Paradise as represented on these and other medieval maps, see Coli, Il paradiso terrestre, 1897, pp. 100–122.

Footnote 1212:

See above, p. 428, note 136.

Footnote 1213:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 892. Dante also placed the Terrestrial Paradise in the southern hemisphere, at the summit of the Mount of Purgatory, which was the antipodes of “Mount Zion.” This has usually been interpreted to mean the Mount Zion near Jerusalum. See Coli, op. cit., pp. 185–207; Moore, Studies in Dante, Third Series, 1903, pp. 134–139; Mori, La geogr., 1922, pp. 287–289. Benini (Origine del Monte del Purgatorio, 1917, pp. 1037–1055), however, maintains that the mountain to which Dante refers was to be associated with Sinai or with the Mount Pharaan of Habakkuk, iii, 3 (see above, p. 461, note 19; see also R. Benini, Il grande Sion, il Sinai e il piccolo Sion (dove ha posto Dante l’entrata dell’ inferno), in: Rendiconti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, series 5, vol. xxiii, Rome, 1915, pp. 293–315). He argues that Dante believed this mountain to be on the Tropic of Cancer and that the Mount of Purgatory, its antipodes, was consequently on the Tropic of Capricorn.

Footnote 1214:

See above, p. 164.

Footnote 1215:

Chron., II, 25.

Footnote 1216:

Tractatus excerptionum (under Hugh of St. Victor in the Bibliography), III, 2, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxvii, col. 211.

Footnote 1217:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 13; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 2.

Footnote 1218:

ibid., vol. iii, p. 46 and pl. 4.

Footnote 1219:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), p. 36.

Footnote 1220:

Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram, VIII, 1, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xxxiv, cols. 371–373. On other medieval ideas concerning the location of Paradise, see Graf, Miti, leggende, vol. i, 1892, pp. 1–15.

Footnote 1221:

Iter ad Paradisum, edit. by J. Zacher, 1859 (under “Alexander the Great, Romance of, VI” in the Bibliography). See Meyer, Alexandre le Grand, vol. i, 1886, pp. 47–51.

Footnote 1222:

Graf, op. cit., pp. 73–126, discusses these stories in detail. In his La leggenda, 1878, pp. 22–44, he shows that there were four types of Paradise legend in the Middle Ages: (1) legends which grew out of pre-existing legendary themes, as, for example, the story of Seth’s visit to Paradise; (2) those which developed out of a spirit of pure devotion and asceticism, such as certain of the stories of the visits of pious monks; (3) those which arose out of a spirit of exploration and adventure, as the story of St. Brandan’s voyages or that given in the Pantheon of Godfrey of Viterbo; and, finally, (4) those which arose from a chivalric love of adventure and conquest, as the Iter ad Paradisum, connected with the Romance of the conquests of Alexander the Great.

Footnote 1223:

On the story of Seth’s visit to Paradise, see Graf, Miti, leggende, vol. i, 1892, pp. 76–84. This story was included in the second verse redaction of the Image du monde. See above, p. 404, note 88.

Footnote 1224:

Pantheon, pars 2, in: Pistorius’ edit., 1726, pp. 58–60; see also Graf, Miti, leggende, vol. i, 1892, pp. 112–113.

Footnote 1225:

Acta Sanctorum quotquot tota orbe coluntur.... Editio novissima, Octobris vol. x, Paris and Rome, 1869, pp. 566–574 (see Potthast, Wegweiser, vol. i, 1896, p. xxxii-xxxiii).

Footnote 1226:

Hercules’ and Alexander’s columns are shown on the Jerome map of Palestine (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 13; vol. iii, 1895, pp. 13–14).

Footnote 1227:

Mâle, L’art religieux, 1898, p. 19. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage in the third century, had suggested this allegorical interpretation, and it was passed on to the Western world by Isidore. See Rahn, Glasgemälde, 1879, p. 42 (14).

Footnote 1228:

De nat. rer., II, 2.

Footnote 1229:

See above, pp. 29–30, 59–60, 184–185, and 199–203.

Footnote 1230:

De imag. mundi, I, 10.

Footnote 1231:

Etym., XIV, 3.

Footnote 1232:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 1; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 3.

Footnote 1233:

Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, col. 778.

Footnote 1234:

Elysaeus, 14, 26, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. viii, 1876, pp. 123–124.

Footnote 1235:

De mundi univ., p. 22.

Footnote 1236:

See the introduction to Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither, 2nd edit., vol. i, 1915.

Footnote 1237:

See Friedrich Hirth, China and the Roman Orient, Leipzig, 1885; an especially full study is Albert Herrmann, Die Westländer in der chinesischen Kartographie, forming vol. viii, pt. 2, of Sven Hedin, Southern Tibet, Stockholm, 1922. See also Albert Herrmann, Die ältesten chinesischen Karten von Zentral- und Westasien, in: Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, vol. viii, Berlin, 1919–1920, pp. 185–198, and note upon this monograph in: Geographical Review, vol. xiii, New York, 1923, pp. 311–313.

Footnote 1238:

See E. Bretschneider, Mediaeval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources: Fragments Towards the Knowledge of the Geography and History of Central and Western Asia from the Thirteenth to the Seventeenth Century, London, 1888, vol. i, pp. 275–344; Leon Cahun, Introduction à l’histoire de l’Asie: Turcs et Mongols des origines à 1405, Paris, 1896; René Grousset, Histoire de l’Asie, in 3 vols., Paris, 1922, vol. ii, pp. 12–160.

Footnote 1239:

W. W. Rockhill, translator and editor, The Journey of William of Rubruck to the Eastern Parts of the World, 1253–55, As Narrated by Himself, With Two Accounts of the Earlier Journey of John of Pian de Carpine, Hakluyt Society Publications, series 2, vol. iv, London, 1900, p. xiii.

Footnote 1240:

Chron. maiora, Rolls series edit., vol. iv, pp. 76–78; translated by Rockhill, op. cit., pp. xiv-xvii.

Footnote 1241:

See above, pp. 287–288.

Footnote 1242:

See Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 275–391; Bréhier, L’Église et l’Orient, 1911, pp. 219–221, 228–233. See also above, p. 286.

Footnote 1243:

See above, pp. 283–286.

Footnote 1244:

See especially Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 275–391, vol. iii, 1906, pp. 15–381.

Footnote 1245:

For the Latin text of John of Pian de Carpine’s travels edited by d’Avezac with extensive commentary see: Recueil de voyages et de mémoires publié par la Société de Géographie, vol. iv, Paris, 1839, pp. 397–779. English translation of a part of this in Rockhill, op. cit., pp. 1–32. Professor Paul Pelliot of the Collège de France in a lecture delivered at Columbia University in 1923 announced that the original letter sent by Carpine from the Khan at Karakorum to the Pope had recently been discovered in the Vatican archives.

Footnote 1246:

For the Latin text of Rubruck’s travels edited by d’Avezac see: Recueil de voyages et de mémoires publié par la Société de Géographie, vol. iv, Paris, 1839, pp. 213–396. English translation and commentary in Rockhill, op. cit.

Footnote 1247:

See above, p. 405, note 92.

Footnote 1248:

See above, p. 408, note 97.

Footnote 1249:

See Yule, Marco Polo, 3rd edit., 1903, with Cordier’s supplement, Ser Marco Polo, 1920 (both under Polo, Marco, in the Bibliography).

Footnote 1250:

See especially vols. ii and iii of Yule’s Cathay, 2nd edit. by Cordier, 1913–1914.

Footnote 1251:

De imag. mundi, I, 8.

Footnote 1252:

Etym., XIV, 3.

Footnote 1253:

For a brief statement in regard to the origins of the conception of a great mountain range running east and west across Asia see Benl, Frühere und spätere Hypothesen, 1905, pp. 1–7.

Footnote 1254:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 761.

Footnote 1255:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1256:

St. Sever Beatus (see Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, p. 50, also reproduction accompanying volume—reduced in our Fig. 2, page 69, above), Osma Beatus (ibid., vol. i, p. 35—our Fig. 4, p. 123, above—; vol. ii, 1895, pl. 3), Henry of Mayence (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 13; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 2), Psalter (ibid., vol. ii, pl. i, vol. iii, pl. 3). For “Paropanissade montes,” see Jerome map of the East (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 11; vol. iii, p. 8 and pl. 1).

Footnote 1257:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, pls. 11 and 12; vol. iii, pl. 1.

Footnote 1258:

“Hae superius dictae regiones, ab oriente incipientes, recta linea ad Mediterraneum mare extenditur” (De imag. mundi, I, 18). See Isidore, Etym., XIV, 3; Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imper., vol. ii, pp. 758–760.

Footnote 1259:

De imag. mundi, I, 19; Isidore, loc. cit.; Gervase of Tilbury, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 762.

Footnote 1260:

Gervase, loc. cit., says that all he remembers having read about the Seres are certain verses of Sidonius, which he quotes as follows:

“‘Ergo ubi se mediam solio dedit (sc. Roma), advolat omnis Terra simul, fert quaeque suos provincia fructus.’ Et post pauca: ‘Ser vellera, thura Sabeus.’”

Footnote 1261:

Hist. nat., VI, 17, sect. 54.

Footnote 1262:

Collectanea, 50.

Footnote 1263:

Etym., XIV, 3, 29.

Footnote 1264:

De imag. mundi, I, 19.

Footnote 1265:

Letter of Prester John, 42, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, p. 915.

Footnote 1266:

Yule, Cathay, vol. i, 1915, pp. 11–13, 183–185, 187–196, especially p. 195. On the Periplus see above, p. 40.

Footnote 1267:

See Yule, op. cit., pp. 181–182.

Footnote 1268:

De scientia stellarum, Bologna edit., 1645, p. 24.

Footnote 1269:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 66–67. See above, p. 414, note 156.

Footnote 1270:

See above, p. 197, and p. 442, note 75; and Borchardt, Itinéraire, 1924, p. 33.

Footnote 1271:

Marco Polo placed the griffon, or Rukh, in Madagascar and asserted that it could carry elephants in its talons (Yule, Marco Polo, 3rd edit., 1903 (under Polo, Marco, in the Bibliography), pp. 412, 415).

Footnote 1272:

Pseudo-Abdias, De historia certaminis apostolici, VIII; edition of 1560, fol. 96a.

Footnote 1273:

Guido’s mappamundi of 1119 indicates “insunt tres Indiae” (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 54). Lambert’s map designates the three divisions as “India prima, hic pigmei et fauni et reges gentium,” “India secunda,” and “India ultima, hic arbores solis et lunae” (ibid., p. 49). The Jerome map of the East represents “India ultima” as extending from the Indus to the “Hipanis,” bordering on Persia and Carmania, and including the city of Ophir. “India inferior” lies between the “Hipanis” and the Ganges, and “India superior” to the northeast, between the Ganges and the Octorogorra, a river rising in the Caucasus (ibid., pl. 1). Pullé, La cartog. antica, pt. 2, 1905, p. 31, conjectures plausibly that these three divisions may represent in order, Punjabic India, peninsular India, and Gangetic India.

Footnote 1274:

Hist. eccles., pt. I, bk. II, 15.

Footnote 1275:

Letter of Prester John, 12, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, p. 910.

Footnote 1276:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 911.

Footnote 1277:

“Isti 4 rivuli fundunt his duabus Indiis....” Elysaeus, 14, in: Zarncke, op. cit., vol. viii, 1876, p. 123.

Footnote 1278:

“En Ynde a maintes granz contrées qui sont pueploiées de genz et de grant plente de bestes. Une en y a que l’en apele Perse ...” etc. (Im. du monde, II, 2). This shows that the writer considered Persia a part of India. A rubric in the manuscript of the Image du monde of the Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds français, no. 574, reads “Des contrées d’Ynde,” and includes under it Babylonia, Chaldaea, Arabia, Phoenicia, Assyria, Palestine, and Armenia, showing that the scribe at least, if not the poet, believed that India comprises the greater part of Asia.

Footnote 1279:

See, on India, Isidore, Etym., XIV, passim; De imag. mundi, I, 11, 12, 13; Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imper., vol. i, p. 911; vol. ii, pp. 755, 756; Im. du monde, II, 2. Also see, for a study of India as delineated on medieval maps, Pullé, La cartog. antica, pt. 2, 1905.

Footnote 1280:

Etym., XIII, 21; De imag. mundi, I, 10; Peter Abelard, Expos. in hex., in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, col. 779; Peter Comestor, Hist. schol., Gen. xiv; Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imper., vol. i, p. 892.

Footnote 1281:

Hist. schol., loc. cit.

Footnote 1282:

Peter Comestor gives an alternative suggestion that the word “Phison” may refer to the changeable appearance of the river.

Footnote 1283:

Letter of Prester John, 22, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, p. 912.

Footnote 1284:

The Jerome map of the East (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, pl. 1) and the Henry of Mayence map of the world (ibid., pl. 2) show these rivers and give their Greek names, Hydaspes, Indus, and Hipanis. Pullé, op. cit., pt. 2, pp. 28, 31, believes that the shape of the coast line, the Greek names of the rivers, the position of Taprobane, and other details on these maps strongly suggest the Ptolemaic representation of the East. The resemblances in form to the Ptolemaic map, however, are too doubtful to warrant us in assuming any direct Ptolemaic influence.

Footnote 1285:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 63–65.

Footnote 1286:

These marvels were almost never arbitrary inventions. They can usually be traced back to a remote source which was itself an exaggeration or distortion of a true story. See Peschel, Abhandlungen, vol. i, 1877, pp. 9–19. Most of the marvels of India as set forth by Ctesias had their counterparts in Persian and Indian mythology and probably “originated in obscure and disfigured accounts of nature and man in the mountain chains between the upper Indus and the Ganges and on the high plateaus as far as the Tarim Basin” (Doberentz, Erd- und Völkerkunde, in: Zeitschr., vol. xiii, 1881, pp. 41–57).

Footnote 1287:

Many of the stories go back to Greek writers earlier even than Ctesias. The pygmies who fight with storks are found in Homer, the half-dog-half-men in Hesiod, the umbrella-footed men in Alcman, the gold-guarding griffons and the one-eyed Arimaspians in the writings of Aristeas of Proconnesus. Hecataeus, Scylax, Aeschylus, and, above all, Herodotus, repeat many of these yarns. Ctesias of Cnidus gathered together most of the earlier tales and added to them stories that he himself had heard in the Persian realm, or, perhaps, he wrote down descriptions of monsters that he had seen depicted or sculptured on the walls of the great palaces at Persepolis. Ctesias’ book became the great reservoir to which later writers looked for their marvels. See Doberentz, loc. cit.

Footnote 1288:

The mantichora (see Fig. 8, p. 277 above) was a beast described by Pliny, Hist. nat., VIII, 21, as follows (transl. in Bohn’s edit., vol. ii, p. 280): “It has a triple row of teeth which fit into each other like those of a comb, the face and ears of a man, and azure eyes, is of the color of blood, has the body of a lion, and a tail ending in a sting, like that of a scorpion. Its voice resembles the union of the sound of the flute and the trumpet; it is of excessive swiftness, and is particularly fond of human flesh.” Doberentz shows the route by which the story of this extraordinary combination found its way from its Oriental place of origin to the Weltchronik of Rudolf of Hohen-Ems.

This route was the same as that taken by most of the other marvels which came to this chronicle. The beast appears illustrated on the monuments of Persepolis; possibly it was thought to be the king of the evil beasts of Ahriman, the Zoroastrian god of darkness. Ctesias describes it in his Indica; thence it probably made its way to the Historia animalium of Aristotle, thence to the Chorographia Pliniana, thence to Solinus, thence to the De imagine mundi, and thence to Rudolf’s chronicle (Doberentz, op. cit., pp. 175–180).

Footnote 1289:

Peschel in his Abhandlungen, vol. i, 1877, p. 10, pointed out that some medieval commentators on the subject were disinclined to believe in the existence of these creatures because they were not included in Noah’s ark. St. Augustine, De civitate Dei, XVI, 8, had said: “Either such monsters do not exist at all, or else they are in no wise men, for in the latter case they would be sprung from Adam.” In the ninth century there was discussion as to whether or not the cynocephali in the north were descended from Adam. During our period no text that has been found by the writer questions their existence.

Footnote 1290:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 41 and pl. 3; vol. ii, 1895, pl. 1.

Footnote 1291:

ibid., vol. iii, 1895, pp. 13 and 14; vol. ii, 1895, pl. 12.

Footnote 1292:

Lambert (ibid., vol. iii, 1895, p. 49), Jerome (Palestine) (ibid., p. 13), Psalter (ibid., p. 38). On the Hereford map the legend reads: “Arbor balsami id est sicca” (ibid., vol. iv, 1896, p. 8); on the Ebstorf map, “Oraculum solis et lune” (ibid., vol. v, 1896, p. 48). See Yule, Marco Polo, 3rd edit., 1903, vol. i, pp. 128–138; Cordier, Ser Marco Polo, 1920, pp. 31–32 (both under Polo, Marco, in the Bibliography).

Footnote 1293:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 48 and pl. 4.

Footnote 1294:

ibid., p. 8 and pl. 1.

Footnote 1295:

See above, p. 74.

Footnote 1296:

Philipps, St. Thomas, 1903, pp. 1–8.

Footnote 1297:

Hist. eccles., pt. I, bk. II, 14. Ordericus drew from Pseudo-Abdias. See above, p. 379, note 8.

Footnote 1298:

Miller, op. cit., vol. i, 1895, p. 35; vol. ii, 1895, pl. 3 (our Fig. 4 on p. 123 above).

Footnote 1299:

Letter of Prester John, 56–72, in: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 916–920.

Footnote 1300:

Mâle, L’art religieux, 1898, pp. 378–388.

Footnote 1301:

Zarncke, op. cit., pp. 832–843.

Footnote 1302:

In writing of the journey of Sighelm, who was sent by King Alfred to the shrines of Saints Thomas and Bartholomew in India (see above, p. 74), William of Malmsbury remarks that the journey was made with great success, “at which everybody in this age wonders” (Gesta regum Anglorum, II, 122, edited by William Stubbs (Rolls Series, no. 90), 2 vols., London, 1887).

Footnote 1303:

De adventu patriarchae Indorum ad urbem sub Callisto papa II, 12, in: Zarncke, op. cit., p. 838.

Footnote 1304:

See Zarncke, op. cit., pp. 843–846.

Footnote 1305:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 12 and pl. 1; vol. ii, 1895, pl. 11.

Footnote 1306:

Etym., XIV, 6.

Footnote 1307:

De imag. mundi, I, 11.

Footnote 1308:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 911.

Footnote 1309:

Jerome map of the East (Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 12 and pl. 1; vol. ii, pl. 11); Lambert map of the world (ibid., p. 50 and pl. 4).

Footnote 1310:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2. This passage was copied in: De imag. mundi, I, 11.

Footnote 1311:

Etym. XIV, 6; Otia imper., loc. cit. Copied from Orosius in: De imag. mundi, loc. cit.

Footnote 1312:

Collectanea, 53, 2–3.

Footnote 1313:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 13; vol. iii, pl. 2.

Footnote 1314:

ibid., vol. ii, pls. ii and 12; vol. iii, pl. 1.

Footnote 1315:

ibid., reproduction accompanying vol. iv, 1896.

Footnote 1316:

ibid., reproduction accompanying vol. v, 1896.

Footnote 1317:

De scientia stellarum, Bologna edit., 1645, pp. 24ff.

Footnote 1318:

G. A. Wood in his Discovery of Australia, London, 1921, p. 28, writes that though the Arabs “knew Sumatra, and Java, and perhaps Timor, and though they must have shared whatever knowledge may have been possessed by the Malays or Hindus, there seems no evidence that they had heard of Australia.”

Footnote 1319:

Etym., XIV, 3, sects. 31–32; De imag. mundi, I, 19; Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 756. A long legend on the St. Sever Beatus map describes “Scythia maior” in similar terms (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, p. 49).

Footnote 1320:

See above, pp. 269–270.

Footnote 1321:

Notably on the Jerome map of the East (Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, pl. 1), the St. Sever Beatus (ibid., reproduction accompanying vol. i, 1895; see Fig. 2, p. 69, above), the Osma Beatus (ibid., reproduction in vol. ii, 1895, pl. 3; see also vol. i, p. 35, and Fig. 4, p. 123, above), and Henry of Mayence map (ibid., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 13; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 2). Other significant features shown on contemporary maps in northern and central Asia are the Amazons, the Anthropophagi, the Caspian Gates, the Armenian Pillars, and the Hyperboreans. Beatus Paris No. II (ibid., vol. i, pp. 31–32) shows a region in the vicinity of the Caspian Sea labeled “terra inhabitabilis propter habundanti[am] aqu[ae],” which does not appear on other maps.

Footnote 1322:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., p. 59.

Footnote 1323:

loc. cit. See Neubauer, Ten Tribes, 1888–1889. Neubauer’s article traces the history of speculations regarding the lost ten tribes from the earliest times and contains incidentally much important geographical lore.

Footnote 1324:

See above, pp. 287–288.

Footnote 1325:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., p. 60.

Footnote 1326:

Chron., VII, 33.

Footnote 1327:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 60–61.

Footnote 1328:

See Yule, Marco Polo, 3rd edit., 1903 (under Polo, Marco, in the Bibliography), vol. i, pp. 234–235.

Footnote 1329:

Oppert, Presbyter Johannes, 1870, passim; Zarncke, Priester Johannes (under Prester John in the Bibliography), in: Abhandl., vol. vii, 1879, pp. 847–871.

Footnote 1330:

Pelliot, Chrétiens, 1914, p. 627.

Footnote 1331:

ibid., p. 629.

Footnote 1332:

Zarncke gives a critical Latin text of the Letter in Priester Johannes, in: Abhandl., vol. vii, 1879, pp. 909–924.

Footnote 1333:

Zarncke in: Berichte, vol. xxix, 1877, p. 151 and note 9.

Footnote 1334:

See above, pp. 268–269 and p. 465, note 67.

Footnote 1335:

The name “Prester John” was not used in early manuscripts of the Letter of Prester John. The letter of Pope Alexander III was discussed and edited critically by Zarncke in his Priester Johannes, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 935–946. See Yule, Marco Polo, 3rd edit., 1903 (under Polo, Marco, in the Bibliography), vol. i, p. 231.

Footnote 1336:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 93.

Footnote 1337:

De imag. mundi, I, 11.

Footnote 1338:

Rudimenta astronomica, Nuremberg edit., 1537, dif. ix, fol. 9ro.

Footnote 1339:

From Meyer’s “third branch.” See above, p. 412, note 135, and Meyer, Alexandre le grand, 1886, vol. ii, pp. 170, 217, 386–389.

Footnote 1340:

From Meyer’s “fourth branch,” by Alexandre de Bernay (de Paris). Meyer, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 207.

Footnote 1341:

Chron., V, 9. Godfrey of Viterbo incorporated this passage in his Pantheon, pars 16 (in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcviii, col. 913; also in Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xxii, p. 196).

Footnote 1342:

Chronicon Wirziburgense, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. vi, p. 25. See above, p. 412, note 129.

Footnote 1343:

Chron., II, 23, from Orosius, Hist. adv. pag., III, 7.

Footnote 1344:

This belief in the increase of Jewish population in these regions may possibly have been connected in some way with knowledge of the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism in the eighth century. See Carmoly, Itinéraires, 1847, pp. 3–112, and S. Schechter, An Unknown Khazar Document, in: Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. iii (N. S.), London, 1912, pp. 181–219.

Footnote 1345:

“Goth & Magoth, aeternaliter conclusit. Vndecim trib. Hebraeorum, montib. aeternaliter circumcinxit, de quibus omnibus in versibus plenius dicemus atque iocundius” (Pantheon, pars 11, Herold’s edit., 1559, col. 262; for the poetic elaboration mentioned, see cols. 266–267; both of these passages of the Pantheon are omitted in the editions of Migne and of the Mon. Germ. hist.). Marinelli (La geogr., 1882, p. 493; Scritti minori, vol. i, [1908?], p. 316, note 2, p. 415, note 2) knew of the passage in the Pantheon just quoted at second hand through a paraphrase in Giusto Grion, I nobili fatti di Alessandro Magno: Romanzo storico tradotto dal francese nel buon secolo ..., Rome, 1872, p. cxxxii; not having the original text of the Pantheon at hand, Marinelli was in doubt as to whether the error in the statement that there were eleven tribes was to be imputed to Grion or to Godfrey. Marinelli cites this passage together with a passage from Albertus Magnus’ Compendium theologicae veritatis, VII, 10, as evidence of the fact that the ten tribes of the Jews were associated with Gog and Magog as early as the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. See also the prophecy in the Pantheon within a longer prophecy of the Sibyl: “Et exurgent ab Aquilonae spurcissimae gentes, quas Alexander rex inclusit, Goth videlicet & Magoth. Haec duodecim [sic] regna, quorum numerus est sicut arena maris” (pars 10, Herold’s edit., col. 257; Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xxii, p. 147). See also above, p. 391, note 130, p. 470, note 147.

Footnote 1346:

See above, pp. 267–268.

Footnote 1347:

De imag. mundi, I, 14; Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 756, from Orosius, Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1348:

De imag. mundi and Otia imper., loc. cit., from Isidore, Etym., XIV, 3, sect. 13.

Footnote 1349:

Hist. schol., Gen. 14; De imag. mundi, I, 10.

Footnote 1350:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 911. Most of the maps of the period correctly represent the Tigris as flowing into the Persian Gulf; the Jerome maps even show a common outlet for the two rivers (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 11; vol. iii, 1895, p. 14 and pl. 1). The Jerome map of the Orient, however, makes the Hydaspes a branch of the Tigris (ibid., vol. iii, p. 14).

Footnote 1351:

Otia imper., vol. ii, pp. 756–757; De imag. mundi, I, 15, from Isidore, Etym., XIV, 3.

Footnote 1352:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 757, from Orosius, loc. cit.

Footnote 1353:

Otto of Freising, Chron., VII, 3.

Footnote 1354:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., p. 42. See also above, p. 414, note 156.

Footnote 1355:

Benjamin of Tudela, loc. cit.

Footnote 1356:

ibid., pp. 35–38.

Footnote 1357:

Some manuscripts give “Sikbia” rather than “Siberia.” The “land of Togarmim” was Turkestan.

Footnote 1358:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 40–41.

Footnote 1359:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 757, from Orosius, op. cit., I, 2. See also De imag. mundi, I, 16, from Isidore, Etym., XIV, 3.

Footnote 1360:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 47–51. See especially pp. 48–50, note 2. See also above, p. 414, note 156.

Footnote 1361:

Benjamin of Tudela, op. cit., p. 67.

Footnote 1362:

Yule, Marco Polo, 3rd edit., 1903 (under Polo, Marco, in the Bibliography), vol. ii, p. 431.

Footnote 1363:

Etym., xiv, 3; De imag. mundi, I, 16–17; Otia imper., vol. ii, pp. 757–758.

Footnote 1364:

On the growth of the legends of the Dead Sea before and after our period and particularly on the supposed persistence of the pillar of salt into which Lot’s wife was turned, see White, Warfare, 1920, vol. ii, pp. 221–235. See also above, pp. 208–209.

Footnote 1365:

See Rey, Colonies franques, 1883; Bréhier, L’Église et l’Orient, 1911, pp. 88–100; Heyd, Commerce du Levant, vol. i, 1885, pp. 129–190; Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 396–464.

Footnote 1366:

A brief account of this expedition with references to the Arabic sources will be found in Bernhard Moritz, Arabien: Studien zur physikalischen und historischen Geographie des Landes, Hanover, 1923, pp. 119–120.

Footnote 1367:

Heyd, op. cit., pp. 163–176.

Footnote 1368:

ibid., pp. 301–310. It is unnecessary to enter upon a detailed discussion of the geography of Asia Minor as given in the De imagine mundi, I, 19–20, and Otia imperialia, vol. ii, p. 762. This is no more than the dry repetition of information drawn from classical sources. The Jerome map of the Orient shows the classical divisions of Asia Minor with a good deal of detail; the river systems are also represented, but very poorly (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 11; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 1). Troy appears on the Psalter, Lambert, and Guido maps (ibid., vol. iii, p. 56, and pls. 3 and 4). On the last-named it is the only detail in Asia Minor.

Footnote 1369:

Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901.

Footnote 1370:

See above, pp. 176, 212, 238–239.

Footnote 1371:

Historia, XIII, 3; in medieval French translation in Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. i, p. 480. The “Sur” of William of Tyre is Tyre. See also Dreesbach, op. cit., pp. 24–28.

Footnote 1372:

ibid., pp. 53–61.

Footnote 1373:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, 1895, p. 93.

Footnote 1374:

Ambroise, Estoire de la guerre sainte, verses 9541–9542, in Gaston Paris’ edit., col. 255. See also Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 60.

Footnote 1375:

Dreesbach, op. cit., pp. 36–49.

Footnote 1376:

Historia, XXI, 24; in medieval French translation, XXI, 22 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, pp. 397–398). See also Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 41.

Footnote 1377:

Dreesbach, op. cit., pp. 4–19.

Footnote 1378:

Historia, XVII, 10, XIX, 13, 15, 21; in medieval French translation, XVII, 10, XIX, 12, 14, 20 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, pp. 153, 270, 272–274, 282–283); see also Dreesbach, op. cit., pp. 10–11.

Footnote 1379:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., p. 35.

Footnote 1380:

ibid., p. 71.

Footnote 1381:

Dreesbach, op. cit., pp. 13–19.

Footnote 1382:

Historia, XIV, 19, XX, 29; in medieval French translation, XIV, 16, XX, 28 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, pp. 25 and 357–358).

Footnote 1383:

Estoire de la guerre sainte, verses 8819–8846; in Gaston Paris’ edit., cols. 236–237. Also quoted in Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 17.

Footnote 1384:

See also Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 53–54.

Footnote 1385:

“Hac in oriente Indii fluminis surgit, et per meridiem vergens in occidentem tendit” (De imag. mundi, I, 32). “Indii fluminis” as it occurs in the chapter on Africa, here, obviously refers to the Nile. See above, p. 304.

Footnote 1386:

The Image du monde, II, 4, on the other hand, confusedly includes Syria and Palestine in Africa.

Footnote 1387:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 759.

Footnote 1388:

De imag. mundi, I, 18.

Footnote 1389:

Etym., XIV, 3.

Footnote 1390:

The delta figures on many maps: Jerome map of Palestine (Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1896, p. 14), St. Sever Beatus (ibid., reproduction accompanying vol. i, 1895; Fig. 2, p. 69, above), Turin Beatus (ibid., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 8), Cotton (ibid., pl. 10), Henry of Mayence (ibid., pl. 13; vol. iii, pl. 2), Psalter (ibid., vol. iii, pls. 1 and 3).

Footnote 1391:

De imag. mundi, I, 36. See also Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 759. See above, pp. 260–261.

Footnote 1392:

Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 14. Also shown on the Osma Beatus map (ibid., vol. ii, pl. 3; vol. iii, p. 35; Fig. 4, p. 123, above).

Footnote 1393:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 75–77.

Footnote 1394:

Historia, XIX, 27; in medieval French translation, XIX, 28 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, pp. 298–299). See also Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901, p. 32.

Footnote 1395:

Schaube, Handelsgeschichte, 1906, p. 146.

Footnote 1396:

ibid., p. 181.

Footnote 1397:

Matthew Paris, Chron. maiora, Rolls Series edit., vol. v, p. 217, tells how “the indifferentist, Frederic II, nominal leader of a Crusade, maintains so close a friendship with the Sultan of Egypt that German merchants (it is said) were able to travel in the company of Egyptians to the Indies” (Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, p. 461). Heyd, Commerce du Levant, vol. ii, 1886, pp. 153–156, refers to a Pisan claim to an expedition to India in 1175. This is very doubtful.

Footnote 1398:

Historia, XIX, 24, 27; in medieval French translation, XIX, 23, XIX, 28 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, pp. 288–289 and 298–299). See also Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 29.

Footnote 1399:

Historia, XIX, 27; in medieval French translation, XIX, 28 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, 298–299). See also Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 30.

Footnote 1400:

Historia, XIX, 28, XXI, 23; in medieval French translation, XIX, 29, XXI, 21 (Paulin Paris’ edit., vol. ii, pp. 300 and 395). See also Dreesbach, op. cit., p. 34.

Footnote 1401:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 71–73. On the flood of the Nile, see also above, pp. 206–207.

Footnote 1402:

De imag. mundi, I, 32.

Footnote 1403:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 13; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 2.

Footnote 1404:

De imag. mundi, I, 33.

Footnote 1405:

Miller, op. cit., reproduction accompanying vol. i, 1895 (reduced in Fig. 2, p. 69, above).

Footnote 1406:

ibid., vol. i, passim; vol. ii, pls. 2–9.

Footnote 1407:

ibid., vol. i, p. 56.

Footnote 1408:

Schaube, Handelsgeschichte, 1906, pp. 276–277.

Footnote 1409:

ibid., pp. 275–316.

Footnote 1410:

ibid., pp. 289–290.

Footnote 1411:

Mas-Latrie, Traités de paix, 1866, p. 70.

Footnote 1412:

ibid., pp. 71–72.

Footnote 1413:

ibid., pp. 10, 124–125; Léon Godard, Les évêques de Maroc, in: Revue africaine, vol. ii, Algiers, 1857, pp. 124–130, 242–249, 433–440; vol. iii, 1858, pp. 1–8; vol. iv, 1859, pp. 259–273, 332–346.

Footnote 1414:

R. B. Merriman, The Rise of the Spanish Empire, 2 vols., New York, 1918, vol. i, pp. 303–304.

Footnote 1415:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, p. 56.

Footnote 1416:

ibid., vol. iii, 1895, p. 42.

Footnote 1417:

For a discussion of trade routes westward from Egypt and Nubia across the Sahara according to Benjamin of Tudela and Edrisi, see Paul Borchardt, Die grossen Ost-West Karawanenstrassen durch die Libysche Wüste, in Petermanns Mitteilungen, vol. lxx, Gotha, 1924, pp. 219–223.

Footnote 1418:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 13; vol. iii, 1895, pl. 2 and p. 27.

Footnote 1419:

ibid., vol. i, 1895, p. 56.

Footnote 1420:

ibid., vol. iii, 1895, p. 14.

Footnote 1421:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 759.

Footnote 1422:

ibid., p. 760.

Footnote 1423:

De imag. mundi, I, 33.

Footnote 1424:

Miller, op. cit., vol. i, 1895, p. 56.

Footnote 1425:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 1, vol. iii, 1895, pl. 3 (Psalter); reproduction accompanying vol. v, 1896 (Ebstorf).

Footnote 1426:

Simar, Afrique centrale, 1912, pp. 15–23.

Footnote 1427:

ibid., p. 10.

Footnote 1428:

Langenmaier, Alte Kenntnis, 1916, p. 47.

Footnote 1429:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1430:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 759.

Footnote 1431:

Etym., XIII, 21, 7.

Footnote 1432:

De imag. mundi, I, 10.

Footnote 1433:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, passim; vol. ii, 1895, pls. 2–9.

Footnote 1434:

ibid., vol. i, reproduction accompanying the volume, and also p. 57.

Footnote 1435:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 10; vol. iii, 1895, p. 34.

Footnote 1436:

ibid., vol. iii, pp. 14, 18.

Footnote 1437:

ibid., vol. ii, pl. 13; vol. iii, p. 27 and pl. 2.

Footnote 1438:

Simar, op. cit., pp. 157–158.

Footnote 1439:

Solinus, Collectanea, 18, 1; 23, 13; Isidore, Etym., XIII, 16, (cited by Bunbury, Ancient Geogr., 1879, vol. ii, pp. 678–679).

Footnote 1440:

De imag. mundi, I, 10, from Isidore, Etym., XIV, 4; Otia imper., vol. i, p. 920. On the other hand, during our period the term “mare mediterraneum” was not invariably applied to the sea between Africa and Europe. Bernard Sylvester says (De mundi univ., pp. 34–35): “Neve rerum tranquillitas violentis passionibus temptaretur, contra fontem caloris solem quem linea medialis exportat, fontem humoris mediterraneum mare medio telluris infudi.” “Nous,” or the personification of Providence, is here speaking of the equatorial ocean girdling the earth. The same expression, mare mediterraneum, referring to the equatorial sea is used on the mappaemundi accompanying manuscripts of the Liber floridus of Lambert of St. Omer (Miller, op. cit., vol. iii, 1895, p. 50; see also Rainaud, Continent austral, 1893, p. 162 and note 3).

Footnote 1441:

The term “Mediterranean Sea” in its present-day application is used on the Hereford map (see Miller, op. cit., vol. iv, 1896, p. 23, and reproduction accompanying vol. iv). The St. Sever Beatus map represents the various parts of the sea by the following names: “Tirrenum Mare,” “Mare Ligusticum,” “Mare Balearicum,” “Mare Libicum,” “Mare Siculum,” “Mare Creticum,” “Mare Egeum,” “Sinus Adriaticus,” “Sinum Noricum,” “Ellespontum,” “Eusinus Pontus” (ibid., vol. i, 1895, pp. 60–61 and reproduction accompanying vol. i; names barely legible on our Fig. 2, p. 69, above). The Jerome map of the East also designates portions of the Mediterranean as “Issicum,” “Pamphilicum,” “Ionicum” (ibid., vol. iii, 1895, p. 12 and pl. 1). See also the discussion of the nomenclature of the Mediterranean and of the ocean in Frahm, Das Meer, 1914, pp. 73–77.

Footnote 1442:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 920.

Footnote 1443:

De scientia stellarum, Bologna edit., 1645, p. 25.

Footnote 1444:

[Benedict of Peterborough,] Gesta regis Ricardi, Rolls Series edit., vol. ii, pp. 198–199; Roger of Hoveden, Chron., Rolls Series edit., vol. iii, p. 51.

Footnote 1445:

The usual route from the Tyrrhenian Sea to the east, however, was through the Strait of Messina. Burkhard, an official of Frederick Barbarossa, tells us that during the war of 1162–1179 between the Sicilians and Genoa, Genoese ships used to make their way to Egypt as follows: through the strait between Corsica and Sardinia, thence past the west coast of Sicily, Pantellaria, and Malta to the north coast of Africa, “until they came in sight of the great stone lighthouse of Alexandria by day or of its light by night” (Burkhard, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xxi, p. 236, cited by Schaube, Handelsgeschichte, 1906, p. 153).

Footnote 1446:

This would represent rapid, though probably not excessively rapid, sailing for the Middle Ages. The data which have come down to us on the speed of medieval sea journeys are so varied that it is impossible to determine a fair average. On the whole it is probable that better time was made by the Scandinavian seafarers than by those of the Mediterranean. A rate of fifty miles (English statute) a day was perhaps about all that could have been expected in the Mediterranean under ordinary circumstances, though on occasions one hundred to one hundred and fifty miles or even more may have been accomplished. The Icelanders, on the other hand, may well have covered as much as one hundred and fifty miles in twenty-four hours. See below, p. 486, note 440, and Ludwig, Untersuchungen, 1897, passim, especially pp. 131–132, 185–186.

To make the journey from Marseilles to Acre in fifteen days a rate of rather more than one hundred and twenty miles a day would have to be maintained throughout the entire passage. Schaube (op. cit., pp. 153–154) brings together some interesting material on the speed of journeys in the Mediterranean. “The duration of the voyages naturally varied very much; we hear that it was reckoned from Messina or one of the Apulian harbors an average of forty days to Accon (Acre); obviously this would refer to a voyage in no way influenced by adverse circumstances. For galleys a somewhat longer time was necessary. The forty galleys of the Emperor Frederick II took in midsummer of 1228 twenty-four days for the journey from Brindisi to Limassol in Cyprus in the best of weather. Benjamin of Tudela assumed that the passage from Messina to Egypt took twenty days. At a somewhat later date Peter of Albeney went from Marseilles to Damietta in twenty-two days, though the ambassador of Barbarossa, Burkhard, who left Genoa on the 6th of September and followed the route by way of Pantellaria and Malta, took more than twice this long, or forty-seven days to reach Alexandria.”

Footnote 1447:

[Benedict of Peterborough,] Gesta regis Ricardi, Rolls Series edit., vol. ii, pp. 192–199; Roger of Hoveden, Chron., Rolls Series edit., vol. iii, pp. 47–53.

Footnote 1448:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 56.

Footnote 1449:

ibid., reproduction accompanying vol. i, 1895 (our Fig. 2, p. 69, above).

Footnote 1450:

ibid., vol. i, p. 35; vol. ii, 1895, pl. 3b (our Fig. 4, p. 123, above).

Footnote 1451:

De imag. mundi, I, 34–36; Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 920–923.

Footnote 1452:

[Benedict of Peterborough,] op. cit., vol. ii, p. 198.

Footnote 1453:

Wattenbach, Guido von Bazoches, 1891 (under Guy of Bazoches in the Bibliography), pp. 104–112.

Footnote 1454:

See above, pp. 221–222.

Footnote 1455:

Gaston Paris, La Sicile, 1876, pp. 108–113.

Footnote 1456:

“Mons ibi stat magnus qui dicitur esse Rolandus Alter Oliverus simili ratione vocatus: Haec monumenta truces consistere duces.” —Pantheon, pars. 17, in Pistorius’ edit., 1726, p. 314.

Gaston Paris argues (op. cit., p. 110) that place names of this origin are still to be found in Sicily.

Footnote 1457:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 921. On this legend see Graf, Miti, leggende, vol. ii, 1893, pp. 303–325.

Footnote 1458:

Gaston Paris, op. cit., p. 112.

Footnote 1459:

See above, p. 221–222.

Footnote 1460:

Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, pp. 202, 207, 210–212.

Footnote 1461:

Conrad of Querfurt’s letter, in: Arnold of Lübeck, Chron. Slavorum, V, 19.

Footnote 1462:

Estoire de la guerre sainte, verses 510–558, in: Gaston Paris’ edit., cols. 14–16. See Gaston Paris, La Sicile, 1876, p. 111.

Footnote 1463:

See above, pp. 220–222 and p. 449, note 52.

Footnote 1464:

De imag. mundi, I, 22 (from Isidore, Etym., XIV, 8) mentions the Rhipaean range. See Benl, Frühere und spätere Hypothesen, 1905, pp. 10–12. This doctrine may perhaps be traced back to Babylonian geography, according to which the high mountains at the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates were thought to bound the earth on the north. See Lutz, Geographical Studies, 1924, pp. 167–168.

Footnote 1465:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 763.

Footnote 1466:

See, on Grosseteste, above, pp. 179–180. Roger Bacon’s argument occurs in his Opus majus, Bridges’ edit., vol. i, 1897, p. 359.

Footnote 1467:

Theodosia was on the coast of the Crimea, not far from the Strait of Azov (the Cimmerian Bosporus), which might well have been spoken of as the mouth of the Tanaïs, or Don.

Footnote 1468:

See above, p. 75.

Footnote 1469:

Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. ii, pp. 139–140. Adam of Bremen in the eleventh century wrote (Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 13) of Russia as the last and largest province of the Wends, whose territory bounded the Baltic Sea on the east. He mentioned Ostrogard as an important Russian trading city in his time, situated on the Baltic (ibid., II, 19; IV, 11); Chive, or Kiev, as the principal city of Russia (ibid., II, 19), a rival to Constantinople and an honor to “Graecia”—the lands of the Greek church (Dietrich, Geogr. Anschauungen, 1885, p. 103). See Tiander, Poyezdki, 1906, pp. 47–48.

Footnote 1470:

Schaube, Handelsgeschichte, 1906, pp. 238–239.

Footnote 1471:

“... inter aquilonem et item orientem Pecenatorum et Falonum, maximam venationum copiam habente, sed vomere ac rastro pene experte campania” (Gesta Frid., I, 31). In Chron., VI, 10, Otto states that “Pecenati et hii qui Falones dicuntur, crudis et immundis carnibus, utpote equinis catinis, usque hodie vescuntur.” “Falones” was the medieval German name for the Komans (see Hofmeister’s edition of the Chronicon, p. 271, note 6). The eleventh-century chronicle of Nestor of Kiev speaks of the Komans as eaters of raw flesh (Zeuss, Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme, 1837, p. 744). On the Komans, Petchenegs, and other tribes of the Russian plains in the Middle Ages, see the exhaustive treatise of J. Marquart, Über das Volkstum der Komanen, forming chapter 2 of W. Bang and J. Marquart, Osttürkische Dialektstudien, in: Abhandlungen der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, vol. xiii (N. S.), 1912–1914, pp. 25–238.

Footnote 1472:

Hoff’s edit., p. 52 (as cited by Dreesbach, Der Orient, 1901, pp. 82–83).

Footnote 1473:

See above, pp. 267–268.

Footnote 1474:

Gesta Frid., III, 1.

Footnote 1475:

See above, pp. 330–331.

Footnote 1476:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., p. 81.

Footnote 1477:

See above, p. 269.

Footnote 1478:

Petachia of Ratisbon, Travels, Benisch and Ainsworth’s transl., 1856, pp. 3–5; Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 266–268.

Footnote 1479:

Otia imper., vol. ii, p. 764, from Orosius, Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1480:

Gesta Frid., I, 32.

Footnote 1481:

Karl, La Hongrie dans les chansons de geste, 1908.

Footnote 1482:

ibid., pp. 20–21.

Footnote 1483:

ibid., p. 29.

Footnote 1484:

ibid., p. 36.

Footnote 1485:

De imag. mundi, I, 25–27.

Footnote 1486:

Otia imper., vol. ii, pp. 764–766.

Footnote 1487:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, p. 11 and pl. 1, vol. ii, 1895, pl. 11.

Footnote 1488:

Chron. Slav., I, 3; IV, 9.

Footnote 1489:

Dietrich, Geogr. Anschauungen, 1885, p. 102, identifies this with the modern Cuprija (Tsupriya).

Footnote 1490:

Heyd, Commerce du Levant, vol. i, 1885, pp. 243–244.

Footnote 1491:

ibid., p. 221.

Footnote 1492:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., p. 12.

Footnote 1493:

Heyd, op. cit., vol. i, 1885, p. 295. A brief of Innocent III of 1208 mentions the presence of Lombards, Danes, and English.

Footnote 1494:

Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 12–14.

Footnote 1495:

Gesta Frid., II, 13.

Footnote 1496:

Benjamin of Tudela traversed the length of Italy on his way to the Orient. He gives in his Itinerary (Adler’s edit., pp. 5–10) some details regarding the cities which he passed through. Genoa and Pisa, he said were governed “neither by king nor prince but only by the judges appointed by the citizens.” Each was noted for its “turreted houses for battle in time of strife.” Rome was “the head of the kingdoms of Christendom,” but Benjamin dismissed with brief phrase her claims to glory as the seat of the Papacy. On the other hand, he wrote in some detail of the Jewish inhabitants of Rome and more especially of the ruins, among them “eighty palaces belonging to eighty kings who lived there, each called Imperator, commencing with King Tarquinius ... and ... ending with Pepin, who freed the land of Sepharad [Spain] from Islam, and was father of Charlemagne.” The Colosseum, the Catacombs, statues of Samson and of Constantine the Great, and “many other edifices” and “remarkable sights beyond enumeration” aroused the admiration of the Hebrew traveler. Farther south he spoke of the great school of medicine at Salerno; of Amalfi, “the inhabitants of which are merchants engaged in trade, who do not sow or reap, because they dwell upon high hills and lofty crags, but buy everything for money;” of Benevento; of Trani, with a convenient port where pilgrims gather to take ship to Jerusalem; of Brindisi; and, finally, of Otranto, whence one crosses to Corfu.

Interesting details of a journey through Italy in the twelfth century are also supplied in Abbot Nikulás’ Itinerary (Werlauff, Symbolae, 1821, pp. 29–35).

Footnote 1497:

For a brief discussion of various regional divisions of Italy suggested by writers from the time of Augustus to that of Dante and of Flavio Biondo (fifteenth century) see Andriani, La carta dialettologica, 1923, and below, p. 484, note 418.

Footnote 1498:

On another source of wealth of Northern Italy, its auriferous rivers, as listed in the Honorantie civitatis papie, a document of the second half of the ninth century, see F. Landogna, Su alcuni fiumi auriferi nell’ alto medio evo, in: Rivista geografica italiana, vol. xxxi, Florence, 1924, pp. 77–86.

Footnote 1499:

Denumeratio, p. 45.

Footnote 1500:

Gesta Frid., II, 13.

Footnote 1501:

Ligurinus, II, 131–143.

Footnote 1502:

loc. cit.

Footnote 1503:

See above, pp. 180–181.

Footnote 1504:

Gregorovius, City of Rome (Hamilton’s translation), vol. iv, pt. II, 1896, p. 655. Gregorovius comments on the decided preference given in this book to the pagan as distinguished from the ecclesiastical city. He also commends the work as being fairly accurate in its details. On the interest in ruins that prevailed in our period, see Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, pp. 213–215.

Footnote 1505:

One of the sources which Master Gregory used was a booklet entitled De septem miraculis mundi. The wonders as given in this booklet were: (1) the Capitol at Rome; (2) the lighthouse at Alexandria; (3) the Colossus of Rhodes; (4) the statue of Bellerophon at Smyrna; (5) the theater at Heraclea; (6) the baths of Apollonius of Tyana; and (7) the temple of Diana at Ephesus. All of these, except the last, were included by Gregory in his account of Rome, though he did not believe that all were actually situated in Rome (James, Magister Gregorius, 1917, pp. 537–539).

Footnote 1506:

Conrad of Querfurt’s letter, in: Arnold of Lübeck, Chron. Slav., V, 19. See also Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, pp. 205–208.

Footnote 1507:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 916.

Footnote 1508:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1509:

De imag. mundi, I, 30.

Footnote 1510:

Chron., Rolls Series edit., vol. iii, p. 48.

Footnote 1511:

ibid., p. 176.

Footnote 1512:

Gesta Frid., II, 13.

Footnote 1513:

loc. cit.

Footnote 1514:

Oehlmann, Alpenpässe, in: Jahrbuch, vol. iv, 1879, p. 304.

Footnote 1515:

ibid., in: Jahrbuch, vol. iii, 1878, p. 181.

Footnote 1516:

Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xvi, p. 340.

Footnote 1517:

Oehlmann, op. cit., in: Jahrbuch, vol. iii, 1878, p. 180.

Footnote 1518:

Schaube, Handelsgeschichte, 1906, pp. 334–338. The Great St. Bernard Pass was the principal artery of trade between Northern Italy and the fairs of Champagne. The Septimer Pass, now little used, was much traveled in the Middle Ages and was a principal trade route between Lombardy and southern and western Germany (Schaube, op. cit., p. 450; Oehlmann, op. cit., in: Jahrbuch, vol. iv, 1879, pp. 305–323).

Footnote 1519:

Oehlmann, op. cit., in: Jahrbuch, vol. iii, 1878, pp. 226–227.

Footnote 1520:

See especially Abbot Nikulás’ description of the route over the Great St. Bernard Pass (Werlauff, Symbolae, 1821, pp. 18–19).

Footnote 1521:

Oehlmann, op. cit., in: Jahrbuch, vol. iii, 1878, pp. 257–267.

Footnote 1522:

ibid., vol. iv, 1879, pp. 304–323. The medieval history of the Alpine passes is discussed in detail by Oehlmann, op. cit.; see also, Reinhard, Pässe und Strassen, 1903; Schulte, Geschichte, 1900; Scheffel, Verkehrsgeschichte, vol. ii, 1914, pp. 167–286. For a more compact account of the Alpine passes in the Middle Ages and in later times, see Coolidge, The Alps, 1908, pp. 150–198.

It would seem that the passes of the Central Alps were relatively little known in our period in comparison with those farther east and west. The Simplon and St. Gotthard, now so important, were only just beginning to be frequented. Other routes across the main ranges of the Alps made use of in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries were the Mont Genèvre and Little St. Bernard, leading from Italy into France and French-speaking Switzerland; the Grimsel and possibly the San Bernardino in the Central Alps; and farther east the Reschen-Scheideck and the Pontebba. Shortly before the opening of our period and during it many hospices were built to provide travelers with shelter and hospitality on the passes and along the routes leading to them.

Footnote 1523:

Gesta Frid., II, 1, 24, 28. See also Dietrich, _Geogr. Anschauungen_, 1885, p. 99; Marinelli, Scritti minori, vol. i, [1908?], pp. 600–601.

Footnote 1524:

Gesta Frid., III, 15a; IV, 3.

Footnote 1525:

ibid., I, 8 (discussed in: Dietrich, op. cit., p. 99). Ragewin used the term “Alemanni” to designate Germans in distinction from “Italici” (Gesta Frid., III, 38).

Footnote 1526:

De imag. mundi, I, 24, 25.

Footnote 1527:

Notably by J. A. Endres, Honorius Augustodunensis: Beitrag zur Geschichte des geistigen Lebens im 12. Jahrhundert, Kempten and Munich, 1906, sect. 12. See Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 30.

Footnote 1528:

See above, p. 281.

Footnote 1529:

See above, p. 239.

Footnote 1530:

Gesta Frid., II, 46.

Footnote 1531:

Denumeratio, pp. 49–50. For descriptive passages in Godfrey’s Pantheon on various parts of Germany and Holland, especially on the regions of Nimwegen, Bamberg, and Würzburg, see Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xxii, pp. 159–161, 240 (cited by Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, p. 194).

Footnote 1532:

Ligurinus, I, 377. See also Gaston Paris, Dissertation critique, 1872, pp. 85–86.

Footnote 1533:

Gunther (Ligurinus, loc. cit.) also describes in detail the frontier between the territory of Cologne and that of Mayence and mentions other local details of this region.

Footnote 1534:

Subtilitates, II, 3–10.

Footnote 1535:

See above, pp. 185 and 201–202.

Footnote 1536:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., I, 1–5. This is taken from Einhard’s Vita Caroli magni (Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, p. 533). Beazley, op. cit., pp. 514–548, gives an excellent résumé of the geography of Adam of Bremen. He asserts that Adam “possessed the geographical instinct; almost every mention he makes of persons, places, or nations is accompanied by some definition of their habitat or position” (ibid., p. 516).

Footnote 1537:

Dietrich, Geogr. Anschauungen, 1885, p. 189. Adam gives, of course, much fuller detail regarding this and other regions; we have merely tried to bring out a few of his more important geographical ideas.

Footnote 1538:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 4.

Footnote 1539:

ibid., pp. 4–5.

Footnote 1540:

“Iulinum, Iumne, Iomsburg, 935/60–1043 a fort of the Jom Vikings” (Spruner-Menke, Hand-Atlas für die Geschichte des Mittelalters und der neueren Zeit, 3rd edit., Gotha, 1880, pl. 37)—the site of the present-day town of Wollin, according to some (Karl Baedeker, Die deutsche Ostseeküste: Handbuch für Reisende, Leipzig, 1922, p. 122) or of Swinemünde according to Dietrich, op. cit., p. 189, note 8.

Footnote 1541:

Dietrich, loc. cit. Helmold (Chron. Slav., I, 2) describes this city, but by his time it had been destroyed by a Danish king.

Footnote 1542:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 18; Helmold, Chron. Slav. I, 1. See Dietrich, op. cit., p. 192.

Footnote 1543:

Chron. Slav., II, 216.

Footnote 1544:

Moritz, Geogr. Kenntnis, 1904, p. 26.

Footnote 1545:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 10; IV, 15. In Adam of Bremen’s work the designation “Baltic” probably appears for the first time. Adam says it was so called “because it extends in the form of a belt (baltei)” (Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, p. 185).

Footnote 1546:

Adam speaks of a bay trending northward at Birka (Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., I, 62). See also Moritz, op. cit., p. 21.

Footnote 1547:

Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 186. See also Marinelli, Scritti minori, vol. i, [1908?], pp. 301–302, esp. footnote 1 on p. 302.

Footnote 1548:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 8.

Footnote 1549:

Beazley, Dawn, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 516–520. For Adam of Bremen’s conception of the geography of the North see the full treatment by Björnbo, Adam af Bremen, 1909. Björnbo’s map showing his theory of Adam’s geography is reproduced in Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, p. 186. See also Tiander, Poyezdki, 1906, pp. 46–51, for a Russian scholar’s identification of places mentioned by Adam.

Footnote 1550:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 30.

Footnote 1551:

Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 203–232.

Footnote 1552:

Gesta Danorum, Praefacio, Holder’s edit., p. 8.

Footnote 1553:

Historia Norweg., I, Storm’s edit., p. 83. See also Nansen, op. cit., p. 204. A ski-runner is represented on the Hereford map of the thirteenth century (Miller, Mappaemundi, reproduction accompanying vol. iv, 1896; see also Nansen, ibid., p. 157).

Footnote 1554:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 31.

Footnote 1555:

Ragewin’s continuation of Otto of Freising, Gesta Frid., III, 1.

Footnote 1556:

Ligurinus, VI, 13–49.

Footnote 1557:

Traditions of cannibalism among the northern tribes of Europe and Scythia were widespread in the ancient world and date back at least to the time of Herodotus. Human sacrifice and cannibalism were undoubtedly practiced by the early Scandinavians (Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. 1, pp. 81, 148–149).

Footnote 1558:

Chron., VI, 30.

Footnote 1559:

Wattenbach, Guido von Bazoches, 1891 (under Guy of Bazoches in the Bibliography), pp. 72–73.

Footnote 1560:

Denumeratio, pp. 47–48.

Footnote 1561:

Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 914, 923.

Footnote 1562:

ibid., p. 914.

Footnote 1563:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1564:

Etym., XIV, 6, 38.

Footnote 1565:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 914.

Footnote 1566:

loc. cit.

Footnote 1567:

De imag. mundi, I, 29.

Footnote 1568:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 922.

Footnote 1569:

See above, pp. 72–173 and 175.

Footnote 1570:

Benjamin of Tudela passed through the south of France. He gives a few details (for the most part concerning the Jewish population) about Narbonne, Béziers, Montpellier, Lunel, Posquières, Arles, and Marseilles. Apparently he went by sea from Marseilles to Genoa (Itinerary, Adler’s edit., pp. 2–5).

William the Breton gives several striking descriptions of landscapes in France in his Philippis. His descriptions of Château Gaillard, of the vicinity of Tours, of Flanders, and of the region about Pontarlier are cited and in part translated into German by Ganzenmüller, Naturgefühl, 1914, pp. 196–197.

Footnote 1571:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. i, 1895, p. 50 and reproduction accompanying the volume (reduced in Fig. 2, p. 69, above).

Footnote 1572:

Hist. adv. pag., I, 2.

Footnote 1573:

Hist. nat., IV, 16. Pliny gives Agrippa as authority for these figures. He states that the width of Britain is 300 miles, not 200 as according to Orosius (loc. cit.).

Footnote 1574:

Miller, op. cit., vol. ii, 1895, pl. 10; vol. iii, 1895, p. 33.

Footnote 1575:

De imag. mundi, I, 31.

Footnote 1576:

Otia imper., vol. i, p. 916. Gervase quotes Orosius, Hist. adv. pag., I, 2, 37, to the effect that Britain is 800 miles long by 200 broad, but adds that “more recent authorities” give its length as twenty days’ journeys and its breadth as ten days’ journeys. Elsewhere (Otia imper., vol. i, pp. 936–938) Gervase copies extensively from Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia Britonum, which contains a long account of various supernatural marvels of Britain.

Footnote 1577:

De laud. div. sap., V, 789–880.

Footnote 1578:

ibid., III, 825–938.

Footnote 1579:

Giraldus Cambrensis, Top. Hiber., I, 1.

Footnote 1580:

ibid., I, 2.

Footnote 1581:

ibid., I, 3.

Footnote 1582:

See above, pp. 211–212.

Footnote 1583:

Top. Hiber., I, 5.

Footnote 1584:

ibid., I, 6.

Footnote 1585:

ibid., I, 8.

Footnote 1586:

ibid., I, 9.

Footnote 1587:

ibid., III, 2.

Footnote 1588:

ibid., III, 10.

Footnote 1589:

ibid., III, 11–15.

Footnote 1590:

Giraldus Cambrensis, Opera, Rolls Series edit., vol. v, p. lxiii.

Footnote 1591:

Top. Hiber., I, 7.

Footnote 1592:

“Gratianus Lucius” (Dr. John Lynch), Cambrensis eversus, edited by Matthew Kelly, 3 vols., Dublin, 1848–1851. This work, a violent attack on Giraldus, was first published in 1662. Dr. Lynch believed that the Welsh traveler had uttered a terrible calumny against the good name of the Irish people and undertook to demolish practically everything he had said.

Footnote 1593:

Kelly in his notes to the Cambrensis eversus, vol. i, 1848, pp. 117–119, shows how it would have been possible for Giraldus to have made this mistake. From near the Shannon Pot, or source of the River Shannon, other streams flow northward toward Ballyshannon; from Lough Clean (Allen), also very near the Shannon Pot, it is only four miles to the headwaters of the River Bennet, which flows westward into Sligo Bay. These facts might easily give an impression that the Shannon itself branches at its source in two directions, one branch running down towards Ballyshannon or the Bennet, and the other flowing to the southwest. The imperfect drainage development of Ireland would make such an impression seem natural. Lough Hoyle, for instance, is actually drained by two outlets at opposite ends of the lake.

Footnote 1594:

Desc. Kamb., 6.

Footnote 1595:

loc. cit.

Footnote 1596:

ibid., 17.

Footnote 1597:

See above, pp. 178–179, 197, 215, and 216.

Footnote 1598:

Desc. Kamb., 6.

Footnote 1599:

An unusual treatment of linguistic geography is found, subsequent to our period, in the De vulgari eloquentia of Dante. Whereas Isidore of Seville on Biblical authority had divided the languages of the world into three main groups, the Japhetic, Hamitic, and Semitic, Dante recognized the fact that these groups are further divisible into secondary groups each consisting of several kindred languages. He believed that there were three original European tongues: Greek, spoken in the southeast and in Asia Minor; a language spoken in the southwest; and one spoken in the north and east. “Man being a most unstable and variable animal,” these three original tongues became altered “according to the distances in place and time” with the result that certain “vulgar tongues” were formed. These tongues in turn underwent variations in different localities; the resultant forms were still further subdivided, until by Dante’s time there were in existence in Italy alone more than a thousand local dialectic peculiarities. See Mori, La geogr., 1922, pp. 289–292.

Andriani, La carta dialettologica, 1923, discusses Dante’s study of the local dialects of Italy as elaborated in the De vulgari eloquentia. The poet divided the peninsula and Sardinia into fourteen major dialectic regions. These correspond essentially with the geographical regions established by Flavio Biondo in his Italia illustrata (fifteenth century). With the aid of the latter work Andriani constructs a tentative dialectic map of Italy as Dante probably would have conceived it. Modern research in the linguistic geography of that country has served in general to confirm Dante’s assertions on the subject.

Footnote 1600:

See Bibliography under William Fitzstephen.

Footnote 1601:

See above, p. 331–332.

Footnote 1602:

The preceding quotations from William Fitzstephen are taken from Morley’s translation on pp. 22–26 of his edition of Stow’s A Survay of London ... 1598, 1908.

Footnote 1603:

The quotations on the sports of the Londoners are from Stow’s sixteenth-century translation in Morley’s edition of Stow, op. cit., pp. 117–125.

Footnote 1604:

Miller, Mappaemundi, vol. iii, 1895, pp. 74–77.

Footnote 1605:

ibid., p. 75.

Footnote 1606:

See above, p. 335 and p. 483, notes 392 and 395. For these and other legends quoted below, see Miller, ibid., pp. 75–82.

Footnote 1607:

“Pinlimon,” “Montes Chivieti,” “Mons Snaudun” (ibid., pp. 78, 79).

Footnote 1608:

“Regio montuosa et nemorosa, gentem incultam generans et pastoralem, quia pars eius mariscus est et harundinetum” (ibid., p. 78).

Footnote 1609:

“Regia invia et aquosa.” “Patria palustris et invia, pecudibus et pastoribus apta” (ibid.).

Footnote 1610:

“Regio palustris, montuosa, nemorosa, invia, pastoribus accomoda, incolas habet agiles, incultos et bellicosos” (ibid., p. 79). See above, p. 233.

Footnote 1611:

“Sephe,” “Thanet,” “Vecta,” “V̄en̄.” (Alderney?), “Grenese” (Guernsey), “Purland,” “Sulli,” “Lundeth,” “Engleseia insula,” “Man,” “Tyren insula” (this may be either Tiree or the peninsula of Kintyre, Miller, ibid., p. 75), “insula Columkilli” (Icolmkill, or Iona), “Orkades Insule” (ibid., p. 75).

Footnote 1612:

Top. Hiber., II, 15.

Footnote 1613:

ibid., II, 11.

Footnote 1614:

ibid., II, 13.

Footnote 1615:

ibid., II, 17.

Footnote 1616:

C. H. Haskins, The De Arte Venandi cum Avibus of the Emperor Frederick II, in: English Historical Review, vol. xxxvi, London, 1921, p. 346, note 8; idem, Studies, 1924, p. 316, note 104. “Gallandia” here may mean Greenland, although in Ordericus Vitalis (Hist. eccles., II, 5) “Gollanda” is probably Gotland (see below, p. 487, note 455). Abu-l-Ḥasan, a Moslem geographer of the thirteenth century, places the island of the white falcons to the west of Denmark. “Its length from west to east is about seven days and its breadth about four days.” He reports that white falcons are brought from here for the Sultan of Egypt. He also speaks of a white bear in these regions, which goes out into the sea and swims and catches fish (Nansen, Northern Mists, 1911, vol. ii, pp. 208–209).

Footnote 1617:

Íslendingabók, 1, 2–3; translation from Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 254. The pre-Norse Christians in Iceland were Irish hermits, whose visits to Thule or Iceland are described by Dicuil, De mens. orb. ter., 7 (Letronne’s edit., p. 38). See also (ibid., pp. 165–166).

Footnote 1618:

Hist. de antiq. reg. norwag., 3, Storm’s edit., p. 8; translation from Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 254. See above, p. 412, note 122.

Footnote 1619:

Hist. Norweg., I, Storm’s edit., p. 92; translation from Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 255.

Footnote 1620:

Translation from Nansen, loc. cit.

Footnote 1621:

On Norse settlements and voyages on the coasts of Greenland, see Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 258–311. The Landnámabók, I (transl. in Vigfusson and York Powell, Orig. Island., vol. i, 1905, pp. 14–15) gives the distances in days’ sailing from points on the coast of Iceland to points on the coasts of Norway, Greenland, Ireland, and to “Svalbard” (possibly Spitsbergen; see above, p. 349). It was said to have been a journey of seven doegr from Cape Stat in Norway to Cape Horn on the east coast of Iceland, of three (according to one version of the Landnámabók) or of five (according to another version) from Reykyanes to the Mare’s Leap in Ireland, of four doegr from the northeasternmost cape of Iceland to Svalbard, and of one across to Greenland at what was probably the narrowest passage. These figures are difficult to interpret. The relative times given in no way correspond to the actual relative distances, and we are not absolutely certain what is meant by doegr. In fact Nansen writes that it is hopeless to look for any system in these data (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 170). If we take doegr to be a journey of twelve hours (as would seem to be indicated by the Heimskringla, Morris and Magnússon’s transl., vol. ii, p. 242; interpreted by Nansen, op. cit., pp. 170, 171, and note) the passage from Norway to Iceland would require sailing at a rate of 155 sea miles in twenty-four hours, not altogether excessive under favorable conditions. On the other hand, the passage from Iceland to Ireland and to Greenland would necessitate a speed of either 475 or 385 sea miles in twenty-four hours respectively, which would be excellent speed for a modern liner. See Nansen, loc. cit., and E. Magnússon’s note on the sailing directions of the Landnámabók in: Transactions of the Cambridge Philological Society, vol. i, for 1872–1880, London, 1881, pp. 316–318.

Footnote 1622:

Konungs-Skuggsjá, 16 (Brenner’s edit.), pp. 47–48; translation from Nansen, Northern Mists., 1911, vol. i, pp. 279–280.

Footnote 1623:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 39; translation from Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 195.

Footnote 1624:

Gesta Danorum, VIII, Holder’s edit., pp. 287–292.

Footnote 1625:

Hist. Norweg., I, Storm’s edit., pp. 75–76; translation from Nansen, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 167.

Footnote 1626:

Hist. Norweg., I, Storm’s edit., pp. 78–79; translation from Nansen, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 168. On the relation of this gulf with the mythical Ginungagap (see above, p. 147) see Nansen, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 239–240.

Footnote 1627:

Landnámabók, I, 1 (transl. in Vigfusson and York Powell, _Orig. Island._, vol. i, 1905, p. 15.) See Nansen, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 166.

Footnote 1628:

Nansen, loc. cit.

Footnote 1629:

It is of course not certain that Spitsbergen is meant by the “Svalbard” of the Icelandic Annals. See the discussion in Nansen, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 166–171.

Footnote 1630:

Reeves, Wineland, 1890, p. 10.

Footnote 1631:

ibid., p. 81.

Footnote 1632:

English translation of these in Reeves, op. cit., pp. 28–52, 64–78.

Footnote 1633:

See above, p. 405, note 90. This part of the geographical description is probably not the work of Abbot Nikulás Bergsson. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, 1911, vol. i, p. 313.

Footnote 1634:

Nikulás Bergsson’s geographical description of the world, in: Werlauff, Symbolae, 1821, p. 14.

Footnote 1635:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 38; translation from Reeves, op. cit., p. 92.

Footnote 1636:

“Orcades insulae et Finlanda. Islanda quoque et Grenlanda, ultra quam ad Septentrionem terra non reperitur, aliaeque plures usque in Gollandam regi Noricorum subjiciuntur, et de toto orbe divitiae navigio illuc advehuntur” (Hist. eccles., pt. III, bk. X, 5, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxxviii, col. 727). “Finlanda” here refers to Wineland (Rafn, Antiq. americanae, 1837, p. 337).

Footnote 1637:

See Rafn, op. cit., p. 338, note g; Lappenberg, in his edition of Adam of Bremen in Scriptores rerum germ., Hanover, 1876, p. xvii, maintained that this was a later interpolation made by Adam himself. See Nansen, op. cit., vol. i, p. 195; vol. ii, pp. 147–155.

Footnote 1638:

Gesta Hammenb. eccl. pont., IV, 38; translation from Reeves, op. cit. pp. 92–93.

Footnote 1639:

De imag. mundi, I, 36.

Footnote 1640:

E. Renan, Essais de morale et de critique, 3rd edit., Paris, 1868, p. 445, quoted by F. Michel, Les voyages merveilleux de St. Brandan, Paris, 1878, p. vii.

Footnote 1641:

Schröder, Sanct Brandan, 1871 (under Brandan in the Bibliography), p. vi.

Footnote 1642:

This résumé of the voyages of St. Brandan in the present text was made from the Latin text of the Peregrinatio given by Schröder, op. cit., pp. 3–36. Reference has already been made to various aspects of the voyages; see above, pp. 197–198, 224–225, 230–231.

Footnote 1643:

De mensura orbis terrae, 7 (Letronne’s edit., p. 40).

Footnote 1644:

The Peregrinatio (Schröder, op. cit., p. 32) describes Paul’s islet as being as long as it was broad and of equal height. This suggests the lonely Rockall, some 280 miles west of the Outer Hebrides. See J. B. Charcot, Les croisières du “Pourquoi pas?” en 1921, in: La Géographie, vol. xxxvi, Paris, 1922, pp. 475–476.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Those who wish to carry out detailed investigations of the various topics discussed in the present volume will find in the Notes and Bibliography references to the original sources and to secondary works. Owing, however, to the scattered nature of the references in the Notes and to the alphabetical arrangement of the Bibliography it is impossible from them alone to gain a rapid introduction to the outstanding publications on the subject. To supply such an introduction is the purpose of the following note.

Titles are not as a rule here cited in full, and the reader should therefore turn to the Bibliography for the full titles, for indications of the place and manner of publication, and for other bibliographical details. The relatively few titles of publications mentioned here only are given in full and are followed by the words “(not in Bibliography).”

BIBLIOGRAPHIES

The study of the geographical lore of the Middle Ages has been approached by scholars from many different points of view. This is reflected in the character of the bibliographies dealing specifically or incidentally with this field. We may group these bibliographies arbitrarily into three classes: (a) historical bibliographies; (b) geographical bibliographies; (c) bibliographies devoted to the history of science.

Historical Bibliographies

Among the historical bibliographies mention should first be made of Chevalier’s Répertoire des sources historiques du moyen âge, 1894–1907. Two volumes of this work, with the subtitle Bio-bibliographie, list alphabetically a large number of personages of importance in the Middle Ages. Brief biographical notes are given, followed by extensive lists of references to publications by or in any way relating to these personages. A great difficulty in using the Bio-bibliographie lies in the fact that no clues are given regarding the type of publications to which reference is made. We are not told whether these publications are printed texts of medieval works, scholarly treatises, or merely passing and relatively unimportant allusions. In a third volume of Chevalier’s Répertoire (with the subtitle Topo-bibliographie) the effort is made to list alphabetically a multitude of topics relating to medieval history and life and, as in the Bio-bibliographie, to give references to publications upon these topics. Here again, owing to the lack of critical evaluation of the references as well as to the somewhat arbitrary selection of the topical headings, the work is of very uneven utility.

Whereas Chevalier attempts to cover the entire range of medieval civilization, the writings of the historians and chroniclers of the age are dealt with in Potthast’s indispensable Bibliotheca historica medii aevi, 1896. The main part of these volumes consists of an alphabetical repertory of names and titles with references to manuscripts, editions, translations, and secondary works explanatory of the sources. There are also included highly useful synopses of the contents of the great collections of medieval sources (see below, pp. 493–495) and an appendix in which the titles of the original sources are given chronologically within regional divisions.

For a general guide to many of the more important books and articles on medieval history, L. J. Paetow’s Guide to the Study of Medieval History for Students, Teachers, and Librarians (University of California Syllabus Series, no. 90), Berkeley, Cal., 1917 (not in Bibliography), is valuable. A large part of Paetow’s book is devoted to medieval culture. Though by no means exhaustive, the Guide is excellent for orienting the student in an unfamiliar field.

We refrain from mentioning other historical bibliographies of regions and topics relating to the Middle Ages. References to many of these may readily be found in the first chapter of Paetow’s Guide and in the various paragraphs entitled “Bibliographies” appended to the topical sections of that publication.

Geographical Bibliographies

The bibliography of ancient and medieval geography has been dealt with at some length in the summaries of the progress of geographical research that have appeared from time to time in the Geographisches Jahrbuch published by Justus Perthes, Gotha (not in Bibliography), which since 1880 has been edited by Professor Hermann Wagner of Göttingen. The ancient period has been covered by Professor Eugen Oberhummer in vols. xix (1896), xxii (1899), xxviii (1905), and xxxiv (1911); the medieval by Professors Sophus Ruge and Walther Ruge in vols. xviii (1895), xx (1897), xxiii (1900), xxvi (1903), and xxx (1907). These reports are running commentaries on the progress of current investigation, with references to the literature in the footnotes.

A section on the history of geography, with occasional references to publications in the medieval field, has appeared regularly in the Bibliographie géographique annuelle (not in Bibliography) of the periodical Annales de Géographie, published by Armand Colin, Paris, 1893–1914, and in its continuation, Bibliographie géographique 1915–1919, 1920–1921, 1922 (not in Bibliography), published under the auspices of the Association de Géographes Français. References to secondary works in medieval geography are also given in the annual volumes of Bibliotheca Geographica (not in Bibliography), published by the Gesellschaft für Erdkunde Berlin, and covering 1891 to 1912.

Bibliographies of the History of Science

References to publications on medieval geography as a part of the history of science may be found in the critical bibliographies that have been included since its inception in 1913 in each number of the periodical Isis: International Review Devoted to the History of Science and Civilization, Brussels.

DICTIONARIES

Research in the field covered by the present volume requires a working knowledge of medieval Latin, the language in which most of the original sources were written. Medieval Latin is not difficult—except in occasional passages—for one who has some knowledge of classical Latin. The great dictionary of C. D. Du Cange, Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae latinitatis (not in Bibliography), first published at Paris in 1678 and subsequently in other editions (the latest at Niort, 1883–1887), is indispensable. For medieval French, consult F. E. Godefroy, Dictionnaire de l’ancienne langue française, 10 vols., Paris, 1881–1902 (not in Bibliography).

MANUSCRIPTS

Many of the works of medieval authors have never been printed. They can be consulted only in the collections of manuscripts of the libraries of Europe and, to a limited extent, of America. While research in manuscripts is not absolutely essential for a general study like the present, no detailed research can very well be conducted without direct recourse to unprinted documents.

The use of medieval manuscripts is an art in itself, requiring some familiarity with paleography. The handwritings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, however, are frequently not difficult to decipher. On this subject consult: E. M. Thompson, An Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography, Oxford, 1912 (not in Bibliography), and, for abbreviations commonly used in manuscripts, A. Cappelli, Lexicon abbreviaturarum ...: Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane ..., Milan, 1899, 2nd edit., Milan, 1912 (not in Bibliography).

A list of catalogues of collections of manuscripts will be found in a publication of the Bibliothèque Nationale of Paris: Collection alphabétique des livres imprimés mis à la disposition des lecteurs dans la salle de travail, suivi de la liste des catalogues usuels du département des manuscrits, Paris, 1910 (not in Bibliography). Useful references to manuscripts of some of the writings on geography and natural science of the Middle Ages are included in Beazley, Dawn of Modern Geography, 1897–1906, in Thorndike, History of Magic and Experimental Science, 1923, and in Haskins, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science, 1924. References to manuscript maps will be found in Miller, Mappaemundi, 1895–1898.

COLLECTIONS OF ORIGINAL SOURCES

The great printed collections of historical sources dealing with the Middle Ages are discussed in Paetow’s Guide (see above, p. 492) and analyzed in Potthast’s Bibliotheca (see above, p. 491). In the Bibliography of the present volume reference is made to printed texts of individual works. It will therefore not be necessary here to do more than indicate the titles of a few of the collections most important from the point of view of medieval geography.

The Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, 1866 ff., is a collection of critically edited texts of the writings of the Latin Church Fathers. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus ... series latina (referred to in the Notes as Pat. lat.), 1844–1864, contains texts, for the most part uncritical, not only of the writings of the Church Fathers but also of a vast assemblage of works bearing directly or indirectly on the medieval Church.

In nearly all the nations of Europe the publication has been carried through or is in progress of great collections of sources dealing with the national history during the Middle Ages. To mention briefly a few of these, we may refer first to the Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 1858–1891, usually known as the “Rolls Series.” This series includes not only the works of the historians and chroniclers of Britain of the Middle Ages but also those of many British writers on matters of geography and natural science. The Monumenta Germaniae historica, 1826–1874 and 1876 ff., contains in its magnificent volumes documents relating to all aspects of the history and life of the medieval Germans and incidentally of Europe as a whole. Many of the texts of the Monumenta have been more critically edited in the Scriptores rerum germanicarum in usum scholarum ex Monumentis Germaniae historicis recusi, 1840 ff. For France there are the Rerum gallicarum et francicarum scriptores, or Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, Paris, 1738–1904 (not in Bibliography), and the publications of the Société de l’Histoire de France, Paris, 1835 ff. (not in Bibliography); for the Crusades the most important collection is the Recueil des historiens des croisades, 14 vols., Paris, 1841–1898 (not in Bibliography).

Collections dealing more especially with texts of geographical importance are, for ancient geography, Müller’s Geographi graeci minores, 1882, and Riese’s Geographi latini minores, 1878. Itineraries to and descriptions of the Holy Land will be found in Tobler, Descriptiones terrae sanctae, 1874, Tobler, Itinera ... saec. iv-xi, 1877, Michelant and Reynaud, Itinéraires à Jerusalem, 1882, and Tobler, Molinier, and Kohler, Itinera ... bellis sacris anteriora, 1880–1885. English translations of certain medieval travels in Palestine will be found in Thomas Wright, Early Travels in Palestine, 1848, and in the Library of the Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, 1885–1897. Texts and English translations for the early exploration of Iceland will be found in Vigfusson and Yorke Powell, Origines islandicae, 1905. Documents relating to the Norse discovery of America are included in Rafn, Antiquitates americanae, 1837–1841; and Reeves, The Finding of Wineland the Good, 1890, gives English translations of the Vineland voyages. On the texts of the great Asiatic voyages of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, which do not fall within the scope of the present volume, see above, pp. 269–270, and p. 465, notes 70, 71, 74, 75.

The primary collection of facsimiles of medieval maps prior to the appearance of the portolan charts is Miller, Mappaemundi, 1895–1898; critical texts with references to manuscripts and discussions are here given. Reproductions of early medieval maps are also given in the atlases to Santarem, Essai sur l’histoire de la cosmographie et de la cartographie, 1849–1852, and to Lelewel, Géographie du moyen âge, 1852–1857.

A selection of medieval texts dealing with meteorology will be found in Hellmann, Denkmäler mittelalterlicher Meteorologie, 1904.

SECONDARY WORKS

We may divide our treatment of secondary works into two parts: first, a discussion of publications dealing with the broader background of medieval life and thus, incidentally, with the geographical lore of the period; second, a discussion of publications dealing directly with the geographical and related lore of antiquity and the Middle Ages or with the enlargement of geographical knowledge. The titles of secondary works relating to the specific writings or authors referred to in the present volume may readily be found by using the cross-references in the Bibliography.

Background of Medieval Intellectual Life

In order not to expand our discussion beyond due measure, we shall restrict ourselves in this section to mentioning a very few publications the majority of which have been of direct service in the preparation of the present volume.

For a broad and brilliantly written treatment of medieval intellectual activity in its many phases, we may refer to H. O. Taylor, The Mediaeval Mind: A History of the Development of Thought and Emotion in the Middle Ages, 2 vols., New York, 1911, revised edit., 1914 (not in Bibliography). Haskins’ Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science, 1924, which appeared while the present volume was in press, is fundamental for the history of science in Western Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Several of its chapters are revisions of articles which had previously appeared, but other parts of the work are entirely new contributions. The volume is based to a very large extent upon hitherto unpublished sources; many critical and interesting passages of Latin texts are published in it for the first time. Poole’s Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought and Learning, 1920, is a discussion of the work of a few selected exponents of typical modes of medieval thought. The original work of the scholars of Chartres in the Middle Ages is the subject of Clerval’s Écoles de Chartres, 1895.

The Latin literature of the period as a whole is dealt with in Gröber, Übersicht über die lateinische Literatur von der Mitte des 6. Jahrhunderts bis 1350, 1888–1902, and medieval Latin literature prior to the middle of the eleventh century is treated in greater detail in M. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, vol. 1, 1911. On the Latin poetry of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries consult Francke, Geschichte der lateinischen Schulpoesie, 1879. For the French literature of the age there is the important volume of Gaston Paris, La littérature française au moyen âge, 1914, or the English translation.

Medieval philosophy is outlined in De Wulf, Histoire de la philosophie médiévale, 1900, or the English translation.

On the art of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries as expressing the thought of the time the student should read Mâle’s two volumes, L’art religieux du xii^e siècle, 1922, and L’art religieux du xiii^e siècle, 1910, or the English translation of the volume dealing with the thirteenth century.

An old but highly suggestive treatise on the natural science of the early twelfth century is that of C. B. Jourdain, Dissertation sur l’état de la philosophie naturelle, 1838. Natural science, magic, and legendary lore of the first thirteen centuries of the Christian era form the topics of Thorndike’s learned History of Magic and Experimental Science, 1923. Some of these subjects as they were embodied in medieval French encyclopedias compiled for the use of the layman are illustrated in C. V. Langlois, La connaissance de la nature, 1911. Legendary lore more especially is the theme of Denis’ little Monde enchanté, 1843, of Berger de Xivrey’s Traditions tératologiques, 1836, and, more recently, of Graf’s Miti, leggende e superstizioni, 1892–1893.

The relation between theology and natural science in the Middle Ages has been a matter of controversy. From a point of view relatively favorable to medieval science the subject was discussed by Zöckler, Geschichte der Beziehungen zwischen Theologie und Naturwissenschaft, vol. i, 1877; from a more critical point of view, by Draper, Conflict Between Religion and Science, 1875, and in White’s scholarly Warfare of Science with Theology, 1895.

The influence of classical scholarship upon medieval thought was potent. This topic as a whole is dealt with in much detail in Sandys’ monumental History of Classical Scholarship, 3rd edit., vol. i, 1921. On the use of classical works in the Middle Ages see also the two monographs of M. Manitius, Beiträge zur Geschichte der römischen Prosaiker, 1890, and Philologisches aus alten Bibliothekskatalogen, 1892. In regard to medieval Latin translations from the Greek, Arabic, and Hebrew, the formerly authoritative treatises of Amable Jourdain, Recherches critiques, 1843, and Wüstenfeld, Übersetzungen arabischer Werke, 1877, have to a large extent been superseded by the researches of Steinschneider (Hebräische Übersetzungen, 1893; Europäische Übersetzungen, 1905–1906), Mandonnet (Siger de Brabant, 1908, 1911), Grabmann (Forschungen über die lateinischen Aristotelesübersetzungen, 1916), Haskins (Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science, 1924), and others (see above, pp. 95–102, and notes 32–70 on pp. 398–403).

The Geographical Lore of Antiquity and of the Middle Ages

The publications dealing with ancient and medieval geographical lore may be divided into three groups: those devoted to (a) the history of geography as a whole; (b) the history of geography in particular periods; (c) the history of particular aspects of geography.

The History of Geography as a Whole

With the exception of a few brief popular works, the writer knows of only three general histories of geography in which the attempt is made to cover the entire field. These are Louis Vivien de St. Martin, Histoire de la géographie et des découvertes géographiques depuis les temps les plus reculés jusqu’à nos jours, with atlas, Paris, 1873 (not in Bibliography); Peschel, Geschichte der Erdkunde, 1877; and Günther, Geschichte der Erdkunde, 1904. The first is concerned primarily with explorations and the expansion of regional knowledge; in its pages the medieval period receives but scant attention. Peschel aimed to cover both exploration and scientific geography, and his work, though old, is of great value: scholarly, well balanced, and clearly written. Whereas Peschel stopped with the early nineteenth century, Günther carries the record through that century; his book contains a wealth of detail and of useful bibliographical notes.

The History of Geography in Particular Periods

1. Ancient Geography. Bunbury’s History of Ancient Geography, 1879, remains to the present day the only work of large scope on Greek and Latin geography as a whole. Tozer’s delightful History of Ancient Geography, 1897, is a good introduction to the subject but is inadequate for detailed research. A scholarly treatment of the scientific geography of the Greeks is Berger’s Geschichte der wissenschaftlichen Erdkunde der Griechen, 1903. The most extensive recent treatment of classical geography as a whole, with numerous references, is Gisinger’s article “Geographie” in Paulys Real-Encyclopädie, 1924. The evolution of those theories of ancient geography which prepared the way toward the discovery of America is admirably outlined in the now somewhat out of date but nevertheless useful and stimulating chapter by Tillinghast, Geographical Knowledge of the Ancients in Relation to the Discovery of America, in the first volume of Winsor’s Narrative and Critical History, 1889. Alexander von Humboldt in the first part of the Examen critique de l’histoire de la géographie du nouveau continent et des progrès de l’astronomie nautique aux quinzième et seizième siècles, Paris, 1st edit., 1814–1834 (not in Bibliography), probed deeply into the history of ancient geography. See also C. B. Jourdain, De l’influence d’Aristote ... sur la découverte du Nouveau-Monde, 1861.

2. Medieval Geography. Santarem’s Essai sur l’histoire de la cosmographie et de la cartographie, 1849–1852, marks one of the earliest attempts in modern times to open up the subject of medieval geography. It consists of a mass of detailed notes on the regional geographical theories of the cosmographers of the Middle Ages. Lelewel’s Géographie du moyen âge, 1852–1857, is a work of erudition exasperating in the confusion of its arrangement, the difficulty of its style, and the untenability of many of its theories. Lelewel, however, went beyond Santarem in his endeavor to take into consideration the work of Arabic as well as of Occidental geographical authors.

The most recent broad history of medieval geography is Beazley’s important Dawn of Modern Geography, 1897–1906. These three volumes are the result of long and arduous research and will probably remain for many years to come on the whole the most satisfactory general treatment of the subject. They cover the period from 300 to 1420 A. D. Attention is given to the explorations and geographical science not only of the Christians but also of the Arabs and Chinese (the two latter subjects, however, having been studied through translations and secondary works only). Throughout, especial stress is laid upon the record of travel and exploration and upon the historical events that led to the acquisition of geographical information by travel and exploration. In the first two volumes, on the period until 1260, extensive chapters are devoted to “Geographical Theory,” but in the third, covering 1260 to 1420, only 29 out of a total of 541 pages are given to geographical theory, and the chapter on geographical theory of the period from 900 to 1260 in the second volume barely touches upon the various topics discussed in Chapters V to X of the present book. To illustrate the theoretical “earth-knowledge” of the “Central Middle Age period” Beazley discusses three examples only, the work of Constantine Porphyrogenetos, that of Adam of Bremen, and the chief maps of the age. There is either the briefest passing mention or else no reference whatever to the writings of the highly characteristic authors the study of whose geographical opinions is the main purpose of the present volume—such writers as Peter Abelard, Peter Comestor, Hildegard of Bingen, Bernard and Theodoric of Chartres, Adelard of Bath, William of Conches, Gerard of Cremona, Michael Scot, Robert Grosseteste, Gervase of Tilbury, Otto of Freising, Gunther of Pairis, Giraldus Cambrensis, Saxo Grammaticus, Guy of Bazoches, and the various translators from the Arabic. Furthermore, Beazley makes no attempt to give a systematic analysis of the various elements that constituted the geographical lore of the scholar or educated reader of Western Europe in the age of the Crusades.

A scholarly account of the geography of the Church Fathers is Marinelli, La geografia e i padri della chiesa, 1882 (also translated into German). Very full references are here given in footnotes.

On the geography of the Moslems of the Middle Ages the first volume of Reinaud’s Géographie d’Aboulféda, 1848, though now more than seventy years old, is still, to our knowledge, the only thoroughly scholarly work covering the whole field in detail. More recent, but much briefer treatments are those of Baron Carra de Vaux in the second volume of his Penseurs de l’Islam, 1921, and of Carl Schoy in various articles (cited in the Bibliography under his name), especially the article in the Geographical Review, 1924.

The History of Particular Aspects of Geography

1. Cosmogony and Cosmology. Duhem’s great Système du monde, 1913–1917, is now the fundamental history of the evolution of cosmological doctrines from the time of Plato to the fourteenth century. To it the writer owes, to a large extent, his guidance to the original sources as well as much of the material which he has necessarily accepted at second hand in those parts of the present book which deal with the origins and the larger relations of the earth to the remainder of the universe. For the twelfth and thirteenth centuries Werner’s two monographs, Die Kosmologie ... Wilhelm von Conches, 1873, and Die Kosmologie ... des Roger Baco, 1879, are important. On the development of Christian theories of the Creation one should also consult Zöckler, Geschichte der Beziehungen zwischen Theologie und Naturwissenschaft, 1877–1879, and Robbins, Hexaemeral Literature, 1912. See also A. C. McGiffert, The God of the Early Christians, New York, 1924 (not in Bibliography), for the theologians’ view of the Creation in the early centuries of our era. An interesting monograph on the ancient theory of the periodic destruction and rebirth of the universe is that of Günther, Die antike Apokatastasis, 1916.

2. Larger problems of terrestrial geography. These problems are dealt with by Kretschmer in the monograph discussed in the following subsection (3).

Several important studies have been written on the medieval beliefs regarding the shape of the earth. Günther, in his Studien zur Geschichte der mathematischen und physikalischen Geographie, 1877–1879, treated the subject from the point of view shared by many Protestants; Schneid, Die Lehre von der Erdrundung, 1877, replied to Günther from the Catholic point of view. More recently the matter has been discussed by Betten (see above, p. 384, note 48). Proofs of the curvature of the earth adduced in antiquity and during the Middle Ages are the topic of a monograph by Günther, Optische Beweisung für die Erdkrümmung, 1920.

On the Eratosthenic measurement of the size of the earth and its subsequent influence the fundamental work is now the two volumes of Thalamas, Étude bibliographique de la géographie d’Ératosthène, 1921, and La géographie d’Ératosthène, 1921. Other interesting studies in this field are those of Mori, La misurazione eratostenica, 1911, Decourdemanche, Note sur l’estimation de la longeur du degré terrestre, 1913, and Miller, Die Erdmessung im Alterthum, 1919.

The problems of the antipodes and the austral continent are sketched historically by Rainaud, Le continent austral, 1893; the antipodes more particularly by Boffito, La leggenda degli antipodi, 1903.

Three important discussions of the evolution of ancient and medieval theories regarding the relative positions and extent of areas of land and water on the earth’s surface and of the relations which obtain between the spheres of land and of water are Günther, Ältere und neuere Hypothesen ..., forming part iii of his Studien zur Geschichte der mathematischen und physikalischen Geographie, 1879; Boffito, La controversia dell’acqua e della terra prima e dopo di Dante, forming Memoria I of his Intorno alla “Quaestio de aqua et terra,” 1902; and Norlind, Das Problem des gegenseitigen Verhältnisses von Land und Wasser, 1918.

3. Physical Geography. An important monograph on the physical geography of the Christian Middle Ages is Kretschmer, Die physische Erdkunde im christlichen Mittelalter, 1889. After a discussion of the sources—both Greek and Latin—Kretschmer takes up systematically the problems of the size and shape of the earth, the question of the antipodes, medieval theories of the divergent centers of the spheres of earth and water, the compass, and the physical geography of the waters, the atmosphere, and the lands. The topics dealt with are similar to those treated in parts of Chapter VI and in Chapters VII, VIII, and IX of the present volume. On the other hand, Kretschmer neglects the interesting question of theories of the origin of the earth. In dealing with physical geography he gives little attention to the writers of the age of the Crusades. With the exception of William of Conches, he neglects the same authors of that age whom Beazley neglects (see above, p. 498).

Several works on particular phases of ancient and medieval physical geography deserve special mention. An elaborate study of the meteorological lore of the Greeks is that of Gilbert, Die meteorologischen Theorien des griechischen Altertums, 1907. A German doctoral dissertation is devoted to the theories of the Church Fathers in regard to meteorology: Hoffmann, Die Anschauungen der Kirchenväter über Meteorologie, 1907 (see also Günther, Notiz zur Geschichte der Klimatologie, 1887). Medieval wind-roses are discussed in Cusa, Sulla denominazione dei venti, 1884; Revelli, Una “rosa dei venti,” 1910; and Bertolini, L’orologio solare di Aquileia e la sistemazione della rosa dei venti, 1916. Dissertations by Frahm (Das Meer und die Seefahrt in der altfranzösischen Literatur, 1914) and Koch (Das Meer in der mittelhochdeutschen Epik, 1910) deal respectively with the sea as depicted in old French literature and in the Middle High German epic. The basic study of the history of theories of the tides in antiquity and during the Middle Ages is Almagià, La dottrina della marea, 1905. Material, pleasingly presented, on the history of geology, with, incidentally, some interesting observations on medieval physical geography, will be found in Geikie, Founders of Geology, 1905. Medieval beliefs regarding the interior of the earth, volcanoes, and earthquakes are outlined by Stegmann in a dissertation, Die Anschauungen ... über die endogenen Erscheinungen der Erde, 1913. Classical and medieval ideas of the arrangement of the mountains of the earth’s surface form the subject of Benl’s dissertation, Hypothesen über die regelmässige Anordnung der Erdgebirge, 1905.

4. Feeling for Nature. The feeling for nature as expressed in the Latin literature of antiquity is the topic of a delightful book by Geikie, The Love of Nature Among the Romans, 1912. On the feeling for nature in the medieval period we may refer to the works of Biese, Die Entwicklung des Naturgefühls, 1892 (or the English translation), and of Ganzenmüller, Das Naturgefühl, 1914. To the latter the writer is especially indebted for numerous references to source material that might otherwise have been overlooked. Interesting studies of early mountain climbing are those of Gribble, The Early Mountaineers, 1899; Günther, Wissenschaftliche Bergbesteigungen, 1896; and W. W. Hyde, The Development of the Appreciation of Mountain Scenery in Modern Times, in: Geographical Review, vol. iii, 1917, pp. 107–118 (not in Bibliography), though none of these devotes a great deal of attention to the period of the Crusades.

5. Astronomical Geography. On the history of the invention and use of methods of determining latitude, see Schoy, Die geschichtliche Entwicklung der Polhöhenbestimmung, 1911; on longitudes, Schoy’s Längenbestimmung und Zentralmeridian, 1915. See also the various articles and monographs on Ptolemy cited in the cross-references under Ptolemy in the Bibliography. Knowledge of latitudes and longitudes in the Christian West in the Middle Ages is discussed by J. K. Wright, Notes on the Knowledge of Latitudes and Longitudes, 1923.

6. Cartography. The history of cartography is discussed in the works mentioned in the sections on the history of geography as a whole and in particular periods, pp. 497–498 above. To the cartography of the ancient period as a whole are devoted two important recent publications: Kubitschek’s article “Karten” in Paulys Real-Encyclopädie, 1919, and Cebrian, Geschichte der Kartographie, 1923. The most complete single study of the medieval cartography of the period with which we have to deal is Miller, Mappaemundi, 1895–1898. Other publications which deal incidentally but significantly with the cartography of the pre-portolan period are the works of Pullé, Simar, and Langenmaier referred to in subsection 7, immediately below.

7. Regional Geography. The fundamental study of belief in the Terrestrial Paradise is that of Coli, Il paradiso terrestre, 1897, although the matter has also been discussed by Graf in his La leggenda del paradiso terrestre, 1878, and in his Miti, leggende e superstizioni, 1892–1893.

The growth of medieval knowledge of Asia is traced in the introduction to Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither, 1913–1916, and much important material on this topic may be gleaned from the notes in the third edition of Yule’s Marco Polo, 1903, and from Cordier’s Ser Marco Polo, 1920. India as depicted on medieval maps is the subject of an interesting treatise by Pullé, La cartografia antica dell’India, 1901–1905. Lowes, in The Dry Sea, 1905, deals with interesting problems in the geography of Central Asia in the Middle Ages (see also Pelliot, Chrétiens d’Asie centrale et d’Extrême-Orient, 1914). On the history of commercial connections between the Near East and Europe during our period, two highly important books are Heyd, Commerce du Levant, 1885–1886 (reprinted 1923), and Schaube, Handelsgeschichte der romanischen Völker des Mittelmeergebiets, 1906. Dreesbach, Der Orient in der altfranzösischen Kreuzzugsliteratur, 1901, is a résumé of notices relating to the Near East as they appear in French literature of the Crusades.

Two scholarly works deal with the widening of Western knowledge of Central Africa in antiquity and during the Middle Ages. These are Simar, La géographie de l’Afrique centrale, 1912, and Langenmaier, Alte Kenntnis ... der Zentralafrikanischen Seenregion, 1916. Schaube’s Handelsgeschichte and Mas-Latrie, Traités de paix et de commerce ..., concernant les relations des Chrétiens avec les Arabes de l’Afrique septentrionale, 1866, are also important for the relations between Europe and North Africa.

Not much has been written in modern times upon the geography of Europe as it was conceived in the period covered by the present book. Hungary as it figures in the chansons de geste is the subject of an article by Karl, La Hongrie ... dans les chansons de geste, 1908, and there are other monographs of limited scope, but no general discussion. The progress of geographical knowledge of the North is outlined by Moritz, Die geographische Kenntnis von den Nord- und Ostseeküsten, 1904; Weinhold, Die Polargegenden Europas, 1871; and especially by Nansen, In Northern Mists, 1911. The history of Icelandic geography (both of historical geography and of geographical studies in Iceland) is treated by Thoroddsen, Geschichte der isländischen Geographie, 1897. European wanderings in the Atlantic and legends of fabulous islands in that ocean have been made the subject of a large library of books and monographs. We may mention here Westropp, Brasil and the Legendary Islands of the Atlantic, 1912, and the recent volume of Babcock, Legendary Islands of the Atlantic, 1922.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

This bibliography is intended merely as an aid to those who wish to carry on further studies of the topics covered by this book. It is in no sense complete. The publications listed are for the most part only those to which reference is made in the Notes. Enough, but only enough, additional information is given about each entry to enable the reader to identify it. In the case of original sources the attempt has been made to refer to modern critical editions, and only to manuscripts or early printed editions where modern critical editions are lacking. More complete bibliographical information may be obtained from the publications discussed on pp. 491–493 above.

The arrangement is alphabetical by authors and, in the case of anonymous works, by the first important word in the titles. (Collections of sources are in general placed under the editor’s name.) The names of authors of original sources, or the titles in the case of anonymous original sources or collections of sources, are given in capital letters, the former in Roman, the latter in italic type. The names of authors of modern, secondary studies are set in small letters in Roman type. Different works by the same ancient, Arabic, or medieval author are listed together in the same entry and are indicated by Roman numerals. Different works by the same modern author are listed separately and are arranged chronologically.

Cross-references within the Bibliography are, as in the Notes, given in abbreviated form. The full titles of the works referred to will be found in the Bibliography in their proper places.

For a topical discussion of the bibliography of ancient and medieval geography, see the Bibliographical Note above.

ABDIAS, PSEUDO-. Abdiae, Babyloniae primi episcopi, ab apostolis constituti, De historia certaminis apostolici libri X, Julio Africano interprete. Paris, 1551, 1560, 1566, etc.

ABELARD, PETER. I. Expositio in hexaemeron, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxviii, cols. 731–784. II. Sermones, in: Migne, _op. cit._, cols. 379–610. III. Sic et non, in: Migne, op. cit., cols. 1329–1610.

ABŪ-L-FIDĀ. Géographie d’Aboulféda, traduite de l’arabe en français. Vol. i (Paris, 1848) of this work, by J. T. Reinaud, is a general introduction to Moslem geography. Vol. ii, pt. 1 (Paris, 1848), forms the first part of the French translation and is also by J. T. Reinaud. Vol. ii, pt. 2 (Paris, 1883), contains the second part of the translation and is by Stanislas Guyard.

ABŪ MAʿSHAR (ALBUMASAR). The Great Book of the Introduction. This was translated into Latin by Hermann the Dalmatian and by John of Seville. The title of Hermann’s translation reads in the manuscript Liber introductorius in astrologiam (see Haskins, Studies, 1924, p. 45); editions printed in Venice, 1489, 1495, 1506, bear the title Introductorium in astronomiam (see Duhem, Système, vol. iii, 1915, p. 174, note 6, and Haskins, loc. cit.)

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, APOCRYPHAL. Acta apostolorum apocrypha ... etc., edited by L. F. C. von Tischendorf, Leipzig, 1851. Acta apostolorum apocrypha post Constantinum Tischendorf denuo ediderunt R. A. Lipsius et [A.] M. Bonnet, Leipzig, 1891–1903. Acts of Thomas in vol. ii, pt. 2, of this edition. English translation by M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford University Press, 1924.

ADAM OF BREMEN. Gesta Hammenburgensis (or Hammaburgensis) ecclesiae pontificum (also called Historia ecclesiastica, or Bremensium praesulum historia), edited by J. M. Lappenberg, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. vii, 1846, pp. 280–389, and in: Scriptores rerum germ. in usum scholarum, Hanover, 1876.

See Björnbo, A. A.; Kohlmann, P. W.; Krabbo, Nordeuropa, 1909.

ADELARD OF BATH. I. De eodem et diverso, edited by Hans Willner, in: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, vol. iv, pt. I, Münster, 1903. II. Quaestiones naturales. There is no modern edition of the text of this work. An English translation is found in Gollancz, Dodi ve-Nechdi, 1920, pp. 87–161. The references in the present work are to the chapters as numbered in the Louvain incunabulum, ap. 1484, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris (shelf-mark “Rés. R. 900”). In parentheses are given references to the chapters as numbered in the twelfth-century manuscript, Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds latin, no. 6415. For further bibliographical references, see Haskins, Adelard, 1911, p. 493; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 26. III. Translation of Khorazmian Tables. In MSS. only. See Haskins, loc. cit.; KHWĀRIZMĪ, Al-, II.

Adler, M. N. See BENJAMIN OF TUDELA.

ADVENTU, DE, PATRIARCHAE INDORUM AD URBEM SUB CALISTO PAPA II. In: Zarncke, Priester Johannes, Erste Abhandlung, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 837–843 (also numbered 11–17).

AETHICUS OF ISTRIA. Cosmographia Aethici Istrici, edited by H. Wuttke, Leipzig, 1854.

AGRIPPA. Map of the world. See Detlefsen, D.; Lessert, C. P. de.

Ainsworth, W. F. See PETACHIA OF RATISBON.

ALAN OF LILLE. I. De planctu naturae, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. ccx, cols. 430–482. English translation by D. M. Moffat, The Complaint of Nature by Alain of Lille, New York, 1908. II. Anticlaudianus, in: Migne, op. cit., cols. 482–576.

Al-BATTĀNĪ, Al-FARGHĀNĪ, and other Arabic names beginning with the article Al. See under first letter of main part of name.

ALBERTUS MAGNUS (OF BOLLSTADT). Opera omnia, edited by Petrus Jammy, 21 vols., Lyons, 1651. Also an edition by Augustus Borgnet, 38 vols., Paris, 1890–1899 (not seen).

For brief discussion of the geographical works, see above p. 406, note 93.

ALBUMASAR. See ABŪ MAʿSHAR.

ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF. I. Pseudo-Callisthenes, edited by C. Müller and included in a volume with F. Dübner’s edition of Arrian’s Anabasis and Indica, Paris, 1846 (also 1877). II. Julius Valerius, Res gesta Alexandri Macedoniae II, edited by B. Kübler, Leipzig, 1888. III. Epitoma Julii Valerii, edited by J. Zacher in his Pseudo-Callisthenes: Forschungen zur Kritik und Geschichte der ältesten Aufzeichnung der Alexandersage, Halle, 1867. See De Julii Valerii epitoma oxoniense, by G. G. Cillie (Dissertation, University of Strasburg, 1905). IV. Epistola ad Aristotelem de mirabilibus Indiae, edited by F. Pfister in his: Kleine Texte zum Alexanderroman, Heidelberg, 1910. See also Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. i, pp. 555–556, footnote 2. V. Historia de praeliis of Leo Archipresbyter. See Landgraf, G. VI. Iter ad Paradisum, edited by J. Zacher, Regimonti (Königsberg), 1859 (not seen). VII. The Romance in alexandrines: Li romans d’Alixandre par Lambert li Tors et Alexandre de Bernay, edited by Heinrich Michelant, in: Bibliothek des Literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, vol. xiii, 1846; F. le Court de la Villethassetz and E. Talbot, Alexandriade ou chanson de geste d’Alexandre le Grand, de Lambert le Court et Alexandre de Bernay, Dinan, Huart, and Paris, 1861.

See Meyer, P. For further references to texts and secondary works on Oriental versions see Thorndike, Magic, 1923, vol. i, pp. 551–552.

ALEXANDER NECKAM. See NECKAM, ALEXANDER.

ALEXANDER III (Pope). See PRESTER JOHN, III.

ALEXANDRE DE BERNAI. See ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF, VII.

ALEXANDRIADE. See ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF, VII.

ALFRAGANUS. See FARGHĀNĪ, Al-.

ALFRED THE GREAT. See Geidel, H.

ALFRED OF SARESHEL. I. De motu cordis. Extracts were published by C. S. Barach in: Bibliotheca philosophorum mediae aetatis, vol. ii, Innsbruck, 1878. II. Liber de congelatis. Baeumker, Alfred von Sareshel, 1913, p. 27, note, states that this work was printed under the title Avicennae de congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum, in: Theatrum chemicum, praecipuos selectorum auctorum tractatus de chemiae et lapidis philosophici ... etc., vol. iv, Argentorati (Strasburg), 1659, pp. 883–887 (not seen), and that it was also printed in: Gebri, régis Arabum ... summa perfectionis Magisterii, in sua natura ... denique libri Investigationis Magisterii et Testamenti eiusdem Gebri ac aurei Trium Verborum libelli et Avicennae ... mineralium additione castigatissimi, “Gedani” (Danzig), 1682, pp. 245–253 (not seen).

See Baeumker, C.

Almagià, Roberto. La dottrina della marea nell’antichità classica e nel medio evo, in: Memorie della Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Classe di scienze fisiche, matematiche, e naturali, series 5, vol. v, Rome, 1905, pp. 375–514. (Also printed separately.)

The most authoritative study of the history of theories of the tides in ancient and medieval times.

ALPETRAGIUS. See BITRŪJĪ, Al-.

ALPHONSI, PETER (PETRUS ANFUSI). Dialogus cum Judeo. Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 10722, fols. 3ff.; also in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clvii, cols. 527–706.

Amari, M. Storia dei Musulmani di Sicilia, 3 vols., Florence, 1854–1872.

Contains material on Edrisi and earlier Moslem geographers of Sicily.

AMBROISE. L’Estoire de la guerre sainte: Histoire en vers de la troisième croisade, edited by Gaston Paris, Paris, 1897.

ANAXIMANDER. See Heidel, W. A.

Anderson, R. B. See SNORRI STURLUSON, II.

Andriani, Giuseppe. La carta dialettologica d’Italia secondo Dante in: Atti dell’ VIII Congresso Geografico Italiano, vol. ii, Florence, 1923, pp. 255–263.

ANFUSI, PETRUS. See ALPHONSI, PETER.

ANONYMOUS. See under initial letter of first important word of title.

ANTIQUITATES AMERICANAE. See Rafn, C. C.

ARI FRODHI. Íslendingabók. For editions see Hermannsson, _Bibl. Icelandic Sagas_, 1908, pp. 56–59. English translation in: Vigfusson and York Powell, Origines Islandicae, vol. i, 1905, pp. 279–306.

ARISTARCHUS OF SAMOS. See Heath, T.

ARISTOTLE. Aristoteles, graece (et latine, interpretibus variis), ex recensione Imm. Bekkeri, edidit Academia Regia Borussica, 5 vols., Berlin, 1830–1870. This is the best general edition of the Greek text of the works of Aristotle and is known as the Berlin edition. It was reprinted with the title Aristotelis opera, graece, ex recensione Imm. Bekkeri, accedunt indices sylburgiani, 11 vols., Oxford, 1837. There is also the following useful edition with Latin translations: Aristotelis opera omnia, graece et latine, cum indice nominum et rerum absolutissimo, 5 vols., Paris (Firmin-Didot), 1848–1886. An English translation is appearing entitled: The Works of Aristotle, Translated into English, Oxford (Clarendon Press), 1908ff.; in this the De caelo (translated by J. L. Stocks), 1922, De generatione et corruptione (translated by H. H. Joachim), 1922, the spurious De mundo (translated by E. S. Forster), 1914, and the Meteorologica (translated by E. W. Webster), 1923, have appeared, together with other works of lesser geographical interest. The best Greek text of the Meteorology is that of F. H. Fobes, Aristotelis meteorologicorum libri quattuor, Cambridge, Mass., 1919.

See also Duhem, Du temps, 1909; Endrös, A.; Fobes, F. H.; Grabmann, M.; Hammer-Jensen, I.; Jourdain, A.; Jourdain, C. B., Infl. d’Aristote, 1861; von Lippmann, E. O.; Lones, T. E.; Mandonnet, P.

ARNOLD OF CHARTRES. De sex dierum operibus, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. clxxxix, cols. 1513–1570.

ARNOLD OF LÜBECK. Chronica Slavorum, edited by J. M. Lappenberg, in: Mon. Germ. hist., Scriptores, vol. xxi, pp. 115–250, and in: Scriptores rerum germ. in usum scholarum, Hanover, 1868.

ARNOLD THE SAXON. Encyclopedic work published in part by Valentin Rose, Aristoteles de lapidibus und Arnoldus Saxo, in: Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum, vol. xviii (new series, vol. vi), Berlin 1875, pp. 424–454.

See Stange, E.

Asher, A. See BENJAMIN OF TUDELA.

ATHELHARD. See ADELARD OF BATH; KHWĀRIZMĪ, Al-, II.

AUGUSTINE, Saint. Works in Migne, Pat. lat., vols. xxxii-xlvii. Also in part in Corpus script. eccl. lat.

AVERROËS. See IBN RUSHD.

Avezac, [Armand] d’. Coup d’oeuil historique sur la projection des cartes de géographie, in: Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris, series 5, vol. v, 1863, pp. 257–361, 438–485. (Also printed separately, Paris, 1863.)

Still the classical and probably the most satisfactory treatment of the subject.

AVICENNA (IBN SINĀ). See ALFRED OF SARESHEL, II; IBN SINĀ; and above, p. 401, note 60.

Babcock, W. H. Saint Brendan’s Explorations and Islands, in: Geographical Review, vol. viii, New York, 1919, pp. 37–46.

Babcock, W. H. Legendary Islands of the Atlantic (American Geographical Society Research Series, no. 8), New York, 1922.

BACON, ROGER. I. The Opus majus of Roger Bacon, edited by J. H. Bridges, 3 vols., Oxford, 1897–1900. II. Opus minus, Opus tertium, Compendium philosophiae, edited by J. S. Brewer, in: Fr. Rogeri Bacon opera quaedam hactenus inedita (Rolls Series, no. 15), London, 1859. III. Communia naturalium, edited by Robert Steele, in: Opera hactenus inedita Rogeri Baconi, fascs. ii, iii, iv, Oxford, 1905, 1911, 1913. IV. Secretum secretorum, edited by Robert Steele, op. cit., fasc. v, Oxford, 1920.

See Bridges, J. H.; Little, A. G.; Steele, R.; Werner, Kosm. Roger Baco, 1879.

Baeumker, Clemens. Die Stellung des Alfred von Sareshel (Alfredus Anglicus) und seiner Schrift De motu cordis in der Wissenschaft des beginnenden XIII. Jahrhunderts, in: Koeniglich-bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Sitzungsberichte, Philosophisch-philologische und historische Klasse, Munich, 1913, Abhandlung 9. (Also published separately, Munich, 1913.)

Barthold, W. Die geographische und historische Erforschung des Orients mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der russischen Arbeiten (Quellen und Forschungen zur Erd- und Kulturkunde herausgegeben von R. Strube, vol. viii), Leipzig, 1913.

Summary of the history of relations between Orient and Occident to the nineteenth century. Extensive bibliographies.

BARTHOLOMEW ANGLICUS. De proprietatibus rerum. There is no modern edition. Translations of extracts will be found in: Robert Steele, Mediaeval Lore, London, 1907.

BATTĀNĪ, Al-. Astronomy. Arabic text with Latin translation and commentary in C. A. Nallino, Al-Battānī sive Albatenii opus astronomicum, in: Pubblicazioni del Reale Osservatorio di Brera in Milano, no. xl, pts. 1–3, Milan, 1899–1907.

See PLATO OF TIVOLI.

Baur, L. Der Einfluss des Robert Grosseteste auf die wissenschaftliche Richtung des Roger Bacon, in: Little, Roger Bacon Essays, 1914, pp. 33–54.

Beazley, C. R. The Dawn of Modern Geography, 3 vols., London, 1897–1906.

This, the most extensive and satisfactory work on medieval geography as a whole, covers the period from 300 to 1420 A. D. The main emphasis is laid upon the history of discovery and exploration. The study of the geographical science of the latter part of the Middle Ages is relatively brief (see above, p. 498).

BEDE, The Venerable. I. De natura rerum, edited by J. A. Giles, The Complete Works of the Venerable Bede (Bedae opera quae supersunt omnia), vol. vi, London, 1843, pp. 99–138. Also in Migne, Pat. lat., vol. xc, cols. 187–278. II. De temporum ratione, edited by Giles, op. cit., pp. 139–342. Also in Migne, op. cit., vol. xc, cols. 293–578. III. Hexaemeron, sive libri quatuor in principium Genesis, in: Migne, op. cit., vol. xci, cols. 9–190.

See above, p. 387, note 68.

[BENEDICT OF PETERBOROUGH.] I. Gesta regis Henrici II; II. Gesta regis Ricardi; both in: The Chronicle of the Reigns of Henry II and Richard I, A. D. 1169–1192, edited by William Stubbs (Rolls Series, no. 49), 2 vols., London, 1867.

These two works have been erroneously ascribed to Benedict of Peterborough.

Benini, R. Origine, sito, forma e dimensioni del Monte del Purgatorio e dell’Inferno dantesco, in: Rendiconti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, series 5, vol. xxv, Rome, 1917, pp. 1015–1129.

This important study of the cosmography of Dante came to the present writer’s attention when this book was in press.

Benisch, A. See PETACHIA OF RATISBON.

BENJAMIN OF TUDELA. The Itinerary of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela, text and English translation by A. Asher, 2 vols., London and Berlin, 1840–1841; The Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela, critical text, English translation, and commentary, edited by M. N. Adler, London, 1907.

See Borchardt, P.; Zunz, —.

Benl, Oskar. Frühere und spätere Hypothesen über die regelmässige Anordnung der Erdgebirge nach bestimmten Himmelsrichtungen (Dissertation, University of Munich, 1905).

Berger, Hugo. Geschichte der wissenschaftlichen Erdkunde der Griechen, 2nd edit., Leipzig, 1903.

The fundamental work on the geographical science of antiquity.

Berger, Hugo. Die Lehre von der Kugelgestalt der Erde im Altertum, in: Geographische Zeitschrift., vol. xii, Leipzig, 1906, pp. 20–37.

Berger de Xivrey, [J.]. Traditions tératologiques, ou récits de l’antiquité et du moyen-âge en Occident sur quelques points de la fable, du merveilleux et de l’histoire naturelle, Paris, 1836.

Throws light on the marvels of India.

BERGSSON, NIKULÁS. See NIKULÁS BERGSSON.

BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX, Saint. Works will be found in: Migne, Pat. lat., vols. clxxxii-clxxxv. There are numerous other editions. See also: The Life and Works of St. Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, Edited by Dom John Mabillon, Translated and Edited with Additional Notes by Samuel J. Eales, 4 vols., London, vols. i and ii, 1889, vols. iii and iv, 1896. This translation is from the fourth edition of Mabillon, Paris, 1839.

BERNARD SYLVESTER. De mundi universitate, edited by C. S. Barach and J. Wrobel, in: Bibliotheca philosophorum mediae aetatis, vol. i, Innsbruck, 1876.

See Hauréau, Mémoire, 1883; Langlois, C. V., Maître Bernard, 1893; Poole, R. L., Masters, 1920.

Bertolini, G. L. I quattro angoli del mondo e la forma della terra nel passo di Rabano Mauro, in: Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana, vol. xlvii, Rome, 1910, pp. 1433–1441.

Bertolini, G. L. L’orologio solare di Aquileia e la sistemazione della rosa dei venti nel medio evo, in: Bollettino della Reale Società Geografica Italiana, vol. liii, Rome, 1916, pp. 969–985.

BIBLE, THE. Citations are to the Vulgate; translations, except where otherwise stated, from the Douai and Rheims version.

Biese, A. Die Entwicklung des Naturgefühls im Mittelalter und Neuzeit, Leipzig, 1892. English translation with title The Development of the Feeling for Nature in the Middle Ages and Modern Times, London, 1905 (not seen).

Birkenmajer, Alexander. Eine neue Handschrift des “Liber de naturis inferiorum et superiorum” des Daniel von Merlai, in: Archiv für die Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und Technik, vol. ix, Leipzig, 1920, pp. 45–51 (not seen).

BITRŪJĪ, Al- (ALPETRAGIUS). On the Sphere. This work was translated into Latin by Michael Scot in 1217 (on manuscripts see Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 251, note 3; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 273, note 9). It was also translated into Latin from the Hebrew version of Moses ben Samuel ben Tibbon (1259) by the Neapolitan Jew Calo Calonymos ben David under the title Alpetragii Arabi planetarum theorica ... etc., Venice, 1528 (not seen; cited by Duhem, Système, vol. ii, 1914, p. 146).

Björnbo, A. A. Adam af Bremens Nordensopfattelse, in: Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie, Copenhagen, 1909 (not seen).

Blázquez y Delgado Aguilera, Antonio. San Isidoro de Sevilla: Mapa mundi, in: Boletín de la Real Sociedad Geográfica, vol. 50, Madrid, 1908, pp. 207–272, 306–358.

Boffito, Giuseppe. Intorno alla “Quaestio de aqua et terra” attribuita a Dante: Memoria I, La controversia dell’acqua e della terra prima e dopo di Dante, in: Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, series 2, vol. li, Appr. nell’adunanza del 23 giugno 1901, Turin, 1902, pp. 73–159; Memoria II, Il trattato dantesco, in: op. cit., series 2, vol. lii, Appr. nell’adunanza del giugno 1902, Turin, 1903, pp. 257–342. See also above, p. 410, note 98.

Boffito, Giuseppe. La leggenda degli antipodi, in: Miscellanea di studi critici ed. in onore di Arturo Graf, Bergamo, 1903, pp. 583–601.

Boncompagni, Baldassare. Delle versione fatte da Platone Tiburtino, traduttore de secolo duodecimo: Notizie, Rome, 1851.

Boncompagni, Baldassare. Della vita e delle opere di Gherardo Cremonese, traduttore del secolo duodecimo, e di Gherardo da Sabbionetta, astronomo del secolo decimoterzo: Notizie raccolte da —, in: Atti dell’Accademia Pontifica dei Nuovi Lincei, anno IV, sesione VII del 27 giugno, 1851, Rome, 1851. (Also published separately.)

Borchardt, Paul. L’itinéraire de Rabbi Benjamin de Tudèle en Chine, in: T’oung Pao, ou archives concernant l’histoire, les langues, la géographie et l’ethnographie de l’Asie orientale, vol. xxiii, Leiden, 1924, pp. 31–35.

See above, p. 414, note 156.

BRANDAN (BRENDAN), Saint. Peregrinatio sancti Brandani abbatis. Latin text and early German versions edited by Carl Schröder, Sanct Brandan: Ein lateinischer und drei deutsche Texte, Erlangen, 1871. Latin, Flemish, and French texts in: A. Jubinal, La légende latine de Saint Brendaines, Paris, 1836. Anglo-Norman text in: H. Suchier, Brandans Seefahrt (anglonormannischer Text der Handschrift Cotton, Vesp. B. X.), in: Romanische Studien herausgegeben von E. Böhmer, vol. i, pt. 5, Strasburg, 1875, pp. 553–588.

See Babcock, W. H.; Goeje, M. J. de.

Brehaut, Ernest. An Encyclopedist of the Dark Ages: Isidore of Seville (Columbia University Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. xlviii, no. 1), New York, 1912.

Part I deals with Isidore’s life, writings, relation to previous culture, his general view of the universe, and his attitude toward education. Part II consists of commentary and translation of selected passages from the Etymologiae, including extracts from Book XIV, “On the Earth and Its Parts.”

Bréhier, Louis. Les colonies d’orientaux en Occident au commencement du moyen-âge, v^e-viii^e siècle, in: Byzantinische Zeitschrift, vol. xii, no. i, Munich, 1903, pp. 1–39.

Bréhier, Louis. L’Église et l’Orient au moyen âge: Les croisades, Paris, 1911.

BRENDAN, Saint. See BRANDAN, Saint.

Bresslau, H. Die Chroniken des Frutolf von Bamberg und des Ekkehard von Aura, in: Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde, vol. xxi, Hanover, 1895, pp. 197–234.

Bridges, J. H. The Life and Work of Roger Bacon: An Introduction to the Opus Majus, edited by H. G. James, London, 1914.

Brown, J. Wood. An Enquiry into the Life and Legend of Michael Scot, Edinburgh, 1897.

Unreliable. See Haskins, Michael Scot, 1921–1922, p. 250; the same, Studies, 1924, p. 272.

BRUNETTO LATINO (or LATINI). See LATINO, BRUNETTO.

Bruun, P. Die Verwandlungen des Presbiters Johannes, in: Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin, vol. xi, 1876, pp. 279–314.

Bubnov, Nicholaus. See GERBERT (SYLVESTER II).

Bunbury, E. H. A History of Ancient Geography, 2 vols., London, 1879.

Scholarly and accurate. Though old, the best work on the subject in English.

CALLISTHENES, PSEUDO-. See ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF, I.

CAMBRENSIS, GIRALDUS. See GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS.

CAPELLA, MARTIANUS. De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii, edited by F. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig (Teubner), 1866.

See Mori, Misuraz. eratos., 1911.

Capelle, Wilhelm. Berges- und Wolkenhöhen bei griechischen Physikern (Στοιχεῖα: Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Weltbildes und der griechischen Wissenschaft herausgegeben von Franz Boll, vol. v), Leipzig and Berlin, 1916.

Carmoly, E., transl. and edit. _ITINÉRAIRES DE LA TERRE SAINTE DES XIII^e, XIV^e, XV^e, XVI^e, ET XVII^e SIÈCLES traduits de l’hébreu, et accompagnés de tables, de cartes et d’éclaircissements_, Brussels, 1847.

Carra de Vaux, [Bernard.] Les penseurs de l’Islam, vols. i and ii, Paris, 1921; vol. iii, 1923 (to be complete in 5 vols.).

The first three chapters of vol. ii give an admirable popular account of the geographers of Islam and their work.

Cebrian, Konstantin. Geschichte der Kartographie: Ein Beitrag zur Entwicklung des Kartenbildes und Kartenwesens. I. Altertum. 1. Von den ersten Versuchen der Länderabbildung bis auf Marinos und Ptolemaios (Zur Alexandrinischen Schule), (Geographische Bausteine, edited by Hermann Haack, vol. x), Gotha, 1923.

Useful general history, sometimes misleading in details. The author was killed in the World War, and hence the present part represents the only part published. Contains an appendix by Joseph Fischer, Ptolemaios als Kartograph, pp. 113–129, in which the endeavor is made to correct Cebrian’s misapprehensions regarding Ptolemy.

Chevalier, Ulysse. Répertoire des sources historiques du moyen âge: (1) Bio-bibliographie, 2 vols., Paris, 1905–1907; (2) Topo-bibliographie, Montbéliard, 1894–1899, 1903.

See above, p. 491.

CHRONICLES AND MEMORIALS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. See “ROLLS SERIES.”

Clarke, John. See SENECA.

CLEOMEDES. De motu circulari corporum caelestium libri duo, edited by Hermann Ziegler, Leipzig (Teubner), 1891.

Clerval, A. Les écoles de Chartres au moyen âge du v^e au xvi^e siècle. (Mémoires de la Société Archéologique d’Eure-et-Loir, no. 11), Paris, 1895.

Important study of the scholars of the leading intellectual center of France in the early twelfth century.

Coli, Edoardo. Il paradiso terrestre dantesco (Pubblicazioni del R. Istituto di Studi Superiori Pratici e di Perfezionamento in Firenze, Sezione di filosofia e lettere, vol. ii, no. 28), Florence, 1897.

Columba, G. M. La questione soliniana e la letteratura geografica dei Romani, in: Atti della Reale Accademia di Scienze, vol. xi, Palermo, 1920 (not seen).

COMESTOR, PETER. Historia scholastica, in: Migne, Pat. lat., vol. cxcviii, cols. 1045–1722.

See Masson, G.

CONRAD OF QUERFURT. Letter describing journey through Italy, in: Arnold of Lübeck, Chronica Slavorum, v, 19, in: _Mon. Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol. xxi, pp. 192–196.

Coolidge, W. A. B. The Alps in Nature and History, New York, 1908.

Contains compact, scholarly discussions of Alpine history and of the great passes.

Cordier, Henri. Documents historiques et géographiques relatifs à l’Indochine, 4 vols., Paris, 1910–1914.

Includes texts of Greek and Latin authors relating to the Far East from the fourth century before Christ to the fourteenth of our era. Also Oriental geographical texts.

Cordier, Henri, on Marco Polo. See POLO, MARCO.

CORPUS SCRIPTORUM ECCLESIASTICORUM LATINORUM, Vienna, 1866ff. 65 vols. have appeared (1924).

Great collection of critical texts of the Church Fathers until the seventh century.

Cousin, G. Etudes de géographie ancienne, Paris and Nancy, 1906.

Chapter 38 is on the geography of the East in the writings of Henri de Valenciennes and Villehardouin.

Cumont, Franz. After Life in Roman Paganism, New Haven, 1922.

Cusa, Salvatore. Sulla denominazione dei venti e dei punti cardinali, e specialmente de Nord, Est, Sud, Ouest, in: Terzo Congresso Geografico Internazionale tenuto a Venezia dal 15 al 22 settembre 1881, vol. ii, Rome, 1884, pp. 375–415.

Dahlmann, Joseph. Die Thomas-Legende und die ältesten historischen Beziehungen des Christentums zum fernen Osten im Lichte der indischen Altertumskunde, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1912.

DANIEL OF MORLEY. De philosophia, or Liber de naturis inferiorum et superiorum, edited by K. Sudhoff in: Archiv für die Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und Technik, vol. viii, pts. 1–3, Leipzig, June, 1917, pp. 1–40.

See Birkenmajer, A.; Singer, Daniel of Morley, 1920.

DANTE. I. Tutte le opere, edited by Edward Moore, Oxford, 1894. A convenient edition of all the works. II. The Convivio [Convito] of Dante Alighieri, translated by P. H. Wicksteed, London, 1903. III. Dante, De vulgari eloquentia, translated by A. G. F. Howell, London, 1890. IV. The Divine Comedy. Among the numerous English translations note especially that of C. E. Norton, 3 vols., Boston, 1891–1892. V. Quaestio de aqua et terra [not certainly the work of Dante], edited by C. L. Shadwell, Oxford, 1909, with English translation. German translation by Josef Krejcik, Dantes Quaestio de aqua et terra, in: Kartographische und Schulgeographische Zeitschrift, vol. ix, Vienna, 1921, pp. 107–110, 136–140.

For further material on Dante’s cosmology and geography see Andriani, G.; Benini, R.; Boffito, Intorno alla “Quaestio de aqua et terra,” 1902–1903; Coli, E.; Moore, E.; Mori, La geogr., 1922; Schmidt, W.; and references in Krejcik, op. cit.

Daunou, P. C. F. Discours sur l’état des lettres au xiii^e siècle, Paris, 1860. Also in: Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. xvi, Paris, 1824, pp. 1–254.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us