path: root/78333-0.txt

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78333 ***




                        GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE
                          TIME OF THE CRUSADES




                     AMERICAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY

                         RESEARCH SERIES NO. 15

                        W. L. G. JOERG, _Editor_




           THE GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE TIME OF THE CRUSADES
  A Study in the History of Medieval Science and Tradition in Western
                                 Europe


                                   BY

                      JOHN KIRTLAND WRIGHT, Ph.D.
                Librarian, American Geographical Society

[Illustration: AMERICAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY OF NEW YORK · 1854 ·]

                     AMERICAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY
                        BROADWAY AT 156TH STREET
                                NEW YORK

                                  1925


                            COPYRIGHT, 1925
                                   BY
                   THE AMERICAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY
                              OF NEW YORK


                             RUMFORD PRESS
                             CONCORD, N. H.


                                   TO
                                K. M. W.




                                CONTENTS


 CHAPTER                                                            PAGE
      PREFACE                                                        xix
      INTRODUCTION                                                     1
         The Time of the Crusades                                      1
         Scope of the Term “Geographical Lore”                         1
         Origins of the Geographical Lore of the Time of the
           Crusades                                                    3
         Organization of the Present Work                              4

                                 PART I
      _Origins, Sources, and Place in the Classification of
        Knowledge of the Geographical Lore of the Time of the
        Crusades_
    I THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE ANCIENT WORLD                            9
         Sources                                                       9
            The Pythagoreans, Plato, and Aristotle                     9
            Roman Influence on Geography                              10
            Ptolemy                                                   10
            Latin Writers: Pliny, Solinus, Capella, Macrobius         11
         The History of the Universe                                  12
            Ancient Cosmogony                                         12
            Celestial Influences                                      12
            Cosmic Cycles: The Great Years                            13
            Geographic Application of the Theory of the Great Years   14
            Duration of the Great Years                               14
         Shape, Movements, and Size of the Earth                      15
            Sphericity of the Earth                                   15
            Immobility of the Earth                                   15
            Circumference of the Earth                                16
         The Distribution of Habitable Regions; Zones; the
           Distribution of Land and Water                             17
            Zones                                                     17
            Crates’ Theory of Four Land Masses                        18
            Extent of the “Oikoumene”                                 19
         Physical Geography                                           19
            Aristotle, Seneca, and Pliny                              19
            The Four Elements                                         20
            Meteorology                                               21
            Winds                                                     22
            Climatology                                               23
            The Water Element                                         24
            The Sea: Its Salinity, Depth, Currents, and Tides         25
            Subterranean Channels                                     27
            Rivers of the Underworld                                  28
            Origin of Rivers                                          29
            The Nile Flood                                            30
            The Lands                                                 31
            Earthquakes and Volcanoes                                 31
            Height of Mountains                                       32
         Mathematical Geography and Cartography                       33
            Mathematical Geography Largely Based on Itineraries       33
            Astronomical Determination of Latitude                    34
            Astronomical Determination of Longitude                   34
            Cartography                                               35
         The Expansion of Regional Knowledge                          36
            Expansion of Greek Regional Knowledge                     37
            Geography at Alexandria                                   38
            Hellenistic Regional Knowledge                            39
            Regional Knowledge of Mela and Pliny                      40
            The “Periplus of the Erythraean Sea”                      40
            Limits of Ancient Regional Knowledge on the South and
              East                                                    41
   II THE CONTRIBUTION OF WESTERN CHRISTENDOM BEFORE 1100 A. D.       43
         Introduction                                                 43
            Scriptural Influence on Early Medieval Geography          43
            Ignorance of the Best Work of Antiquity                   43
            Scientific Stagnation During the Early Middle Ages        44
         Sources                                                      45
            The Bible                                                 45
            Writings of the Church Fathers                            46
            Interpretation of the Bible                               46
            Classical Influences                                      47
            Encyclopedic Compilations                                 47
            Miscellaneous Geographical Writings                       48
            Legends                                                   49
            Books of Travel and Description                           50
         The History of the Universe                                  51
            Christianity Opposed to Belief in an Eternal Universe     51
            The Creation                                              52
         Shape and Size of the Earth                                  53
            Early Christian Belief in a Flat Earth                    53
            Early Christian Belief in a Spherical Earth               54
            Size of the Earth                                         54
         Zones and the Antipodes                                      55
            Zones                                                     55
            The Antipodes                                             55
         Physical Geography                                           57
            Meteorology                                               57
            The Waters Above the Firmament                            58
            The Congregation of the Waters                            59
            The Nile Flood                                            60
            The Earth Upon the Waters                                 61
            The Sea                                                   61
            The Lands                                                 62
         The Medieval Attitude Towards Landscape and Scenery Before
           1100 A. D.                                                 63
            Esthetic Appreciation of Nature in Antiquity              63
            Early Christian Attitude Towards Nature                   64
            Revival of Esthetic Feeling in the Middle Ages            64
         Mathematical Geography and Cartography                       65
            Mathematical Geography                                    65
            Maps                                                      65
               Macrobian Maps                                         66
               T-O Maps                                               66
               Sallust Maps                                           68
               Beatus Maps                                            68
         Regional Geography                                           70
            Limited Geographical Horizon in the Early Middle Ages     70
            Medieval Conception of the Known World                    71
            Paradise                                                  71
            Rivers of Paradise                                        72
            Asia                                                      72
               Gog and Magog                                          72
               Romance of Alexander the Great                         73
               St. Thomas in India                                    74
            Africa                                                    74
            Europe                                                    74
            Explorations to the North                                 75
            The Atlantic                                              75
            America Reached by the Norsemen                           76
  III THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MOSLEMS                                 77
         Sources                                                      77
            Influence of Aristotle                                    77
            Influence of Ptolemy’s “Almagest”                         78
            Influence of Ptolemy’s “Geography”                        78
            Az-Zarqalī and the “Toledo Tables”                        79
            Geography in Sicily                                       79
            Edrisi                                                    80
            Influence of Sicilo-Moslem Geography                      81
            Oriental Ideas Transmitted to the West                    82
         Astronomical Geography; Theories of the Tides                82
            The Great Years                                           82
            Cosmic Cycles and Geographical Changes                    83
            Theories of the Tides                                     84
            Measurement of a Terrestrial Degree                       85
            Geographical Positions                                    85
            Arin                                                      86
         Arabic Exploration and Travel                                87
   IV THE SOURCES FOR THE PERIOD 1100–1250 A. D.                      88
         Introduction                                                 88
         Theological and Philosophical Works                          89
            Theological Works                                         89
               Peter Abelard                                          89
               Hugh of St. Victor                                     90
               Hildegard of Bingen                                    90
               Peter Lombard and Peter Comestor                       91
            The School of Chartres: Its Intellectual Independence     91
               Bernard and Theodoric of Chartres                      91
               Adelard of Bath; Hermann the Dalmatian; Robert of
                 Retines                                              92
               Bernard Sylvester                                      93
               William of Conches                                     93
            Alexander Neckam                                          93
         Translations from the Arabic; Works Written under Arabic
           Influence; Aristotelianism and Its Opponents               95
            Adelard of Bath; Peter Alphonsi                           95
            John of Seville; Plato of Tivoli                          96
            “Marseilles Tables” and “Toledo Tables”                   96
            Robert of Retines; Hermann the Dalmatian; Daniel of
              Morley                                                  97
            Gerard of Cremona; John of Holywood (Sacrobosco)          97
            Aristotelianism Introduced Through Arabic Works           98
               Gerard of Cremona                                      99
               Michael Scot                                           99
               Aristotelianism in the Thirteenth Century             100
            Opponents of Aristotelianism                             101
               William of Auvergne                                   101
               Robert Grosseteste                                    101
            Encyclopedic Works                                       102
            “De Imagine Mundi”                                       103
            Lambert’s “Liber Floridus”; Guido’s Encyclopedia         103
            “Lucidarius”                                             104
            Gervase of Tilbury                                       104
            Jacques de Vitry                                         105
            “L’Image du Monde”                                       105
            “Konungs-Skuggsjá”                                       105
            Great Encyclopedias of the Thirteenth Century            106
            Dante                                                    106
         Histories, Chronicles, Sagas, Epic Poems                    107
            Otto of Freising                                         107
            Gunther of Pairis                                        108
            Walter of Châtillon; William the Breton                  108
            Historians and Histories of the Crusades                 109
            Scandinavian Historical Works                            110
            Latin Histories of the North                             111
         Legends                                                     113
            Romance of Alexander                                     113
            Prester John                                             114
            St. Brandan                                              115
         Pilgrim Narratives; Miscellaneous Records of Travel         115
            Christian Pilgrim Narratives                             115
            Letters of Travel                                        116
            Jewish Travelers                                         117
               Benjamin of Tudela                                    117
               Petachia of Ratisbon                                  118
         Topographical Works                                         118
            Godfrey of Viterbo                                       119
            Gervase of Canterbury                                    119
            Giraldus Cambrensis                                      119
         Maps                                                        121
            Zone Maps                                                121
            T-O and Sallust Maps                                     121
            Beatus Maps                                              122
            Maps of Lambert, Guido, Henry of Mayence, and Others     124
            Regional Maps                                            125
               Matthew Paris’ Maps of Britain                        126
    V THE PLACE OF GEOGRAPHY IN THE MEDIEVAL CLASSIFICATION OF
        KNOWLEDGE                                                    127
         Geography Included Under Geometry                           127
         Geography Included Under Astrology                          128
         Geography and the Aristotelian Division of Learning         129

                                 PART II
      _The Substance and Character of the Geographical Lore of the
        Time of the Crusades_
   VI COSMOGONY, COSMOLOGY, AND COSMOGRAPHY                          133
         General Character of the Cosmology and Natural Science of
           the Period                                                134
            The Chartres Group: Bernard Sylvester and Theodoric      134
            Adelard of Bath and William of Conches                   135
            Concept of Natural Laws                                  136
            The Orthodox Tendency                                    137
            Effects of Influx of Arabic Science                      138
         The Creation                                                138
            Problems                                                 139
            The Preëxistence of Matter                               139
               The Orthodox View                                     139
               A Rational View                                       141
            Processes of the Creation                                141
               Theodoric of Chartres’ Theory                         141
               William of Conches’ Theory                            142
            Function of Light in the Creation                        143
            The Nature of the Six Days                               144
            Eternity of the Universe                                 145
            Bernard Sylvester’s Account of the Creation              145
            The Icelandic Account                                    146
         Macrocosm and Microcosm                                     147
         Shape, Movements, and Size of the Earth                     150
            Sphericity of the Universe                               150
            Shape of the Earth                                       152
            Immobility of the Earth                                  153
            Size of the Earth                                        155
         Zones, the Antipodes, and “Climata”                         156
            Zones                                                    156
            Uninhabitability of Polar Caps and Equatorial Zone       157
            Austral Continent and Antipodal Regions                  157
            The Cratesian Theory                                     158
            Persistence of Belief That Antipodal Regions Were
              Inhabited                                              159
            Manegold’s Arguments Against This Doctrine               161
            Habitability of the Equatorial Region                    162
            Grosseteste on the Habitable Parts of the Earth          163
               The Equatorial Zone                                   163
               The Southern Hemisphere                               164
               The Polar Regions                                     165
  VII THE ATMOSPHERE                                                 166
         Meteorology                                                 166
            Composition of the Atmosphere                            166
            Temperature                                              167
            Upper Levels of the Atmosphere                           167
            Clouds                                                   168
            Precipitation                                            169
            Floods; The Deluge                                       170
            Winds                                                    171
               Atmospheric Circulation                               172
               Names of the Winds                                    173
               Qualities of the Winds                                174
               Local Winds                                           175
         Climatology                                                 175
            Hot and Cold Climates                                    176
            Distribution of Climates                                 177
            Climatic Differences Between East and West               177
            Topographic Influences Upon Climate                      177
               The Sea                                               177
               Mountains                                             178
            Influence of Climate on Man                              180
            Climate of Rome                                          180
 VIII THE WATERS                                                     182
         The Waters Above the Firmament                              182
            Rationalistic Beliefs                                    182
            Literal Beliefs                                          183
            Purpose of the Waters                                    184
         The Congregation of Waters                                  184
            Connection Between Seas and Rivers                       185
            The Earth Established on the Waters                      186
         The Oceans and Seas                                         187
            Relative Areas of Land and Sea                           187
            Explanation of Uniform Level of Sea Surface              188
            Salinity of the Sea                                      189
            Tides                                                    190
               Lunar Causation                                       190
               Terrestrial Causation                                 192
               Giraldus Cambrensis’ Tidal Studies                    194
            Other Marine Phenomena Noted by Giraldus                 196
            St. Brandan and the Spirit of the Sea                    197
            Bottom of the Sea                                        198
         The Waters of the Lands                                     199
            Ground Water                                             199
            The Sea As the Source of the Waters of the Land          200
            Effect of Land on Waters Which Spring From It            202
            Miraculous Wells and Springs; Geysers                    203
            The Fountain of Youth                                    204
            Rivers                                                   205
            The Nile Flood                                           206
            Lakes                                                    207
   IX THE LANDS                                                      210
         Classification of Land Areas                                210
            Quantitative and Qualitative Subdivisions                210
            Giraldus Cambrensis’ Comparison of East and West         211
         Mountains                                                   212
            Origin of Mountains                                      213
            Their Size and Height                                    214
            Miraculous Mountains                                     214
            Accurate Observation of Orographic Phenomena             215
            Appreciation of the Beauty of Mountains                  215
            Religious Attitude Towards Mountains                     216
            Normal Medieval Feeling About Mountains                  217
            Glaciers                                                 219
         Volcanoes and Earthquakes                                   220
            Visits to Volcanoes                                      220
            Volcanic Region of Southern Italy and Sicily             220
               Michael Scot on the Eolian Isles and Etna             222
            Volcanoes of Iceland                                     222
            St. Brandan’s Visits to Volcanic Isles                   224
            Volcanoes As Gates of Hell                               225
            Causes of Vulcanism                                      225
            Earthquakes                                              227
         Deserts                                                     228
         Islands                                                     229
            Origins                                                  229
            Miraculous Islands                                       229
            Islands of St. Brandan                                   230
         Influences of Geographical Environment                      231
            On Plant and Animal Life                                 231
            On Man                                                   232
               Topography As a Natural Defense                       233
               Theory of the Westward Flow of Civilization           233
         Feeling for Landscape and Scenery                           235
            Spiritual Feeling for Nature                             235
            Esthetic Love of Nature                                  237
            Practical Interest in Countrysides                       238
            Giraldus Cambrensis’ Eye for Local Topography            240
    X THE ASTRONOMICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE KNOWN WORLD                  241
         Phenomena Resulting From Differences in Latitude            241
         “Climata”                                                   242
         Geographical Coördinates                                    243
         Methods of Finding Latitude and Longitude                   244
   XI CARTOGRAPHY                                                    247
         Inaccuracy                                                  247
            Accuracy Not Deemed Necessary                            248
            Exaggeration                                             249
            Distortion                                               249
         Technique                                                   250
            Conventions                                              251
            Symbols and Legends                                      252
         Summary                                                     254
  XII REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY                                             255
         General Character of Regional Knowledge of the Period       255
            Geography of Tradition and Geography of Observation      255
            Gradations of Accuracy of Knowledge                      256
         The “Oikoumene” As a Whole                                  257
            The “Oikoumene” Divided into Three Parts                 258
         The Center of the “Oikoumene”                               259
            Jerusalem As the Center                                  259
            The Exact Position of the Earth’s Center                 260
         The Terrestrial Paradise                                    261
            Paradise in the East                                     261
            Journeys to Paradise                                     263
            The Rivers of Paradise                                   264
         Asia                                                        265
            The Opening of Asia in the Thirteenth Century            266
            The Mongol Conquests                                     266
            Thirteenth-Century Journeys                              269
            The Great Mountain System of Asia                        270
            The Land of the “Seres”                                  271
            China                                                    271
            India                                                    272
               Subdivisions                                          272
               Facts Known About India                               273
               Marvels of India                                      274
               Legend of St. Thomas in India                         275
               Visit of Patriarch John of India to Rome              278
         Indian Ocean                                                279
            Islands of the Indian Ocean                              280
            Al-Battānī on the Indian Ocean                           280
         Scythia and Central Asia                                    281
            Benjamin of Tudela on Central Asia                       282
            Prester John                                             283
               Origins of the Legend                                 283
               Prester John’s Kingdom As Described in His “Letter”   285
               Alliance With Prester John Desired                    286
            Gog and Magog                                            287
            Western Asia                                             288
               Mesopotamia                                           289
               Benjamin of Tudela on Baghdad                         289
               Benjamin of Tudela on Arabia                          291
               Syria and Palestine                                   292
               Geographical Knowledge Enlarged by the Crusades       292
               Occidental Population of the Levant                   294
               European Occupation of Syria                          294
               Asia Minor                                            295
               Western Asia As Described by the Crusaders            296
         Africa                                                      298
            Egypt As Part of Asia                                    298
            Descriptions of Egypt                                    299
            Africa West of Egypt                                     300
            Ethiopia                                                 302
            Sources of the Nile                                      304
            Traditional View of Central Africa                       306
         The Mediterranean Sea                                       307
            The Name “Mediterranean”                                 307
            The Mediterranean During the Crusades                    307
            Instructions for Navigation in the Mediterranean         308
            Islands of the Mediterranean                             309
               Sicily                                                311
         Europe                                                      312
            Northeastern Europe                                      312
            Russia                                                   312
            Poland                                                   313
            Slavic Europe As Described by Benjamin of Tudela and
              Petachia of Ratisbon                                   314
            Hungary                                                  314
            Balkan Peninsula                                         316
               Constantinople                                        318
            Italy                                                    319
               Rome                                                  321
               Antiquities                                           321
            Spain                                                    322
            The Alps                                                 323
            Use of Terms “Transalpine” and “Cisalpine”               324
            “Alemannia”                                              325
            Germany                                                  325
            Baltic Regions                                           327
            Scandinavia                                              329
            France                                                   331
               Paris                                                 331
               Alsace                                                332
               Southern France                                       333
         Islands of the Atlantic Ocean                               334
            British Isles                                            335
               Cities of Britain                                     336
               Giraldus Cambrensis on Ireland and Wales              337
               Ireland                                               337
               Wales                                                 340
               William Fitzstephen on London                         341
               Matthew Paris’ Maps of Britain                        342
               Orkneys and Shetlands                                 345
            Iceland and Thule                                        345
               Iceland in Icelandic Literature                       346
            Greenland                                                347
            Polar Seas                                               348
            Wineland the Good                                        349
            Fabulous Isles                                           350
               St. Brandan’s Isles                                   351
 XIII CONCLUSION                                                     353
         The Outstanding Elements of the Geographical Lore of the
           Time of the Crusades                                      353
         Character of the Geographical Lore of the Time of the
           Crusades                                                  358
 ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
      NOTES TO CHAPTER I                                             365
      NOTES TO CHAPTER II                                            378
      NOTES TO CHAPTER III                                           392
      NOTES TO CHAPTER IV                                            396
      NOTES TO CHAPTER V                                             416
      NOTES TO CHAPTER VI                                            417
      NOTES TO CHAPTER VII                                           430
      NOTES TO CHAPTER VIII                                          435
      NOTES TO CHAPTER IX                                            445
      NOTES TO CHAPTER X                                             453
      NOTES TO CHAPTER XI                                            458
      NOTES TO CHAPTER XII                                           459

      BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE                                           491
      BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                   503

      INDEX                                                          547




                         LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS


 FIG.                                                               PAGE
    1 Types of T-O and Sallust maps                                   67
    2 St. Sever Beatus map                                            69
    3 Zone map in Lambert of St. Omer’s _Liber floridus_             122
    4 Osma Beatus map                                                123
    5 The macrocosm, the microcosm, and the winds from Hildegard
        of Bingen’s _Liber divinorum operum_                         148
    6 Sketch map of the Mediterranean region and the Near East
        plotted from the geographical positions in the
        _Marseilles Tables_, with inset of Henry of Mayence’s
        map                                                          245
    7 Plan of Jerusalem from the anonymous _Gesta Francorum
        Ierusalem expugnantium_                                      250
    8 Two sections from the Hereford map to illustrate the
        marvels of India                                         276–277
    9 Matthew Paris’ map of Britain                                  343
   10 Diagram to illustrate John of Holywood’s reasoning that
        the earth is in the center of the universe                   422
   11 Comparative diagram of certain parallels of latitude and
        of the _climata_ according to various ancient and
        medieval geographers                                     454–455
   12 Map showing the relative positions of certain points in
        Europe as indicated in astronomical tables of the
        twelfth and early thirteenth centuries                       457




                                PREFACE


When viewed historically, geographical concepts are seen to have come
from an immense variety of sources. They have sprung partly from
activities that cause men to travel over the surface of the earth: war,
commerce, pilgrimage, diplomacy, pleasure. They have also sprung from
the accumulated learning and lore of preceding ages and to no small
extent from unfettered flights of the imagination. The history of
geography, therefore, leads its students into many fields, affording
them a key by means of which they may gain a sounder understanding of
the extensive ranges of human activity and of the evolution of important
phases of intellectual life.

This book is an attempt to illustrate and trace the origins of the most
characteristic geographical ideas current in Western Europe at the
height of the Middle Ages. Historians of geography have tended to
neglect this period partly because of the dramatic appeal of the great
Age of Discovery which was immediately to follow. It should be
remembered, however, that, small as the known world was during the
Middle Ages and naïve as may have been men’s conceptions of it, medieval
learning was none the less the central element in the scholarly
background of the Age of Discovery. The Renaissance brought no sudden
and complete emancipation from old modes of thought. While medieval
science persisted and some of its errors may have restricted subsequent
progress, on the whole the positive achievements of the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries would have been impossible had it not been for the
enlightenment transferred from the centuries that went before.

C. R. Beazley in the second volume of his great work, _The Dawn of
Modern Geography_ (1901), adequately treats of the travels and
explorations of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, but to the
more theoretical aspects of geographical knowledge in this age he gives
but meager space. Karl Kretschmer in a monograph, _Die physische
Erdkunde im christlichen Mittelalter_ (1889), deals systematically with
the physical geography of the entire Middle Ages but necessarily slights
or wholly neglects many of the more interesting writings of the century
and a half to which the present book is devoted. Other, lesser studies
of the geographical conceptions of this period have to do exclusively
with points of detail. The present writer ventures to hope, therefore,
that there is place for a book in which the geographical lore of the
time of the Crusades is discussed with greater fullness and at the same
time with an orientation differing in many particulars from that of any
work hitherto devoted to the subject.

Except as regards a few minor points (especially in Chapter X) he makes
no claim to having based his work upon hitherto unpublished manuscript
sources. The main part of the study, however (that dealing with the time
of the Crusades, Chapters IV-XIII), is founded essentially upon printed
editions of the primary sources for the history of civilization in the
period. The first three chapters, on the other hand, relating as they do
to the background of medieval geography and covering an enormous field,
of necessity have to a large degree been written with the aid of the
secondary works of modern scholars.

The volume is an enlargement of a thesis submitted in 1922 in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in history at Harvard University. Some of the research was pursued in
Europe in 1919–1920, during which academic year the writer held the
Woodbury Lowery Fellowship from Harvard. Subsequently the American
Geographical Society has generously permitted him, while acting as
Librarian of the Society, to devote much time to the revision of the
manuscript.

The writer owes a special debt of gratitude to Professor C. H. Haskins,
largely as a result of whose advice the particular period dealt with was
selected. Helpful suggestions and the occasional receipt from Professor
Haskins of a photograph or transcript of a manuscript bearing upon an
apposite topic have been a constant stimulus. Useful suggestions have
also been made by Professor R. P. Blake of Harvard and by Monsieur
Charles de La Roncière of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. Dr.
Charles Singer of the University of London courteously permitted the use
of Plate VIII from his _Scientific Views and Visions of St. Hildegard_
(1917) as a basis for Figure 5 of the present volume. The writer is
indebted to Mr. W. L. G. Joerg, the editor, from whose editorial skill,
experience, and tireless care the book has greatly profited. He also
wishes to thank Mr. George W. Robinson, Secretary of the Harvard
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Miss Genevieve R. Fallon, formerly
of Radcliffe College, and Mr. Arthur A. Brooks and members of the
library staff of the American Geographical Society for their painstaking
aid with manuscript and proof.

_New York, October 7, 1924._




                              INTRODUCTION


                        THE TIME OF THE CRUSADES

The time of the Crusades, like all great constructive epochs in the
history of civilization, was an age of contrasts. A succession of crises
marked the progress of conflict between the ideals of Papacy and of
Empire. The feudalism of an earlier day was giving place in Western
Europe to centralized monarchy, in Italy to the growth of city states.
Though faith swayed the masses of men to the undertaking of immense
coöperative enterprises—cathedral building and crusades—the time, none
the less, was one of questioning and doubt: faith sometimes gave place
to heresy hunting. Keener intellects were not afraid to probe deep at
the very foundations of established theological doctrine. A profound and
widespread enthusiasm for scholarship expressed itself in many forms.
The writings of older authorities were ransacked for the wisdom which
they contained, and from them erudite and forbidding tomes were
compiled. But wandering students and poets were abroad who hated the
musty learning of the monastic cell and frankly rejoiced in the beauty
of the world around them. For some time historians have been in the
habit of speaking of a “twelfth-century renaissance.” This expression is
not wholly apt if used in a narrow sense to imply merely a rebirth of
interest in the Greek and Latin classics. If taken to mean a re-stirring
of the vital forces of civilization, the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries were an age of renaissance indeed.

The purpose of this book is to illustrate a limited aspect of the
intellectual activity of the time of the Crusades, but an aspect that is
sufficiently broad to reveal to us something of the contrasting forces
of this age.


                 SCOPE OF THE TERM “GEOGRAPHICAL LORE”

By “geographical lore” we mean what was known, believed, and felt about
the origins, present condition, and distribution of the geographical
elements of the earth. This covers a wider field than most definitions
of geography. It comprises theories of the creation of the earth, of its
size, shape, and movements, and of its relations to the heavenly bodies;
of the zones of its atmosphere and the varied physiographic features of
air, water, and land; finally, it comprises theories of the regions of
the earth’s surface. Because many of these theories were false they are
no less deserving of attention. The errors of an age are as
characteristic as the accurate knowledge which it possesses—and often
more so. Moreover, in addition to formulated beliefs, whether true or
false, our definition of geographical lore covers man’s spiritual and
esthetic attitude toward the various geographical facts, as
revealed—often unconsciously—in descriptions of regions or of
landscapes.

The historian of geology or the theologian may complain that we trespass
on their domains in discussing theories of the Creation in a book
devoted to the history of geography. Yet this is justifiable if we hold
with most modern geographers that some explanation of the immediate
causes of existing terrestrial conditions is an essential part of
geography. These causes, it was the opinion of medieval thinkers, were
to be sought for in the processes of the Creation. No man had the
vaguest conception of the countless eons that have elapsed during which
air, sea, and land have been in evolution. The good Christian thought
that the world was made by God in the course of the six days of Genesis
and that it then assumed practically the identical geographical
appearance it has preserved ever since. In the Middle Ages geology,
geography, and theology were inextricably interwoven.

Then again, the geographical lore of the Middle Ages involves a wider
range of subjects in space, as well as in time, than is now included in
geography. If medieval man had no knowledge of the age of the earth, he
also had but the feeblest understanding of the immensity of the
universe. To him, earth, stellar bodies, and celestial spheres were all
part of a unified system of which the earth formed the core and most
important member. Cosmology, astronomy, astrology, theology all dealt
with this unified, geocentric, cosmic system; the interrelations between
them were immediate and intimate. We cannot avoid some discussion of the
matters in which these allied sciences bore directly on geography.


      ORIGINS OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE TIME OF THE CRUSADES

Whence came the geographical lore of the time of the Crusades?

Some of it came from books of earlier ages, some of it from contemporary
observation. A sharp distinction may be made between the geography of
the scholar and churchman, drawn largely from antiquity, and the
geography of the merchant, soldier, and pilgrim, who learned of the
world by travel and exploration. It was exceptional when the philosopher
or theologian incorporated in his book the reports of recent travels.
Indeed, we are almost startled to come across a bit of “up-to-date”
geography in the philosophical or theological treatises. Even the
histories and chronicles of contemporary events, though perforce
containing more new geography than works of deeper learning, tended to
appeal to ancient authorities in explaining the course of rivers or the
relation of provinces or mountain chains to each other.

Any consideration of the state of medieval geography inevitably
presupposes some acquaintance with the earlier accumulation of
geographical lore from which it borrowed.

This was derived for the most part from two fountainheads of original
observation and thought: (1) the writings of Greek historians and
philosophers and (2) the Bible. Greek geography was the main source
whence Latin writers of the Roman Empire and Moslems of the eighth,
ninth, and tenth centuries of our era found their inspiration and facts.
The Bible, as interpreted in the exegetical works of the Church Fathers,
stimulated thought on geographical problems. The scholar of our period
had at his disposal many Latin writings, both classical and patristic,
and a somewhat more limited number of Arabic books and translations from
the Arabic.


                    ORGANIZATION OF THE PRESENT WORK

The aim of the first three chapters of our study is to give an estimate
in broad outline of the contributions of classical, patristic, and
Oriental geography to the medieval West. The purpose is to show the kind
of geographical ideas which a reader of the twelfth or thirteenth
century might have gathered from older works in the libraries and to
reveal something of the evolution of these ideas. No attempt is made to
discuss works not well known in the Occident. The writings of famous
Greek geographers like Herodotus, Pausanias, Strabo, Eratosthenes,
Hipparchus, and Ptolemy receive only scant attention, and their contents
are noted only in so far as they became familiar to Western Christendom
through Latin media. Similarly the Greek Fathers of the Church and most
of the more important Moslem geographers are overlooked because they
exerted almost no influence on Western thought. Nor within the period
itself that forms the subject of our investigation is much space given
to writers like the Moslem Edrisi or the Greek Michael Psellos, whose
researches did not contribute materially to the formation of Western
science.

After a fourth chapter, on the literary and cartographic sources which
date from the time of the Crusades and upon which our estimate of the
geographical lore of this age is based, and a fifth, on the place of
geography in the medieval scheme of learning, there follows the main
part of this book. The attempt is here made to illustrate from
representative sources geographical lore of all kinds, whether original
or borrowed, to emphasize evidences of originality where they are
apparent, and to trace a few significant borrowed theories to their
origins. Though the period under consideration lasted a century and a
half, there was not much change during this time in the quantity of
geographical information available or in the quality of geographical
thinking. Hence it will be more convenient and enlightening to adopt a
topical and regional arrangement for the main portion of our treatment
than to try to arrange the material chronologically.

By no means all the geographical knowledge and thought of the Crusading
age could be stated and discussed in a volume of even many times the
size of this. It is the writer’s hope that the materials selected are
sufficiently diverse to give a rounded and just, though it be
necessarily far from complete, understanding of the geographical lore of
a significant period in the history of science and of civilization.




                                 PART I
 ORIGINS, SOURCES, AND PLACE IN THE CLASSIFICATION OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE
             GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE TIME OF THE CRUSADES




                               CHAPTER I
                 THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE ANCIENT WORLD


                               _SOURCES_


                 THE PYTHAGOREANS, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE

The earliest writers who dealt with geographical matters in a more or
less scientific spirit were the Greeks of Ionia and the Pythagorean
philosophers of Magna Graecia. Though their theories exerted no direct
influence on the formation of medieval geography, they should not be
entirely overlooked. Ionic geography gave many ideas to the later
Greeks; Pythagorean thought brought to bear a strong influence on the
Platonic cosmology, which reached the Middle Ages through the Latin
translation of Plato’s _Timaeus_ made by Chalcidius early in the fifth
century after Christ, and through the Platonists Martianus Capella and
Macrobius. Until the middle of the twelfth century Plato, of all
philosophers, held the strongest grip on medieval thought; after that
time the influence of Aristotle became more potent in the framing of the
scholastic conception of the universe. We must regard Plato and, even
more, Aristotle as the indirect sources of most of the cosmological,
physiographic, and meteorological knowledge which, elaborated by later
writers of antiquity and by the Moslems, reached the Middle Ages at
second hand. Among the many writings of Aristotle those which contain
the most material of interest to the geographer are the _De caelo_ (Περὶ
οὐρανοῦ) and the _Meteorology_. The former, in four books, treats of the
properties of the heavenly bodies, of the elements, and of the earth.
Translations of the _De caelo_ in the Middle Ages often went under the
title _De caelo et mundo_.[1][2] The _Meteorology_, besides a detailed
discussion of the phenomena of the atmosphere, includes many
speculations on physical geography. Theories of cosmology also found
expression in the _Physics_ and _De generatione et corruptione_.

Footnote 1:

  The notes will be found at the back of the book grouped by chapters
  and consecutively numbered within each chapter.

The scientific genius of the Alexandrian Greeks of the Hellenistic
period showed itself in the work of men like Eratosthenes and
Hipparchus. By them the mathematical and astronomical aspects of
geography were developed with accuracy; but unfortunately, owing to the
almost universal ignorance of Greek in the West, the products of their
genius had little part in the molding of medieval theories.


                      ROMAN INFLUENCE ON GEOGRAPHY

The Roman conquests tended to discredit scientific investigations and to
bring into favor works of a descriptive nature which would appeal to the
military chief, the provincial governor, or man of the world—to the
practical rather than speculative type of mind. Polybius regarded
geography as an important auxiliary science to politics and history. The
geographical portions of his history treat of the countries of the known
world, their peoples and customs; he is not concerned with the size and
shape of the earth nor with the determination of latitudes and
longitudes. Strabo, writing at the time of Augustus, represents the
culmination of the Polybian method; but his great and comprehensive
work, though of first importance in the history of ancient geography,
was not read at the time of the Crusades.


                                PTOLEMY

The Greek, or more purely scientific, attitude, however, did not
completely succumb. Posidonius[3] in the first century before Christ
reverted to the method of Eratosthenes; and with Marinus of Tyre and
Claudius Ptolemy, in the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian, there came a
revival of mathematical geography which almost, if not quite, equaled
the high level reached by the Alexandrians[4]. Ptolemy was the author of
two works, both of which were destined profoundly to modify the
development of science in later ages. These were the _Mathematical
Composition_ (or _Almagest_, as the Arabs called it), a treatise on
astronomy, knowledge of which reached the medieval West through Moslem
channels; and the _Geography_, a work which remained virtually unknown
in Europe until the fifteenth century.


           LATIN WRITERS: PLINY, SOLINUS, CAPELLA, MACROBIUS

Though the most fertile investigations were made by Greeks, Latin
writers naturally influenced more directly medieval thought in the West.
Of those who dealt with geographic matters in the strictly classical
period Pliny the Elder (23–79 A. D.) and Seneca (3 B. C.-65 A. D.) were
the most influential. The _Historia naturalis_ of Pliny, an ill-digested
compilation of information of all sorts, contained books on geography
that were destined to furnish the larger part of the lettered man’s
geographical ideas during many centuries.[5] Pliny’s work was not merely
extensively read but was used and plagiarized by other writers of
possibly greater popularity. The most significant of these was
Solinus,[6] a compiler of fables in the third century after Christ,
whose _Collectanea rerum memorabilium_ consists almost entirely of
borrowings from Pliny or from a book from which Pliny drew.[7] The
geographical information in Isidore’s _Etymologiae_ is largely made up
of quotations and paraphrases from Solinus. Seneca’s _Quaestiones
naturales_[8] was also widely read and formed the source of the bulk of
the meteorological lore of the Middle Ages.

Two Latin writers of the late Empire also contributed materially to the
evolution of geographical knowledge, Martianus Capella (fourth or fifth
century) and Macrobius (fifth century). Capella’s encyclopedic _De
nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii_ is an elaborate commentary on and
exposition of the seven arts; the book dealing with geometry gives the
author an opportunity of presenting a résumé of geography, more
particularly in its mathematical aspects.[9] That Martianus Capella’s
treatise enjoyed an immense popularity in the medieval period is
indicated by the quantity of manuscripts extant and by the frequency
with which we find it listed in the medieval library catalogues[10] that
have been preserved. The general sketch of the distribution of land and
water on the surface of the globe contained in Macrobius’ commentary on
the _Somnium Scipionis_[11] of Cicero was often quoted at later periods
and formed the basis for some of the extremely crude maps of the world
used in the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries.

In the remainder of the present chapter a very general review will be
given of the more important geographic ideas borrowed by the Western
world in these centuries from Aristotle, Pliny, Solinus, Seneca,
Martianus Capella, Macrobius, and some others, and an attempt will be
made to indicate the relationship between the growth of these ideas and
the broader evolution of ancient geography as a whole.


                     _THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE_


                           ANCIENT COSMOGONY

Though it is not now regarded as lying strictly within the field of
geography, the history of the evolution of theories about the origin of
the earth is so closely allied to the history of geography that the two
cannot well be dissociated. A marked antagonism inevitably arose between
the usual Greek view, which regarded matter as eternal, and the
Christian view, which was based on the first chapter of Genesis and
conceived of the universe as created at a definite point in time or
concurrently with time. The men of the Middle Ages tended to adhere
strictly to the Christian opinion, for to have done otherwise would have
been heretical. Nevertheless, the ancient theory was well known to
Christians and exerted in its various forms no small influence on the
development of certain phases of Christian thought.


                          CELESTIAL INFLUENCES

It was a deeply rooted belief of many classical thinkers that the events
and conditions on this world and on all the regions below the sphere of
the moon’s orbit are regulated by the heavenly bodies. Aristotle and his
followers taught that the heavenly bodies themselves are made of an
imperishable and incorruptible, almost divine, fifth element, ether,
which distinguishes them from the four corruptible elements (fire, air,
water, and earth) that constitute the immediate world of our senses.[12]
By virtue of this semi-divine quality, it was argued, the sun, planets,
and stars exert an all-powerful control over the earth around which they
revolve—an absolutely determining control over all events both great and
small.[13] From this fatalistic belief sprang the science of astrology,
a science which throughout antiquity was held in equal esteem with
astronomy.

The study of the movements of the celestial bodies revealed the fact
that at some time in the distant future, sun, planets, and stars will
bear exactly the same relative position one to another that they do at
the present moment. Consequently, it was inferred that the influence
exerted by them on the sublunar regions will at that time be exactly the
same as it now is, and all the phenomena now apparent on the earth’s
surface will be exactly repeated. They will be repeated not only once
but an infinite number of times at periodic intervals in the future;
similarly they have been repeated throughout infinite cycles in the
past.[14]


                     COSMIC CYCLES: THE GREAT YEARS

This idea of cosmic cycles, or Great Years, appears to have originated
in the Orient, possibly with the Chaldeans.[15] It was firmly
established among the Ionian Greeks[16] and Pythagoreans,[17] from whom
Plato adopted it. Many and various opinions prevailed about the violence
and character of the changes produced by the celestial cycles. The
Chaldeans had thought that whenever all the planets come into
conjunction on one straight line in the sign of the zodiac Cancer, the
entire universe is destroyed by fire but destroyed only to be born
again; similarly the world is destroyed by water when the same
phenomenon occurs in Capricorn.[18] The theory of a complete and
universal birth and rebirth (_palingenesis_) was held by some of the
Greek philosophers.[19] Plato and Aristotle, however, seem to have
restricted the destructive effects of the celestial influence to the
sublunar sphere and maintained that the realms above the moon were
eternal.[20] On the whole, belief in periodically recurrent destructions
of the earth by water was more widespread and was given greater
definition than belief in corresponding destructions by fire.[21] The
main reason for this is probably to be looked for in the dissemination
among nearly all peoples of legends of a great flood, but it also in no
small measure may be attributed to rudimentary geological observations
(notably of the presence of shells on high ground) which showed that
portions of the earth’s surface had at one time lain beneath the
waters.[22]


        GEOGRAPHIC APPLICATION OF THE THEORY OF THE GREAT YEARS

The theory of the Great Years was invoked to explain changes in
geographic and climatic conditions on the earth’s surface.[23] When the
various planets and stars bear a certain relation to one another, a
period of dryness and heat, or a Great Summer, is experienced;
conversely, when other stellar relationships prevail, there is a period
of cold and wetness, or a Great Winter. Even land and sea gradually
change places under stellar control. Certain parts of the land,
Aristotle observed, had once been covered by the sea, and what is now
sea had once been land: like plants and animals, land and sea grow to
maturity and old age. If the causes adduced for these changes were not
so utterly different from those that are now accepted, we might almost
be tempted to think that Aristotle had some conception of climatic
cycles and cycles of erosion.

After Plato and Aristotle, as before them, the doctrine of the Great
Years, though by no means universal, was very popular in antiquity.[24]
The Stoics adopted it in its more extreme form involving successive
burnings and liquefactions of the universe.[25] It entered into
Neoplatonism and was ultimately taken over by the Jews. It seems to have
penetrated to India, where the Greek elaboration of the theory gave
precision to ideas that were probably already in existence there. The
Indian belief in the recurrent reincarnations of Brahma was brought into
connection with Hellenic calculations of the duration of the Great
Years.[26] From the Hindus and from the Greeks the conception was
transferred to the Arabs and by them to the knowledge of the Latin West.


                      DURATION OF THE GREAT YEARS

Numerous endeavors were made in antiquity to calculate the length of a
Great Year.[27] The figure that was adopted by the Arabs and passed on
to the Christian world originated in Hipparchus’ discovery of the
precession of the equinoxes, or apparent gradual revolution of the fixed
stars around the pole of the ecliptic.[28] Ptolemy calculated that the
period of this revolution was 36,000 years,[29] a figure which became
known to the Hindus and Arabs and ultimately to medieval
Christendom.[30] The actual figure is approximately 25,800 years.


               _SHAPE, MOVEMENTS, AND SIZE OF THE EARTH_


                        SPHERICITY OF THE EARTH

Nearly all scholars of antiquity after the fifth century before Christ
thought that the earth was a globe.[31] The earlier opinion of a
disk-shaped earth resting upon the waters, which appears to have been
held by Anaximander (although some students have thought that he, too,
believed in a spherical earth [32]), was discarded by the Pythagoreans
and Plato, and after their time no serious thinkers questioned the
theory of sphericity. The Pythagoreans based their opinion on
speculative and philosophical grounds rather than on physical and
experimental proofs; they thought that since the sphere is the most
perfect mathematical form, the earth must therefore be a sphere. The
whole tendency of Aristotle’s thought, less speculative and less
hypothetical than Plato’s,[33] led him to look for proofs of
sphericity,[34] and these he enunciated with great emphasis.
Cleomedes,[35] Pliny,[36] Ptolemy,[37] Martianus Capella,[38] and other
ancient writers likewise adduced more or less convincing proofs, which
were well known and often cited in the medieval period.


                        IMMOBILITY OF THE EARTH

Though the learned men of the ancient world were almost universally
agreed that the earth is a globe, they were not unanimous in the belief
that it stands immovable in the center of the universe; yet the various
theories which diverged from this orthodox view had no place in the
development of medieval cosmology until long after our period.[39]
Certain among the Pythagoreans maintained that there is a fire in the
heart of the earth.[40] Plato said that the center of the earth, which
stands immobile[41] in the center of the universe, is the seat, not of a
fire, but of the World Soul.[42] Through its own internal movement the
World Soul causes the movement of the universe as a whole. Belief in the
World Soul of Plato was extraordinarily tenacious, and it emerges in the
writings of more than one Neoplatonist of the Middle Ages. Aristotle,
however, though he likewise held fast to the doctrine of the immobility
of the earth in the center of the universe, differed both from the
Pythagoreans and from Plato in refusing to believe that the center of
the universe could be the seat of an incorruptible being of the same
substance as the celestial bodies, be it fire or World Soul.
Aristotle,[43] Pliny,[44] and Ptolemy[45] also brought forward proofs of
varying validity in favor of the immobility of the earth.


                       CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE EARTH

Several figures were given by ancient authors for the circumference of
the earth. Aristotle stated it to be 400,000 stades;[46] Eratosthenes
determined it to be 252,000 stades according to the testimony of many
writers, including Pliny,[47] Vitruvius,[48] Martianus Capella,[49] and
Macrobius,[50] although Cleomedes, who gives the most circumstantial
account of Eratosthenes’ measurement, had said that the latter’s figure
was 250,000.[51] It is probable that Eratosthenes himself arbitrarily
added 2000 stades to his result in order to obtain a figure more easily
divisible.[52] Cleomedes quotes Posidonius as giving 240,000 stades,[53]
and Strabo says that the latter gave 180,000 stades.[54] The last number
was that adopted by Marinus of Tyre and by Ptolemy.

Though we have several distinct figures cited by ancient writers, these
assuredly do not indicate that as many distinct processes of measurement
were carried out. The circumference given by Aristotle was a mere
estimate; Eratosthenes’ result was the only one based on accurate
measurements and calculations;[55] the two figures given by Posidonius
may well have been derived from Eratosthenes, the larger arising from a
mistaken interpretation or intentional alteration of the latter’s
figure, and the smaller from the use of a longer stade.[56]

At all events, so far as we know, only one method was employed by the
Greeks for determining the size of the earth. This consisted of finding
on the same day of the year the meridian altitudes of the sun at two
places supposed to be on the same meridian of longitude, the distance
between which was known through itineraries. The angle between the two
meridian altitudes was then assumed to bear the same relation to the
circumference of the heavens as the distance between the two points of
observation bore to the circumference of the earth. Cleomedes[57] and
Martianus Capella[58] described how Eratosthenes carried out such
observations in Egypt.

The figure determined by Eratosthenes is surprisingly accurate. Whether
the stade used by him was 157.50[59] or 168[60] meters, as different
modern scholars contend, the circumference according to his estimate
would be 39,375 or 42,336 kilometers. In either case the error is seen
to be very slight, the true circumference of the earth being about
40,000 kilometers.


_THE DISTRIBUTION OF HABITABLE REGIONS; ZONES; THE DISTRIBUTION OF LAND
                               AND WATER_

We see, then, that the writers of antiquity whose opinions were destined
to mold the thought of the medieval period believed that the earth is a
sphere, immovably fixed in the center of the universe. We must now
examine their theories regarding the distribution of phenomena on the
surface of the globe and the interaction of these phenomena. Of prime
importance were their views concerning the distribution of habitable
areas of land, but these were so closely bound up with the theory of
climatic zones that it is absolutely necessary to understand what this
theory was before going further, even though the subject of zones might
more properly be included in the study of the atmosphere.


                                 ZONES

Parmenides may have been the first to conceive of zones upon the earth’s
surface corresponding to the zones into which the astronomers had
divided the heavens. Eratosthenes is said to have been the first to
place the theory of terrestrial zones upon a firmly scientific footing,
“by determining exactly upon the sphere the position of the fixed
circles which mark the limits of each zone” (Thalamas).[61] Ancient
geographers set the number of terrestrial zones at five, though they
differed as to the character of the climates within them. The general
opinion—one which was shared by Aristotle—was that the polar caps and
the equatorial regions were incapable of sustaining life, the first on
account of cold, the second on account of heat. Despite the fact that
the notion of the existence of a fiery belt between the tropics was
challenged by Polybius and Posidonius, who had heard reports from
expeditions in these regions, this notion persisted in the writings of
Martianus Capella, Macrobius, and many others and exerted an extremely
restrictive effect on the subsequent development of geographical
knowledge and enterprise.

The majority of the ancient writers whose works were read in Christendom
before 1300 also thought that the _oikoumene_, or portion of the earth
inhabited by men of our kind, is completely surrounded by an ocean. This
is a belief common to many early peoples.[62] In the Greek world we can
trace it back to the Homeric and Hesiodic Ocean Stream and to the
conceptions of early Ionian philosophers, who had gone so far as to
maintain that the earth had been created out of water,[63] or at least
that it was originally submerged beneath the ocean and had been brought
forth through the evaporation of the water by sun and stars.[64] The
theory of an encircling ocean was certainly held by Aristotle,
Pliny,[65] Seneca, Macrobius, and Martianus Capella.


                   CRATES’ THEORY OF FOUR LAND MASSES

The two last-named writers set forth an elaboration of an opinion first
held by the Pythagoreans and worked out in detail by Crates of Mallos in
the second century before Christ, which gained great ascendancy over the
minds of map makers and writers of the Middle Ages. They explained that
the _oikoumene_ is one of four similar inhabited bodies of land on the
surface of the globe. These bodies of land are separated from one
another by two oceans which encircle the earth, one running east and
west in the fiery equatorial regions, and one running north and south at
right angles to the equatorial ocean. This idea, which we shall call the
“Cratesian” theory after its foremost expositor, did not pass
unchallenged either in antiquity or in the Christian period. Involving
as it did the doctrine of the antipodes—people dwelling in quarters
absolutely inaccessible to men of our race, eternally cut off from our
_oikoumene_ by the fires of the equator and the terrors of the
meridional ocean—the Cratesian theory provoked the indignation of the
Fathers of the Church as containing the seeds of heresy.[66]


                       EXTENT OF THE “OIKOUMENE”

Aristotle, although he had derived from the Pythagoreans the theory of
an uninhabitable torrid belt,[67] believed in a greater southward
extension of our _oikoumene_ than would be possible in accordance with
the Cratesian theory. He harbored no idea of the existence of another
_oikoumene_ in the same latitude as ours. He says very clearly in the
_De caelo_[68] that there is no great distance between India and Spain
and hinted at the same opinion in the _Meteorology_.[69] Seneca[70] held
similar views.

The opposite theory—which has been called the continental as opposed to
the oceanic hypothesis[71]—that Africa and Asia extended unknown
distances south and east and that the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, like
the Caspian Sea, were enclosed basins—also had its adherents, among them
Herodotus, Hipparchus, and, most significant of all, Ptolemy. But
Ptolemy’s _Geography_, though its content was reflected in Arabic
notions of the earth’s surface, had almost no readers in the Christian
West until the fifteenth century, and the works of Herodotus and
Hipparchus were unknown.


                          _PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY_


                      ARISTOTLE, SENECA, AND PLINY

Among the writers of antiquity who dealt with physical geography only
three can be said to have influenced twelfth- and early
thirteenth-century thought to any marked degree. These were, first and
foremost, Aristotle, the substance of whose _De caelo_ and _Meteorology_
had reached the West before the year 1187 through the borrowings and
plagiarisms of later scholars and after that time could be read in
translations from the Greek and Arabic. In the second place, Seneca’s
_Quaestiones naturales_ was popular before the direct influence of the
_De caelo_ and _Meteorology_ began to be felt. In the third place, as we
have seen, the Elder Pliny’s _Historia naturalis_ was not only widely
read in the original, but also much that it contained was familiar
through the intermediary channels of Solinus, Isidore, Martianus
Capella, and others. Aristotle, however, was the fundamental authority,
for a large portion of the material in the books of the two Latin
authors came from his treatises.


                           THE FOUR ELEMENTS

Most ancient authorities believed that the universe is composed of four
elements, fire, air, water, and earth, arranged in concentric spheres.
Theoretically, according to this view, the sphere of water should
entirely enclose the earth. Practical observation shows that it covers
the lower levels of the earth’s surface only. How to reconcile the
theoretical conception with observed facts was a problem which, as we
shall see, greatly puzzled geographers and physicists during the later
Middle Ages.[72]

According to Aristotle the four elements, under the control of the
heavenly bodies and through their interaction upon each other, produce
all the physical phenomena of the atmosphere, sea, and earth.[73]
Working from this axiom, he, and all the ancient writers who dealt with
the subject, attempted to explain winds, tides, earthquakes, and other
occurrences of nature; but there was little agreement among them as to
the manner in which these interactions were manifested. Though there
were many theories, the actual matters under discussion were not very
numerous. Only the most striking and unusual happenings—such as tides,
earthquakes, and floods—attracted attention, and we find almost no trace
of a minute and careful observation or even of a superficial
understanding of those imperceptibly slow natural forces which modern
geology recognizes as having fashioned mountains, rivers, and seas.

A logical division of the subject matter of physical geography is into
three studies: that of the atmosphere, that of the waters, and that of
the earth. In each of these there is room for a great deal of
hairsplitting about what belongs to geography and what to geology,
geophysics, or meteorology. Physical geography merges into the other
natural sciences as human geography merges into history, politics,
economics, or ethnology. Even at the present day, when the often futile
attempt is being made to delimit the domains of the various sciences
ever more definitely, it is impossible to distinguish where one begins
and another ends, and it would be foolish to set up hard and fast
definitions in dealing with the lore of the ancient and medieval worlds,
when natural science was as yet inchoate.


                              METEOROLOGY

The ancients were more interested in meteorology[74] than they were in
oceanography and physiography (if such terms can be used for their naïve
attempts at explaining the features of ocean and land), perhaps because
the phenomena of the air make a deeper impression on men than the
phenomena of the sea and earth—tides, earthquakes, and volcanoes
excepted. Thunder and lightning, comets, rainbows, balls of fire were
looked upon as portents, and complex theories were created to explain
them and what they were supposed to foretell. But all this type of
meteorological lore, however interesting in itself, is, strictly
speaking, not geography. On the other hand, there are certain distinctly
geographical aspects of the study of the atmosphere as pursued by the
Greeks and Romans that deserve our attention.

The men of antiquity conceived of the interaction of atmosphere and
earth in two ways: effects produced by the land upon the atmosphere, and
effects produced by the winds upon the land. In connection with the
first, Seneca makes a remark which, when taken from its context, would
not be out of place in a modern manual of meteorology. He conceived the
lower portion of the atmosphere to be extremely variable and inconstant
as a result of the proximity of the earth. “The earth is a more
important cause than all others ... for the air’s changefulness and
inconstancy. The varying positions of the land, facing here this way and
there another way, are of great moment in determining the temperature of
the air.”[75] Nothing is truer than this, but the reasons that Seneca
gives for the influence of the atmosphere upon the land are not
satisfactory, being based to a large extent on the supposition that
winds are produced by vapors. Indeed, by the theory of vapors and
exhalations many ancient and medieval thinkers attempted to explain
nearly all the phenomena of the atmosphere and heavens as well.
Aristotle had pointed out that a dry and smokelike exhalation is caused
by the sun to rise from the earth’s surface through the air and even to
penetrate the zone of fire.[76] While near the earth this exhalation
takes the form of wind; when ignited at higher levels it becomes comets
and shooting stars. Besides this, Aristotle maintained that a damp and
watery vapor is also drawn into the atmosphere by the sun’s heat and
when cooled turns into cloud or falls in the form of rain and snow.[77]
These ideas of Aristotle became known to the Western world of the Middle
Ages with translations of the _De caelo_ and _Meteorology_ and found
their expression in the thirteenth-century writings of Albertus
Magnus.[78] Seneca, on the other hand, explained that the winds were air
in motion and that they might be produced by many and various
causes.[79]


                                 WINDS

All three of the writers whom we are specially considering,[80]
Aristotle, Seneca, and Pliny, had observed that there is a variety of
local winds—valley, river, sea, and marsh breezes—taking their origin
from the exhalations and vapors arising from these natural features. But
even though their explanations of the causes for these winds are now
regarded as archaic, the observations they made of their occurrence were
not inaccurate.

As to the effects of the winds on the earth, we encounter a theory that
sounds most extraordinary in the light of modern science but which
corresponds logically to the Aristotelian hypothesis of the elements and
to the general ideas current in classical times regarding the structure
of the earth. This theory, that the winds are the cause of earthquakes,
can better be understood after we have examined the ancient opinions
about the physical geography of the water and of the earth.

Another persistent belief, held alike by poets, physicists, and
geographers, originated in the Homeric mythology of the calm heights of
Olympus, dwelling place of the gods. This was to the effect that the
winds are limited to the lower part of the atmosphere,[81] a zone some
ten or fifteen stades in thickness.[82] The highest mountains were
thought to reach above into a realm of perpetual tranquillity where
clouds and dew and frost were unknown and where the ashes of sacrifice
would remain undisturbed for a year’s time.[83] This idea was
transferred to the Middle Ages through the writings of Pomponius Mela,
Solinus, and others.


                              CLIMATOLOGY

As to the climates, it has already been shown that many writers of
antiquity divided the earth’s surface into zones: fiery, temperate, and
frozen. Aristotle, Seneca, and Pliny do not seem to have had that more
exact understanding of the distribution of climates which recognizes
that two countries in the same latitude may, nevertheless, have
different climatic conditions and products.[84] To them, all places on
the same parallel were virtually the same from the climatic point of
view. In this connection it must be pointed out that the parallel
strips, or _climata_, into which Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, Ptolemy,
Pliny, and Martianus Capella divided the _oikoumene_ were not climatic
divisions in our modern sense—implying the prevalence of well-defined
conditions of temperature and weather—but, rather, artificial
astronomical divisions the boundaries of which were determined by
arbitrary means.[85] Nevertheless, true climatic differences were well
understood; Seneca describes vividly in more than one place in the
_Quaestiones naturales_ the intense heat and dryness of southern
regions[86] and the cold of the far North; Seneca and Pliny had acquired
more detailed knowledge than Aristotle of the northern ice and
snows.[87] Pliny made some interesting, if unsound, observations
connecting the dark complexions of the Ethiopians with the scorching
effects of the sun and foreshadowed a modern theory by asserting that
the inhabitants of northern Europe are blonde (and savage) because of
the coldness and inclemency of the climate in which they dwell.[88] A
brief but striking passage from the _Octavius_ of Marcus Minutius Felix
explains as follows the warming effect of the western ocean upon the
climate of Britain: “God is mindful of our welfare not only universally
but locally. Britain is deficient in sunshine, but this deficiency is
made good by the warmth of the sea that flows around it.”[89]

The Greeks and Romans certainly had no satisfactory understanding of the
general circulation of the atmosphere. Only with the maritime voyages
since the fifteenth century have we come to know the distribution of
belts of prevailing winds and calms. Aristotle said that the etesian, or
north, winds blow from the cold countries full of water and snow under
the Great Bear; and that the south wind originates at, but not south of,
the Tropic of Cancer;[90] this is the nearest he came to giving a theory
of atmospheric circulation. Megasthenes had heard of the monsoons of the
Indian Ocean; Pliny described the use made of them by sailors in going
out to India,[91] but he made no attempt to explain the general areas of
westerlies or trades. On the other hand, Aristotle,[92] Seneca,[93] and
Pliny[94] all recognized and discussed at considerable length the
influences of wind on weather; for example, the fact that the etesians,
though they bring clear skies to Italy, deluge Ethiopia and India with
rain—a conception which contains a shadow of truth.[95] Auster, the
south wind, was supposed to bring rain to Italy.


                           THE WATER ELEMENT

Since water was one of the four—or, according to Aristotle,
five—elements that were supposed to make up the universe, the ancient
authorities looked upon the ocean as necessarily as old as the earth
itself. Seneca thought that the Nile and the Ister (Danube) are of equal
age with the primordial ocean, because of remarkable characteristics
which differentiate them from all other streams.[96]


           THE SEA: ITS SALINITY, DEPTH, CURRENTS, AND TIDES

We must note what features of the sea interested the Greeks and Romans.
These were primarily its saltness, its depth, its currents, and its
tides.

The problem of why the sea is salt gave rise to a good deal of
theorizing. That the evaporation of the lighter fresh water leaves
behind the heavy salt water was well understood, but in the further
solution of the problem opinions diverged widely. Aristotle thought that
the salt was the result of combustion;[97] that it was an ashlike
substance first carried into the air by the exhalations from the earth
and then deposited in the sea by rainfall—particularly by the autumn
rains that accompany the south winds blowing from hot, dry districts
where the process of combustion is most active. Pliny believed that the
salt came partly from dry vapors intermingled with the sea waters and
partly from the nature of the earth, which tends to impregnate the sea
with salt.[98]

Aristotle said[99] that the Pontus (Black Sea) was deeper than the
Maeotis (Sea of Azov), the Aegean deeper than the Pontus—except in one
place—the Sicilian Sea deeper than the Aegean, and the Sardinian and
Tyrrhenian the deepest of all seas. Pliny quotes[100] a certain Fabianus
to the effect that the greatest known depth of the sea is fifteen
stades, or about 1200 fathoms—not an excessive figure, for parts of the
Mediterranean are in fact even deeper. Pliny,[101] following
Aristotle,[102] believed that the “Deeps of the Euxine,” opposite the
shores of the people of the Coraxi, were unfathomable.[103] Aristotle
had a very false idea that the Atlantic is made up of shallows and mud
banks and that it is calm, an idea shared by the Mohammedans and one
that may have contributed to the horror of the Western Ocean which
lingered in the minds of Mediterranean peoples throughout antiquity and
until the close of the Middle Ages.[104]

The ancient geographers certainly had no clearer understanding of the
general circulation of the ocean than of the atmosphere, and for the
very same reason: they had not traveled sufficiently. Aristotle thought
that there is a flow of water southward from the higher northern part of
the earth,[105] and Macrobius explained a series of currents in the
oceanic belts which he imagined surrounded the earth.[106] Certain
currents of the Mediterranean attracted attention: the constant flow
from the Euxine into the Aegean and the fluctuating currents of the
Strait of Messina and the Euripus (between Euboea and the mainland). A
tradition arose at later times that the death of Aristotle was caused by
his disgust at being unable to explain to his satisfaction the currents
of the Euripus.[107]

Only with the travels of Pytheas of Marseilles along the North Atlantic
coasts, the expedition of Alexander, and Nearchus’ voyage and
exploration of the mouths of the Indus and coasts of Beluchistan and
Mekran did the Greeks gain any adequate knowledge of tidal phenomena;
for the tides of the Mediterranean, except in a few places, are so low
as to be almost negligible.[108] Eratosthenes thought that the currents
through narrows in the Mediterranean are caused by variations in the
relative levels of the sea at either end of the channels and that these
variations are a response of the sea to fluctuations of the tides in the
ocean beyond the Pillars of Hercules.[109] As early as the third century
before the Christian era the Greeks had understood the relation of the
moon’s phases to the ebb and flood, but certainly not much earlier, for
Aristotle appears to have been ignorant of it.[110] Posidonius was the
first to give a full account of the manner in which the moon and sun
regulate the tides.[111] He had accurate knowledge of the diurnal, the
monthly, and perhaps the annual tidal periods,[112] a knowledge which
formed a bulwark of the structure of his astrology. Pliny also believed
that the tides were caused by lunar influence and described the three
periods with even greater accuracy than Posidonius.[113] He recognized
that the tides must correspond to a lunisolar cycle of one hundred
lunations, or eight years, an astronomical cycle that had long been
familiar to the Greeks.[114] He included in his account an astute
observation that the tides, like everything else on the earth’s surface
depending on celestial controls, tend to drag behind the time when these
controls are exerted.[115] Seneca does not try to explain the tides; he
mentions them only incidentally in connection with a graphic description
of the terrible deluge that will overwhelm the earth at the end of the
Great Winter. Though in some respects like the spring tides at the
equinoxes, when the sun and moon are in conjunction, this flood will be
bound by no law of nature and will have no curb to its fury.[116]
Macrobius’ explanation of the tides,[117] which was copied by many later
writers, though ingenious, was not founded on actual knowledge or
observation. He said that the ebb and flood are caused by the impact of
the opposing currents of the two ocean belts which encircle the earth,
and, with Eratosthenes, he thought that the tide of the Mediterranean is
a repercussion of the ocean tides. Indeed, after the time of Pliny there
was no addition to the scientific understanding of tidal phenomena until
the eighth century.


                         SUBTERRANEAN CHANNELS

Evaporation was given by Aristotle as a reason why the sea does not
overflow its bed on account of the constant inflow from the rivers.[118]
Another explanation of this puzzling circumstance was found by
Pliny[119] in a curious theory that prevailed throughout antiquity and
the Middle Ages to the effect that the land is seamed with veins,
cavities, and tunnels.[120] Into some of these the air enters; others
are the passages for rivers which sink into the ground; through still
others the water of the sea finds its way to wells, springs, and
fountains, where, made fresh by its passage through the earth, it bursts
forth to form rivers which return it to the sea. A continuous
circulation of the waters of the earth is thus maintained through
passages corresponding to the veins, arteries, and canals of the human
body.[121]

The origin of the latter theory is undoubtedly to be sought for partly
in the nature of the ground in Greece and the Aegean region and partly
in the age-old belief that the interior of the earth is the abode of the
dead.

The soluble character of the limestone rocks throughout parts of the
Balkan Peninsula has led to the production of what is now known as
_karst_ topography, so called from the Karst, a plateau between Trieste
and Fiume, where it has attained its most typical development. In such
regions many streams disappear into hollows of the ground; caverns and
underground galleries are extremely common; and the traveler
occasionally comes across a full-grown river bursting out of the depths
of the earth. The old and persistent story that the river Alpheus of the
Peloponnesus passes beneath the Ionian Sea only to gush forth in the
well of Arethusa in Syracuse was destined to have a medieval counterpart
in the explanation of the subterranean courses of the rivers of
Paradise.


                        RIVERS OF THE UNDERWORLD

Among the most famous and sinister of the subterranean streams of
antiquity were the dark waters of Cocytus, Acheron, Pyriphlegethon, and
Styx.[122] These were the streams of the nether world, the world of the
dead. Belief in the subterranean position of the after-world, the Hades
of the Greeks, the Inferi of the Italian folk, was widespread and
lasting among early Mediterranean peoples. Hellenic mythology placed not
only Tartarus, the abyss of torment, but also the Elysian Fields in the
depths. Plato taught that within the bowels of the earth are immense
caverns, some filled with fire, some with water, others the abode of the
shades. To be sure, rationalistic arguments against such doctrines were
raised by the incredulous. Aristotle had believed that of all four
elements the earth is the most dense and solid and that its position is
at the center of the universe. Although the earth might be seamed with
small water channels, it would be a reversal of the physical laws of the
universe to suppose that within it there could exist caverns large
enough to “hold Tartarus, the Elysian Fields, and the infinite multitude
of the dead” (Cumont).[123] Hence some would identify the Elysian Fields
with the Islands of the Blessed, placing them in the antipodes, and
would relegate Tartarus to the lowest hollow of the celestial
sphere.[124] But even this explanation could not be reconciled with the
more mature cosmography of the Alexandrian age. The Epicureans resorted
to out-and-out disbelief in a future life and future dwelling place of
the spirit.[125] Others looked for the shades in the atmosphere below
the moon’s orbit or else treated the whole problem in a lofty vein of
allegory. Rationalistic questioning of the subterranean position of the
next world, however, did not shake faith in this doctrine as it
persisted among the ignorant, and the doctrine was given new life, if in
somewhat different forms, by the Neoplatonic movement and the influx of
Oriental cults during the waning years of the Western Empire.[126] The
Neoplatonists reverted to Plato’s theory that the interior of the earth
may well include hollows large enough to contain the future abode of
men’s souls. The religion of Mithras tended to spread throughout the
Occident the dualistic cosmology of an eternal conflict between the
powers of light and goodness on high and the powers of darkness and evil
below. In the words of Franz Cumont, whose truly fascinating study of
this subject we are here following: Oriental dualism cut “the abode of
the souls into two halves, of which it placed one in the luminous sky
and the other in subterranean darkness. This was also the conception
which, after some hesitation, became generally accepted by the Church
and which for long centuries was to remain the common faith of
Christendom.”[127] In the period with which it is our special problem to
deal, then, we shall find that Hell is almost invariably placed in the
heart of the earth.[128]


                            ORIGIN OF RIVERS

To return from this digression to the vexed question of the origin of
super-terrestrial rivers, we find that the circulation of water from the
sea either by underground passages or by rain was not regarded by the
majority of ancient thinkers as sufficient to account for the huge
volumes of water that rivers constantly pour into the sea. Plato had
thought that there were enormous reservoirs in the interior of the earth
which served to keep the rivers supplied,[129] but Aristotle rejected
this hypothesis.[130] A reservoir as large as the entire earth, he said,
would be necessary for the purpose. His explanation was worked out of
the theory that one element actually may be transformed into another. In
a relatively unscientific age what is more natural than to believe, when
one sees soluble substances passing into solution in water, that they
actually become water? Or when one sees the condensation of invisible
vapor into clouds and of clouds into rain, that the air is actually
turning to water? Aristotle, followed by Seneca,[131] argued that the
air which penetrates into the internal cavities and recesses of the
earth is chilled and liquefied by the cold encountered there, just as
air seems to be condensed by cold in the outer atmosphere. Aristotle
cited as a proof of this the supposed fact that most great rivers have
their sources in mountains.[132] Mountains were to be looked upon as
enormous elevated sponges exuding water on all sides. Aristotle
concluded likewise that the northern part of the earth must be high and
mountainous,[133] because many great rivers originate there. But, if the
air is transmutable into water, why, then, was it not perfectly logical
to suppose that the earth could also undergo a similar change? This as a
theory to explain the origin of some of the water of rivers was clearly
expressed by Seneca and, among the early Church Fathers, by Gregory of
Nyssa.[134] The faulty character of Seneca’s scientific thought is seen
in his failure to account satisfactorily for the logical demands of his
theory, i. e. for the replacement of the land lost by its liquefaction.


                             THE NILE FLOOD

One of the natural phenomena most puzzling to the Greeks and Romans was
the inundation of the Nile.[135] Herodotus in his famous book on Egypt
had given a lengthy account of the Nile and what it meant to Egypt. He
had called Egypt the “gift of the Nile,” for he understood the alluvial
character of the country. His theory as to the cause of the flood—he
held that the normal height of the river was its flood height but that
the etesian winds, by driving the sun southward out of its course in
winter, caused the sun to dry up the headwaters of the stream—was less
successful than his description of the features of the flood itself.
Seneca also gives a long and extremely picturesque description of the
inundation[136] and sets forth various older explanations of its origin,
all of which he tries to refute without presenting an opinion of his
own. He tells how, starting in the upper reaches of the river, the flood
travels downstream and arrives in Egypt about midsummer; how it adds to
the fertility of the country by its deposits of silt; and how—here
Seneca repeats the crisp phrase of Herodotus—Egypt is the creation of
its stream. Among the various theories which he comments upon and
refutes it is rather significant to find one which had been propounded
by Anaxagoras and which is now recognized, in part at least, as the
right explanation: that the high water is caused by the melting of the
snows on the Ethiopian mountains. Seneca said that there were twenty
proofs available to refute this hypothesis.[137] Another view which
Seneca rejected was that the flood was caused by the etesian winds
backing up the water, a theory fated to reappear in many medieval books,
among them the _Expositio in hexaemeron_ of Peter Abelard.[138] Pliny
discussed the Nile and its peculiarities.[139] Like Herodotus, he
believed that it rises in the western part of Africa and reaches the
Sudan and Upper Egypt only after a series of long subterranean journeys.
He described the flood, giving statistics of the various heights of the
water on the nilometer and explaining which heights meant plenty and
which meant famine. He shows a lack of critical sense in his remarks on
the causes of the high water; for he held that two theories are equally
worthy of credence, the theory of the etesian wind, which we have just
examined, and the true explanation that the floods are due to summer
rains in Ethiopia.


                               THE LANDS

To turn now from water to land. We have already discussed Aristotle’s
idea of the gradual transposition of continents and oceans under the
control of the celestial bodies. Pliny describes a large number of local
changes of land and sea:[140] the building of new land by alluvial
deposits, the sudden appearance of land and islands out of the depths of
the waters, the separation of islands from the mainland, the tying of
islands to the shore, the total disappearance of entire countries
beneath the sea—Plato’s Atlantis is given as an example[141]—the
collapse of mountains; but in all this, though he tells where such
prodigies took place, he rarely tries to explain how and why they
happened.


                       EARTHQUAKES AND VOLCANOES

The explanation of the causes of earthquakes and volcanoes, however, was
attempted by Plato, Aristotle, Pliny, Seneca, and many other writers of
antiquity with no small measure of ingenuity. We have seen that ancient
philosophers almost universally were of the opinion that the earth is
honeycombed with cavities and subterranean passages. Plato said that
some of these cavities were filled with water and air but that others
contained mighty swamps and streams of fire, including the immense fiery
river Pyriphlegethon. The volcanoes of the earth’s surface were
outpourings from these internal streams, and their minglings with the
atmosphere and strivings to burst forth were the cause of
earthquakes.[142] Aristotle, on the other hand, denied the possibility
of subterranean fires. According to his scheme of physics the place for
fire in the universe was above the sphere of air. He maintained that the
dry and smokelike exhalation which causes the winds of the atmosphere
not only penetrates into the cavities of the earth from the outside but
is generated within the earth’s interior[143] and that when this
exhalation tries to escape and is opposed by any obstacle—for example,
by the sea—there is a tremendous upheaval and the land is shaken.
Seneca[144] and Pliny[145] ascribed the cause of earthquakes to the
winds. Pliny believed that after a great storm, in which wind is driven
down and compressed in the interior of the earth, it frequently strives
to come forth and in so doing shakes the earth’s surface far and wide.
Occasionally, if the pressure is too tremendous to be withstood by the
crust of the earth, the winds burst through, accompanied by a violent
tempest and a rain of sparks and cinders. Aristotle describes such a
volcanic eruption in the Eolian (Lipari) Isles.[146] While this was the
explanation of violent eruptions, the quiescent volcanic activity of
mountains like Etna was usually attributed to a different cause.
Pliny[147] speaks of Etna, Chimaera in Lycia, and various other
volcanoes as burning, and it would seem that he connected them with such
phenomena as burning naphtha wells and pits of bitumen and sulphur.


                          HEIGHT OF MOUNTAINS

A word must be said about classical estimates of the height of
mountains.[148] Aristotle suggested that these altitudes might be
determined by observing the duration of sunlight on the peaks. He would
have us believe that the Caucasus range is illumined by the sun for a
third of the night after sunset and for a corresponding time before
sunrise. If this were true, these mountains would be from 60 to 180
miles high![149] Less fantastic were the estimates of Dicaearchus and
Eratosthenes. The former, Pliny tells us, measured Pelion and found it
to be 1250 paces (10 stades) in height.[150] If we are right in our
understanding of the length of the pace here employed, this represents
5167 feet[151]—certainly not far short of the actual altitude (5308
feet). We do not know the method used by Dicaearchus in this survey, but
his calculation was probably determined from simple triangulation with
the aid of a diopter, an instrument for measuring angles.[152]
Triangulation as a means of finding the height of trees and buildings
was well understood. Eratosthenes probably did not carry out a
triangulation of his own but adopted the results obtained by
Dicaearchus, asserting that the highest mountains in the world do not
exceed 10 stades in elevation. He demonstrated by an ingenious and
graphic mathematical proof that the volume of mountains is so utterly
insignificant in comparison with the volume of the earth as a whole that
the earth can be regarded as essentially a sphere,[153] a conception
which became well established in the astronomical thought of antiquity
and one which reappeared in the Middle Ages.[154] When the Greeks
learned something of the Alps, they were able to correct Eratosthenes’
underestimate of the maximum height of mountains. Posidonius argued that
15 instead of 10 stades should be taken as the correct figure and that
the maximum depth of the sea was no greater than 15 stades.[155]


                _MATHEMATICAL GEOGRAPHY AND CARTOGRAPHY_

Mathematical geography deals in part with the accurate determination of
the location of places and with the accurate representation of the
earth’s surface on maps.


          MATHEMATICAL GEOGRAPHY LARGELY BASED ON ITINERARIES

The method almost universally employed by ancient geographers for
determining locations was the compilation of itineraries; the position
of a place was found, not by accurate surveys, but by reference to other
places at so many stades or so many days’ journey in such and such a
direction. Whatever maps the Romans may have had (for example the great
representation of the Empire set up by Agrippa in the Porticus Octaviae
in Rome) were probably compiled entirely from route traverses. The
greater part of the information which even the most accurate and
scientific of the Greek geographers, Eratosthenes, Marinus of Tyre, and
Ptolemy, possessed, was drawn from such itineraries and from estimates
of sea voyages. The figures for the latitude and the longitude of the
large number of places given in Ptolemy’s _Geography_ are for the most
part not the result of astronomical observations, and the tables cannot
be regarded as analogous to modern tables of latitudes and longitudes
but must be considered rather as guides for the construction of
maps.[156]

Other methods besides these simple reckonings of locations were well
known, none the less.


                 ASTRONOMICAL DETERMINATION OF LATITUDE

The determination of latitude has always been a comparatively easy
astronomical problem. No complicated instruments are needed to measure
either the vertical elevation of the sun on the meridian or of the north
celestial pole, and from both of these the latitude of the observer can
be calculated with extreme accuracy. The instrument commonly used by the
Greeks for measuring the angle of the sun[157] consisted of an
hemispherical bowl (_scaphe_) with a vertical rod (_gnomon_) for a
radius. The shadow of the rod on the concave interior of the bowl gives
the elevation of the sun (with an error of 16′[158]) and thereby the
latitude. Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, and Ptolemy were all familiar with
the latitudes of several places that had thus been determined.


                ASTRONOMICAL DETERMINATION OF LONGITUDE

To find longitude by astronomical means is a more difficult matter for
people who have neither chronometers nor telegraphs. Eratosthenes,
Hipparchus, Pliny, and Ptolemy all understood that it may be found by
observing the time of eclipses in different localities.[159] Hipparchus
believed that an extensive series of observations should be carried out
in order to ascertain, by mathematical and astronomical means alone,
latitudes and longitudes of a large number of places.[160] To facilitate
such a survey he prepared tables of lunar eclipses and tables to aid in
the determination of latitudes, but the practical difficulties of the
undertaking were too great and the work was never completed. In fact,
throughout antiquity the total number of places whose position had thus
been accurately determined probably does not exceed half a dozen, if it
is as many.

Pliny gives[161] an account of two different occasions when observations
were made of the same eclipse at two different places. He says that at
the time of the battle of Arbela the moon was eclipsed at the second
hour of the night, when at the same hour it was rising in Sicily. He
also speaks of an eclipse of the sun that was seen in Campania between
the seventh and eighth hours and in Armenia between the eleventh and
twelfth, indicating a difference in longitude of four hours, or 60°. The
actual distance is no more than half of this. Ptolemy also cites[162]
the eclipse of 331 B. C. as giving the distance between Carthage and
Arbela. We shall see later that much greater accuracy was attained by
the Arabs in their calculations of longitude and that some of their
figures were passed on to the Western world in astronomical tables
during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.


                              CARTOGRAPHY

Little need be said of the cartography of antiquity,[163] for although
medieval maps undoubtedly owe much to classical predecessors, none of
the classical maps which were destined directly to influence the
cartography of the Middle Ages have come down to us. Indeed we have good
copies of only two. These are the maps of Ptolemy and the so-called
Tabula Peutingeriana,[164] or Peutinger Table. Ptolemy’s maps exerted no
influence whatever on the cartography of the age of the Crusades.[165]

The Tabula Peutingeriana is preserved in a manuscript of the twelfth
century or earlier and probably was originally copied from a large chart
showing the main routes and provinces of the Roman Empire. It is an
extremely long and narrow affair in which the geography is woefully
distorted. Though in itself hardly representative of the best in the
Roman cartographer’s art, the original may have been compiled from a
contemporary Roman map of the world and adapted through its long and
narrow form to the especial purpose of illustrating itineraries. We know
that maps of the world were officially drawn in imperial Rome and posted
up for the benefit of the public: the one constructed by the order of
Agrippa and Augustus in the Porticus Octaviae was the most famous;[166]
and others are mentioned in literary sources.[167] Certain medieval maps
of the world are possibly related to some of these Roman charts,[168]
but unfortunately in the absence of the Roman maps themselves the exact
relationships cannot satisfactorily be worked out.

Although the ancient astronomers knew a variety of projections for
representing the heavens—stereographic, orthographic, and
others[169]—these were not applied to maps of the earth until long after
our period. Ptolemy describes several projections, among them the conic,
which he may have used; but there is no question of any mathematical
projections in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and none of the
cartographers of that period took account of the fact that they were
endeavoring to show a globe on a flat surface.


                 _THE EXPANSION OF REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE_

We have seen what the geographers of antiquity thought about the general
distribution of land and water and about the physical processes of the
earth’s surface. We now must study a subject which is less concerned
with what they thought than with what they actually knew—however vague
and inexact this knowledge was. Though the heritage of knowledge which
antiquity left to the Middle Ages of the countries and regions of the
_oikoumene_ was vast, much had been lost and much garbled in the process
of transmission. Hence it would be beside the point to discuss the
details of topographic information contained in the works of Strabo,
Pliny, and Ptolemy; our aim is merely to indicate in a broad way the
limits of the regional knowledge of the ancient world. This can best be
done by sketching the various stages in which the horizon of geography
was expanded until it reached the Shetlands and Scandinavia in the
north, China in the east, and, perhaps, the Central African mountains in
the south.


                 EXPANSION OF GREEK REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE

Homer’s geographical horizon was limited by the Mediterranean—one might
almost say Aegean—shores; Italy, Sicily, and everything to the west was
a realm of fable, and his acquaintance with the Black Sea coasts was
little better. The colonizing movement of the eighth to the sixth
centuries before Christ brought Greek settlers to these coasts; and
through them there was gained some acquaintance with the country behind
them, which found expression in the writings of Hecataeus at the close
of the sixth century. With this writer ancient geography begins to
assume its familiar classical form. He shows some slight knowledge of
Central Asia beyond the Caspian Sea and is even aware of the existence
of India—or at least of the northwestern portions of that peninsula. The
great struggle with Persia brought the Greeks into much closer relations
with Asia, and a corresponding increase in geographical knowledge
ensued. This was summed up by Herodotus. Much of his geography is
fabulous and legendary, but much of it is of surprising detail and
accuracy. The voyage of Scylax of Caryanda from the Indus to the Persian
Gulf had brought the Indian Ocean within Greek ken. Herodotus also
describes the rivers of Scythia and of Central Asia and displays
detailed familiarity with Egypt and northeastern Africa; he knew less of
the West, although at about this same time the voyages of the
Carthaginian Hanno in the Atlantic Ocean extended the horizon at least
as far as the Canaries, which were destined to remain on the limits of
the known world in that direction for many centuries to come. Shortly
after Herodotus, Ctesias, who had lived seventeen years at the Persian
court, wrote his _Persica_ and _Indica_, in which we find collected
together many of the fabulous and marvelous tales of Oriental animals
and monsters which were later to figure so strikingly in the _Historia
naturalis_ of Pliny, in the medieval encyclopedias, and in the
_Physiologus_, a collection of animal lore widely read in the Middle
Ages. Further detail regarding the local features of Mesopotamia and
Armenia was learned from the expedition of Cyrus and preserved for the
future in Xenophon’s _Anabasis_. But the events which did most to expand
the regional knowledge of the ancients were those connected with
Alexander’s conquests and with the reigns of his successors. Alexander’s
march in itself opened to Greek eyes wide territories that had been
unknown before; it brought Greek armies and, after them, Greek merchants
into the innermost heart of Asia; it established direct connections with
India; rumors reached the companions of Alexander of an enormous island
of Taprobane in the Southern Ocean, an island which we now recognize to
be Ceylon. With the voyage of Nearchus came a better understanding of
the Indian seas; and subsequently under Seleucus I (Nicator),
Megasthenes, who was sent as ambassador to the court of an Indian
potentate on the Ganges, gave a detailed description of the tribes and
products of Hindustan, more extensive notes on Taprobane,
and—unfortunately—a repetition of the fabulous legends of Ctesias.
Patroclus, in command of the easternmost provinces of the kingdom of
Antiochus I, provided some valuable statistical and geographical facts
about the peoples of the Caspian region, although he was quoted as an
authority for the belief that the Caspian communicates with the outer
ocean and that it is an easy matter to sail thence to India.


                        GEOGRAPHY AT ALEXANDRIA

In addition to the reports of travelers and eyewitnesses, the
establishment of Greek control over Egypt and the greater part of
southwestern Asia led to a scientific awakening that centered in
Alexandria. One of the greatest triumphs of Hellenistic science was the
geographical and astronomical school that flourished at Alexandria under
the Ptolemies. Eratosthenes and Hipparchus were undoubtedly the most
famous representatives of this school, and in them we see the
culmination of Greek scientific geography; for their work, all things
considered, surpassed that of Claudius Ptolemy, and the work of no other
man approached it. Though Eratosthenes’ researches were significant
mainly in the field of mathematical geography, he made use of much of
the regional knowledge which was available in the library at Alexandria
and which he could gain from enterprising Greek traders, administrators,
and soldiers who had actually visited the countries with which he deals
in his treatises.

One striking result of this broadening of regional knowledge was the
lesson it taught in regard to the countries south of the Tropic of
Cancer. The progress of exploration in Upper Egypt and in India showed
that these countries were not only habitable but thickly settled.
Adherents of what we have called the Cratesian theory were obliged to
acknowledge that the tropic could not be taken as the beginning of the
burning zone. Eratosthenes pushed the limit of the _oikoumene_ as far
south as latitude 11½° N.[170]


                     HELLENISTIC REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE

While Greek military enterprise had been opening up the Orient and
exploratory enterprise penetrating the tropics, an important advance was
made in the direction of the northwestern seas and the British Isles.
The voyage of Pytheas of Marseilles, about 330 B. C., had brought within
the scope of ancient knowledge Britain, Scandinavia, Thule, and the
frozen ocean beyond. Thus, in the Hellenistic period the frontiers of
knowledge included the Orkneys, Shetlands, Faroes—or whatever of the
northern isles was meant by Thule—the Canaries, tropical Africa, and
Ceylon. No further notable extension of these borders seems to have been
made until the first century after Christ, except that vague rumors of a
people called “Seres” and of the use of silk had crept into the Roman
world in Virgil’s time. This may have indicated acquaintance with China,
although Horace took the Seres to be a tribe of Central Asia.[171] The
Scythian invasions which overwhelmed the Greek kingdom of Bactria and
the conquest by the newly risen power of Parthia of the provinces of the
Seleucids east of the Euphrates tended to cut all communication with the
interior and farther parts of the Asiatic continent; but the Mithridatic
wars, as described by Theophanes, familiarized the public with the local
geography of Armenia, Pontus, and the Caucasus. Similarly Caesar’s
campaigns in Gaul, Germany, and Britain opened Western Europe to the
Roman world.


                  REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE OF MELA AND PLINY

The most complete and accurate summing up of the regional geography of
the ancients was the _Geography_ of Strabo, written in Greek probably
shortly before 17 A. D. But, as we have seen, this work was unknown to
our period of the Middle Ages, when men had to rely on Latin writers
like Pomponius Mela and Pliny, whose writings were of distinctly
inferior quality and included a great deal of fabulous and worthless
material. Devoid of that critical judgment which characterized
Eratosthenes and Strabo, Mela and Pliny were content to bring together
huge quantities of miscellaneous information, much of which was derived
from antiquated Greek sources. Mela, for example, closely follows
Herodotus’ description of the marvels of Asia, and Pliny retails many of
the fanciful legends of Ctesias and Megasthenes. Pliny’s contributions
to geography were somewhat more satisfactory than those of Mela; for he
added some details about Asia that had not been mentioned before,
especially in his description of Serica and of India and in his account
of the monsoons. On the other hand Mela was the first writer to mention
the Baltic Sea, or “Sinus Codanus,” which he described as a great gulf
full of islands.


                  THE “PERIPLUS OF THE ERYTHRAEAN SEA”

Nearly contemporaneously with Pliny there came an advance in the
knowledge of the Indian Ocean in the anonymous Greek _Periplus of the
Erythraean Sea_, a manual for sailors and merchants. This is of interest
because it gave indications of the existence of coasts and islands
beyond India, the islands of Chryse, the land of the Seres, and, at the
end of the earth to the east, a region of “Thin”—the first mention of
the word “China” in the West unless we take into account the “Sinim” of
Isaiah xlix, 12, which may or may not have referred to the great nation
of the Far East.

At about the same time, as we have already seen, the upper reaches of
the Nile, possibly as far as the great marshes of the White Nile in
about latitude 9° N., were explored by the expedition described by
Seneca and Pliny which Nero sent out to solve the age-long mystery’ of
the sources of the river of Egypt.[172] Pliny accordingly placed the
southern border of the _oikoumene_ some 7½° south of the position to
which Eratosthenes had assigned it, or at about latitude 4° N.[173]


       LIMITS OF ANCIENT REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE ON THE SOUTH AND EAST

Before the days of Marinus of Tyre and Ptolemy the limits of
geographical knowledge were again much extended both southward and
eastward. The Ptolemaic map depicts a wealth of detail in the interior
of Africa, although we are unable to say with assurance what most of
this detail represents in reality.[174] Ptolemy certainly had some
knowledge of the great lakes and mountains of east-central Africa. The
snow-covered mountains which he placed at the sources of the Nile may be
associated with reports derived from the east coast of Africa, of Kenya,
Kilimanjaro, or possibly the Ruwenzori range.[175] Farther to the west
he describes a river, the Nigir, flowing from a region south of the
country of the Garamantes (probably modern Fezzan) to the westward into
a lake near the Atlantic. It seems altogether likely that by this river
he meant the Niger. Ptolemy mentions two expeditions that had been made
at an unknown period to the south from the land of the Garamantes, one
under Septimius Flaccus, who arrived at the country of the Ethiopians
after three months’ journey, and the other under Julius Maternus and the
king of the Garamantes, a four months’ journey to a country called
Agisymba, abounding in rhinoceroses. Ptolemy’s regional knowledge
certainly extended as far south as the equator, and he was well aware of
the fact that the equatorial zone is inhabited.

In the east, also, the Ptolemaic map reveals an advance in knowledge
over its predecessors. Chryse appears as a peninsula, and other islands
and coasts are shown that certainly indicate familiarity with the Malay
Peninsula and China, possibly also with Borneo and Java. We shall find,
however, that these valuable extensions of knowledge eastward and
southward were universally lost sight of in the West in the Middle Ages
and that cosmographers were united in placing India or Paradise as the
farthest end of the world in the one direction and either the shores of
the Ethiopian Ocean immediately beyond the Garamantes or the edge of the
uninhabitable zone at the tropic or not far beyond it, as the extreme
limit in the other.[176]




                               CHAPTER II
       THE CONTRIBUTION OF WESTERN CHRISTENDOM BEFORE 1100 A. D.


                             _INTRODUCTION_

The geographical lore of antiquity was carried over to the Western
Europe of the Crusading age by the Christians of the first eleven
centuries of our era and by the Moslems. In this chapter we shall study
the manner in which it was transmitted, transformed, and augmented by
Christian agencies.


            SCRIPTURAL INFLUENCE ON EARLY MEDIEVAL GEOGRAPHY

Our primary problem is to examine the effects of Christianity on
geographical knowledge and belief, effects which sprang in large measure
from men’s varying attitudes toward the Bible. Some believed that
Scripture contains the absolute and only truth, but others were willing
to grant a partial authority to pagan teachings. The evolution of
science was profoundly modified by the conflicts between these divergent
tendencies of thought and by the efforts made to reconcile one with the
other. The general result spelled disaster to clear thinking in
geography. Moreover, many of the facts which the scholars of antiquity
had gathered together were wholly lost sight of in the confusion that
accompanied the disintegration of Roman civilization. The horizon of the
known world was narrowed from the wide bounds it had reached in the time
of Ptolemy.[177] New information acquired by exploration and travel was
ignored; and a host of legends, fancies, and false theories took the
place of the reasonably accurate body of information which the Greeks
and Romans had possessed.


                IGNORANCE OF THE BEST WORK OF ANTIQUITY

During these long years Constantinople was the only great metropolis of
Christendom, the only center where the arts and sciences of civilization
were cultivated without interruption. We might expect, therefore, that
the Byzantine influence upon Western geography would be as marked as it
was upon Western art and architecture. But this was not the case.
However much the scholars of Constantinople may have been interested in
the historians of antiquity, they neglected the geographers; and the
scientific geography of the Greek Empire was at best a work of lifeless
compilation and commentary. Furthermore, knowledge of Greek was at no
time widespread in the West until the Renaissance, and the great
majority of Western scholars were profoundly ignorant of Byzantine
literature.[178] For their geography the men of the Occident turned
rather to the Bible and to the mediocre and worse than mediocre works of
an age of intellectual degeneracy. Solinus, Martianus Capella,
Macrobius, Aethicus of Istria, and Orosius became authorities from which
later writers derived their facts.


           SCIENTIFIC STAGNATION DURING THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES

The earlier Fathers of the Church, whatever may have been their merits
as theologians and dialecticians, were not distinguished by an ability
to understand the truths of natural science or to combat error in that
field. With the establishment of the barbarian kingdoms between the
sixth and eighth centuries came an epoch of mental stagnation in nearly
all realms of science and scholarship. Learning in general and geography
in particular suffered almost universal eclipse. Yet dark and ignorant
as the times may have been, the torch of civilization was kept burning,
if feebly, by a few Irish and English monks[179] and by contacts with
the Levant that were maintained through Greek, Asiatic, and Egyptian
traders in the principal cities of Europe.[180] If not much authentic
geographical information was contributed to Western society by these
agents of enlightenment, they served to disseminate certain geographical
legends and traditions destined to seize a strong hold on the Western
imagination.

In the days of Charlemagne came the new awakening sometimes known as the
“Carolingian Renaissance;” and, although tenth-century Europe relapsed
temporarily into a torpor, a current of theological interest and, with
it, interest in the natural sciences had by then once more set in—a
current which was to reach full flood at the time of the Crusades.


                               _SOURCES_

What works widely read during these centuries served as sources of
geographical information for the scholar of the era of the Crusades?


                               THE BIBLE

First and foremost we must place the Bible. Certainly in the pagan world
no one book had ever held the paramount position in the minds of
thoughtful men that Scripture held during the Middle Ages. As we saw in
the Introduction, the two great fountainheads of medieval geography were
the works of Greek philosophers and historians and the Bible. The
geographic material in Scripture is neither very extensive nor very
explicit in comparison with the contributions of such writers as Strabo
and Ptolemy to the geographic education of mankind, and yet so
tremendous was its authority that it tended at one time completely to
supersede classical teachings. Slight and confusing as may have been its
geographical references, the man of the Middle Ages attached to all of
them paramount importance. Simply compare a map of the world
reconstructed from Ptolemy’s data[181] with one of the crude Beatus
sketches reflecting Biblical beliefs,[182] and some of the changes which
the reading of Scripture had wrought become strikingly apparent.

Genesis was the most important book of the Bible from the geographical
point of view. Here we find, in the history of the Creation, texts which
were the starting point of many speculations about the origin of the
world and the elucidation of which was attempted in many a long
commentary on the Works of the Six Days.[183] Furthermore, in Genesis we
find the description of Paradise and its four rivers, which figured
largely on most medieval maps, and the account of the division of the
earth among the descendants of Noah, which lay at the bottom of the
crude ethnography of the Middle Ages. By some writers the description of
the tabernacle of the Lord and its furnishings[184] was regarded as an
allegorical account of the heavens and earth. Gog and Magog, described
in Genesis, Ezekiel, and Revelation, were prominent among the supposed
medieval tribes of Asia.[185] And in the apocryphal Acts of the
Apostles, which, though technically not a part of Scripture, were often
given the authority of Scriptural truth, we find accounts of the
preaching of the Gospel in far lands, India, Ethiopia, Babylonia.[186]


                     WRITINGS OF THE CHURCH FATHERS

These and many other incidental references gave rise to those relatively
restricted portions of the vast mass of patristic literature which deal
with geography, but which nevertheless inevitably marked out the
channels that certain elements of geographic thought and tradition were
destined to follow until the beginnings of the Renaissance. How these
passages were interpreted was, then, of great importance.[187]


                      INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE

According to the Church Fathers there were four methods of
interpretation; but for our purposes we need consider only two of these,
the literal and the allegorical.[188] Both led to pitfalls: the literal
interpretation tended to narrow the thought and make it correspond to
the exact words of a text; the allegorical, unjustifiably to expand the
meaning of simple statements.[189] To these dangers were added the
difficulties and contradictions due to the manifold authorship of
Scripture and to the misunderstanding of passages woefully faulty from
the textual point of view.

Yet the writers of the early Christian age were in most cases unaware of
these pitfalls and did not even know when they had fallen into them.
Faith in the truth of the Holy Word was usually sufficient to render men
supremely oblivious to conflicting and inconsistent assertions that
would otherwise have been revolting to reason. Tertullian said: “When we
believe, we desire nothing besides belief. For we believe this in the
beginning: that there is nought which we need to believe beyond
it.”[190]


                          CLASSICAL INFLUENCES

This faith in the truth of the written Word persisted throughout the
Middle Ages and down to our own day. During the earliest Christian
centuries the Bible was sometimes regarded as the only source of truth,
and the teachings of pagan writers were often looked upon with
abhorrence. Lactantius Firmianus (early fourth century), with an
inconsistency characteristic of many of the Church Fathers, made use in
his _Institutiones divinae_ of the classical authors themselves to prove
the supposed fallacies and evils of pagan science.[191] About the fourth
century men began to try to amplify and expound the fundamental Biblical
truths by appeal to the legacy of classical learning. To effect a
reconciliation and combination of Christian teachings with the
classics—especially the works of Plato and his followers—became one of
the main preoccupations of theologians. Platonic and Neoplatonic
influences made themselves felt in the thought of churchmen and
scholars, and among the most popular works of the entire period was
Chalcidius’ translation of the _Timaeus_ of Plato. Neoplatonism was
interwoven into the theological system of Augustine.[192] In the ninth
century it appears in the writings of the great Irish scholar, John Scot
Erigena.[193] In the tenth and eleventh centuries the Platonic
commentary by Macrobius on Cicero’s _Somnium Scipionis_ enjoyed an
immense vogue;[194] it was read by the mathematician and astronomer Pope
Sylvester II (Gerbert) at the end of the tenth century and on the
threshold of our period aroused the protests of the more old-fashioned
churchmen like Manegold, who objected to the seeds of heresy which it
contained.[195]


                       ENCYCLOPEDIC COMPILATIONS

For more strictly geographical, rather than “cosmogonic” or cosmological
material, we must turn to the encyclopedias rather than to the
thoughtful and speculative theological books of such men as Augustine.
Like the mighty volumes of Aristotle or the _Natural History_ of Pliny
these encyclopedias were attempts to encompass and to put in convenient
form the entire range of human knowledge. The most significant was the
_Etymologiae sive originum libri XX_ of Isidore of Seville (died 636
A. D.). This large compilation of miscellaneous information served as a
model of style and composition as well as a mine out of which later
writers dug their “facts.” For the geographical portions of the
_Etymologiae_, Isidore used the Bible and classical authorities alike;
he derived much from Orosius and Solinus; and, though it is doubtful
whether he was acquainted with Pliny at first hand,[196] he incorporated
in his book not a little Plinian material taken from Solinus. Isidore’s
method was followed, and much of his work copied, by the Irish and
English monastic encyclopedists of the eighth and ninth centuries. We
find a great deal from Isidore in the Venerable Bede’s (died 735 A. D.)
_De natura rerum_, in Raban Maur’s (776–856 A. D.) _De universo_, in
Dicuil’s _De mensura orbis terrae_ (825 A. D.),as well as in the _De
imagine mundi_ of our period. John Scot Erigena, the great Platonist of
the eighth century, stands out among his contemporaries as one of the
most original and critical scholars of the Middle Ages. The range of his
interests was very broad, and it seems probable that he understood
Greek. In his _De divisione naturae_, beside the Latin sources which
Isidore, Bede, and other encyclopedists had copied, he made use of the
_De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii_ of Martianus Capella and also of
various Greek works, including the _Geography_ of Ptolemy.[197]
Martianus Capella was held in high favor during this epoch, and his
works were commented upon by such men as Remy (Remigius) of Auxerre, the
master of Gerbert, and by Adam of Bremen.[198]


                  MISCELLANEOUS GEOGRAPHICAL WRITINGS

Closely akin to the geography of the encyclopedias, and not infrequently
borrowed from by the encyclopedists, are a number of miscellaneous
writings, which, though intrinsically of slight value, nevertheless
profoundly affected the development of geographical ideas. The most
important of these was the brief description of the countries of the
world forming the second chapter of the first book of Orosius’
_Historiae adversus paganos_ (fifth century). Enjoying great popularity,
as is testified by the existence of over two hundred manuscripts, this
was much plagiarized by later scholars: parts of it became incorporated
into Isidore’s _Etymologiae_; it was translated into Anglo-Saxon by King
Alfred the Great;[199] and during our period it was extensively quoted
and copied by nearly all who attempted to write on geographical
subjects. Another of this miscellaneous group is a seventh-century
cosmography in barbarous Latin, a pretended translation of a fictitious
work originally written in Greek by Aethicus of Istria.[200] We find set
forth here for the first time many of those marvels of Scythia and the
northern regions employed by later writers to add interest to their
pages. Priscian’s sixth-century translation of the geographical
poem[201] of Dionysius Periegetes was also extensively quoted. In the
middle of the seventh century an anonymous cleric of Ravenna wrote a
description of the world in five books. Though entirely the result of
compilation, this cosmography is in many respects the most elaborate and
interesting geographical book dating from the early medieval West. The
sources quoted and utilized are extremely varied, including the Bible,
“Jordanis” (Jornandes), Ptolemy, Orosius, Isidore, and possibly the
Tabula Peutingeriana, in addition to a number of Greek, Roman, and
Gothic writings otherwise unknown.[202] The main importance of the work
of the Ravenna geographer in relation to the geography of the Crusading
age lies in the fact that a large portion of it was included in a
compilation made by a certain Guido in 1119.[203]


                                LEGENDS

During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries many legends were current in
the West, some of which contained geographical elements. Though we shall
have occasion to discuss this subject in greater detail later on, the
fact should be brought out here that the origin of most of these legends
may be traced far back into the centuries before the beginning of the
Crusading age.

Perhaps the most significant was the cycle of stories of the exploits
and adventures of Alexander the Great which originated in a Greek
history purporting to be the work of Callisthenes, a companion of the
Macedonian conqueror, and is hence known as the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_.
Written in Alexandria about the beginning of the third century after
Christ, this work subsequently became widely dispersed through the East,
where translations were made into Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic, and other
Oriental tongues. Put into Latin by Julius Valerius about the middle of
the fourth century, again translated in the tenth century,[204] given
further Latin vernacular renderings with many additions at later dates,
the Romance of Alexander had come, by the time of the Crusades, to form
the nucleus of a mass of stories and fables whose scenes were laid in
distant Asiatic countries. With it had been associated those mysterious
tales and prophecies of Gog and Magog whose origins were ultimately
connected with the Biblical revelations of the end of the world.[205]
Alexander the Great and Gog and Magog appear in the _Pseudo-Methodius_,
a book of prophecy which foretold the dread events of the Last Day.
Rendered into Latin at an early period from a Greco-Syrian original, the
_Pseudo-Methodius_ made a deep impression on the medieval mind,
especially at the time of the Mongol invasions in the early thirteenth
century.

Writers of our period like Gervase of Tilbury and Giraldus Cambrensis
also drew on the legends found in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s mythological
history of Britain, many of which had entered into the composition of
the Romance of King Arthur. Some of the latter were of slight
geographical interest.

Finally, the mythology and folklore of Ireland, with infusions from
classical and even Arabic literature, gave rise to the story of the
wanderings of St. Brandan[206] among mysterious islands in the Western
Ocean, an account of which we have in a manuscript dating back perhaps
to as early a period as the ninth century.[207]


                    BOOKS OF TRAVEL AND DESCRIPTION

The most important books describing actual travels and explorations
written between the conversion of Constantine and the Crusades were for
the most part in languages unknown to the men of the West—Greek and
Arabic. Zemarchus’ account of the tribes and trade of Central Asia[208]
and the _Meadows of Gold_ of Al-Masʿūdī, wherein were described things
personally seen by the travelers between Spain and Burma and south as
far as Madagascar, were treasures of geographical lore unknown to
Occidental readers of this age.

In Adam of Bremen’s _Gesta Hammenburgensis ecclesiae pontificum_,
written in the latter half of the eleventh century, we find a
description of the countries of the North. This was based on knowledge
acquired from the voyagings of the Northmen between the eighth and
eleventh centuries and, together with the Sagas, will be discussed in a
later chapter.

From the varied narratives of Christian pilgrims the Western student
might have gleaned some arid details about routes eastward and about the
topography of the Holy Land.


                     _THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE_

We saw in the first chapter that Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, and most of
the other Greek philosophers had believed that the universe is eternal,
though subject to ever-recurring destructions by fire or water, followed
by “rebirths” (_palingeneses_).[209] Aristotle had attributed to the
stars control over all occurrences in the sphere below the moon; not
only over physical and material happenings, but over the mind and will.
He had believed that this was by virtue of the fact that the celestial
bodies are formed of a divine substance different from the four
corruptible elements which constitute the sublunar world. On this theory
of the stars had been built the “science” of astrology.


         CHRISTIANITY OPPOSED TO BELIEF IN AN ETERNAL UNIVERSE

What could be more antagonistic to such ideas than the teachings of the
Bible? The antagonism, however, was not felt by all the Fathers of the
Church. The fascination of Platonism led many to seek for analogies
between Greek and Biblical cosmology. Clement of Alexandria, for
instance, thought that the destruction of the world by fire prophesied
in Deuteronomy (xxxii, 22) was one of those general burnings which would
occur when the stars find themselves in conjunction in Cancer.[210]
Indeed, it was a common belief, and one shared by Augustine, that the
Greeks themselves had actually derived the best of their theological
concepts from the Bible.[211] But the glaring contradictions between
Scriptural and classical cosmology could not be overlooked even by the
Augustinians, and classical theories of the periodicity of the universe
in general were vigorously combated. Christian monotheism could never be
reconciled with a fatalistic doctrine that attributed to the stars in
their control over the destinies of the world a quality that approached
the divine; and through Christian teachings the astrology built on this
doctrine was discredited and the stars stripped of their divinity.[212]
This alone was enough to strike a deathblow at the idea of the unvarying
periodicity of the universe under celestial controls; but other
arguments equally potent were leveled against it. Augustine refused to
believe that Christ had been incarnated an infinite number of times in
the past or was destined to suffer the Passion an infinite number of
times in the future.[213] Origen declared that another Adam, another
Moses, another Judas were unthinkable and asked how the belief in the
stellar control of man’s actions and volition could be reconciled with
the Christian doctrine of the freedom of the will.[214]

Perhaps the most fatal argument lay in the express contradiction, by the
Old Testament account of the Creation, of the Hellenic idea of an
eternally recurrent universe.[215] Neoplatonist and Peripatetic alike
had denied that there ever had been a first day or a first Great
Year.[216] Yet the words of Scripture are very definite and very
explicit: “In the beginning God created heaven and earth.” Neither
Christian nor Jew could question the meaning of these words nor think
otherwise than that all things were created at a certain fixed and
calculable point in time or else, following Augustine, that the universe
and time were created simultaneously.

In spite of these fatal objections, neither the Great Year theory nor
astrology perished completely in the Middle Ages. Lingering on
underground, they gave an heretical and pagan tinge to the thought of
many a philosopher and theologian during our twelfth and thirteenth
centuries and thereafter.[217]


                              THE CREATION

Even the Scriptural history of the Creation did not wholly satisfy the
inquiring curiosity of theologians or philosophers. One of the primary
problems dealt with by scholars was the problem of the first chapters of
Genesis. This inquiry led into the domain of metaphysics and theology:
through it men hoped to arrive at an understanding of the nature of God
and of his relation to the universe, to time, and to man. It also led to
innumerable speculations about the actual manner in which the will of
God operated in fashioning the world and to discussions of this question
from very diverse points of view—literal, allegorical, transcendental.
Indeed, there were even a few writers, notably the Venerable Bede, who
went so far as to try to reconcile a physical conception of the
processes of creation with the account given in the Bible[218] and who
thus prepared the way for more rationalistic studies of the Works of the
Six Days in the centuries which were to follow.


                     _SHAPE AND SIZE OF THE EARTH_


                 EARLY CHRISTIAN BELIEF IN A FLAT EARTH

Prevalent among most peoples in an early stage of their intellectual
development is the natural and obvious theory that the earth is a flat
disk covered by a dome-shaped heaven. This view was held by the
Assyrians, Chaldeans, Egyptians,[219] and, as we saw in the first
chapter, by the early Greeks; it was long believed by the Jews[220] and
is found in the Koran;[221] it was undoubtedly reflected in the words of
Scripture, although what is said there on the subject is by no means
definite and occurs in connections wholly incidental to other subjects.
We read in Isaiah (xl, 22):[222] “It is he that sitteth upon the circle
of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that
stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain and spreadeth them out as a tent
to dwell in.”

This can hardly be called an exhaustive dissertation on the shape of the
universe, yet on it and on other scraps even less detailed were erected
the medieval arguments in favor of the flatness of the earth, a firm
belief in which was probably held by the majority of the earlier Church
Fathers, especially those of the East.[223] Not only were the ancient
proofs of sphericity overlooked; but such ideas were regarded as
heretical, and elaborate new systems were raised on the weak foundations
of littleunderstood Scriptural texts. The most remarkable theories of
the universe, however, were devised by the Greek fathers Patricius,
Cosmas Indicopleustes, and Severian of Gabala.[224] They remained
unknown to the men of the Western world and consequently do not concern
us. The Latin father Lactantius contented himself with endeavoring to
prove by pseudo-scientific means that the earth is not a sphere; a
spherical heaven, he argued, does not necessitate a spherical earth; and
the idea of the possibility of antipodes was to him thoroughly
absurd.[225]


              EARLY CHRISTIAN BELIEF IN A SPHERICAL EARTH

On the other hand, the theory that the earth is a globe never, perhaps,
suffered complete eclipse.[226] Augustine was non-committal in this
regard, evidently troubled and puzzled by contradictory statements in
the Bible and in the writings of classical astronomers.[227] Isidore
quotes writers of antiquity who favored a spherical earth, though if we
interpret correctly texts in the _De natura rerum_[228] and
_Etymologiae_[229] we are impelled to think that he himself conceived of
a flat earth surrounded by a spherical heaven. The Venerable Bede, on
the contrary, did not mince matters; he stoutly maintained that the
earth is a sphere and cited as proof the fact that stars visible in one
latitude are invisible in another.[230] After the so-called Carolingian
Renaissance the world of thinkers seems gradually to have outgrown the
primitive notion of a flat earth. To the _De nuptiis Philologiae et
Mercurii_ of the Neoplatonist Martianus Capella may be ascribed much of
the credit for keeping alive the doctrine of sphericity during these
centuries. This immensely popular work, with its condensed argument in
favor of a globe-shaped earth, doubtless contributed to the formation of
the opinions of men like John Scot Erigena, Gerbert, Hermann of
Reichenau, and Adam of Bremen, adherents to the only theory compatible
with any observation better than the most superficial and any reasoning
better than the most trivial.[231]


                           SIZE OF THE EARTH

With the reëstablishment of the belief in a spherical earth we find men
again making conjectures about its size, though there is no evidence
that attempts were made in Christendom (as in the Moslem world) actually
to measure the circumference. In the ninth century John Scot Erigena
gave, from Martianus Capella, a full explanation of the famous
Eratosthenic measurements.[232] An unknown author of the ninth or tenth
century of a work on geometry often attributed to Gerbert also
explained, from Capella, Eratosthenes’ method of measuring a
degree;[233] and the eleventh-century mathematician Hermann of
Reichenau[234] had learned (possibly from Macrobius) how the length of a
degree could be ascertained from observations of the pole star. His
result, 700 stades, was the same as that of Eratosthenes, a fact which
alone indicates that he did not himself undertake any measurement. Thus
we see that as a result of the Platonic movement between the ninth and
eleventh centuries knowledge of one of the most magnificent achievements
of classical geographical investigation had been revived.


                       _ZONES AND THE ANTIPODES_


                                 ZONES

Most Greek thinkers had agreed in dividing the earth’s surface into five
zones, though they differed as to whether or not the equatorial zone was
habitable. By Ptolemy’s time the discovery of countries in the heart of
the tropical regions and possibly beyond had exploded the old idea of an
equatorial ocean and fiery belt around the middle of the globe.
Unfortunately the broader regional knowledge which had been at Ptolemy’s
disposal was lost in the Middle Ages, and older views reappeared. The
maps of the period show us the encircling ocean in which Homer had
believed, and nearly all writers of the patristic age thought that
Africa has a very limited extension toward the south.[235] Beyond
Africa, they said, lies an equatorial ocean and an equatorial zone
uninhabitable on account of heat.


                             THE ANTIPODES

Whether or not there were other regions of the world on the other side
of this equatorial zone or beyond the waters of the western ocean, and
whether or not such regions were inhabited, were questions which piqued
the curiosity of the Church Fathers. The possibility of antipodal
regions—perhaps continents—must, in the logic of things, have been
admitted by those who were ready to believe that the earth is a sphere;
and even those who were not believers in the sphericity of the earth
were prone to discuss the possibility of a fourth, or austral,
continent, usually called by analogy the region of the antipodes, lying
immediately south of the equatorial zone.[236] Bede adopted Crates’
theory of two oceans encircling the earth, east and west, and north and
south, dividing its surface into four temperate habitable areas; and
after the interest in Macrobius had become widespread in the ninth
century this theory undoubtedly must have been generally familiar if not
generally accepted.

Whether or not the antipodes were actually inhabited was another matter.
Lactantius, who thought that the world is flat, was a determined
opponent of the possibility of inhabited antipodes for physical reasons.
His arguments were obvious but seem puerile to us: “Is there any one so
stupid,” he asked, “as to believe that there are men whose feet are
higher than their heads?”[237] It puzzled him to explain how trees could
grow upside down or rain fall upward. More serious were the religious
objections to the possibility of inhabited regions in other parts of the
earth, for this was as antagonistic to the words of the Bible as the
Great Year theory and antagonistic in much the same way. The theory of
the antipodes, as generally presented in association with the theory of
a fiery equatorial zone, presupposed the existence of other races of men
absolutely cut off from our race. How, then, inquired Augustine,[238]
could such races be descended from Adam, who, the Bible tells us, was
the forefather of all men? How could Christ have died for antipodeans?
How could the Gospel have been preached in “the four corners of the
earth” if half the earth is cut off from our quarter by tropical fires?
How could the text of Romans x, 18, be true which says: “Yes, verily,
their sound went forth over all the earth, and their words unto the ends
of the whole world”? Isidore[239] and Bede[240] categorically denied the
possibility of inhabitants of antipodal regions. Their authority,
together with the strength of their arguments and the arguments of
Augustine, were sufficient to arouse suspicions of the man who ventured
to believe in this doctrine. Such a man must certainly be a heretic. A
tenth-century interpreter of Boëthius wrote: “God forbid that anybody
think we accept the stories of antipodes, which are in every way
contradictory to Christian faith.”[241] In the middle of the eighth
century the question reached a head in a controversy between St.
Boniface and a certain Virgil, bishop of Salzburg.[242] The latter, who
doubtless thought that there were antipodal regions if not antipodeans,
was accused by Pope Zachary, to whom St. Boniface had complained, of
holding “perverse and iniquitous doctrines regarding another world.”
Unfortunately we do not possess Virgil’s own account of the incident and
are unable to tell exactly what these doctrines were.[243] At all
events, belief in antipodes contained the seeds of bitter religious
quarrels and was one of the charges brought against Cecco d’Ascoli, who,
after our period, was burnt to death for holding this and other damning
convictions.[244]


                          _PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY_

In the field of physical geography slight was the contribution of the
early medieval writers.


                              METEOROLOGY

Classical ideas about the atmosphere were repeated and garbled,[245]
little progress was made in the development of earlier theories, and
little new was added but superstition. Isidore, followed closely by Bede
and Raban Maur, was the primary authority in matters of
meteorology.[246] The ancient view persisted, that the polar regions
were uninhabitable on account of cold and the equatorial zone on account
of heat. The sort of popular meteorology that prevailed is illustrated
in an early ninth-century treatise written by Agobard, archbishop of
Lyons, and entitled _Against the Absurd Opinion of the Vulgar Touching
Hail and Thunder_.[247] This was an attack on charlatans who claimed
that they could control the weather, produce storms and hail at will,
and who asserted that there is a region, called Magonia, “whence ships
come in the clouds” (Poole’s translation).[248] Natural enough as it is
for the uneducated in any age to believe such things,[249] the
significant fact here is that Agobard did not attempt to invoke
scientific arguments to confute the claims of the impostors. Poole says:
“He disdained to allege scientific reasons to overthrow what was in its
nature unreasonable. He could only fall back on ... broad religious
principles. He argued that God’s relation to nature is immediate and
least of all conditioned by the artifices of men.”[250]


                     THE WATERS ABOVE THE FIRMAMENT

One distinctly new idea, however, was introduced by the Bible into the
circle of what we may, with a slight stretch of the imagination,
consider the medieval physical geography of the water element. This new
conception tended to revolutionize theories based on classical physics
and to cause much confusion and doubt in the minds of the Fathers of the
Church. The orthodox classical physicists had held that the elements
normally form four concentric spheres surrounding the center of the
universe, in order, from the heaviest to the lightest, earth, water,
air, fire. Genesis (i, 6–7) states that “God said: Let there be a
firmament made amidst the waters; and let it divide the waters from the
waters. And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under
the firmament from those that were above the firmament.” Though belief
in waters above the firmament is found in the cosmologies of the ancient
Egyptians and Persians and is there closely associated with belief in a
disk-shaped earth covered by a dome-shaped heaven, water in such a
position was very far removed from its proper place in the scheme of
nature of Aristotle and his followers. The Church Fathers, nevertheless,
were unwilling to doubt the actual existence of these waters, and in
general they accepted the text literally.[251] Gregory of Nyssa even
went to the extent of imagining mountains on the back side of the
firmament and that the waters were contained in the hollows and valleys
between them.[252] Others thought the waters were in the form of clouds
or fine drops. Jerome, Josephus, Ambrose, and Bede all held that the
waters were crystal.[253] Augustine was non-committal, though he
gathered together the statements of many who had expressed concrete
views on the subject.[254] Ambrose argued from analogy that if the earth
can hang in the center of the universe without support so also can the
waters hang unsupported above the firmament.[255]

The purpose which the waters were to serve was also a thorny problem.
Ambrose said they were intended to cool the axis of the universe,
overheated by its perpetual rotation;[256] others thought that they were
meant to screen the earth from the fiery heat generated by stars and
sun;[257] others that they were stored up as a reservoir to supply
hydraulic resources at the time of the Great Flood.[258]


                     THE CONGREGATION OF THE WATERS

According to the description of the Creation in the book of Genesis “God
also said: Let the waters that are under the heaven be gathered together
into one place; and let the dry land appear. And it was so done.” The
difficulty in explaining this text was to account for what became of
these waters. Great as are the seas, they were not considered large
enough to absorb all the primordial waters, and consequently arguments
were elaborated in favor of the existence of vast reservoirs within the
earth. Bede, for example, was of the opinion that the waters under the
firmament at first took the form of clouds and that when they became
condensed and fell as rain the water was sequestered in caverns of the
earth’s interior.[259]

Of even greater significance was the assertion that God had gathered the
waters below the firmament into “one” place. This could mean nothing
else than that all the waters of the earth, whether in subterranean
reservoirs, oceans, lakes, rivers, or in the atmosphere, must be
connected and must constitute a unit. Probably with this idea in mind
Isidore wrote: “The abyss is the deep water which cannot be penetrated,
whether caverns of unknown waters from which springs and rivers flow, or
the waters which pass secretly beneath, whence it is called abyss. _For
all waters or torrents return by secret channels to the abyss which is
their source_” (Brehaut’s translation).[260] Certainly most medieval
theorizing about the origin of springs and rivers[261] was dependent on
the doctrine of a “congregation of waters.” In further elaboration of
this doctrine it was often said that the water of the sea found its way
by underground channels to the Garden of Eden and returned again to the
sea, flowing first through a subterranean passage and thence through the
four rivers of Paradise. Augustine maintained that the words of Genesis
(ii, 6), “But a spring rose out of the earth, watering all the surface
of the earth,” mean that all the waters of the earth come from a single
source.[262] Rainfall as a source of springs and well water, however,
was also recognized,[263] and Gregory of Nyssa accepted and elaborated
the classical theory of the transmutation of earth into water.[264]


                             THE NILE FLOOD

The strange phenomenon of the flood of the Nile brought forth no new
theories during the Middle Ages, and Isidore, whose words were most
often copied, reverted to the explanation of Thales that the flood was
caused by the building of sand bars at the mouth of the river during the
summer when the etesian winds blow.[265]


                       THE EARTH UPON THE WATERS

Another Biblical phrase that provoked discussion of the problems of
hydrography was in the one hundred and thirty-fifth Psalm (Vulgate):
“Praise ye the Lord of lords, ... Who established the earth above the
waters” (_qui firmavit terram super aquas_). Many writers took this
literally and thought of the earth as actually floating upon water, held
up by the arbitrary force of God’s will. A few, despite the explicit
words of Scripture, were inclined to doubt; they either explained the
phrase by urging that the word “above” (_super_) should be taken to mean
“beside” or argued that all that was meant here was that the land rises
to a higher level than the sea.[266] The difficulty was also avoided, as
was frequently the case with puzzling Scriptural passages, by saying
that the passage was allegorical and should not be taken literally.


                                THE SEA

There is not much to record about the development of knowledge or theory
concerning the physical geography of the sea. The ancients themselves
had known little enough about the sea to pass on to an age when maritime
ventures were almost unknown—to learned men at least—and certainly we
cannot find a great deal of marine lore in the Bible. Occasional
glimmerings of intelligence, however, break the darkness of the times in
this respect. Dicuil, for instance, in his _De mensura orbis terrae_,
questions Fabianus’ statement that the sea is at most fifteen stades
deep. “Has Fabianus measured its depth?” he asks; “if not, how can we
believe what he says?”[267] Bede understood the difference in density
between fresh and salt water; and in accord with Isidore and others he
explained why the seas do not overflow their banks by pointing out that
water is constantly being removed into the air and into the land.[268]

Though the Church Fathers stood out valiantly against those teachings of
astrology which tended to exaggerate the powers of the heavenly bodies,
they were none the less ready to admit that the moon may exert a
physical attraction on the ocean and in that way may produce the tides.
Basil even explained that there is a corresponding lunar control over
the atmosphere.[269] Augustine and Ambrose believed that the moon causes
tides;[270] and a certain Augustine, writing in the seventh century,
described the spring and neap tides and tried to show how they follow
not only the moon’s phases but also the equinoxes and solstices. He made
a serious mistake by placing spring tides at the time of the
solstices.[271] Bede corrected this in his _De natura rerum_, apparently
from personal observation—a rare thing at this time—and noted a number
of tidal peculiarities which had not been commented on before.[272]

Not all writers attributed the action of the tides to the moon. Most
significant among the opponents of the lunar theory was Paul the Deacon
(720–780 A. D.). In his _Historia gentis Langobardorum_ he
described[273] the maelstrom on the coast of Norway. He asserted that
this gigantic whirlpool and another one, which he placed off the coast
of Ireland, made the tides by sucking in and spewing out vast quantities
of water twice a day. With the fashion of reading Macrobius a theory
became popular that the flood and ebb result from the impact of opposing
ocean currents; and in the twelfth century, as we shall see later,[274]
William of Conches and Giraldus Cambrensis made curious combinations of
the theories of Paul the Deacon with those of Macrobius.


                               THE LANDS

There was no science of geomorphology in the Middle Ages. The medieval
mind interested itself for the most part only in those natural phenomena
that force themselves upon the attention or seem out of the ordinary.
Commonplace and static elements of the earth’s surface such as hills,
valleys, and plains were taken more or less for granted by those who
sought to explain the secrets of Nature. In the geographical writings of
the period, on the other hand, not a little space was devoted to
volcanoes and earthquakes. Their violent and spectacular qualities have
made these the object of interest throughout all time. And yet in the
early Middle Ages there seems to have been no originality in observing
them or in speculating about their causes. Men were content uncritically
to accept what classical writers had said.[275] Isidore, for example,
following Aristotle and Pliny, wrote that volcanoes were burning
mountains rather than vents for deep-seated terrestrial fires and that
the whole of Sicily was filled with seams of sulphur and bitumen,
readily kindled by the winds into flame. The eruption of Etna, more
especially, was caused by winds driven down into the interior of the
earth by the waves of the Strait of Messina.[276] This theory of
vulcanism was reiterated by Bede, Dicuil, and the multitude who copied
from Isidore’s work. Other writers explained volcanoes as the outlets of
profound subterranean fires,[277] a view fostered by Plato and one that
gained authority in the minds of many of the Church Fathers as well as
of laymen through the widespread belief, derived from classical
mythology[278] as well as from the Bible, that the heart of the earth is
the seat of Hell.[279]


_THE MEDIEVAL ATTITUDE TOWARDS LANDSCAPE AND SCENERY BEFORE 1100 A. D._

Man has been accustomed to look upon the geographical elements of the
earth’s surface from widely different points of view. So far we have
been concerned with the record of his scientific or pseudo-scientific
investigations of these elements. Let us now turn for a moment to his
emotional attitude toward them. The impression made upon the heart and
imagination by the aspects of countryside, mountain, and sea has
constantly changed with changing religious and philosophical beliefs and
with shifting social régimes. We may estimate the character of these
changes in a multitude of descriptions of landscape and scenery
scattered throughout the whole realm of literature.


              ESTHETIC APPRECIATION OF NATURE IN ANTIQUITY

It is probably safe to assert that there prevailed in antiquity a
genuinely esthetic appreciation of nature. If the Greeks seldom made
conscious efforts to paint word pictures of the form and colors of their
land, their poetry and drama none the less show in many a turn of phrase
that they were alive to its beauty. The Romans rejoiced in the tranquil
serenity of mild and cultivated landscapes as an escape from the welter
of city life.[280] Perhaps the Roman attitude toward nature was tinged
with pessimism, with regret that beauty is transient, that man’s span of
life is short, and that all too soon we must cease to find solace in the
loveliness of the world.[281] With the crystallization of Latin literary
forms there appeared a stereotyped conception of the ideal landscape in
which the essential elements were always the same: a rich meadow shaded
by laurels, myrtles, and elms and watered by a murmuring stream, clear
and cool; a placid spot where eternal spring prevails and where rain and
storm, frost and heat are alike unknown.[282] This formula was used by
the Latin poets in describing the blessed Isles of the Hesperides and
the Elysian Fields; ultimately it was employed by the Christians in
picturing the terrestrial Paradise.[283]


                EARLY CHRISTIAN ATTITUDE TOWARDS NATURE

A new and different spirit pervaded the early Christian’s attitude
towards nature. His thoughts were turned to the world to come and to the
glory of the Kingdom of God.

The more austere and ascetic of the Church Fathers believed that, as it
is sinful to take pleasure in things of this world, so also sin must
lurk in the breast of him who derives personal and esthetic satisfaction
from scenes of natural beauty. This is one of the reasons why hermits
retired to deserts and rugged mountains, where they might no longer be
tempted either by things of the flesh or by the charm of green and level
meadows or of rolling, cultivated hillsides. Among some of the hermits
there arose an actual love for the grandeur of the very wildernesses to
which they betook themselves. Jerome regarded the desert as a place of
beauty: in deep valleys, rough mountains, and steep rocks he saw not
only negative excellence, in so far as these were free from the
pollutions of “civilization,” but also a congenial background for his
work and thought.[284] The eremitic movement was primarily
characteristic of the Eastern branch of Christendom, but it extended to
the West, where its influence was powerful during the early centuries of
our era.[285] Nevertheless an ascetic disdain for the haunts of man and
glorification of the wilderness was, at best, alien to Western modes of
thought. The normal habit of the Occidental Christian was, rather, to
take joy in the immensity of earth and heaven and in the marvelous
detail of the created world because these stand as manifestations of the
unity and glory of the Deity, symbols of the omnipotence of God.


             REVIVAL OF ESTHETIC FEELING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

On the other hand, pleasure in a landscape by reason of the merely
personal satisfaction it affords the beholder was exceptional before the
time of the Renaissance. But, though exceptional, an esthetic as
distinguished from a religious or transcendental love of nature was by
no means wholly lacking. Certainly from the eleventh century onward we
find many poems and letters that testify to the existence of a truly
pagan enjoyment of scenery. Whether this can be said of the earlier
periods is more doubtful. Ganzenmüller, whose important study of the
feeling for nature in the Middle Ages we are following in this
connection, maintains that the term “Carolingian Renaissance” is more or
less of a misnomer because under Charlemagne the classical spirit was
lacking, even though classical forms of expression were revived; that
the classical influence on descriptions of landscape was but rarely
felt; and that we find at that time nothing of the subjective and
pessimistic attitude of the Roman poets. In short Ganzenmüller concludes
that the feeling for nature was altogether Christian.[286]

However this may be, there is no question that throughout a century or
more before the age of the Crusades individuals not only among the laity
but even in the monasteries were openly writing poems of earthly love
and openly lauding the beauty of natural scenery in more or less the
vein of the Romans.[287] This was but one aspect of the worldly tendency
in Church and society which brought about the Cluniac and later
movements of reform.


                _MATHEMATICAL GEOGRAPHY AND CARTOGRAPHY_


                         MATHEMATICAL GEOGRAPHY

We may pass over the mathematical geography of the Christian period
before 1100; no discoveries were made, nor were there any attempts to
apply the results of older discoveries. Gerbert, indeed, in his _Liber
de astrolabio_, gives a few details of the division of the earth’s
surface into seven climates, details which he had probably derived
entirely from Latin authors like Pliny and Martianus Capella.[288]
Though Gerbert owed much to Arabic writers, he did not draw from them
the semi-geographical portions of his writings. Certainly in the strict
application of mathematical geography to the determination of
positions—latitudes and longitudes—nothing was done in the West. Ptolemy
was forgotten, and the labors of the Arabs in this field were as yet
unknown.


                                  MAPS

Though very few maps dating from these centuries are actually in
existence, maps were then made in no inconsiderable numbers.[289] Three
circumstances convince us of the truth of this statement. In the first
place, we find frequent references to lost maps in contemporary
literature. Then again, many of the cosmographies and encyclopedic
works, such as those of Orosius, Isidore, and the Ravenna geographer,
show undeniable indications that they were either compiled from maps or
else were accompanied by maps as illustrations. And, finally, most of
the examples of twelfth- and early thirteenth-century cartography can
only have been derived from older models, some of which in the final
analysis may well have been inspired by the cartography of the period of
the Roman Empire.[290]

With a few exceptions[291] the existing specimens of the cartography of
Western Europe dating from before 1100 may be classified as regards form
in four more or less well-defined groups, representatives of each of
which are also found from the Crusading age and even later. The
character of the maps was largely determined by the purposes intended to
be served.[292]


                            _Macrobian Maps_

The first group consists of outline diagrams illustrating Macrobius’
division of the earth’s surface into zones and is to be found in
manuscripts from as early as the ninth century. This group cannot
properly be said to include true maps.[293]


                               _T-O Maps_

The second group is made up of simple representations of the three
continents, often called T-O maps (Figs. 1a-1b). On these the known
world is shown as a circle within which a T is drawn dividing it into
three parts. East is at the top. The upper compartment, that above the
crossbar of the T, represents Asia; the two lower compartments, Europe
and Africa. The surface is usually unadorned with vignettes or
conventional symbols of any sort, and the legends are reduced to a
minimum. It seems likely that Augustine had before him such a diagram
when he wrote a passage in _De civitate dei_ which describes to
perfection the division of the known world as the T-O maps show it, and
it may well be that the map which Orosius must have used when he wrote
the geographical chapter of his history was a modified example of the
same type. An extremely large number of T-O maps are to be found in
codices dating from the eighth century onward, illustrating the writings
of Isidore, Bede, Raban Maur, and others.[294]

[Illustration:

  FIG. 1—Types of T-O and Sallust maps. (Figs. 1a and 1b from Santarem,
    _Essai_, 1849–1852, atlas, vol. i, pl. 5, figs. 5 and 1; Fig. 1c
    from Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. iii, 1895, fig. 43.)
]


                             _Sallust Maps_

Closely akin to the T-O maps, but somewhat more elaborate, are the
sketches of the third group (Fig. 1c). These accompany manuscripts of
Sallust’s works and may have been drawn to illustrate a passage in
Sallust’s _De bello Jugurthino_ describing briefly the countries of the
known world. The T-O form is carefully followed, but legends and
pictures add a touch of life. The oldest example (tenth century) is
strictly classical and fails to show Jerusalem, a stock feature in most
medieval maps. Later specimens reveal the influence of the Christian
tradition, and upon them Jerusalem figures as an immense church or
castle.[295]


                             _Beatus Maps_

The fourth group is by far the most interesting. In the latter part of
the eighth century a priest, Beatus, of the Benedictine abbey of
Valcavado in northern Spain wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse,
destined to become very popular in later times. To demonstrate
graphically the division of the world among the twelve apostles, which
is spoken of in a passage included in this commentary, either Beatus or
one of his contemporaries drew a map. Though the original of this is not
now extant, no less than ten subsequent maps for which it served as a
model are preserved in manuscripts of the tenth century and later. The
researches of Miller[296] have shown that three of these ten were
probably derived from a fairly full and faithful copy of the original,
but that the others represent merely a generalized outline. The best
example, the so-called St. Sever map, dating from about 1050 and now in
the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, displays an immense wealth of
detail, legends, vignettes, and pictures of all sorts (Fig. 2).

[Illustration:

  FIG. 2—St. Sever Beatus map. In the original, east is, as here, at the
    top. The geographical features (e. g. the Mediterranean, the Nile
    and its delta) may be recognized more readily, however, by viewing
    the map with north at the top. (From Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. i,
    1895, colored reproduction in pocket.)
]


                          _REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY_


         LIMITED GEOGRAPHICAL HORIZON IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES

In the first chapter, under the heading “The Expansion of Regional
Knowledge,” was discussed the expansion of actual knowledge of the
earth’s surface, and a careful distinction was made between that section
dealing with actual knowledge and the preceding sections of the chapter
which had been concerned with theories. We cannot make this distinction
in speaking of the regional geographical ideas of the early Christian
centuries, for fact and fancy were irrevocably blended. In the Greek and
Roman age knowledge of the earth’s surface was widened by exploration,
trade, wars, and conquests; but in the early Middle Ages the limits of
the accurately known world contracted, and the ocean, Asia, Africa, even
Western Europe itself, became domains of legend and fable.

This does not mean that exploration, trade, and conquest did not
progress. Commerce in silk flourished in the sixth century between
Byzantium and the nations of Central Asia, and much knowledge of those
distant countries was thereby acquired in the Greek world.[297] Between
the eighth and the beginning of the twelfth centuries the Northmen had
penetrated in their open ships to the innermost recesses of the White
Sea[298] and westward as far as Iceland, Greenland, and the shores of
America. Throughout the Middle Ages there was an intermittent flow of
pilgrims to and from the Holy Land. At a very early date the Italian
cities began to lay the foundations of their great Levantine trade. Why,
then, was geographic knowledge not enriched by all this activity? There
were many reasons. The spirit of the age turned the scholar’s mind
almost exclusively to religious and theological matters. He felt no
particular interest in voyages unless they had some religious
significance. He cared nothing about the exploits of piratical Norse
rovers in subarctic seas or about things that Byzantine traders and
diplomats might have seen in the heart of Asia. Even if he could have
read the languages in which the stories of these discoveries were
written, he probably would not have troubled to investigate them. The
pilgrim, forcing his way through hardships and privations to the Holy
Land, was certainly stirred by no interest in the geography of the lands
and seas through which he passed beyond that of finding the best and
quickest practicable route. Once arrived in Palestine, he may have felt
some slight enthusiasm about studying out the topography of the sacred
places. On the whole, however, pilgrim narratives added as little to
Western geographical knowledge of the East as American soldiers’ letters
during the World War added to our geographical knowledge of France.


                 MEDIEVAL CONCEPTION OF THE KNOWN WORLD

The usual medieval conception of the known world was of a circular or
oval area, divided into three continents. Asia occupied the eastern
portion and was cut off from Europe by the Tanaïs (Don) and from Africa
by the Nile. The Mediterranean, piercing the center of the western
section, separated Europe from Africa. The relative size of the
continents was variously represented; Asia was usually thought to be
much larger than either Europe or Africa. The two latter were believed
to be of about the same size.


                                PARADISE

One of the principal Biblical contributions to medieval geography was
Paradise with its four rivers.[299] In the maps of the period, the
garden is drawn at the easternmost limits of the world in accordance
with the words of Genesis (ii, 8), “And the Lord God planted a garden
eastward in Eden.”[300] Martianus Capella, however, by following a Greek
tradition which placed the Hyperboreans in a favored and delightful
country of the far north, caused certain of the Church Fathers to look
northward for Paradise.[301] Modeling their account of Paradise on the
Biblical description and on the ideal landscape of the Roman poets,[302]
the men of the Middle Ages conceived of the garden as a deliciously cool
and shady meadow, made beautiful with flowers of many sorts, watered by
murmuring streams, and redolent with sweet odors.[303] Many theories
were elaborated concerning the surroundings of the forbidden
garden.[304] In order that men be kept out, an impassable barrier must
have encircled it. Some believed that this was an immense wall; others,
a ring of flames; others, mountains and deserts. Some placed Paradise on
an island in the ocean; Cosmas removed it beyond the ocean to the shores
of unknown lands in the east; Augustine, Origen, and Philo regarded it
as allegorical and not real at all.


                           RIVERS OF PARADISE

“And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it
was parted, and became into four heads” (Gen. ii, 10).[305] These four
heads were the sources of the four rivers of Paradise: the Pison, later
thought to be either the Indus, the Ganges,[306] or, sometimes, the
Danube; the Gihon, or Nile; the Hiddekel, or Tigris; and, finally, the
Euphrates. It was a little difficult for some persons at first sight to
understand how all these rivers, whose upper reaches were known in
reality to be very far apart, could actually spring from one
source.[307] Many cosmographers were even tempted to place Paradise in
Armenia, near the known sources of the Euphrates and Tigris. In general
an appeal to the simple theory of the existence of subterranean
watercourses sufficed to solve the problem and to explain the otherwise
absurd belief that the Nile had its headwaters in the far east beyond
the Red Sea.


                                  ASIA


                            _Gog and Magog_

Asia was frequently made the scene of Paradise and of the creation of
man. Here, too, medieval tradition placed Gog and Magog,[308] whose
advent at the Last Day should bring destruction to the world. There are
three different Biblical accounts of Gog and Magog. On the basis of
Genesis (x, 2), which makes Magog a son of Japhet, a Jewish tradition
conceived of this shadowy and fearful personage as the progenitor of the
Scythian tribes. In the book of Ezekiel (xxxviii, xxxix) we read the
prophecy of the ravages and destructions of “Gog, the land of Magog, the
chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,” who should issue with his terrible
hordes from the north and bring death and devastation to the lands of
Israel. Finally, in Revelation (xx, 7) we are warned that “when the
thousand years shall be finished, Satan shall be loosed out of his
prison, and shall go forth and seduce the nations which are over the
four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, and shall gather them
together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.” Here “Gog
and Magog” are not the names either of men or of a country, but rather
of savage tribes. Most medieval writers, following the Jewish tradition,
thought of these tribes as Scythian barbarians of the north—so Josephus,
Jerome, and Isidore, though Eusebius believed that they were Kelts, and
Jerome referred to a certain history which identified them with the
Goths; one chronicle even made the Aquitanians their descendants.[309]

The apocalyptic story of Gog and Magog spread widely in the Orient as
well as through the Christian world. In the East, curiously enough, it
was made a part of the Romance of Alexander. We read in the Koran[310]
that the “two-horned Alexander” built a great wall of bronze and pitch
and brimstone, behind which he enclosed the wild peoples of Yajūj and
Mājūj (Gog and Magog) until they should break forth on the day of the
Last Judgment. This story was probably told for the first time in
connection with Alexander the Great by Procopius in his _De bello
Persico_.[311] It formed one of the most important parts of the
immensely popular work, the _Pseudo-Methodius_, which foretold with
considerable detail the events of the Last Day.[312] It entered into
later versions of the Romance of Alexander itself, although it formed no
part of the versions of the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_ or of the translation
of Julius Valerius.[313]


                    _Romance of Alexander the Great_

The Romance of Alexander, one of the most widely known of the various
cycles of medieval legend, deserves some comment here because the scene
of most of Alexander’s exploits was laid in Asia. The Romance contains
some fantastic geographical details concerning the East in general and
India in particular. The classical stories of the monsters and marvels
of these mysterious lands are here preserved in attractive form. We meet
with Amazons and mermaids, griffons, and men who live on the smell of
spices. We have a text of correspondence between Alexander and the
Brahmin king, Dindimus, in which the latter explains to the Macedonian
conqueror his religion and the simple habits of the Brahmins.[314]


                         _St. Thomas in India_

India was also supposed in the Middle Ages to have been visited by St.
Thomas, the Apostle,[315] who was said to have built therein a great
castle for King Gundophorus. Though little geography is to be gleaned
from the apocryphal legends of St. Thomas and St. Bartholomew in India
and of St. Matthew in Ethiopia, they served to carry the reader’s mind
to distant corners of the earth and are of passing interest to us
because certain elements of the story of St. Thomas became part of the
fabric of the great twelfth-century legend of Prester John. If we are to
believe the _Anglo-Saxon Chronicle_,[316] an Englishman visited India in
the ninth century, for we are told that King Alfred sent a certain
Sighelm to the shrines of Saints Thomas and Bartholomew in A. D. 883.


                                 AFRICA

Africa was utterly neglected. Unlike Asia, it did not become the habitat
of legend and fable. Supposedly of small extent and made up mostly of
desert, it failed to arouse much interest until long after our period.
The universal testimony of cosmographer and cartographer during the
entire age under consideration was to the effect that the African
continent stops well to the north of the equator at the borders of the
sea.


                                 EUROPE

Europe was of course less a land of romance than Asia, but geographical
ideas concerning it were crude enough, as a glance at any contemporary
map or at the brief and dry catalogue of facts given in the encyclopedic
works will show. Isidore, Orosius, and Bede added little to what
classical writers had already said. Local mythology tended to creep into
the geographical conceptions of the best-known countries and to blur
what had been in classical times fairly distinct and clean-cut
conceptions.


                       EXPLORATIONS TO THE NORTH

In one quarter, however, to the north, the horizon of geographical
knowledge was immensely widened. The inner shores of the Baltic, of
which the Romans and early Christians had known next to nothing, became
from the eighth century familiar ground to the Northmen. Furthermore,
the widespread rovings of these adventurous seamen carried them not only
westward and southward to harry Britain, France, and Spain and to
penetrate into the Mediterranean but also northward along the long
stretch of Norwegian coast. Alfred the Great appended to his translation
of Orosius an account of the journey in 890 of Othere of Halogaland
around the North Cape and into the White Sea even as far as the shores
of Biarma Land (near modern Archangel; the word “Biarma” is said to be
related to the Russian “Perm”). In later years Norse expeditions visited
the remote coasts of Finnmark and Biarma, seeking trade and carrying war
and destruction.[317]


                              THE ATLANTIC

The maritime wanderings of the early Irish and their successors, the
Northmen, gave rise to a circle of legends regarding fabulous islands in
the Atlantic and fabulous voyages among them. The poetic imagination of
both Kelt and Viking contributed marvelously to the growth of these
tales. Great and often misguided ingenuity has been shown in modern
times in attempts to find the seeds of truth from which these stories
may or may not have sprung.[318] The most famous legend and the one
destined to exert the strongest influence on the imagination of the
future told of St. Brandan’s journeyings among enchanted isles and
fantastic seas to the west and northwest of Ireland. Actual discovery in
these quarters is recorded in the pages of the ninth-century Dicuil, who
narrates the finding of Thule by Irish priests some thirty years before
his time (825 A. D.) and describes the cold of those regions and the
long twilights at the time of the summer solstice, when one day merges
into the next.[319] The Northmen reached Iceland in 860 and settled
there a few years later; Greenland was discovered by them in 877, though
it was not colonized until the close of the following century.


                    AMERICA REACHED BY THE NORSEMEN

Icelandic rovers also reached America in the latter years of the
tenth century.[320] The _Landnámabók_, compiled from an original
version written about 1200, tells how, about the year 983, Ari
Marsson “was driven out of his course at sea to White-men’s-land
(_Hvitramanna-land_), which is called by some persons Ireland the
Great (_Irland-it-mikla_); it lies westward in the sea near Wineland
the Good; it is said to be a sail of six _doegr_ west of Ireland”
(Reeves’s translation).[321] Though we may not be certain whether
this brief passage is rightly to be interpreted as referring to
America, it is undeniable that soon after Ari Marsson’s discovery
the northeastern shores of our continent were visited by Biarni, the
son of Heriulf, and by Leif, the son of Eric the Red, and that the
latter were followed by Thorfinn Karlsefni and others.[322] Sailing
southwestward, these adventurers came to the shores of a barren
country of flat stones which they called Helluland; thence they
coasted southward past the forested Markland and past long beaches
and sand reefs, until they reached Wineland, with grapevines, a mild
climate, and savage inhabitants (or Skraellings). From some of the
latter, captured by Karlsefni in Markland, the Icelanders learned
that “kings governed the Skraellings” and that “there was a land on
the other side over against their country which was inhabited by
people who wore white garments and yelled loudly and carried poles
before them to which rags were attached” (Reeves’s translation).
This land they identified with White-men’s-land, or Ireland the
Great.




                              CHAPTER III
                    THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MOSLEMS


There is no necessity here of giving a general review of the very broad
field of Arabic geography. The works of the foremost Mohammedan
geographers, Al-Masʿūdī, Ibn Ḥauqal, Al-Iṣṭakhrī, were unknown in Europe
during the Middle Ages, and formal Arabic geography certainly
contributed next to nothing to the knowledge of the earth possessed by
the Occidentals of the Crusading age.


                               _SOURCES_

Other branches of Arabic science, however, profoundly influenced the
development of European thought at this time. As transmitters of
classical learning to the West, the Saracens reintroduced fragments of
the geographical lore of the Greeks. The two classical authors in whom
they had taken the deepest interest were Aristotle and Ptolemy. Their
most important contribution to Western geographical knowledge was to
make known to the West geographical speculations in the works of these
men and in the various treatises which the Moslem writers themselves had
composed under Peripatetic and Ptolemaic influences.


                         INFLUENCE OF ARISTOTLE

Aristotle held a position of preëminent authority among the Moslems in
all matters scientific. Arabic scholars had received his writings both
through Syriac translations and direct from Greek texts. Vast
commentaries on his works were made by Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā, 980–1037
A. D.) in the Eastern Caliphate and by Averroës (Ibn Rushd, 1126–1198
A. D.) in Spain. Aristotelian astronomy, as distinguished from
Ptolemaic, was reproduced with modifications in the work _On the Sphere_
of Al-Biṭrūjī of Cordova, known to the Christians as Alpetragius.[323]
By the end of the twelfth century, owing to the rising interest in
Aristotelianism in Europe (the “flood of Aristotelianism,” as Duhem
calls it), translations had been done from the Arabic into Latin of a
large number of Aristotelian works on astronomy, physics, meteorology,
and many other subjects.[324] It was in these works that most of
Aristotle’s thought and observation in geography had found expression.
Aristotelian physical geography, transmitted through these channels, was
destined to dominate the geographical speculations of many Christian
writers of the thirteenth century.


                   INFLUENCE OF PTOLEMY’S “ALMAGEST”

The Moslems of the Eastern Caliphate also had become familiar with
Ptolemy’s _Almagest_ and _Geography_ through Syriac translations and
through versions of the original Greek text.[325] A manuscript of the
_Kitāb al-Majisṭī_, or _Almagest_, was translated into Arabic in the
days of Hārūn ar-Rashīd by that caliph’s vizier, Yaḥyā, and other
translations appeared during the middle part of the ninth century. Study
of the _Almagest_ stimulated Arabic scholars and incited them to write
such original treatises of their own as Al-Farghānī’s (Alfraganus’) On
the _Elements of Astronomy_, Al-Battānī’s _On the Movements of the
Stars_, or _Astronomy_,[326] and Ibn Yūnūs’ _Ḥakīmī Tables_.


                   INFLUENCE OF PTOLEMY’S “GEOGRAPHY”

Furthermore, Ptolemy’s _Geography_ was certainly known to the Moslems in
Syriac translations and probably also in copies of the original Greek
text.[327] With the _Geography_ as a model a number of Arabic treatises,
usually entitled _Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ_, or _Book of the Description of
the Earth_, were composed at an early period of Islam and served as
bases on which later geographical writers built more complex systems.
One of the most significant was the _Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ_ of
Al-Khwārizmī, composed about the time of Al-Maʾmūn (813–833 A. D.), the
full text of which was discovered forty-four years ago by Spitta.[328]
From another book of the same sort and title Al-Battānī derived the
geographical details included in his _Astronomy_.[329] The latter was
translated into Latin during the twelfth century; and Al-Khwārizmī’s
work was known in Europe at second hand.[330]


                   AZ-ZARQALĪ AND THE “TOLEDO TABLES”

Ptolemy was studied in the western as well as in the eastern centers of
Islam. Toledo, notwithstanding its conquest by the kings of Castile in
1085, long remained a scientific center, where the Arabic spirit of
investigation lingered on among Jew, Christian, and Moor. It was largely
through Spanish channels that the Latin West found its Oriental
inspiration in astronomy and astrology.[331] About 1080 Az-Zarqalī, of
Toledo,[332] who had devised a new type of astrolabe, wrote various
works on astronomical subjects, including a commentary on a series of
astronomical tables that had been constructed by a group of Jewish and
Moslem scholars before his time.[333] These so-called _Toledo Tables_,
with Az-Zarqalī’s _Canons_ explaining them, contained some incidental
geographical information derived in part from Ptolemy’s _Geography_ and
from Al-Khwārizmī.[334] They were rendered into Latin in the twelfth
century by the famous Gerard of Cremona, who probably found in Spain
most of the manuscripts from which he made his many Latin
translations.[335]


                          GEOGRAPHY IN SICILY

Ptolemy’s _Geography_ was also studied in Sicily under the Moslem emirs
and their successors, the Norman kings. From the eleventh century date
several Arabic descriptions of Sicily now known only in fragments but
bearing eloquent witness to a true enthusiasm for geography prevalent
among the Moslem aristocracy of the island.[336] The Normans, who became
masters of Sicily between 1060 and 1071, preserved much that was best of
Arabic traditions and culture, and Moslem scholars played a brilliant
part in the intellectual life of the court. Roger II himself was a
devotee of geography, occupying much of his spare time in collecting
Arabic geographical treatises and in questioning travelers about distant
parts of the earth. “He gave himself up to this work tirelessly for
fifteen years, never ceasing to examine personally into all geographical
questions, to search for their solution and to verify facts, in order
that he might obtain in complete form all the information that he
desired” (from Jaubert’s translation of Edrisi).[337]


                                 EDRISI

At Roger’s instigation and with his aid Al-Idrīsī, or Edrisi (as the
name is more usually written), who had come to the Sicilian court from
Spain, undertook a great series of geographical labors. Little is known
of the life of Edrisi besides a few details to be gleaned from later
biographers[338] and what he himself tells us in the preface to his
_Geography_, as it is usually known, or, to cite its Arabic title, _The
Recreation for Him Who Wishes to Travel Through the Countries_, which
was completed in 1154 or later.[339] We know that he constructed for
Roger a celestial sphere and a disk-shaped map of the world, both of
silver. Furthermore, we are told that Roger provided him with special
facilities for the construction of maps and for the compilation of his
great treatise. It appears that the king and Edrisi together selected
“certain intelligent men, who were despatched on travels and were
accompanied by draftsmen. Just as soon as these men returned Edrisi
inserted in his treatise the information which was thus communicated to
him.” On the basis of observations made in the field, data derived from
Ptolemy and earlier Arabic geographers were correlated and brought up to
date. The book and the maps which were drawn to elucidate the book are
for this reason unquestionably among the most interesting monuments of
Arabic geography; furthermore, the book is the most voluminous and
detailed geographical work written in twelfth-century Europe. After a
very brief description of the earth as a globe, the hemispheres,
climates, seas, and gulfs, Edrisi launches into a long and minute
account of the regions of the earth’s surface. He takes up the seven
climates in order, dividing each climate into ten sections, an
arrangement that is artificial to excess. None the less, Edrisi’s works
are of exceptional quality when considered in comparison with other
geographical writings of their period, partly by reason of their
richness of detail but mainly because of the scientific method used, the
coöperative employment of many observers, and the critical correlation
of their observations—a procedure which was indeed unlike that adopted
by Latin scholars of the time.


                  INFLUENCE OF SICILO-MOSLEM GEOGRAPHY

The question of the full extent to which the fruits of this Sicilian
geographical school became known in the Latin Europe of the late twelfth
and early thirteenth centuries is a matter that awaits further
investigation.

Certainly the influence of Edrisi’s _Geography_ could not have been
great in the world of letters or else traces of it would more easily be
detected in Western literature. Unlike a multitude of Arabic writings of
far less intrinsic value, the _Rogerian Description_ (as the _Geography_
of Edrisi is often called) found no Gerard of Cremona to put it into
Latin, and the authoritative geographical knowledge of the Western world
was destined to develop unenriched by the treasures which Roger and
Edrisi together had amassed.

On the other hand, there is no question but that the Sicilo-Norman
enthusiasm for geography exerted an indirect influence on the evolution
of geographical knowledge, an influence that was to make itself felt
more especially after the close of our period. This enthusiasm for
geography was the product of a mingling of Arabic scientific and
scholarly traditions with Norman maritime enterprise in an island which
occupied a central position in relation to the world of its day. It was
an enthusiasm that arose partly from pure love of knowledge but also in
very large degree from the practical necessities of a sea-faring people,
and it was early applied to the solution of the problems of navigation.
In the words of De La Roncière, “The use of coast charts was destined to
become general in Sicily; a rational method of navigation to be
substituted for the routine of pilotage, and thus the way was prepared
for the progressive conquest of the world.”[340] As De La Roncière goes
on to point out, the Genoese learned the arts of navigation from the
Sicilians in the early thirteenth century and transmitted them
subsequently to the Spaniards, Portuguese, French, and English; and a
new science of the sea was developed upon the foundations originally
laid by Sicilian Moslems and Normans.[341]


                 ORIENTAL IDEAS TRANSMITTED TO THE WEST

Besides the classical heritage, the Moslems also transmitted some
peculiarly Oriental ideas to the West. Al-Khwārizmī was the author of a
treatise with astronomical tables, the translation of which by Adelard
of Bath usually goes under the name of _Khorazmian Tables_.[342] The
original work was a redaction of a book drawn ultimately from Hindu
sources and known as the _Little Sindhind_.[343] Thus it was from Hindu
sources, as is shown by this work, that the Mohammedans got their idea
of the world center of Arin. Hindu religion, furthermore, contributed
something toward the molding of Greek and Moslem doctrines of the
periodicity of the universe and of the Great Year—doctrines which became
widely known in the West through Hermann the Dalmatian’s Latin
translation of the Persian Abū Maʿshar’s book, _The Great Book of the
Introduction_, entitled in the Latin, _Liber introductorius in
astrologiam_.[344] Hindu influences were also felt in an anonymous but
widely read Arabic treatise falsely attributed to Aristotle in the
Middle Ages and called _Liber de proprietatibus elementorum_.[345]


            _ASTRONOMICAL GEOGRAPHY; THEORIES OF THE TIDES_

Turning now from the sources to the material substance of the
contribution of the Moslems, we find that, except in so far as it
brought a knowledge of Aristotle to Europe, it added little to Western
notions either of physical or of regional geography. Though the Moslems
entirely failed to share with the Western World their wide practical
acquaintance with lands and seas, the Arabic writers did nevertheless
introduce some new ideas in the fields of astronomical—or, better,
astrological—geography and in the closely allied study of tidal
phenomena.


                            THE GREAT YEARS

The theory of the Great Years was very popular among the Orientals,
possibly because it appealed to their fatalistic spirit. Arabic
astronomers adopted Ptolemy’s calculation of the length of the Great
Year at 36,000 terrestrial years[346] and seem to have believed that
after every complete revolution of the sphere of the fixed stars, the
planets, as well as the fixed stars, will find themselves in the same
relative positions that they held at the beginning of the
revolution.[347] The Arabic work on this subject most read in the Latin
West was Hermann the Dalmatian’s translation of Abū Maʿshar’s book, in
which it was explained that astral influences—especially the perpetual
circulation of the fixed stars—are the cause of everything which is born
and dies and of everything which occurs between birth and death on this
earth.


                 COSMIC CYCLES AND GEOGRAPHICAL CHANGES

In much the same way that the Chaldeans, Hindus, and Greeks had done,
the Moslems worked out a theory of the supposed influence of these
cosmic cycles on geography.[348] The most striking elaboration of the
theory was made by the “Brothers of Piety and Sincerity,” who formed a
philosophical school in the tenth century after Christ. In the great
encyclopedic work[349] produced by this school (which, incidentally,
contains many other interesting speculations on the subject of physical
geography) gradual alterations in the relative position of land and sea
are ascribed to almost imperceptible changes in the longitude of the
fixed stars resulting from the precession of the equinoxes. Not only do
lands and seas change places, but various types of terrain; in the
course of time “cultivated land becomes desert, desert becomes
cultivated land, steppes become seas, and seas become steppes or
mountains.”[350]

Whereas this curious theory was accepted by the Aristotelian Al-Biṭrūjī,
the author of the pseudo-Aristotelian _Liber de proprietatibus
elementorum_ vigorously opposed to it the following argument.[351] If
the fixed stars revolve around the earth in 36,000 years, the land ought
to revolve around the 34,000 miles which he believed make the
circumference of the earth in the same time, or, as we may infer, at a
rate of slightly less than a mile per year. We should therefore expect
to find certain cities much nearer the coast and other cities farther
from the coast than they used to be. The anonymous author says that if
the theory were valid one ought to be able to observe great changes in
the position of such places as Arin, Ceylon, Byzantium, and Rome in
relation to the sea. But since, as a matter of fact, no such changes are
apparent, the whole theory of the transposition of land and sea falls to
the ground.

Obvious as it may seem to us, this reasoning is remarkable at a time
when actual observation as a foundation for, or check on, theorizing was
rare indeed; and hence it is gratifying to note that the _Liber de
proprietatibus elementorum_ with its argument against the Great Year,
rather than the encyclopedia of the “Brothers of Piety and Sincerity”
with its argument for it, was the work on this subject that was read by
Occidental scholars.


                         THEORIES OF THE TIDES

The Moslems did not add much to the classical theories of the tides
which they transmitted to Christendom. Their fundamental work concerning
tides was that treatise of Abū Maʿshar which we have already mentioned,
a work from which, as Duhem says, all the Middle Ages learned the laws
of the ebb and flood.[352] Here, in the chapters on the moon,[353] a
full description is given of the various characteristics of the tides
together with copious speculations regarding their causes. The actual
observations of fact were exact and careful. Abū Maʿshar explains with
not a little accuracy the relation of the tides to the moon’s rising and
setting, to her phases, and to the position of the sun; he understood
that winds might cause exceptionally high water; he recognized the
influences of local topographic features, that some seas display
different tidal phenomena from others and that the flood waters may be
retained by reefs, or valleys, or deep bays. On the other hand, Abū
Maʿshar’s treatment of the causes of the tides was less successful.
Though he believed firmly that the moon produces the ebb and flood, he
failed to account for the presence of the high tide at the time of the
moon’s opposition. His explanation of the moon’s attraction of the
waters was in keeping with astrological methods of reasoning. Our
satellite was supposed by astrologers to be of peculiarly aqueous nature
and for that reason exceptionally capable of governing the movements of
the liquid element of the earth.

Other theories of the tides entered the West from Arabic sources.
Al-Biṭrūjī’s _On the Sphere_ ascribed their origin not to the moon but
to the general circulation of the heavens.[354] Averroës, in a
commentary on the _Meteorology_ of Aristotle, devoted a confused
chapter[355] to an attempt at showing that ebb and flood are the results
partly of currents produced by differences in level between the ocean
and certain seas and partly of the moon’s attraction of the waters. The
possibility of differences in level between seas and ocean had probably
become known to the Spanish scholar through some garbled rendering of
Eratosthenes’ observations on the currents and levels of the
Mediterranean.[356]


                  MEASUREMENT OF A TERRESTRIAL DEGREE

That the Saracens also were interested in the more strictly mathematical
aspects of astronomical geography is emphatically proved by the fact
that they undertook actually to measure the length of a terrestrial
degree[357] and thereby to determine the circumference of the earth.
Some knowledge of this great work came to the Western world in our
period through translations of the _Astronomy_ of Al-Farghānī.[358]


                         GEOGRAPHICAL POSITIONS

The Arabic investigations, however, which most profoundly interested the
men of the West were those concerned with the determination of the
location of places on the earth’s surface rather than those whose aim
was to find the size of the globe. Stimulated by their interest in
Ptolemy, the Moslems felt a special need for the accurate knowledge of
positions, for upon such knowledge depended the construction of mosques,
which, according to religious law, must face in the direction of Mecca.
Astrology also necessitated this type of investigation. In order to cast
a horoscope one must know what stars are overhead at a particular
moment; and, to ascertain this, one must know latitude and longitude. In
the Arabic astronomic works there occur rules for determining positions
and tables of the latitudes and longitudes of places throughout the
world.[359]

One of the most practical results of Arabic investigations in this field
was a reduction of Ptolemy’s exaggerated estimate of the length of the
Mediterranean Sea. The Greek geographer gave the length as 62° or about
half again too long. Al-Khwārizmī cut this figure down to about 52°,
and, if we are right in our interpretation of the available data,
Az-Zarqalī still further reduced it to approximately the correct figure,
42°. As we shall see in a later chapter, the results of these
corrections became known in the medieval West.[360]

The Moslems, as a general rule, measured longitudes from the prime
meridian which Ptolemy had used, that of the Fortunate Islands (now the
Canaries), situated in the Western Ocean at the westernmost limit of the
habitable earth; but individual writers came to make use of another
meridian farther west, a meridian destined to become known to the
Christian world as that of the True West as distinguished from the
supposed border of the habitable West.[361] Abū Maʿshar, on the other
hand, referred his prime meridian to a fabulous castle of Kang-Diz, far
to the east in the China Sea.[362]


                                  ARIN

The western prime meridian was commonly supposed to be 90° from a
mythical city called Arin (or Arim) situated on the equator, halfway
between the farthest east and the farthest west. This city was said to
have neither latitude nor longitude, and its meridian came arbitrarily
to be placed at 10° east of that of Baghdad. The idea of Arin probably
originated among the Hindus,[363] who believed that the city of Langka
in Ceylon (or perhaps Sumatra)—the abode of devils—lies on the equator.
They traced their prime meridian from Langka through Odjein, a place in
India, to Mount Meru at the north pole—the abode of angels. Odjein was
transliterated into Arabic as “Arin” or “Arim” and was shifted by the
Moslems to the equator. It was made known to the Christian world through
such works as Adelard of Bath’s translation of the _Khorazmian Tables_
(which, as we have already seen, was an Arabic redaction of a Hindu
work) and Plato of Tivoli’s translation of Al-Battānī’s _Astronomy_. In
the latter, Arin was represented as a cupola or tower; and on Christian
maps and diagrams of the Middle Ages it was not infrequently so
depicted.


                    _ARABIC EXPLORATION AND TRAVEL_

This sums up briefly a few of the more significant original ideas that
the Moslems added to twelfth-century geographical knowledge in the
West. By way of contrast, it is not out of place briefly to recall
what they had actually accomplished in the field of geographical
investigation.[364] Moslem trade between the seventh and ninth
centuries reached China by sea and by land; southward it tapped the
more distant coasts of Africa, including Zanzibar; northward it
penetrated Russia;[365] westward Mohammedan navigators saw the unknown
and dreaded waters of the Atlantic. Al-Masʿūdī speaks of the presence
of Moslem traders in the heart of Europe, in a country to which he
gave the name Ad-Dir (probably Bohemia).[366] Arabic literature
abounds with descriptions of the lands within these wide borders; of
their products and kingdoms and marvels, true and fanciful. But all
this was destined to remain a sealed book to the man of the Latin
Occident,[367] who as a rule felt little genuine interest in the world
beyond his immediate ken. He looked to Arabic books for practical aid
in making calendars and star tables and horoscopes; he looked to
Arabic translations and commentaries on Aristotle for help toward a
better understanding of the dark and hidden meaning in the words of
Scripture. The geographical knowledge which he acquired from the
Moslems during our period was merely incidental to other interests, a
sort of flotsam borne in on the great wave of astrologic and
Aristotelian lore sweeping into Europe at this time.




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


                             _INTRODUCTION_

To gain anything approaching complete understanding of the status of the
geographical lore in Western Europe during the Crusading period, one
would be obliged to undertake the colossal task of ransacking
practically all the available literature of this age. From an
examination of selected specimens of various types of document, however,
we may arrive at a fairly correct conception of the kind of geographical
thought and information that was current. Certainly our view of the
subject would not be materially modified by the further accumulation of
illustrative examples. We must, none the less, look to a large variety
of sources: to the writings of theologians, philosophers, historians,
chroniclers, and topographers; to maps, poetry, romances, and even to
works of art. These show us what the sedentary man of the Middle Ages
could learn of geography through reading and study. Pilgrim narratives,
letters, commercial and diplomatic treaties, and many other
miscellaneous documents throw light upon the actual extent of travel
during this century and a half.

Writers of the Middle Ages did not specialize as we do at the present
day. They treated subjects of the most diverse nature within the pages
of the same book. We shall group their productions into a few broad
categories: philosophical and theological writings that were read for
the most part by the scholar and churchman; translations from Arabic
scientific treatises and other works written under Arabic influence;
encyclopedic compilations or attempts to encompass the whole range of
human learning, also for the scholar, and popularizations of these in
prose and verse for the intelligent layman; histories and chronicles;
pilgrim narratives and other records of travel; topographical works;
and, finally, maps.

Other more instructive classifications might well be made. One in which
the works were grouped according to the type of thought of which each is
the expression might bring out the conflicting intellectual
crosscurrents of the age. In such a classification the great
differentiation could be emphasized between writers bound by respect for
authority and writers of originality and independence; between those who
interpreted the words of Scripture literally, those who interpreted them
allegorically, and those who went so far as to neglect or to doubt them.
The classification which follows, based upon the purposes which the
various groups of writings were intended to serve, is merely one of
convenience.


                 _THEOLOGICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS_

The distinction between theology, philosophy, and the physical and
natural sciences was not sharply drawn during the earlier Middle Ages.
Only after the ninth century did the tendency to mark off theology and
philosophy as separate spheres of thought become gradually evident,[368]
and it remained for a much later age to set off the physical and natural
sciences from philosophy.


                           THEOLOGICAL WORKS

Though not much geography is found in the strictly theological writings
of our period, those portions of them which deal with the Creation
embody cosmogonic and cosmographic speculations which have a geographic
character for reasons that have already been explained.[369] Many of the
philosophical writings, on the other hand, are rich in passages of
geographical interest; for the physical geography, like the natural
history, of the Middle Ages was the province of the philosopher.


                            _Peter Abelard_

Among the outstanding theologians of the twelfth century was Peter
Abelard (1079–1142), whose tragic history is well remembered. In his
_Expositio in hexaemeron_, _Sermones_, and more famous _Sic et non_ we
find a few scattered observations of a geographical character. Though
Abelard’s fame rests upon the keenness of his reasoning and the
destructive brilliance of his dialectic, his position when dealing with
the Works of the Six Days was that of mystic.[370] We shall have
occasion to see how the geographical passages from his works reveal a
love of elaborate allegory.


                          _Hugh of St. Victor_

The monastic school of St. Victor in Paris was preëminently a center of
twelfth-century mysticism.[371] A leading figure here was Hugh of St.
Victor, who held the direction of studies after about the year 1125 and
who enjoyed during his lifetime (he died in 1141) a great reputation for
learning in things divine.[372] Among Hugh’s writings we find
_Adnotationes elucidatoriae in Pentateuchon_, containing speculations on
the Creation, and the curious treatises _De arca Noë mystica_, _De arca
Noë morali_, and _De vanitate mundi_,[373] which display a love of
symbolism and include the exposition of a strange theory of the westward
course of the tide of civilization.[374]


                         _Hildegard of Bingen_

Hildegard (1098–1179 or 1180), abbess of a Benedictine convent near
Bingen on the Rhine, was another lover of the symbolic. Her mystic
exaltation took the form of visions in which were revealed to her the
secrets of the universe. With the knowledge thereby attained she served
her fellow man as a prophetess and healer of disease. Besides a series
of letters, she wrote three works recording her visions: _Scivias sive
visionum ac revelationum libri tres_ (1141–1150), _Liber vitae
meritorum_ (1158–1162), and _Liber divinorum operum simplicis hominis_
(1163–1170). She was also probably the author of two treatises,
_Subtilitates diversarum naturarum creaturarum_ and _Causae et curae_,
which, though not avowedly the record of visions, could hardly have been
written except as the result of some form of religious experience.[375]
Her “cosmology and physiology,” as Thorndike points out, were none the
less in essential conformity with “the then prevalent theories of
natural science” although she “displays no little originality in giving
a new turn to the familiar concepts.” She does not, however, “evolve any
really new principles of nature.”[376]


                   _Peter Lombard and Peter Comestor_

To turn from the imaginative and visionary writings of Hugh and
Hildegard to the more coldly intellectual theology and philosophy of the
age, we find in the _Sic et non_ of Abelard the first example of a new
method of handling philosophical and theological questions. This
so-called didactic method was destined to find its culminating
expression in the mighty volumes of Thomas Aquinas. Its essence was to
incite discussion by placing in juxtaposition divergent and
contradictory Scriptural and patristic texts on the same subject.
Abelard did this in the _Sic et non_ without giving interpretations of
his own. Peter Lombard (died 1164), who in his _Sententiae_ followed
Abelard’s method, usually gave in addition his own views on a subject,
though not infrequently the reader was left faced by two or more
conflicting theories. It might almost be said that the _Sententiae_
served to standardize the orthodox doctrine of the age. Shortly after
Peter Lombard’s death Peter Comestor (the “eater”), at one time dean of
the cathedral church in Troyes and lecturer in Paris, produced an
extensive treatise entitled _Historia scholastica_. This compilation of
commentaries on Scripture enjoyed an immense popularity at a later
period, especially towards the close of the thirteenth century.[377]
Comestor, like Peter Lombard, represented the more orthodox point of
view.


         THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES: ITS INTELLECTUAL INDEPENDENCE

Unusual intellectual independence was displayed during the twelfth
century by the philosophical writers of the school of Chartres[378] and
by those who came under their influence. Well known early in the
eleventh century, this cathedral school had acquired, in the first half
of the twelfth, a European reputation, founded on the boldness and
originality of its masters and on the widespread influence which they
exerted through their pupils and associates.


                  _Bernard and Theodoric of Chartres_

Two brothers stand out preëminently among them, Bernard and Theodoric
(or Thierry). Very little in detail is known about the life of either.
Bernard was probably born late in the eleventh century and was
chancellor between 1124 and 1126.[379] He enjoyed an immense reputation
and was called by John of Salisbury the most perfect Platonist of his
century.[380] It seems likely that he died before 1130 and was not the
same man as Bernard Sylvester of Tours, with whom he has often been
confused.[381]

We know even less of Theodoric, who enjoyed a contemporary fame as great
as, if not even greater than, that of his brother. Theodoric was
mentioned by a disciple as the foremost philosopher of the whole of
Europe.[382] Master of the school (_magister scholae_) in Chartres in
1121, the successor to Gilbert de la Porrée as chancellor in 1141, he
produced a large work on the seven liberal arts (the _Heptateuchon_) and
a treatise describing the Creation.[383] The latter, entitled _De sex
dierum operibus_, was in many respects unique, representing a remarkably
rationalistic discussion of a subject in the treatment of which any
display of reason or independence almost inevitably was deemed
heresy.[384]


      _Adelard of Bath; Hermann the Dalmatian; Robert of Retines_

Bernard and Theodoric maintained scholarly connections throughout
Western Europe and counted many famous men among their disciples. The
Englishman Adelard of Bath[385] belongs to their broader circle, for it
is likely that he was acquainted with the Chartres scholars, at least by
reputation, and his important work, _Quaestiones naturales_[386] (dating
from between 1107 and 1142), shows that he held many ideas in common
with the most famous of Bernard’s pupils, William of Conches. In his
wide travels[387] and in his translations from the Arabic[388] Adelard
exemplifies another phase of the awakening intellectual life of the age,
a turning to Moslem literature for new sources of information and
inspiration beyond the standard and easily available collections of
classical, Scriptural, and patristic authorities.

Among the disciples of Theodoric may also be counted the travelers and
translators from the Arabic, Hermann the Dalmatian (or Hermann the
Carinthian) and Robert of Retines, to whose translations we shall later
have occasion to refer.[389]


                          _Bernard Sylvester_

Very closely akin in spirit with the scholars of Chartres was Bernard
Sylvester, who taught at Tours in the fifth decade of the twelfth
century.[390] It has long been a moot point whether or not Bernard
Sylvester was the same as Bernard of Chartres. There are very potent
arguments in favor of identifying them, among the most convincing being
the remarkable manner in which the philosophy of the _De mundi
universitate_ (or _Cosmographia turonense_),[391] written by Bernard
Sylvester between 1145 and 1148, gives expression to theories which John
of Salisbury ascribes to Bernard of Chartres. Yet, despite these
extraordinary similarities, the weight of evidence seems opposed to the
theory that the two names refer to the same man.[392] In any case, if
Bernard Sylvester was not the brother of Theodoric of Chartres, he was
acquainted with Theodoric and with the latter’s work, for it was to
Theodoric that he dedicated the _De mundi universitate_.


                          _William of Conches_

Another member of the Chartres group, William of Conches, was a disciple
of Bernard of Chartres in his youth. He taught at Chartres probably as
early as 1126. Between 1140 and 1150 he acted as tutor to the young
Henry and Geoffrey Plantagenet.[393] Hauréau says that William believed
that “la philosophie tient subordonnées à ses principes généraux, comme
deux sciences subalternes, la théologie et la physique.”[394] His most
significant book, the _De philosophia mundi_,[395] throughout
exemplifies this attitude and reveals to us a mind deeply interested in
physics and natural science for their own sakes and a desire to explain
the phenomena of the universe according to natural and observable laws.
The rationalism of his philosophy brought him into conflict with the
ecclesiastical authorities and necessitated his retracting various
opinions late in life.[396] He died either in 1150 or 1154.


                            ALEXANDER NECKAM

The scholars of the Chartres group formed the intellectual élite of
their age. More in keeping with the normal habit of the period than
their mode of thought was the manner in which the Englishman Alexander
Neckam dealt with matters of natural science. Born in 1157, Neckam had
become a professor at the University of Paris by 1180; later in life he
returned to England, became abbot of Cirencester in 1213, and died in
1217.[397] His principal works were _De naturis rerum_, in prose, and a
verse paraphrase and enlargement of it entitled _Laus sapiencie divine_,
or _De laudibus divinae sapientiae_.[398] In these works we see that
Neckam, though inspired by a lively curiosity and even by some degree of
understanding of experimental and observational science, was on the
whole less original and less courageous intellectually than either
Theodoric of Chartres or William of Conches. Instead of trying to
explain rationally the phenomena of nature as these earlier writers had
done, he was nearly always content merely to describe these phenomena as
facts and to draw lengthy moral lessons from them.

                  *       *       *       *       *

These are merely a few characteristic representatives of the host of
theologians and philosophers of the twelfth and early thirteenth
centuries. Their works serve to illustrate widely diverse tendencies of
thought: the heretical independence of the scholars of Chartres as
contrasted with the mysticism of Hugh of St. Victor, the orthodoxy of
Peter Lombard and Peter Comestor, and the cautious inquisitiveness of
Alexander Neckam. Though these men differed in mental caliber, their
learning was based almost exclusively on the Latin writings of classical
and earlier Christian authors, and most of their geographical knowledge
was borrowed from the sources we have discussed in Chapters I and II.
But our period was also memorable by reason of the influx of a new body
of learning destined to bring about profound modifications in the
methods of European scholarship and to add materially to the sum total
of European knowledge. This new body of learning was made available
through translations from the Arabic.


  _TRANSLATIONS FROM THE ARABIC; WORKS WRITTEN UNDER ARABIC INFLUENCE;
                   ARISTOTELIANISM AND ITS OPPONENTS_

The enthusiasm for the work of translation which prevailed during our
period foreshadowed a far broader enthusiasm of the same sort that
marked the great age of the Renaissance. Only a relatively few scholars,
however, were familiar with Greek; and the number of direct translations
from the Greek was limited.[399] The men of the Crusading age received
the results of Greek scientific investigation primarily through the
medium of the Moslems.

We saw in Chapter III how the Moslems had translated certain works of
Aristotle, of Ptolemy, and of the Hindus and had themselves composed
sundry treatises under Peripatetic, Ptolemaic, and Hindu influences.
Many of these Arabic translations, in turn, were converted into Latin by
Occidental scholars of our period.[400]

Western interest in Moslem science centered at first on the translation
of astronomical and mathematical treatises and somewhat later on Arabic
versions of Aristotle. Indirectly through both of these channels
important geographical conceptions gained currency in Europe.


                    ADELARD OF BATH; PETER ALPHONSI

Among the early translators of astronomical and mathematical treatises
was Adelard of Bath, whose connections with the school of Chartres we
have already mentioned. Through Adelard’s Latin version of the so-called
_Khorazmian Tables_[401] of Al-Khwārizmī, made in the year 1126,[402]
knowledge of the Hindu conception of a world center, Arin, was
introduced into Europe. The _Khorazmian Tables_ had found their way to
Spain by the beginning of the eleventh century and were there adapted
from the era of Yezdegerd to that of the Hejira by a certain Maslama
al-Majrīṭi of Madrid.[403] In addition to Adelard’s version of Maslama’s
work, there is reason to believe that the _Khorazmian Tables_ were also
put into Latin by Hermann the Dalmatian.[404]

A contemporary of Adelard of Bath was the Jew, Peter Alphonsi[405] (or
Petrus Anfusi), who was baptized in 1106 at the age of forty-five and
subsequently became an ardent devotee of Christianity. His _Dialogus cum
Judeo_ contains references to Arin and a few significant observations on
astronomical geography.


                    JOHN OF SEVILLE; PLATO OF TIVOLI

In 1135 John of Seville (also known as Johannes Hispanensis, or John of
Luna) translated Al-Farghānī’s _On the Elements of Astronomy_,[406] a
work from which John of Holywood borrowed much of the materials that he
incorporated into his _De sphaera_ and which thereby was fated to
produce a profound effect on the future development of astronomical
geography during the later Middle Ages. Gerard of Cremona also
translated the same work.[407]

From about 1140 dates Plato of Tivoli’s version of the _Astronomy_ of
Al-Battānī,[408] a close rendering into Latin of Al-Battānī’s chapters
on the theory of astronomy but not of the astronomical and geographical
tables that followed in the original Arabic. Our interest in the
chapters lies in the fact that they contain (Chapter 6) a brief general
description of the inhabited earth widely differing from those found in
contemporary Latin geographical works.


                “MARSEILLES TABLES” AND “TOLEDO TABLES”

Preserved in a twelfth-century manuscript of the Bibliothèque Nationale
is a set of astronomical tables for Marseilles dating from 1140, the
work of a certain Raymond of Marseilles.[409] The _Canons_, or
introductory explanation, of these tables are drawn largely from the
astronomical _Canons_ of Az-Zarqalī;[410] the tables are an adaptation
for the meridian of Marseilles of the _Toledo Tables_. Both Az-Zarqalī’s
_Canons_ and the _Toledo Tables_, with their modifications like the
Marseilles set, contained not a little incidental material of importance
from the point of view of astronomical geography, including a list of
cities with their latitudes and longitudes derived ultimately from
Al-Khwārizmī.[411] That this material enjoyed wide popularity during our
period and later is proved by the existence of a large number of
manuscripts.[412] One of the translations of Az-Zarqualī’s _Canons_ was
done by the hand of the famous Gerard of Cremona, as we have already
seen in Chapter III.[413]


       ROBERT OF RETINES; HERMANN THE DALMATIAN; DANIEL OF MORLEY

It is almost certain that before 1143 the _Astronomy_ of Al-Battānī was
again put into Latin, this time by Robert of Retines[414] (or Robert of
Chester). We do not, as in the case of Plato of Tivoli’s version,
possess the text of this translation, though we have what was probably
Robert’s adaptation to the meridian of London of Al-Battānī’s and
Az-Zarqalī’s astronomical tables. This adaptation, for 1149–1150, forms
a continuation of tables for the meridian of Toledo in 1149.[415]
Furthermore, Al-Battānī is cited, and some of the geographical ideas
expressed in his _Astronomy_ are reflected, in the as yet unpublished
_Liber de essentiis_ of Hermann the Dalmatian, who was a close associate
of Robert and a student of Theodoric of Chartres. The _Liber de
essentiis_ was written at Béziers in 1143.[416] Robert also adapted
Adelard’s _Khorazmian Tables_ to the meridian of London.[417] Another
Englishman, Roger of Hereford, was probably the maker of tables for the
meridian of Toledo and certainly of a series for Hereford dating from
1178, based on tables for Toledo and Marseilles.[418] Towards the end of
the century, still another Englishman, Daniel of Morley, journeyed to
Spain in search of Arabic astronomical lore. Here, at Toledo, he came in
contact with Gerard of Cremona. On his return to England he took with
him “a precious multitude of books” and, “to explain the teaching of
Toledo to Bishop John of Norwich” (1175–1200),[419] wrote a work called
_De philosophia_, or _Liber de naturis inferiorum et superiorum_, the
astronomy of which, as in the case of John of Holywood’s _De sphaera_,
was mainly based on the writings of Al-Farghānī.


            GERARD OF CREMONA; JOHN OF HOLYWOOD (SACROBOSCO)

At about the same time, Gerard of Cremona produced a short independent
treatise, the _Theorica planetarum_,[420] which became a stock text from
which later writers borrowed extensively. This is merely a summary of
the _Almagest_, produced apparently before Gerard made his famous
translation of that great work in 1175,[421] and is of interest to us
because it contains an account of methods of transposing astronomical
tables to different longitudes. It had certainly been read by the author
of the London tables of 1232,[422] a set which, in addition to being of
astronomical value, contains a few incidental notes of geographic
importance.

The _De sphaera_[423] of John of Holywood (also known as John of
Halifax, or John Sacrobosco), dating from the very end of our period,
includes citations from Al-Farghānī’s _Astronomy_ as well as from
classical authors and was the most influential work in the field of
astronomical geography of its century, though the intrinsic value of its
contents was not great.


            ARISTOTELIANISM INTRODUCED THROUGH ARABIC WORKS

The translators of Arabic mathematical and astronomical works during the
twelfth century prepared the way for an event of the first magnitude in
the intellectual history of the Middle Ages—the reintroduction of
Aristotelian learning into the West.[424] It would lead us far beyond
the bounds of this study to try to discuss the immense influence of
Aristotelianism on the development of European philosophy and theology
in and after the thirteenth century. Something of the geographical
content of Aristotle’s writings on physics and natural science, however,
was indicated in Chapter I, and it was during the closing years of the
twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenth centuries that these works
began to gain a hold on European thought. Their influence at this time
was for the most part exerted through roundabout channels: probably in
some cases through Latin translations of Arabic translations from the
original Greek; unquestionably in others through Latin translations of
Arabic translations of Syriac translations from the original Greek; and
in still others through Latin translations of Arabic commentaries on
Aristotle or of works inspired by his writings. The desire or ability to
tap the sources of Aristotelian lore by direct recourse to Greek texts
themselves was exceptional before the middle of the thirteenth century.

The precise date when the Occident became acquainted with the _Physics_
and _De caelo_ is a matter of some doubt. It is likely that Avicenna’s
version of these two books had been converted into Latin at Toledo
before the middle of the twelfth century by Dominicus Gondisalvi,[425]
who worked there under the patronage of Archbishop Raymond, but the
extent to which these early translations influenced European science is
a subject of controversy. It has been suggested by Duhem that Latin
translations of Aristotle were known to the scholars of the Chartres
school, Theodoric, Gilbert de la Porrée, and William of Conches,
passages in whose works certainly reveal some familiarity with
Peripatetic theories.[426] On the other hand, there are no actual
citations of Aristotle which would enable us to prove that the passages
in question show first-hand knowledge of the books of the
Stagirite.[427] The fact that much Peripatetic thought had been brought
to the West through the writers of the late Roman and earlier Christian
periods often makes it difficult, in the absence of actual citations, to
distinguish between what had been learned from these earlier sources and
what was contemporaneously derived from the Moslems.


                          _Gerard of Cremona_

We are on much firmer ground when we turn to the work of Gerard of
Cremona,[428] for we know as a fact that before his death in 1187
this indefatigable translator had put into Latin, of the works of
Aristotle of geographical interest, the first three books of the
_Meteorology_,[429] the _Physics_, the _De caelo et mundo_,[430] and
the _De generatione et corruptione_.[431]


                             _Michael Scot_

Michael Scot, who died in 1236[432] and was remembered by later ages as
a great magician, was another student of Aristotelian science. After
studying in Spain this Scotsman became court astrologer of the Emperor
Frederick II in Sicily. He learned Arabic and composed treatises on
astronomy, astrology (_Liber introductorius_ and _Liber particularis_)
and physiognomy under the influence of Moslem learning. He also
undertook the translation of sundry works on alchemy and astronomy,
among them the treatise of Al-Biṭrūjī, based on Aristotelian astronomy,
and Aristotle’s _De caelo_ with Averroës’ commentary. Associated with
the _Liber particularis_ we have the text of a questionnaire[433] which
Frederick II presented to Michael and which reveals something of that
versatile Emperor’s burning interest in cosmology and physical
geography. The philosopher’s “brief statements” in reply “concerning
hell, purgatory, heaven, and the terrestrial paradise are followed by an
account of the marvels of nature—strange lakes and rivers of the East,
wondrous metals, stones, plants, drugs, and animals, with their
respective virtues” (Haskins).[434] Michael in this connection also
gives expression to familiar, traditional opinions on the earth as a
sphere, though he includes some original observations on volcanoes and
hot springs.[435]


              _Aristotelianism in the Thirteenth Century_

By the time of Michael Scot Aristotelian theories of physics and of
physical geography as introduced through Moslem channels were finding
fairly general currency in the West. Arnold the Saxon, for instance, in
his encyclopedic treatise written perhaps about 1225, gave citations
from the _De caelo et mundo_, the _Meteorology_, and the _Physics_, as
well as from Averroës and other Arabic admirers of Aristotle.[436]
Aristotelian cosmology, astronomy, and metaphysics, however, were not
accepted by Western scholars until after a strenuous intellectual battle
had been waged over them. Serious efforts were made to place these
teachings forever under the ban of the church. In 1210 and 1215 strict
prohibitions against the study of the Averroïstic versions of the
_Physics_ and _Metaphysics_ were issued by the authorities of the
University of Paris.[437] This shows that by that time not only had the
commentaries of Averroës been translated but that they must have become
popular.[438] Indeed, the popularity of Aristotle and Averroës was
destined to increase despite all prohibitions, and after their works, by
the middle of the thirteenth century, had been purged of objectionable
matter by the ecclesiastical authorities, they became prescribed studies
in the curriculum of the University of Paris. Aristotelianism dominated
the scientific thought of the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries;
and the physical geography of the great encyclopedist, Albertus Magnus,
was largely based upon it. Albert, indeed, was sometimes unjustly called
Aristotle’s ape.


                      OPPONENTS OF ARISTOTELIANISM

On the other hand, there were many individuals who, though accepting the
teachings of Aristotle and his Arabic commentators in regard to specific
facts and theories, were none the less sternly opposed to blind and
uncritical adoption of them.


                         _William of Auvergne_

William of Auvergne, bishop of Paris from 1228 to his death in 1249, was
leader of the ecclesiastical party that stood out against the study of
Aristotelian philosophy and theology in that city. It was nevertheless
true, as Duhem tells us, that William’s erudition “had received in
abundance additions from sources which had not enriched the erudition of
earlier centuries: that is from the works of Aristotle and Arabic
authors.”[439] The _De universo_ of William contains much material on
cosmology and natural history.


                          _Robert Grosseteste_

The great English churchman, Robert Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln from
1235 until his death in 1253, presents an even more striking example of
the scholar, well read in Aristotelian and Arabic learning, who was
prone to question many of the Peripatetic doctrines. Grosseteste
deserves a high place in the history of medieval science by reason of
the depth of his scholarship and the originality of his ideas. His
style, however, is often difficult and obscure. From the geographical
point of view several of his treatises are of unusual interest. The _De
sphaera_ is devoted to problems of astronomical geography. In the _De
impressionibus aëris seu de prognosticatione_ rules are laid down for
the preparation of weather forecasts based upon astrological
considerations. The _De luce seu de inchoatione formarum_ explains
Robert’s theory of the Creation. The _De natura locorum_, in which the
influences of celestial rays upon the earth’s surface are discussed,
gives expression to many views that were elaborated in fuller detail by
Robert’s more famous pupil and intellectual successor, Roger Bacon.[440]


                          _ENCYCLOPEDIC WORKS_

Our period was marked by the production of encyclopedic works the object
of which was to bring together as much human knowledge as possible in
convenient, readable, and, frequently, in popular form. These
encyclopedias carried on the traditions of Pliny, Solinus, Isidore,
Bede, and other earlier writers and for the most part were lacking in
originality. Made up of paraphrases and word-for-word excerpts from
older books, they exemplify better than any other type of literary
production the respect which the man of the Middle Ages felt towards the
authority of the written word and his lack of critical acumen. Their
immense popularity shows that they satisfied a distinct want: the lore
contained in them, however worthless and puerile it often may seem to
us, formed an important part of the intellectual cargo of the medieval
mind. It is imperative, therefore, that representatives of this type of
work should be consulted by anyone who wishes to arrive at a just
estimate of the status of medieval knowledge.[441]

Most of the geography of the encyclopedias was a geography handed down
from classical times, a geography but distantly related to contemporary
facts and one in which fabulous elements tended to persist and multiply
at the expense of sound and accurate information. Yet it was the
geography of the majority of the lettered men, and the man who did not
himself actually travel found here practically the only convenient means
of learning about the countries of the world. He might pick up
occasional details of routes to Rome and Palestine from pilgrims,
traders, or soldiers; but only in the pages of the encyclopedias could
he find anything approaching a systematic treatment of the earth and its
various parts.


                           “DE IMAGINE MUNDI”

The most widely read book of this nature was the _De imagine mundi_,
which dates from about 1100. Though this has often been attributed in
recent years to Honorius of Autun (it has also been ascribed to St.
Anselm and with far greater probability to an unknown Honorius
Inclusus), the evidence at hand is insufficient to warrant us in coming
to any definite conclusions on the vexed question of its
authorship.[442] The general character of the compilation is illustrated
by a remark at the close of the dedicatory letter: “I place nothing in
this work except that which is approved by the best authorities.”[443]
The main source of the geographical chapters was the _Etymologiae_ of
Isidore, though the author also drew directly from Orosius.[444] It
seems likely, indeed, that the geographical chapter of Orosius served as
a basis for the entire compilation and provided an outline which was
embellished by copious excerpts of detail from the more elaborate
writings of Isidore, Augustine, and Bede. Furthermore, it is even
probable that the unknown author had a map before him.[445] He appears
to have borrowed directly from the _Collectanea rerum memorabilium_ of
Solinus his account of the marvels of India, though elsewhere he taps
Solinus at second hand through the medium of Isidore.[446]


            LAMBERT’S “LIBER FLORIDUS;” GUIDO’S ENCYCLOPEDIA

Dating from approximately the same period is a similar work, the _Liber
floridus_ of Lambert. Practically all we know of the author is that he
was a canon of St. Omer early in the twelfth century.[447] His book, a
hodgepodge of notices, geographical and otherwise, from Isidore, Bede,
Martianus Capella, Raban Maur, and others, though it did not enjoy
popularity comparable to that of the _De imagine mundi_, nevertheless by
no means lapsed into obscurity during the centuries that followed. There
are at least eight manuscripts of it preserved in the libraries of
Europe, and it was referred to with high praise by writers of the
thirteenth century.[448] The manuscripts are illustrated by crude maps,
among the few remaining relics of twelfth-century cartography.

Of much the same nature is an encyclopedic compilation made by a certain
Guido, probably an Italian, in 1119.[449] It contains excerpts from a
variety of sources, including Isidore, the Romance of Alexander, Paul
the Deacon, and, more especially, the anonymous Ravenna geographer.


                              “LUCIDARIUS”

The _De imagine mundi_ became an important source for later writings. It
was a standard authority during the closing years of the Middle Ages for
those who deliberately undertook to give a geographical description of
the earth. The _Lucidarius_ (or _Aurea gemma_) was a popular
encyclopedia written in German towards the end of the twelfth century at
the order of Henry the Lion. Though embodying the peculiar and fabulous
features of the _De imagine mundi_, it omitted the drier but more
correct geographical and topographical details.[450] The principal
source of much of the natural science in the _Lucidarius_ was William of
Conches’ _De philosophia mundi_. The _Lucidarius_ was translated at a
later date into Danish, Dutch, and Bohemian,[451] and from it were
derived the geographical portions of the famous _Hortus deliciarum_ of
the abbess Herrad of Landsperg.[452]


                           GERVASE OF TILBURY

Another widely read book that came under the influence of the _De
imagine mundi_ was the _Otia imperialia_ of Gervase of Tilbury,[453] a
protégé of Otto IV and by him appointed marshal of the kingdom of Arles.
The _Otia_, composed to entertain the emperor during the leisure moments
of his struggle with Frederick II, is in large measure a compilation of
facts, fables, and theories borrowed from earlier works. The
cosmological chapters are drawn from Peter Comestor’s _Historia
scholastica_, the geographical ones from Orosius, Isidore, and, more
particularly, the _De imagine mundi_, which furnished a framework into
which the statements of the other writers were made to fit.[454] The
large number of manuscripts of the _Otia_ bears witness to its great
popularity.


                            JACQUES DE VITRY

Jacques de Vitry, bishop of St. John of Acre until 1220, in his
_Historia hierosolymitana_[455] also borrowed from the _De imagine
mundi_, especially in describing Palestine and Asia. His interest in the
remarkable caused him to include, as had been done by the authors of the
German _Lucidarius_, most of the fabulous elements of the earlier book
as well as to add fabulous stories from other sources. It was these
stories, derived in part from the _Historia hierosolymitana_ and in part
directly from the _De imagine mundi_, that accounted for the great
popularity of a poem to which we must now turn.


                           “L’IMAGE DU MONDE”

This poem, the _Image du Monde_,[456] destined to be read for over three
centuries, was decidedly the most important of the many works that felt
the influence of the _De imagine mundi_. Like its Latin predecessor, it
is an attempt at the popularization of universal knowledge. The work of
popularization, however, was here carried to the stage of translation
into a popular tongue, which rendered the book available to a much
broader circle of readers. The style was vivid and not lacking in
originality, and the subject matter contained sufficient of the
grotesque and unexpected to assure the poem a long-lived success. Though
the question of authorship and exact date is a somewhat perplexing one,
it seems likely that the _Image du Monde_ was partially composed in Metz
in 1245 or 1247 by a certain Gossouin and within the following two or
three years was added to either by Gossouin himself or by a certain
Walter of Metz, to whom the entire work has occasionally been
attributed.[457] Prior, however, to the composition of the second verse
redaction by Gossouin or Walter, the poem had been put into a prose
form,[458] from which translations were subsequently made into Hebrew,
Judeo-German, and English (the last by Caxton in 1480).


                           “KONUNGS-SKUGGSJÁ”

From the very end of our period there dates an Icelandic dialogue of
more or less encyclopedic scope, a work which might well be called a
northern counterpart of the _De imagine mundi_. This _Konungs-Skuggsjá_,
or _King’s Mirror_,[459] written about the year 1250 or perhaps as late
as 1260, contains chapters that reveal to us something of the status of
Scandinavian knowledge of the geography and natural phenomena of
Iceland, Greenland, and the Arctic seas. But, like the Sagas, so far as
we know, it was not translated into Latin or into the vernacular
tongues, and the type of knowledge contained in it remained until the
great age of discovery virtually the exclusive property of the peoples
of Iceland and of the far north of Europe.[460]


             GREAT ENCYCLOPEDIAS OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY

We cannot well leave the subject of encyclopedic compilations without
mentioning such gigantic thirteenth-century productions as the _Specula_
of Vincent of Beauvais,[461] the various writings of Albertus
Magnus,[462] and the relatively less ambitious popularizations of
Bartholomew Anglicus,[463] Brunetto Latino,[464] and others.[465] The
_Opus majus_ of Roger Bacon is also encyclopedic in scope. These great
works contain a wealth of reference the systematic study of which would
unquestionably shed much additional light on the substance of medieval
geographical knowledge. The innumerable pages of Albertus Magnus,
indeed, show not a little originality; and Roger Bacon stands somewhat
apart from his contemporaries as a fearless exponent of scientific
method.[466] On the whole, however, there is no very essential
difference between the geography of these men and that of their less
well-informed and perhaps less diligent predecessors. This is one reason
why we have felt justified in failing to treat them in detail. Another
reason is that adequate treatment of the geography of the
thirteenth-century encyclopedists would fill another volume at least the
size of the present one.


                                 DANTE

A figure, however, whom we cannot refrain from mentioning in this
connection, though he lived after 1250 and though his genius far
transcended that of any encyclopedist of any age, is Dante. Much of the
information amassed by the laborious compilers of encyclopedic works
(especially Brunetto Latino) was fused by the poet into the _Divine
Comedy_ and molded into his various prose writings. The universality of
Dante’s knowledge embraced the geography and cosmography of his age.
Though we shall not attempt to deal with Dante’s geographical lore[467]
in the pages which follow, it would be a serious mistake to omit all
reference to one who flourished so soon after the end of our period and
who, besides being a poet of all time, was an outstanding figure in
medieval scholarship and, incidentally, in the history of medieval
geography.

The reader who wishes to investigate the geography of Dante and of the
encyclopedists of the thirteenth century will find brief summaries and
references in Notes 92–98 to the present chapter.


               _HISTORIES, CHRONICLES, SAGAS, EPIC POEMS_

The writings of the historians and chroniclers of the Middle Ages,
though they do not as a rule include systematic expositions of
geography, nevertheless often contain incidental geographical matter of
no slight interest. The present section is devoted to a very few
selected specimens of historical narrative of the Crusading age, whether
prose or verse, that are of particular significance from the
geographical point of view.


                            OTTO OF FREISING

Among the outstanding medieval historians was Otto of Freising.[468] A
man of intelligence and breadth, steeped in the academic literature of
his age, Otto, though never going out of his way to write of
geographical subjects, always maintained an attitude of open and
receptive interest toward all branches of science. The range of his
literary and scholarly learning is a key to the intellectual attainments
of the average man of the world of his period. Born about 1114 or 1115
of a noble or even royal family—his maternal grandfather was the Emperor
Henry IV—Otto studied in Paris probably early in the second quarter of
the century. After his return to Germany in 1132 or 1133, he became a
Cistercian and was subsequently made bishop of Freising. His principal
works were a _Chronicon_, running from the beginning of the world to the
year 1146, and the _Gesta Friderici_, recording the deeds of Frederick
Barbarossa down to the year 1156 and continued after that date by
Ragewin (or Rahewin).[469] Among other classical authorities Otto may
have used Seneca’s _Quaestiones naturales_: most of his geographical
ideas, however, were derived from Isidore and Orosius and from certain
unknown “topographers” whom he cites as giving details on the rivers of
Europe.[470]


                           GUNTHER OF PAIRIS

On the _Gesta Friderici_ was based an historical poem composed about
1186 by Gunther of Pairis (in Alsace), of whom we know next to
nothing.[471] This work, the _Ligurinus_, adds little of material nature
to the sources from which it was taken, although the poet converts the
simple, straightforward narrative of Otto and Ragewin into a poem
vividly expressed. It has been shown that the _Ligurinus_, even though
the work of a German author, is a typical product of the poetical school
of France of the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.[472] Where
the writer expands and converts into verse Otto’s and Ragewin’s words
describing natural features of the earth’s surface and geographical
regions, he displays a sense of color and a feeling for nature that are
striking,[473] even though the actual epithets employed are hackneyed
and drawn from well-known classical models. Furthermore, in the
description of Germany he departs so widely from his literary sources
that it seems more than likely that he actually based his lines on
personal acquaintance with the country.[474]


                WALTER OF CHÂTILLON; WILLIAM THE BRETON

Two other historical poems of the same school and of analogous character
to the _Ligurinus_ are the _Alexandreis_[475] of Walter of Châtillon
(also known as Walter of Lille), written about 1180, and the _Philippis_
of William the Breton, published about 1225.[476] These are Latin
hexameter epics modeled on Virgil and Lucan; full of allusions to Latin
literature and mythology, they also show originality and a power of
accurate description of scenes and country.[477] The _Alexandreis_ sings
the deeds of Alexander the Great; the _Philippis_ the exploits of Philip
Augustus of France.


                HISTORIANS AND HISTORIES OF THE CRUSADES

Our period was the age of the reopening of the Levant and the regions of
the Black Sea to Western knowledge through the Crusades and through the
expansion of commerce that came in their train. The historians of the
Crusades, consequently, furnish us with geographical notices of a kind
differing from the stereotyped and secondhand geography of the
encyclopedias. The items in the Crusaders’ records are often the results
of actual experience. They give us an impression of freshness lacking in
the pages of dry compilations like the _De imagine mundi_. But the
Crusaders were not geographers and were without any true geographical
instinct. They rarely felt an interest in anything besides the immediate
events they were undertaking to describe or in matters not purely
practical or utilitarian.[478]

The most important work, from this point of view, is the _Historia rerum
in partibus transmarinis gestarum_ of William of Tyre (born 1130).[479]
This covers events in Palestine and in the Crusaders’ states during the
years between 1095 and 1185 and abounds in observations on the products
and appearance of the country, on the habits of the Arabs—whose language
William had probably learned[480]—and on other peoples of the East.

The _Gesta regis Ricardi_, which has sometimes been erroneously ascribed
to Benedict of Peterborough,[481] records the voyage of Richard
Coeur-de-Lion to the Holy Land in 1190. In the description of the routes
to and from Palestine[482] we find a wealth of detail about the
countries, isles, and seas traversed. The distinctly nautical style and
content in places make it seem not at all improbable that a part of the
book at least was derived from some sailing manual. Roger of Hoveden in
his _Chronica_[483] (to the year 1201) made use of the same sources as
those on which the author of the _Gesta regis Ricardi_ drew, though
Roger’s account is fuller and more detailed, especially regarding Spain.
Another source for the Crusade of Richard Coeur-de-Lion is the _Estoire
de la guerre sainte_ by Ambroise,[484] a professional writer, who took
part on the expedition and who described the Holy Land with less
understanding than William of Tyre almost exclusively from the point of
view of the sufferings and hardships experienced by the Crusaders.

The _Prise de Constantinople_[485] of Robert de Clari, a history of the
Fourth Crusade by a participant, is the work of a man of relatively
humble estate but of a man who felt more or less genuine interest in
strange peoples and their customs. This interest is manifested
particularly by the data that he gives on the Komans of the Russian
plains, some of whom he undoubtedly had seen on the streets of
Constantinople.

A letter from the patriarch of Jerusalem to Innocent III, entitled _La
devision de la terre de oultremer et des choses qui i sont_,[486] was
composed about 1200 in reply to a request from the Pope for information
concerning the Saracen countries. In this anonymous work a geographical
sketch of Egypt and Palestine shows that its author had no limited
acquaintance with the Moslem faith and the Mohammedan peoples.


                     SCANDINAVIAN HISTORICAL WORKS

The geographical knowledge acquired by the Crusaders became the common
property of all Western Europe. That which was acquired by the Vikings,
on the other hand, was disseminated practically not at all among the
peoples of the Latin West. Brief mention, therefore, must suffice for
the Scandinavian sources, even though of all European folk the Vikings
were the most adventurous voyagers and their geographical horizon the
widest.

The introduction of Christianity marked the end of the heroic age of
Norwegian and Icelandic history. It also ushered in an extraordinary
period of literary productivity, the age of the Sagas[487] and
Eddas.[488] The composition of the Sagas began in the twelfth and lasted
on into the fourteenth century, but the events which they relate
occurred far back in pagan days. For the most part bald but telling
narratives of adventure, war, and litigation, they devote little space
to comment or description; and the numerous place names mentioned are
referred to as if the reader were already familiar with them.

The records of the farthest voyages of the Vikings to the shores of
Wineland the Good were not given the final written form in which we now
know them until after the close of the thirteenth century.[489] On the
other hand, the history of Iceland was told by Ari Frodhi (1067–1148) in
his _Íslendingabók_;[490] and the chronicles of the settlement of the
coasts of this isle and of the discovery of Greenland are recorded in
the _Landnámabók_,[491] or _Book of Settlements_, the original of which
probably dates from the twelfth century. The famous _Heimskringla_ of
Snorri Sturluson, the greatest of early Scandinavian historians, records
the history of the kings of Norway. Its title means “the Round World,”
and the prelude consists of a brief geographical description of the
principal countries of the world. The text includes no less than sixteen
Sagas, among them that of Sigurd the Crusader chronicling an adventurous
voyage (1109) of a king of southern Norway to the Holy Land by way of
the Strait of Gibraltar and homeward overland. Scattered geographical
references are found in other Sagas and in the _Icelandic_[492] and
_Greenland Annals_[493] which, though written after our period, throw
light on events that took place before the mid-thirteenth century.


                      LATIN HISTORIES OF THE NORTH

Besides the Sagas, three historical works written in Latin by Northern
writers of our age deserve particular mention inasmuch as they all
contain geographical descriptions of the Scandinavian world. The first
of these is the history of Adam of Bremen. On strictly chronological
grounds Adam, who died about 1076, belongs before the opening of the
Crusading age. We shall discuss him, however, among the historians of
the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, to whose works his writings
are more akin in spirit than to those of the earlier Middle Ages. Adam
was canon of Bremen and master of the cathedral school of that city in
the time of the great Archbishop Adalbert, who had “made Bremen an
Arctic Rome and his court the greatest center of Northern learning”
(Beazley).[494] The archiepiscopal province of Bremen was the largest in
the entire medieval church, including all of Scandinavia, Iceland,
Greenland, the Orkneys, the Faroes, and the Hebrides. Adam was thus
placed in a most favorable position to gather together materials on the
geography and history of these northern lands. His great work (called
sometimes _Gesta Hammenburgensis ecclesiae pontificum_, sometimes
_Historia ecclesiastica_, and sometimes _Bremensium praesulum historia_)
is in four books, the last of which deals with the geography of the
North. Much of this was based on information derived from
contemporaries; but Adam was also well read in Latin literature and
often quotes and copies from the works of Macrobius, Martianus Capella,
Solinus, and Orosius.

From somewhat more than a century later we have another Latin history of
the Scandinavian North—if Saxo Grammaticus’ curiously heterogeneous
combination of mythology, folklore, poetry, and accurate observation
deserves the name of history. The first book of this work, known as the
_Gesta Danorum_, contains a formal geographical sketch of Denmark, the
Baltic, the Scandinavian Peninsula, and remoter countries and isles
beyond the Atlantic, wherein fact is blended with romance. There are
also occasional observations of geographical interest scattered through
the later books.

Finally, in an anonymous _Historia Norwegiae_ dating from the early
thirteenth century we find an introductory passage on the geography of
the regions with which this history deals: a concise description of
Norway is followed by briefer comments on the tributary islands,
Iceland, Greenland, the Orkneys, and the Faroes. Especially interesting
are the author’s observations upon the volcanoes of Iceland. The
contents show that, like Adam of Bremen and Saxo Grammaticus, the writer
must have been familiar with the standard geographical books of the
Middle Ages, with Bede and Solinus, and perhaps with Isidore and Pliny.
The _Historia Norwegiae_, however, can never have enjoyed great
popularity, or else more than one manuscript would be known at the
present day.[495]


                               _LEGENDS_

Many of the legends of our period contain material of geographical
significance, and a few of these may claim our particular attention.


                          ROMANCE OF ALEXANDER

The stories of Alexander the Great served to direct men’s attention
eastward, for, besides narrating the adventures of the Macedonian
conqueror, they gave, as we have already seen,[496] details of a sort
about the geography of Asia, particularly of India.[497] Not only were
the earlier Latin versions derived from the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_
paraphrased and copied by historians,[498] but new elements were added
to the cycle—notably the _Iter ad Paradisum_,[499] an account of
Alexander’s journey to Paradise. Walter of Châtillon (or of Lille),
about 1180, composed in the style of Lucan a great Latin hexameter poem
entitled _Alexandreis_, based in part on the legendary stories of the
Macedonian and in part on the more authentic histories of Justin and
Quintus Curtius.[500] The widest currency, however, was given to the
Romance through its translation into the vernacular tongues. The oldest
French version, which covers the earlier portion of the Romance only,
was written by Alberic of Besançon (early twelfth century?) in
octosyllabic verse of the dialect of the Dauphiny.[501] This was
translated into German by one Lamprecht and was rendered into the
_langue d’oïl_ in decasyllabic form.[502] The Romance reached its
highest vernacular development in a version in alexandrines,[503] the
joint composition of Lambert li Tors of Châteaudun, Alexander of Bernai
(or of Paris), and Peter of St. Cloud. The existence of more than twenty
manuscripts testifies to the popularity of this great poem, which is a
sort of mosaic from various sources.[504] Much of it came from the
_Pseudo-Callisthenes_ through the medium of Valerius, the _Epitoma_ of
Valerius, Alberic of Besançon, and the decasyllabic poem; but some
elements can be traced back to Orosius, Justin, Quintus Curtius,
Eustatius, and Josephus, and the texts show many later interpolations of
unknown origin. The Romance in alexandrines was drawn upon in its turn
by later compilers. From the mid-thirteenth century there dates a poem,
probably by one Eustace of Kent, which incorporates much material from
this and other sources.[505] It includes miscellaneous geographical
elements; and certain of the manuscripts are adorned with a wealth of
magnificent miniatures, representing, among other things, the marvels of
India and all the fantastic creatures encountered by Alexander
throughout the East.


                              PRESTER JOHN

During our period the belief was spread abroad in the existence of a
numerous Christian population in Asia. We find an account of Christians
in India in an anonymous report of the visit of a certain Patriarch John
of India to Rome in 1122, the authenticity of which is apparently
confirmed in a letter of Odo, abbot of St. Remi in Rheims, to a certain
Count Thomas.[506] Of far greater importance was the fabulous story of
Prester John. Belief in this mighty Christian potentate and his immense
kingdom may be traced in large measure to the widely read _Letter of
Prester John_, dating in its earliest form from before 1177,[507]
addressed in some manuscripts to the Byzantine Emperor[508] and
elsewhere to other Western monarchs. The popularity of this is attested
by the fact that Zarncke, its editor, knew of no less than eighty
manuscripts. The question of the sources of the _Letter_ in its original
form is obscure, though the origins of the numerous interpolations can
nearly all be explained. Much, certainly, was borrowed from the
Alexander stories, and much from the legend of St. Thomas in India;
other parts are indubitably connected with the great Oriental reservoir
of fabulous and miraculous lore. The account of the visit of Patriarch
John to Rome and the _Letter of Prester John_ constituted the principal
sources of an anonymous and highly fanciful description of India and of
Prester John’s country found in a twelfth-century manuscript in the
Heiligenkreutzerstift, near Vienna, and commonly called the _Elysaeus_
account.[509] The _Letter of Prester John_ was not only extensively read
in its various Latin versions but was translated into French, Italian,
German, and English.[510]


                              ST. BRANDAN

Another legend which enjoyed perhaps an even greater popularity was that
dealing with the wanderings of St. Brandan (or Brendan) in the Western
Ocean. The story occurs in several distinct forms.[511] The Latin
version had already taken shape before our period opened and perhaps
dates back to the ninth century or earlier. From it was derived in part
an Anglo-Norman version composed in 1121, which ultimately found its way
into the _Image du monde_. The legend furthermore gained currency among
the Teutonic peoples in a somewhat different version developed probably
from a twelfth-century French original.


         _PILGRIM NARRATIVES; MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF TRAVEL_

The travels of pilgrims and traders during the Middle Ages have been the
subject of more careful research in recent years than many other aspects
of our study.[512] Consequently, it will suffice merely to give a very
brief statement of the more significant pilgrim records dating from the
Crusading age.


                      CHRISTIAN PILGRIM NARRATIVES

The first pilgrim after the conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 who has left a
fairly complete account of the Holy Land was the Anglo-Saxon,
Saewulf,[513] a traveler who visited Palestine in 1102 and 1103,
combining trading enterprise with religious zeal. From the middle of the
century the journeys of John of Würzburg,[514] of his follower
Theoderic,[515] as well as of the Icelandic abbot, Nikulás Bergsson[516]
of Thverá, deserve mention because in these records we find a personal
touch that distinguishes them from the majority of similar narratives.
The latter as a rule show that the pilgrims, like the medieval men of
learning, suffered from that tendency, so characteristic of their age,
to copy slavishly what others had said rather than to rely on their own
powers of observation. This is particularly well illustrated by the
majority of pilgrim records dating from after the early years of the
twelfth century, when, as Beazley puts it, a decline had set in,
“hastened by the compilation of standard guidebooks, which may be
faintly described as legendary and inaccurate, and from which the later
pilgrim narratives blindly copy, to the ever growing exclusion of
anything independent or scholarly. Two of these handbooks, known as the
_Old_ and the _New Compendium_, are the source of most of the tracts on
the Holy Road which have been left us, under various names, from the
time of the Second Crusade to the close of the Middle Ages.”[517] To
this dry, guidebook type belong the narrative ascribed to Fetellus,
archdeacon of Antioch,[518] and a series of anonymous accounts of
pilgrimages dating from the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.
Though several of these contain more or less original matter, the
desiccating influence of the _Old Compendium_ is nearly everywhere
apparent.[519]

Besides the pilgrims other travelers were on the road, and the records
of their travels have in some cases come down to us. The journeys of
Giraldus Cambrensis through Wales and Ireland will be discussed in the
next section, on topographical works. Narratives of travel are also
occasionally to be found in historical works and chronicles, poems, and
letters.


                           LETTERS OF TRAVEL

The letter was an honored form of literary expression throughout
antiquity and the Middle Ages. Carefully composed epistles of the
ecclesiastic and educated man of the world were looked upon as more than
mere media for the conveying of information. Not infrequently they were
highly polished specimens of stylistic art, worthy of finding a
permanent place in literature. From our point of view, they are of
interest for the personal accounts of journeys which they sometimes
contain.[520] Guy of Bazoches, for instance, who was precentor of the
church of St. Stephen at Châlons, gave a brilliant description of his
experiences and of what he saw on the Crusade of 1190 in a series of
letters to his nephew and to others.[521] Conrad of Querfurt, bishop of
more than one see in Germany during the last years of the twelfth
century, wrote enthusiastically of his wanderings through Italy in a
letter preserved for us in Arnold of Lübeck’s _Chronica Slavorum_.[522]
A thorough study of the epistolography of the Crusading age would surely
reveal a wealth of geographical lore.


                            JEWISH TRAVELERS

The Jews of the Middle Ages often journeyed farther afield than their
Christian contemporaries. Their travels, for the most part in the
interests of commerce, though in some instances in the nature of
pilgrimages to Jerusalem, a city holy to Jew and Christian alike,[523]
were facilitated by the presence of Hebrew communities in nearly all the
cities of Europe and Western Asia. Strongly imbued with the racial
consciousness of a vigorous and often oppressed people, the members of
these communities did all in their power to receive the travelers and
speed them on their way. The books composed by such Jewish wanderers as
Benjamin of Tudela and Petachia of Ratisbon have been preserved and are
invaluable as geographical records. It should be remembered, however,
that they were written by men of a despised race and in a tongue unknown
to the Christians of the West and that the geographical lore which may
have been widespread among the more intelligent Hebrews never became an
integral part of the geographical knowledge of Christendom. Hence in the
pages which follow and which deal primarily with the geographical
knowledge of Western Christendom but relatively little space can be
devoted to Jewish geography.

A few words, nevertheless, must be said of Benjamin and of Petachia.


                          _Benjamin of Tudela_

Rabbi Benjamin came from the small Spanish city of Tudela on the Ebro.
It was probably about the year 1159 that this observant wanderer
journeyed eastward from his native town, moving leisurely through
southern France, Italy, Greece, Constantinople, and thence by sea to
Syria. After a thorough examination of the cities of Syria and Palestine
he made his way overland to Baghdad. It is unlikely that he penetrated
beyond Mesopotamia, though on his homeward journey he visited Egypt
sometime before 1171 and returned to his home in Castile in 1173. He
appears to have kept a record as he went along, and from a critical
examination of his book it is possible in a general way to reconstruct
his route. He describes in detail the cities he passed through and the
distances in days’ journeys, though not the directions, from one to
another. He notes particularly the names of the leading Jews of each
place and gives estimates of the numbers of the Jewish population.
Indeed, probably one of his main purposes was to get in touch with Jews
of as many countries as possible in order to determine where they were
treated well. One result of the Crusades was an outburst of persecution
of Hebrews throughout Christendom, and Benjamin, besides traveling for
the sake of trade, was undoubtedly seeking for places “where his
expatriated brethren might find an asylum” (Adler).[524] But, as well as
revealing an interest in the Jewish inhabitants of the regions he
traversed, his book gives us many significant data in regard to commerce
and politics, monuments and natural features. For the regions actually
visited by Benjamin this information is accurate and precise, but for
the farther parts of Asia it becomes confused and often legendary.[525]


                         _Petachia of Ratisbon_

The second of the great Hebrew travelers of the twelfth century was
Rabbi Petachia of Ratisbon in Bavaria. In the ninth decade of the
century Petachia traveled eastward from Prague through Poland, Russia,
Transcaucasia, and Kurdestan to Baghdad, whence he returned homeward by
way of Palestine. The outward journey was a most unusual exploit for
this time, traversing the steppes of Russia then infested with wild
Tatar tribes. Unfortunately, much that was most important and
significant in Petachia’s book appears to have been removed by Rabbi
Yahudi the Pious, “who acted as Petachia’s literary mouthpiece”
(Beazley).[526]


                         _TOPOGRAPHICAL WORKS_

We must now examine a few works on the geography and topography of local
regions.


                           GODFREY OF VITERBO

In a manuscript of the mid-twelfth-century writings of Godfrey of
Viterbo, and in all probability to be ascribed to Godfrey, there is a
poem entitled _Denumeratio regnorum imperio subjectorum_.[527] The
writer explains his purpose in the following terms: “Not the wars of
kingdoms are here set forth, but their fortune (pride?), their rivers,
the extent and kind of regions which constitute them, the types of
customs, the manner of harvesting and of trade.”[528] In the course of
the poem he treats of Rome, of Apulia and other Italian districts
subject to Rome, of the kingdom of the Lombards, of Venetia, of “true
France”—by which he means the lands of the Franks along the lower
Rhine—of Basel, of Alsace, of Strasburg, of Worms; but, though much of
the detail constitutes a poetic geography of peoples and cities, little
attention is paid to physical features.


                         GERVASE OF CANTERBURY

Among the lesser writings of the English chronicler, Gervase of
Canterbury, we find a _mappamundi_ dating from about the year 1200.[529]
This is a brief account of England, its dimensions[530] and languages,
followed by a table in three columns showing, for each county. (1) the
most important ecclesiastical officers, archbishops, bishops, abbots,
and priors; (2) the names of the churches; and (3) the religious orders
and mother churches to which the various ecclesiastics appertained.
After this there follows a list of hospitals, castles, islands, fresh-
and salt-water springs, and other curiosities.


                          GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS

By all means the most important topographical works of our period,
however, came from the pen of Giraldus Cambrensis, or Gerald of Barry
(_c._ 1146-_c._ 1222).[531] This active and intelligent Norman-Welsh
ecclesiastic, who at the time had already made one visit to Ireland, was
appointed chaplain to Henry II in 1184 and in the following year was
sent as counselor to the young Prince John on the latter’s expedition to
Ireland. During the expedition he collected materials for two treatises,
the first of which, the _Topographia Hiberniae_, was completed in 1188.
Though Giraldus’ knowledge of Ireland in reality was limited, barely
extending beyond the areas occupied by the English, though his
impression of the Irish people was prejudiced and hostile, and though he
overburdens us with the recitation of marvels, his books show, none the
less, that their author possessed a keen interest in natural history and
geography and that his powers of observation were far from mediocre. The
second treatise, the _Expugnatio Hiberniae_, or history of the English
conquest of the island, contains much less geographical material than
the _Topographia_.

In 1188, when Henry II was about to start out on the Crusade, he sent
Archbishop Baldwin of Canterbury into Wales to preach there and urge the
people to take the cross. Giraldus accompanied the archbishop on this
tour and subsequently wrote an account of it in his _Itinerarium
Kambriae_. Together with the _Descriptio Kambriae_ that followed a few
years later, this contains many accurate and important remarks and notes
on the physical and human geography of Giraldus’ native land.

These treatises on Ireland and Wales hold a unique position in the
literature not only of our period but of the entire Middle Ages. Brewer,
in his introduction to the collected works of Giraldus, says that the
_Topographia Hiberniae_ is a “monument of a bold and original genius”
and that Giraldus “must take rank with the first who descried the value
and, in some respects, the proper limits of descriptive geography.”[532]
Though this may be a little too strong, we readily agree with Dimock’s
estimate of the treatises on Wales: “His account of the land and the
people of Wales will bear very honourable comparison with any
topographical attempt that had appeared up to his time and with any that
appeared for many ages afterwards.”[533] Giraldus was in a very real
sense the forerunner of the modern writer of the better sort of book of
travel. His works reveal to us a mind keenly interested in the results
of its own observation and not merely in collecting what others had
said. Giraldus was certainly enthusiastic, and we are almost tempted to
say that he was endowed with an “outdoor” and even “Rooseveltian”
interest in the world about him.

Before leaving the topographical works, mention should be made of a
little anonymous guide to the monuments and antiquities of Rome, the
_Mirabilia urbis Romae_,[534] dating from the late twelfth century and
widely read during the years that followed.


                                 _MAPS_

From the age of the Crusades date several of the most characteristic
medieval maps. These highly important sources, which serve so admirably
to illustrate the geographical conceptions of the time, have been made
the object of such thorough and careful research by Konrad Miller,[535]
the results of whose investigations are well summarized in Beazley’s
_Dawn of Modern Geography_,[536] that it hardly seems necessary here to
devote a great deal of space to them. Let us merely indicate what the
more important maps were, and show in a general way their relation to
the literature of the age, leaving for Chapter XI a brief discussion of
them as typifying medieval geographical thought.

We saw in Chapter II that the maps of the world drawn before 1100 and
now extant could nearly all be classified in four groups.


                               ZONE MAPS

1. Of the first, zone maps, or diagrams illustrating the division of the
earth’s surface into zones, examples occur in twelfth- and
thirteenth-century manuscripts of Macrobius, of the _De imagine mundi_,
of Lambert’s _Liber floridus_ (Fig. 3), of William of Conches’ _De
philosophia mundi_, of Herrad of Landsperg’s _Hortus deliciarum_, and of
John of Holywood’s _De sphaera_.[537] The Paris manuscript of Peter
Alphonsi’s _Dialogus_ also contains two related diagrams, one showing
the eccentricity of the sun’s orbit and the other the division of the
northern hemisphere into climates. Arabic influence upon Peter Alphonsi
is revealed by the fact that south is at the top of his diagrams,
instead of east, according to the almost universal custom of medieval
Christian cartography.[538]


                       T-O MAPS AND SALLUST MAPS

2. The diagrammatic T-O group are also represented. By all means the
most interesting of these is a map preserved in a manuscript in St.
John’s College, Oxford, and dating from 1110. Somewhat more elaborate
than others of the same type, this one assigns Greek names to the
cardinal points of the compass, a circumstance which has given rise to a
plausible conjecture that it may have been a copy of an original found
in the Levant at the time of the First Crusade.[539]

[Illustration:

  FIG. 3—Zone map in an early twelfth-century manuscript of Lambert of
    St. Omer’s _Liber floridus_, viz. Ghent Codex 2, fol. 24 vo. East is
    at the top. (From Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. iii, 1895, fig. 59.)
]

3. There also date from our period several examples of the ornamented
T-O maps drawn to illustrate Sallust’s works.[540]


                              BEATUS MAPS

4. We saw that the existing specimens of that series of maps of the
world drawn to elucidate a passage in Beatus’ commentary on the
Apocalypse appear to have come from two sources: (_a_) maps which were
modeled closely on the original map of Beatus or a contemporary copy and
(_b_) those which were merely generalized outlines of it.[541]

_a._ A map dating from 1203 and preserved at Osma in Old Castile comes
nearest to the original in design and form, if not in the richness of
detail (Fig. 4). Alone of all the Beatus type this shows the heads of
the twelve apostles scattered over the earth’s surface. Another map,
probably derived from the same source, is to be found in the
Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris; though it is rich in detail, little
attempt was made to show localities in their proper relative positions,
and consequently the geography represented is chaotic to an extreme.

[Illustration:

  FIG. 4—Osma Beatus map dating from 1203 showing the division of the
    world among the twelve apostles. East is at the top. (From Miller,
    _Mappaemundi_, vol. i, 1895, p. 35.)
]

_b._ There are also three or four maps dating from our period from the
second source. Their main interest lies in the remarkable naïveté of
workmanship.


          MAPS OF LAMBERT, GUIDO, HENRY OF MAYENCE, AND OTHERS

In addition to the above, for which we have prototypes from the period
before 1100, there are a number of maps of the world of the twelfth and
early thirteenth centuries, the prototypes of which either have been
lost or never existed. Among the most notable of these is one found in
certain manuscripts of Lambert’s _Liber floridus_.[542] It was compiled
from the usual medieval authorities, Isidore, Orosius, Julius Honorius,
Martianus Capella, Pomponius Mela, Solinus, the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_,
and the Bible, though there also appear upon it a few names that could
have been taken only from contemporary sources. The influence of
Macrobius is most strikingly revealed, for, unlike most other medieval
maps which indicate the known world (Asia, Europe, and Africa) as
occupying the entire area or by far the greater part of the world disk
(as in the Beatus group), Lambert’s map divides the disk along its
diameter by a zone representing the course of the sun and places in the
southern hemisphere an austral continent of magnitude equal to that of
the _oikoumene_.[543]

Guido’s compilation of geographical works, made in 1119, contains in two
manuscripts not only a T-O map but also a map of the world accompanying
a selection from the book of the anonymous Ravenna geographer and a
detailed map of Italy and the surrounding lands. The map of the world is
peculiar because of the enormous area which the Mediterranean occupies.
Miller believes it to be a reduced sketch of a large map of the world
and holds that the detailed map of Italy is a copy of a small portion of
this same original.[544]

A compilation of the _De imagine mundi_, put together by one Henry,
canon of the Church of St. Mary in Mayence, in 1100 and preserved in a
late twelfth-century copy in Cambridge, England, contains a world map
(see below, p. 245, Fig. 6, inset). Though indirectly made from the
sources that the writers of the _De imagine mundi_ and other medieval
cosmographies utilized, it was probably not compiled directly from the
_De imagine mundi_ but rather from a large wall map. Its affinities to
the immense late thirteenth-century world disk in Hereford Cathedral
make it seem possible that both had a common source. In addition to the
older nomenclature, about a dozen more modern place names are to be
found upon it.[545]

A map of the world which somewhat resembles that of Henry of Mayence is
also to be found in two manuscripts of the _Chronica maiora_ (or
_Historia maiora_) of Matthew Paris. Though there are many names that
have come down to modern times, the geography is meager and poor, in
striking contrast to the detail of Matthew’s map of Britain,[546] to
which reference is made below.

To complete the discussion of _mappaemundi_, mention must be made of a
very small but very neat little map in a late thirteenth-century Psalter
in the British Museum. If this was not actually drawn during our period,
it undoubtedly had predecessors much like it, and it shows marked
resemblances to the map of Henry of Mayence as well as to the Hereford
and Ebstorf maps.[547]


                             REGIONAL MAPS

Several of the regional maps, or maps of limited areas, dating from our
period may be merely fragments or copies of small portions of maps of
the world. This is certainly true of the map of Europe in the Ghent
manuscript of Lambert’s _Liber floridus_, which depicts that continent
crammed into slightly more than a quarter of a circle with no attempt to
show the articulations of the coast. The Guido map of Italy, as we have
already seen, probably represents a portion of a larger map, and the
same can possibly be said of the maps of the East and of Palestine which
follow a treatise by Jerome, entitled _De situ et nominibus locorum
Hebraicorum_, or _De Palestinae locis_, in a manuscript now in the
British Museum. Though these two maps were actually drawn in the twelfth
century, they represent the cartography of a very much earlier age and
perhaps may be attributed to Jerome himself.[548] They were drawn to
illustrate the Biblical geography of Palestine and the Orient, and they
show a great wealth of Scriptural legends. Other legends were taken from
profane sources, such as the writings of Isidore, Orosius, Julius
Honorius, Dionysius, and the Romance of Alexander; and affinities to the
Peutinger Table show that the draftsman was under the influence of the
cartography of the Roman imperial epoch.

Among the regional maps that had no connection with _mappaemundi_ are
plans of Jerusalem (“Situs Ierusalem”) accompanying twelfth- and
thirteenth-century manuscripts of an anonymous work written about 1109
and entitled _Gesta Francorum Ierusalem expugnantium_ (Fig. 7, p. 250,
below). Though these plans reveal many names from the early Crusading
age, their outlines as a whole—the fact, for instance, that Jerusalem is
shown to be circular instead of rectangular—make it seem probable that
they represent a schematic diagram of the Holy City going back to as
early as the sixth century and brought up to date by the anonymous
compiler of the Crusading epoch.[549]


                    _Matthew Paris’ Maps of Britain_

In addition to the map of the world of which we have spoken already, the
works of Matthew Paris contain no less than five regional maps.[550] Two
of these, the “Situs Britanniae” and the “Schema Britanniae,” are simple
diagrams of Britain and are of no particular importance. The other three
are far more significant. The first, a pictorial itinerary of the route
from London to southern Italy, with legends in Old French and Latin,
delineates vividly towns and principal topographic features. The second
is a map of Palestine which superficially resembles that of Jerome; the
names, however, are in French, and the legends refer to places familiar
to the contemporary pilgrim and Crusader. Finally come the three
manuscript variants of Matthew’s map of Britain, which, as Beazley
observes, “among all designs of purely medieval origin ... show the best
evidence of critical study, the most systematic attempt at the exact
delineation of a particular country”[551] (for one variant, see below,
p. 343, Fig. 9). There is a profusion of detail and accuracy in the
representation of the relative position of places refreshing when we
contemplate the confusion and credulity manifested in the earlier works.
This map is also the first example of late medieval cartography in which
north instead of east is shown at the top of the sheet.




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


Geography in the Middle Ages did not form a distinct and separate
science. The student who learned anything of geography learned it
incidentally to the study of other subjects and never thought of it as
sufficiently dignified to enjoy a place by itself in the scholastic
curriculum. Even the word “geography” was scarcely ever used.[552] The
term _cosmographia_, sometimes employed to distinguish certain aspects
of our subject from geometry, included practically all branches of
natural history, the sciences of animals, rocks, monstrosities, and
meteorological phenomena. On the other hand, cosmography did not
comprise many of the topics with which we are concerned, particularly
those lying on the border line between geography, astronomy, and
geology. The question of the origin of the earth was in the province of
the theologian of the Middle Ages.


                   GEOGRAPHY INCLUDED UNDER GEOMETRY

The well-known seven liberal arts formed the foundation of the work in
the medieval schools. From them the student might advance to higher
researches in philosophy and theology, but the seven arts were the base
of all learning.[553] Martianus Capella’s _De nuptiis Philologiae et
Mercurii_ was an attractive and somewhat imaginative exposition of the
arts and had become one of the most popular of medieval textbooks long
before the twelfth century.[554] Here each art is personified as a
gorgeously clad woman, and the seven together compose the escort of
“Philosophy.”

In practical teaching, the arts were divided into two groups: the
trivium, comprising grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic (or logic); and the
quadrivium, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy (astrology), and music.
Geoffrey of St. Victor, in his _Fons philosophiae_, gives[555] an
allegorical description of the arts as a spring which divides into two
main streams, the trivium and quadrivium, that in turn separate into
three and four lesser streams respectively. The teaching of practically
all the natural science of the Middle Ages was included in the
quadrivium. Geometry was generally expanded to include geography and
quite naturally so in view of prevalent opinions regarding its origin.
Adelard of Bath, in his _De eodem et diverso_, repeats an old story to
the effect that in the early days men began to set up stones as
boundaries.[556] Disputes about claims inevitably arose, in Libya
because of sand, and in Egypt because the Nile often obliterated or
destroyed the stones. This necessitated the invention of the science of
geometry, or surveying, by the application of which the bounds might be
replaced so that it would be “possible for all the centuries to have an
everlasting rule for the measurement of land.”[557] Out of the invention
of geometry, Adelard adds, arose subsequently the custom of subdividing
territory into areas of various sizes.[558] Thus it happened that
geometry had become closely allied in the classical and medieval mind
with matters of geographical or topographical interest. Capella includes
his long geographical discourse among chapters devoted to geometry and
makes his symbolical figure of the latter science carry in one hand a
compass and in the other a sphere to represent the terrestrial
globe.[559] Alan of Lille, in the _Anticlaudianus_, describes Geometry
as carrying a scale with which she measured the earth: “The maid carries
a rod by which she encircles the entire earth.”[560] In the sculptured
figures of the cathedrals Geometry is often depicted compass in
hand.[561]


                   GEOGRAPHY INCLUDED UNDER ASTROLOGY

Geography was not always placed in a subordinate position to geometry in
the quadrivium. In the _De divisione philosophiae_ of Dominicus
Gondisalvi, which follows the Aristotelian rather than the Platonic
division of knowledge, we find our science grouped under astrology. Of
the latter art, Dominicus says,[562] there are three parts: the first is
concerned with the number and shape of the heavenly bodies; the second
with their movements; and the third with the earth, those regions that
are inhabited and those that are not, the climates, and the varying
influences exerted by the location of places and the revolutions of the
universe over happenings on the earth’s surface.[563]


          GEOGRAPHY AND THE ARISTOTELIAN DIVISION OF LEARNING

Both geometry and astrology belonged in the quadrivium. Where did the
higher study of the arts of the quadrivium fall in the general
classification of knowledge?

The medieval mind tended to seek for a logical and symmetrical
subdivision of the sum of all knowledge. The desire for systematization
found its supreme expression in the great philosophic structures of the
thirteenth century, the systems founded on Aristotle and devised by such
men as Albertus Magnus. Prior to the thirteenth century confusion had
reigned. According to the Platonists, who divided philosophy into logic,
ethics, and physics, the study of the mathematical and natural
sciences—and, therefore, of geography—fell under the heading of physics.
Aristotle, more logically perhaps, had divided the subject matter of all
human learning into two great categories, theoretical knowledge and
practical knowledge. Theoretical knowledge included physics,
mathematics, and metaphysics (or theology). The studies of the
quadrivium were thrown by the Aristotelians under the heading of
mathematics: geography, then, became to those who followed the
Aristotelian classification—Gondisalvi, Hugh of St. Victor,[564] Roger
Bacon—a sub-department of mathematics.

But on the whole we need not linger over this topic, because the
question of exactly where geography belonged in the artificial systems
devised by the medieval mind was largely a matter of academic interest
even in the Middle Ages and was without influence on the actual
condition of the geographical lore of that time.




                                PART II
THE SUBSTANCE AND CHARACTER OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL LORE OF THE TIME OF THE
                                CRUSADES




                               CHAPTER VI
                 COSMOGONY, COSMOLOGY, AND COSMOGRAPHY


In the preceding chapters the attempt has been made to show the origins
of a large part of the geographical lore of the Crusading epoch, the
sources from which we may learn about it, and where it stood in the
classification of learning. Now we may turn to our central theme: an
estimate of its actual substance and character.

This geographical lore was in no sense a unified body of knowledge and
belief. It was no more a unit than the religious thought of the age, or
the philosophy, astronomy, or morals. No one in the Middle Ages was
acquainted with all the facts and theories with which we shall have to
deal. Mental caliber, credulity, critical spirit, curiosity,
opportunities for research and for travel—these all varied widely with
the individual and determined his geographical concepts. Nevertheless,
though there was no unity of knowledge or belief in regard to specific
facts and no unity of point of view, the reader will not fail to
perceive, in the multitude of illustrative details which are presented,
that certain habits of thought and modes of expression were typical of
the epoch as a whole.

We must first discuss what was known and believed about the earth in its
larger relations, both in time and space, to the remainder of the
universe: opinions about the Creation, about the size and shape of our
terrestrial globe, about the influences exerted by the heavenly bodies
in determining or affecting geographical conditions upon its surface.

In the Introduction we explained why it is justifiable when dealing with
ancient and medieval geography to wander into the fields of cosmogony
and cosmography far beyond what are now regarded as the rightful limits
of geography. The present chapter, it is hoped, will make clear how
closely medieval conceptions of the present condition of the earth may
be connected with the medieval idea of the origins and nature of the
universe.


 _GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE COSMOLOGY AND NATURAL SCIENCE OF THE PERIOD_

These difficult questions of cosmogony, cosmology, and cosmography
excited keen and vivid thinking because they lie on the border between
philosophy and theology. Men were more interested in attempting to solve
the insoluble mysteries of God and the universe than they were in the
world of nature immediately surrounding them. Immense and weighty
volumes were written in commentary on the Works of the Six Days, wherein
complicated arguments were elaborated with the finesse of scholastic
logic. In an age of faith, the religious enthusiasm of the architect and
artisan was transmuted into lofty cathedrals; that of the theologian
turned to the elucidation of the words of Scripture. To analyze these
words, to comment upon their minutest detail, to reveal the meaning that
presumably lay behind them was not only a work of piety and devotion but
an absorbing intellectual pastime for keen-witted thinkers. In more
concrete realms of natural science, the epoch was characterized by
little enough observation and creative thought. The teachings of Plato,
of Aristotle, and of the other available classical, Arabic, and early
Christian authorities were accepted and adopted uncritically. Very
different was the case with matters of cosmogony and cosmography. Here
was highly controversial ground where classical opinions were either
enthusiastically defended as casting light on Scripture or else bitterly
attacked as subversive of all truth.


          THE CHARTRES GROUP: BERNARD SYLVESTER AND THEODORIC

We have seen in Chapter IV that the scholars of the Chartres group and
their pupils during the early twelfth century were endowed with peculiar
freedom of thought.[565] We note in the works of Bernard, Theodoric,
Adelard of Bath, William of Conches, and Bernard Sylvester a wide
departure from authoritative, orthodox theology. Theodoric, William, and
the two Bernards were readers of Chalcidius’ translation of the
_Timaeus_, of Macrobius, and perhaps of the writings of the great
ninth-century Platonist, John Scot Erigena, and all four felt the
powerful and seductive attraction of Platonism. Bernard Sylvester was
almost an out-and-out pagan, so much so, indeed, that his writings can
hardly be considered to lie within the pale of Christian theology.[566]
Theodoric and William tried harder to reconcile Platonism with the
teachings of the church, yet they did so in a rationalistic spirit
almost as abhorrent to strict orthodoxy as the paganism of Bernard
Sylvester. Theodoric expressly stated in his _De sex dierum operibus_
that he was going to explain the different Works of the Six Days
“according to physical principles,” and, following the letter of the
text,[567] he proposed to avoid all allegorical and moral
interpretations of Scripture. He believed that the best way to attain a
genuine knowledge of God was through an accurate understanding of what
God had created; and his explanation of the Creation, as we shall soon
see, was independent to a degree that amazes us in a writer of his time.
The following phrase is particularly significant where Theodoric extols
Moses’ treatment of the Creation in Genesis, saying: “He shows in a
rational manner the causes out of which this world has come into
existence and the order of time in which this same world was founded and
adorned.”[568] Hauréau writes of the first book of Theodoric’s
commentary: “Quant au premier livre, essai d’accord entre la Genèse et
le _Timée_, où l’on voit la religion et la philosophie conspirant à
résoudre le plus grave et le plus obscur des problèmes, le problème de
l’être, et se déclarant satisfaites de l’avoir résolu, ce premier livre
est ... de plus grand intéret.”[569]


                 ADELARD OF BATH AND WILLIAM OF CONCHES

In the _Quaestiones naturales_ Adelard of Bath gives vent to his scorn
for the mentality that blindly accepts beliefs merely because they have
the weight of authority behind them. In an extraordinary passage he
expresses these ideas thus (as translated and paraphrased by Professor
Haskins[570]): “‘It is hard to discuss with you,’ Adelard tells his
nephew [in the dialogue form of the _Quaestiones naturales_], ‘for I
have learned one thing from the Arabs under the guidance of reason; you
follow another halter, caught by the appearance of authority, for what
is authority but a halter?’... ‘If reason is not to be the universal
judge, it is given to each to no purpose.’[571]... While plants spring
from the earth by God’s will, this does not act without a reason.[572]
Human science must first be listened to ... and ‘only when it fails
utterly should there be recourse to God’ as an explanation.”[573]

William of Conches shows the same spirit where he insists that God acts
reasonably and not capriciously. He writes: “I am aware that some people
assert, ‘Though we do not know how this happens to be so, we know that
God can make it so.’ Wretched ones! What is more craven than to talk in
that way! Because God can do something is no sign that he actually does
it, nor any reason why he should do it, nor any reason why it is useful
that it should be done. For God does not do whatever he can do. To
employ a rustic expression: ‘God can make a calf out of a tree trunk,’
but does he ever do so?”[574] William apparently, unlike Theodoric,
thought that we are justified in avoiding irrational deductions from
Scripture by an appeal either to an allegorical interpretation or—what
is even more surprising at a time when the word of authority was usually
regarded as all-sufficient—to one’s own intellect: “We may begin our
reasoning from the authority of a master, but it should be perfected by
our own intellect.”[575]


                        CONCEPT OF NATURAL LAWS

Thus we see in the writings of Adelard, Theodoric, and William that the
approach was tentatively made toward the acceptance of the doctrine that
the universe is governed by natural laws. This doctrine, upon which the
edifice of modern science has been built, was also given partial
expression by other thinkers of the twelfth century. John of Salisbury
stated in effect that a sequence of causes gives rise to all things that
we may perceive with our senses, that we call these causes nature, that
nothing happens that is not the result of natural causation even though
the operation of this causation may be concealed from us; finally, that
the first cause of all is the will of God.[576] Alan of Lille clothed a
similar theory in allegory by personifying Nature in poetic form as the
representative of God and making her say: “Hear how in this universe, as
in a great city, order is established by the control of a majestic
government” (Moffat’s translation).[577] Much the same opinion was
expressed by an anonymous Scandinavian historian of the early thirteenth
century in his Latin _Historia Norwegiae_. After describing a terrible
volcanic upheaval from the bottom of the sea,[578] this writer adds that
many people regard such occurrences as prodigies, believing that the
world itself thereby gives warning of its own destruction.[579] Citing
Solinus, he goes on to set forth a purely physical explanation of
earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and adds that, though it may not be
possible to attain to clearsighted understanding of these phenomena and
of the major marvels of the world, they should not be looked upon as
prodigies nor considered as portents of universal cataclysm. On the
contrary they are, as it were, the servants of the all-knowing and
immutable founder of the universe to whose nature through some marvelous
process they have been placed in bondage.[580]


                         THE ORTHODOX TENDENCY

This sort of reasoning, however, was exceptional. In the mid-twelfth
century the appearance of Peter Lombard’s _Sententiae_ tended to divert
the theologian’s mind from Platonic and rationalistic studies and to
restore Church Fathers and Scripture to paramount authority.[581] We
look in vain for traces of the liberal attitude of the Chartres scholars
in the orthodox works of such prolific writers but perhaps less clear
thinkers as Peter Comestor, Giraldus Cambrensis, Gervase of Tilbury or
even Alexander Neckam. Giraldus’ _Symbolum electorum_[582] contains a
cosmography in verse which explains the Scriptural view of the Works of
the Six Days, and though we feel in this poem the influence of the
Peripatetic physics—which by this time were becoming universally
known—no attempt was made to expound the work of the Creation according
to physical laws. In the _Topographia Hiberniae_[583] Giraldus
illustrates his own attitude and the dominant attitude of his age by the
moral he draws from the story of eagles which occasionally fly so high
that they scorch their wings in the sun. This he compared to the
hopeless vanity of the man who tries to solve by reason or by knowledge
God’s riddles of the Creation and of the universe. Neckam also despairs
of explaining the mysteries of nature and asks, “Who may comprehend the
causes of things?” He describes thunder and lightning briefly but adds,
“The herald of the thunder fills the mind with terror and shows how
great is the creator thereof.”[584] Even Michael Scot, who enjoyed the
patronage of the enlightened, scientifically minded Emperor Frederick
II, attributed the fact that the waters of the spherical earth are held
in place to “a secret virtue ... beyond human ken and merit”
(Haskins).[585] Gervase of Tilbury reproduces uncritically in his _Otia
imperialia_[586] the ideas compiled by Peter Comestor regarding the
Creation. These were strictly correct opinions on which no suspicion of
heterodoxy could be thrown. Comestor went out of his way to express
opposition and antagonism to Platonic teachings.


                  EFFECTS OF INFLUX OF ARABIC SCIENCE

The conventional orthodox position, however, did not remain
unchallenged. The influx of Moslem Aristotelian lore at the end of the
twelfth century was held to be as menacing to the integrity of the
ecclesiastical tradition as any of the Platonic doctrines. But, though
stern prohibitions were leveled against the study of Aristotle and his
Arabic interpreters, the seductions of Aristotelianism could not be
resisted, and those elements of Peripatetic science which did not seem
utterly outrageous to Christian theology became the accepted and
authoritative science of the West in the mid-thirteenth century. William
of Auvergne, bishop of Paris, stood out valiantly against what he
regarded as teachings subversive of Christianity and of morals and in
his vigorous opposition to Aristotelianism even went so far as to adopt
many of the Platonic doctrines that had been popular among the scholars
of Chartres during the preceding century.[587] But translators like
Gerard of Cremona had done their work too well, and the enormous tomes
of Albertus Magnus were based to a large extent on the learning of the
Stagirite.


                             _THE CREATION_

The usual medieval treatise on the Works of the Six Days as described in
the Book of Genesis deals with many problems. Some of these are abstruse
and metaphysical: questions of the nature of God and the nature of time
and space. With these we are not concerned. Others are more concrete:
questions of the materials out of which God made the universe and of the
actual manner in which he worked.


                                PROBLEMS

For the sake of clearness let us state some of these questions as
follows, (1) The question of whether matter existed prior to God’s
creation of the world. That is to say, Did God fashion the universe out
of a pre-existing substance or did he make it out of nothing? (2) The
question of the manner in which the universe was fashioned after it was
once “created.” (3) The question of what furnished the light during the
first three days before the creation of the sun. (4) The problem of
whether the Six Days were actual divisions of time or merely
hypothetical divisions of the process of creation. (5) The question of
the nature of the waters above the firmament. (6) Various problems
arising in regard to the nature and location of Paradise and of the four
rivers flowing from Paradise. The first four problems are discussed
briefly in the present chapter. That of the waters above the firmament
is left for Chapter VIII (on waters), and that of Paradise for Chapter
XII (on regional geography).


                       THE PREËXISTENCE OF MATTER

(1) Did matter exist prior to God’s creation of the universe as we now
know it?

Consistently with his Platonism, Bernard Sylvester thought that God
formed the universe out of what he termed _materia primordialis_—a
chaotic mingling of the elements that had coexisted with God before he
converted the universe into its present shape.[588]


                          _The Orthodox View_

Theodoric of Chartres, on the other hand, explicitly denied the
coëxistence of the _materia primordialis_ with God before the Creation.
In this respect he showed himself far less divergent than Bernard from
the Christian point of view. The work of the first day, he said, was the
creation from nothing of the _materia_ of the universe, out of which
earth and heaven, fire and water and life were to be evolved.[589] This
_materia_ was the _hyle_, or chaos, of the ancient philosophers, he
explained, and was designated by Moses in the book of Genesis under
various names.[590] For example, when Moses wrote, “In the beginning God
created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. i, 1) the words “heaven” and
“earth” referred to chaos; when Moses wrote, “And the earth was without
form and void” (Gen. i, 2) the word “earth” referred to the primordial
mixture of land and water, a mingling of land that was not solid and of
water that was not liquid. Air and fire at that time were of about the
density of water.

Theodoric’s interpretation of the initial process of the Creation was
entirely in keeping with the views of more orthodox writers. Peter
Lombard, for instance, wrote as follows: “In the beginning God created
the ‘heaven,’ that is to say the angels, and the ‘earth,’ by which is
meant the material which composed the four elements. The latter were as
yet in the confused and formless condition to which the Greeks gave the
name of chaos, and this was before any day.”[591]

Peter Comestor also set forth an orthodox view of the Creation. In his
commentary on Genesis he revealed a love of the number three and
classified every thing possible into groups of three.[592] He pointed
out how Moses had avoided three errors. “First, that of Plato, who had
conceived of three coëxistent things, God, _ile_ (_hyle_, or chaos), and
time, and that the world was made out of _ile_; second, that of
Aristotle, who had conceived of two coëxistent things, the world and the
fashioner thereof (_mundus et opifex_); and third, that of Epicurus, who
had also conceived of two, space (_inane_) and matter in the form of
atoms, and that in the beginning natural processes had brought together
certain atoms to form water, others to form earth, and others to form
fire. Moses, however, had said that God alone was eternal and that the
world was created out of nothing, for there was no matter in existence
prior to the ‘Creation.’”[593] “In the beginning” meant in the beginning
of time as well as of matter, for time and matter were coëternal.[594]


                           _A Rational View_

William of Conches refused, on rational, physical grounds, to believe in
the possibility of a chaos preëxisting the Creation.[595] Having
accepted the classical doctrine whereby the four elements were arranged
in concentric spheres in order from heaviest to lightest,[596] he was
unable to conceive of a time when they could have been so intermingled
that they contradicted this law, though there may have been a time, he
conceded, when the earth was completely enveloped in a thick mantle of
water reaching very high and when air and fire themselves were denser
than they now are. Such a condition, William thought, was that described
in Genesis i, 2.[597]


                       PROCESSES OF THE CREATION


                    _Theodoric of Chartres’ Theory_

(2) How was the universe converted into its present form after God had
once created it?

Most commentators answered this either by saying or tacitly implying
that it was through the immediate operation of God’s will alone.
Theodoric of Chartres’ theory, therefore, is peculiarly interesting,
because Theodoric maintained that the formation of the universe resulted
from what we should now style a series of purely mechanical and chemical
reactions which began, once the composition of the _materia_ was
completed, on the first day. For its time this was an extremely
hazardous view, akin in some respects to the modern belief in the
sufficiency of physical and chemical action to produce practically all
observable phenomena.

Let us examine Theodoric’s theory in a little greater detail. In Genesis
i, 2, we read the words, “And the spirit of God moved upon the face of
the waters.” Theodoric explained that by the “waters” was meant the
whole of matter:[598] the “spirit of God” was that which was destined to
give order and form to the chaos, that is to say the “force which
fashioned” or “operated” (_virtus artifex_ or _virtus operatrix_). Plato
had called this force the World Soul, the Christians called it the Holy
Ghost,[599] and through its agency the evolution of the universe out of
chaos by physical processes was rendered possible.

Coincidently with the creation of the original _materia_ the universe
had assumed a rotary motion,[600] each complete rotation marking a day.
In the further unrolling of the universe, fire was the active element
(_artifex et efficiens causa_), earth the passive element, and air and
water stood as intermediaries between fire and earth. During the first
rotation, or first day, the fire heated and illumined the inferior
elements in such a manner as to cause the air to be released from them
(_aer ex inferioribus elementis spissatus_), and thus the atmosphere
came into existence.[601] On the second day the fire, by illuminating
the air, transmitted heat to the third element, water, which rose in the
form of clouds. Some of this vaporized water ascended so high that it
passed into the second heavenly sphere, where it became the “waters
above the firmament,” the firmament itself, according to Theodoric,
being the atmosphere.[602] So much water in this manner was absorbed out
of the original _materia_ that inevitably on the third day the earth
appeared like islands in the midst of the waters remaining behind.
Theodoric compared these to islands that are formed when water dries
after it has been spilled upon a table. Immediately the heat of the
atmosphere was mingled with the humors of the earth, and the latter
thereby received the power of producing vegetable life, herbs and trees.
On the fourth day the stars were formed out of the waters which had been
drawn above the firmament. On the fifth day the heat of the universe
brooded over (_incubuit_) the waters of the earth’s surface and gave
birth to fish and birds. Finally, on the sixth day, the life-giving heat
reached the earth; and from it the animals were created, including, of
course, man.[603]


                      _William of Conches’ Theory_

William of Conches’ theory of the Creation did not differ a great deal
from that of Theodoric, except that the _materia primordialis_ was not,
in his opinion, a chaotic mingling of the elements; for within it, he
thought, as we have already seen,[604] that the elements were arranged
in their proper order according to accepted classical laws of physics.
The lands were uncovered by the removal of the waters, though this took
place later in the process according to William than it did according to
Theodoric. William attributed the drying off of the waters partly to the
warmth of the stars (which were not formed until the fourth day) and
partly to the creation of the water and land animals on the fifth and
sixth days respectively.[605] In different portions of this primordial
land, when it was just in the act of emerging from the waters, fiery,
watery, earthy elements were present in varying quantities. This
condition gave birth to divers varieties of animals. Where the fiery
element was in excess, choleric animals, like the lion, came into being;
where the water element prevailed, phlegmatic animals, like the pig; and
the earthy element produced melancholic creatures like the ass and cow.
At the one and only place where the combination was absolutely equal,
man appeared. Woman, on the other hand, was made from a combination
almost like that of man but one in which the colder elements were very
slightly in excess, because the warmest of women by nature is colder
than the coldest of men! This last, an extremely free and heretical and
from our point of view unchivalrous theory, William retracted in his old
age.[606]


                   FUNCTION OF LIGHT IN THE CREATION

(3) What was the nature of the light which God made when he said, “Let
there be light”? Although Augustine had interpreted this passage
allegorically or mystically as referring to the creation of the world of
the angels,[607] he had also suggested that God might have created an
actual body of light corresponding to the sun. Bede[608] developed the
latter suggestion and maintained that there must have been a luminary
revolving around the earth as does the sun. In the twelfth century Hugh
of St. Victor and Peter Comestor, both of whom interpreted Scripture
more or less literally in this respect, followed Bede. Hugh maintained
that this original light was like a luminous cloud which rose in the
east and set in the west,[609] and Comestor spoke of it in much the same
terms.[610] Other theologians, however, refused to believe that such a
light could have actually existed and reverted to Augustine’s first
explanation that by the light was meant the world of angels as distinct
from the world of evil spirits below.[611] Peter Lombard referred to
both interpretations, though he appears to have been inclined to favor
the more literal and materialistic theory of Bede.[612]

With Robert Grosseteste light is made to play the leading part in the
entire process. In his unpublished _Hexaemeron_[613] and in the _De
luce_[614] he sets forth a theory of cosmogony which was derived in part
from the Moslems but in essentials was original.[615] We trust that the
following brief statement of the theory does not do violence to the
thought of Grosseteste as expressed in the _De luce_. He conceived of
light as the first corporeal form and also as giving form to the
_materia prima_ of the universe. By radiating through the unformed
_materia prima_ the light converted it into a sphere. Thereupon the
light made its way from the outer edge of the sphere towards the center.
As it passed through the various realms of the universe it diffused,
rarified, and purified the _materia_ of each, but with each stage of its
advance its powers were diminished and correspondingly the potentiality
of each successive realm of being purified was diminished. Thus thirteen
concentric spheres were produced, nine celestial spheres and four
spheres of the elements, and each of these was more complex, dense, and
impure than its neighbor above.


                       THE NATURE OF THE SIX DAYS

(4) Were the Six Days described in the book of Genesis actual divisions
of time? The words of the Bible seemed to be contradictory on this
point. From the words of Genesis alone one would gather that the
completion of the universe was accomplished in six days. On the other
hand, we read in Ecclesiasticus (xviii, 1), “He that liveth forever
created all things together” (Qui vivit in aeternum, creavit omnia
simul). According to Theodoric of Chartres[616] these two statements
referred to different events. The passage in Ecclesiasticus applied only
to the creation of the _materia primordialis_ on the first day. The
works of the succeeding days were the result of the automatic
development of natural processes by which the universe became as we now
know it. Belief in the reality of the duration of the Six Days was
shared with Theodoric by most commentators, such as William of Conches,
Hugh of St. Victor,[617] Peter Lombard, and Peter Comestor. Augustine,
however, had argued in a more abstruse vein that the “days” were not
actual units of time but that they represented merely so many distinct
operations in the work of creation.[618] And in our period Arnold of
Chartres urged that the Creation was carried out in one day and all at
once (_uno die et semel_).[619]


                        ETERNITY OF THE UNIVERSE

Though they differed in the details of interpretation, these theories
were all based on the fundamental acceptance of the axiom, deduced from
Scripture, that God created the universe out of nothing. In Chapter II
was explained the antagonism between this view and the Aristotelian
doctrine of an eternal, periodically re-formed universe. Certainly,
among Christians of our period, no one believed either in the eternity
or in the periodicity of the universe, although the existence and nature
of these concepts were well known. Both theories were set forth in
Seneca’s _Quaestiones naturales_,[620] in translations of Plato’s
_Timaeus_[621] and of Aristotle’s _Meteorology_[622] and _De generatione
et corruptione_,[623] and in translations from the Arabic such as the
_Liber introductorius in astrologiam_ of Abū Maʿshar[624] and the
pseudo-Aristotelian _Liber de proprietatibus elementorum_.[625] When
William of Conches specifically denied the possibility of more than one
deluge he may have had in mind the pagan association of Noah’s flood
with the Great Winter.[626] Certainly one of the primary objections of
the orthodox Christians to the acceptance of Aristotelian science during
the early years of the thirteenth century lay in the fact that Averroës,
the great interpreter of Aristotle, was firmly convinced that the
universe is eternal.[627] William of Auvergne also vigorously attacked
the Aristotelian theory as it found expression in Avicenna’s commentary
on the _Metaphysics_[628] and Robert Grosseteste leveled destructive
criticism against it in his _Summa super libros octo Physicorum_, a
commentary on the _Physics_ of Aristotle, and in other works.[629]


              BERNARD SYLVESTER’S ACCOUNT OF THE CREATION

Before leaving this aspect of the subject, a few words should be said
about two other accounts of the Creation that found literary expression
in Western Europe during our period. Very dissimilar, these two accounts
are akin only in the circumstance that they were both based upon the
mythology of an older age and that, though written by Christians,
neither referred in any way to the Scriptural story. One was the
remarkable allegory in Bernard Sylvester’s _De mundi universitate_, the
other the Icelandic myth of the Creation as recorded in the _Edda_ of
Snorri Sturluson.

In the _Megacosmus_, or first part of the _De mundi universitate_,
Bernard tells us of the confusion of matter in the eternal ages that
preceded the “Creation.”[630] Nature, personified, laments to “Nous,” or
Providence, about this confusion and demands that the universe be put
into an orderly condition: “Nous,” moved by the appeal, carries out the
task, separating the elements, arranging the nine hierarchies of angels,
placing the stars in the firmament and regulating their orbits, ordering
the four winds, and, finally, fashioning the earth in the midst of the
universe. The last process gave Bernard occasion to digress and to tell
of the riches and beauties of this earth.

The _Microcosmus_, or second part of the book, goes on to relate the
story of the creation of man. “Nous” sees the barren desolation of an
inanimate world and orders Nature to undertake the work of peopling it.
With the aid of Urania, goddess of the stars, Nature seeks for Physis,
goddess of life, whom she finds in the terrestrial paradise after Urania
has conducted her on a long journey through the heavenly spheres. Here
she tells Physis her mission; and Physis carries out the fashioning of a
human body, in which the soul is then established. Thus was man created.

No comment is needed to bring out the pagan character of this account,
wherein the Six Days are not even mentioned! It would probably be wrong,
however, to assume that this work of literary imagination, any more than
Snorri’s graphic record of the beliefs of his forefathers, represents a
formulated and accepted doctrine of its author.


                         THE ICELANDIC ACCOUNT

The Icelanders were converted to Christianity in the mid-eleventh
century, and the mythology of their pagan days still remained fresh in
their minds and hearts during the period we are studying. The old gods
were looked upon with affection, and the old story of the Creation was
remembered with sympathetic understanding. The Icelandic myth of the
Creation is one of great beauty and vigor. In it is revealed the
impression made upon the minds of a northern people by struggles against
the cold and stormy darkness of the subarctic winter. The outline of the
story, which is worked out in much detail in the _Eddas_, is about as
follows.[631]

In the beginning a great abyss lay between the icy rivers and the
drizzling rains and blasts of wind of the north and the blazing heat of
the south. This was before heaven and earth and sea were made. “And
Fimbultyr said: Let the melted drops of vapor quicken into life, and the
giant Ymer was born in the midst of Ginungagap[632] [the abyss]. He was
not a god but the father of all the race of evil giants. This was Chaos.

“And Fimbultyr said: Let Ymer be slain and let order be established. And
straightway Odin and his brothers ... gave Ymer a mortal wound, and from
his body they made the universe; from his flesh, the earth; from his
blood, the sea; from his bones, the rocks; from his hair, the trees;
from his skull, the vaulted heavens; from his eyebrows, the bulwark
called Midgard. And the gods formed man and woman in their own image of
two trees, and breathed into them the breath of life. Ask and Embla
became living souls, and they received a garden in Midgard as a dwelling
place for themselves and their children until the end of time. This was
Cosmos” (Anderson).[633]


                       _MACROCOSM AND MICROCOSM_

All medieval accounts of the Creation culminate in the creation of man,
as modern outlines of evolution conclude with man’s evolution from lower
forms of life. Christian theology taught that the universe itself was
made for man, a view that persists even to this day. Grosseteste
asserted that when man “no longer requires the processes of generation
and corruption which the movements of the heavens cause, the heaven
itself will cease to move and time will be no longer.”[634] Rupert of
Deutz explained that mountains were placed upon the earth to protect
human beings against the winds.[635] But if the universe and all its
parts were made for man, medieval thinkers held, with the Stoics of
antiquity,[636] that man himself was a lesser universe (_minor mundus_),
or microcosm, comprising all the elements both physical and spiritual
which constitute the greater universe, or macrocosm.

[Illustration:

  EXPLANATION OF FIG. 5—The human figure here represents the microcosm
    in the midst of the universe. The heads of the animals give rise to
    the winds, which Hildegard believed controlled the movements of the
    celestial bodies (see p. 171). The blast originating in the human
    head at the right and moving in a counter-clockwise direction runs
    opposite to the movement of the firmament. “This blast did not give
    forth his breath earthward as did the other winds, but instead
    thereof it governed the course of the planets” (_Liber div. op._,
    in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxcvii, col. 791, as cited by Singer,
    _op. cit._ p. 28).

  In another miniature from the same manuscript (fol. 9 ro) shown in
    Singer, _op. cit._, pl. VII, the universe is revealed in much the
    same manner with the human figure as the microcosm. There is also
    represented the macrocosm, as a larger figure standing behind and
    holding the sphere of the cosmos; only its head, feet, and hands
    appear.


  FIG. 5—The macrocosm, the microcosm, and the winds, from a miniature
    in an illustrated codex of Hildegard of Bingen’s _Liber divinorum
    operum_ in the Municipal Library at Lucca, fol. 27 vo. (Redrawn, by
    permission, from Singer, _Scientific Views and Visions of Saint
    Hildegard_, 1917, pl. VIII.) For explanation, see bottom of opposite
    page.
]

The doctrine of man as the microcosm had its roots far back in
antiquity. Medieval writers from the time of Isidore elaborated upon it
with detail and ingenuity. In the literature of our period it occurs in
many a passing comparison of the phenomena of nature with the human
body, such as that of the _De imagine mundi_ where rivers are compared
with blood vessels.[637] It forms an important element in the cosmology
of Bernard Sylvester’s _De mundi universitate_[638] and of Herrad of
Landsperg’s _Hortus deliciarum_.[639] Hildegard of Bingen’s writings are
full of similes and medical recommendations based upon it (Fig. 5).[640]
In her _Subtilitates_ the abbess says: “In the creation of man from the
earth other earth was taken, and all the elements served man because
they perceived that he lived; both the elements and man worked together
to each others’ advantage in all relationships.”[641] The thought is
expressed more clearly in the _Causae et curae_: “Oh, man! Look at man,
for man has in himself heaven and earth and all other things that are
created, and his form is one and in him all things lie hidden.”[642] To
illustrate the detail in which Hildegard worked out this theory we may
do no better than to quote from Thorndike’s summary. “She compares the
firmament to man’s head, sun, moon, and stars to the eyes, air to
hearing, the winds to smelling, dew to taste, and ‘the sides of the
world’ to the arms and sense of touch. The earth is like the heart, and
other creatures in the world are like the belly. In the _Liber divinorum
operum_ she goes into further detail.... From the top of the cerebral
cavity to the ‘last extremity of the forehead’ there are seven distinct
and equal spaces, by which are signified the seven planets which are
equidistant from one another in the firmament. An even more surprising
assumption as to astronomical distances is involved in the comparison
that as the three intervals between the top of the human head and the
end of the throat and the navel and the groin are all equal, so are the
spaces intervening between the highest firmament and lowest clouds and
the earth’s surface and center.... As the heart is stirred by emotion,
whether of joy or of sorrow, humors are excited in the lungs and breast
which rise to the brain and are emitted through the eyes in the form of
tears. And in like manner, when the moon begins to wax or wane, the
firmament is disturbed by winds which raise fogs from the sea and other
waters.”[643] The preface to the _Subtilitates_ contains another
discussion of the microcosm in the course of which the stones of the
earth are likened to bones and it is pointed out that the earth has
sweat, humors, and other by-products of the body.[644] Much of the
argument of the _Causae et curae_ is based upon the assumption that the
very diseases of man have their counterparts in the facts of the
macrocosm.


               _SHAPE, MOVEMENTS, AND SIZE OF THE EARTH_

When once created, what form did this universe take, and the earth
within it?


                       SPHERICITY OF THE UNIVERSE

Nearly all the authors of our period appear to have shared in the belief
that the universe is a sphere and that the earth is situated in its
center. Lambert of St. Omer says in his _Liber floridus_: “We say the
earth is the center, that is, the point in the middle of the sphere.”
“For the earth is located as a central point in the midst of the
celestial circle through which the sun passes.”[645] Robert Grosseteste
stated that the sphericity of the universe was necessitated by the
nature of the substances composing the heavenly bodies and that it could
be proved by simple astronomical observations.[646] There is, perhaps,
an echo of Pythagorean mathematical doctrines in the exposition which we
find in the _Image du monde_, that the world is round since God desired
it to be so, because roundness is the most perfect of all forms.[647]
Al-Farghānī, whose work was translated more than once during our period
and formed the basis of much that is found in John of Holywood’s _De
sphaera_,[648] had said that there was no difference of opinion among
learned men that the universe was a sphere. That the earth is in the
center of the heaven, he asserted, was shown by the fact that half the
heaven is always visible from all parts of its surface.[649] The author
of the _De imagine mundi_ had also thought the same way:[650] he
compared the universe to a ball, or to an egg of which the shell
corresponds to the upper heavens, the white, to the upper air, the yolk,
to the lower air, and the _pinguedinis gutta_, or drop of grease in the
center, to the earth.[651] Gervase of Tilbury,[652] who borrowed the
idea from Comestor,[653] and the author of the _Image du monde_[654]
make similar comparisons, although Peter Abelard,[655] William of
Conches,[656] and Daniel of Morley conceived of the four parts of the
egg as corresponding exactly to the four elements.[657] Michael Scot
compared the earth, surrounded by water, to the yolk of an egg and the
spheres of the universe to the layers of an onion.[658]

In her _Causae et curae_, on the one hand, and in her _Scivias_ and
_Liber divinorum operum_, on the other, Hildegard of Bingen makes
contradictory statements in regard to the position of the earth in
relation to the heavenly spheres. Scientific consistency was not,
perhaps, the ascetic abbess’s strongest quality, and too much emphasis
should not be laid upon contradictions found in the writings of one who
believed herself to be favored by special divine revelations. The
passage in the _Causae et curae_, however, diverges so widely from
current medieval opinion that it is worth translating. “The earth,”
writes Hildegard, “is of moderate size and is near the base of the
firmament, because if it were in the center of the firmament, then it
would have to be larger; and even so it would easily fall and be
shattered to pieces, had it the same expanse of air beneath that there
is above.”[659] On the contrary, in her _Liber divinorum operum_ she
tells how she saw in a vision the universe as a wheel[660] and that “in
the midst of the air the earth was placed in such a way that the air
measured an equal distance above the earth, below the earth, and on
either side of the earth.”[661]


                           SHAPE OF THE EARTH

Most writers of the Crusading age thought the earth also was a sphere,
though there was less unanimity in this belief. The _De imagine mundi_
calls it a sphere, whence comes the term _orbis_.[662] William of
Conches[663] furnishes us with the Aristotelian proofs of sphericity. If
the earth is flat, he says, it would be day at the same time in the
farthest east as in the farthest west. Certain stars are visible in one
latitude that cannot be seen in another, and this would not be the case
if there were no curvature from north to south.[664] John of Holywood,
following Al-Farghānī, gave two proofs that the earth is round and two
that the water is round.[665] That there exists a swelling or curvature
of the earth (_tumor terrae_), he says, is shown by the difference in
the time of eclipses between places in the east and west as well as by
differences in the visibility of stars.[666] The curvature of water
surfaces is demonstrated by the fact that a person standing at the foot
of a mast is frequently unable to see objects visible to somebody at the
masthead. Furthermore, since water is a homogeneous body, all parts of
it must partake of the nature of the whole. Therefore it follows that
because a drop is round, the mass of the waters of the earth must also
be spherical.[667]

Gervase of Tilbury has been accused of believing that the earth is
square, though the evidence in the text of the _Otia imperialia_ on
which this accusation is based is very slender; and other texts would
seem to support the opposite contention, that he accepted the theory of
sphericity.[668]

Two passages in the _Causae et curae_ of Hildegard can apparently be
explained only on the supposition of a flat earth.[669] Hildegard seems
also to have been haunted by the old belief that bulked so large in the
imagination of Cosmas Indicopleustes,[670] the belief that the earth
rises into an immense mountain in the north.[671] She asserted that this
mountain prevented the light of the east from penetrating the darkness
of the north and the darkness of the north from obscuring the light of
the east. On the other hand, in her visions the abbess more than once
saw the earth as a globe.[672]

In the writings of the mystic Hugh of St. Victor we have a typical
medieval allegorical interpretation of the words of Scripture regarding
the earth’s form, with instructions as to how a map of the world ought
to be made.[673] Hugh compares the _orbis terrae_ to an “oblong circle,”
or oval, drawn around the ark, touching each corner. An oval shape was
necessitated by the rectangular ground plan of the ark. Within this oval
the _mappa mundi_, or map of the world, is to be drawn, with the front
of the ark facing the east, and its rear, the west. In the segment
formed to the east, between the ark and the circle, is Paradise; in that
to the west the resurrection will take place; the chosen will go to the
right, and the damned to the left into Hell, which forms the segment
toward the north. Beyond this “oblong circle” another circle is to be
drawn to show the zones, and the space between the two is the
atmosphere.

One hesitates to draw conclusions from this as to what shape Hugh
imagined the earth to be; probably he himself had no very definite
theory. The picture which his description seems to invoke in our minds
is that of a flat oval earth covered by an ovoid heaven, and certainly
it is in every respect inconsistent with belief in a spherical earth.


                        IMMOBILITY OF THE EARTH

However men may have thought about the shape of the earth, there was no
questioning the fact that it stands immobile and firm. Doctrines like
that of the Pythagorean Philolaus had no place in medieval thought.[674]
The ignorant, nevertheless, were often puzzled by the problem of what
supports the earth. The author of the _De imagine mundi_ was content
uncritically to explain that no fulcrum or support is necessary for this
purpose but that the “divine power” is all-sufficient.[675] He quoted
the one hundred and third Psalm: “Who hast founded the earth upon its
own bases: it shall not be moved for ever and ever.”

Theodoric of Chartres, Adelard of Bath, and John of Holywood, on the
other hand, adduced proofs of the immobility of the earth which had been
derived indirectly from Aristotle. Theodoric asserted[676] that the
earth does not gain its compactness either from its inherent nature,
because earth is actually observed on occasions to become mingled with
air; or from the weight of the overlying atmosphere and sphere of fire,
because these have no weight. What, then, keeps it from flying to
pieces? Here Theodoric appealed to the Peripatetic reasoning that the
circular motion of the heavens necessitates the existence of a solid and
immovable body in the center.[677] All heavy bodies acquire their
_substantia_, or solidity, from the motion of light bodies; and
conversely light bodies derive their motion from heavy bodies.

The _Quaestiones naturales_ of Adelard of Bath is in the form of a
dialogue between Adelard and a nephew who asks questions. The nephew was
much puzzled by the fact that, whereas heavy objects like rocks need a
piece of wood or other support to hold them up in the air, the earth as
a whole, much the heaviest of all, requires no such support.[678]
Adelard replies first that the earth does not fall because there would
be no utility in its doing so; then he proceeds to show by a rational
argument (_rationabiliter_) why the earth does not need a support. The
principal quality of earth he says, is heaviness; heavy bodies naturally
seek the lowest position (_infimum_); the lowest position of a spherical
body like the universe is its center—though why this latter proposition
is so, Adelard fails to make clear. At all events, the earth tends to
seek the center of the universe, just as a stone thrown into an
imaginary hole piercing the center of the earth would come to a halt
there.[679] Since the center of the universe is one point, not several,
the earth forms a single unit, not several; and for these reasons,
moreover, the earth is stable and immobile.

John of Holywood explained[680] the same thing more briefly than Adelard
by simply stating that the immobility of the earth is due to its weight,
since it is the nature of all heavy things to seek the center of the
universe and since the earth is the heaviest of all elements. Both
Adelard’s and John of Holywood’s arguments suggest the Aristotelian
doctrine of an equilibrium of forces around the center of the globe,
though this doctrine is not cited in so many words. Like most medieval
writers, Adelard and John seem only partially to have understood the
obscure texts from which they derived their proofs and to have left out
many links in their chains of reasoning.


                           SIZE OF THE EARTH

Though the geocentric hypothesis prevailed in the Middle Ages, there is
plenty of evidence to show that the smallness of the earth in relation
to the heavenly bodies was understood.[681] William of Conches had
thought that the sun was eight times as big as the earth.[682] In the
_Image du monde_ this theme is elaborated:[683] we are told that it
would take more than a hundred years for a rock to fall from the
heavens; that the earth is like a tiny star in comparison with the
immensity of the cosmos and is one hundred and sixty-six and
three-twentieths times smaller than the sun.[684] John of Holywood
quoted Alfraganus (Al-Farghānī) to the effect that the smallest fixed
star is larger than the earth[685] but that the dimensions of such a
star are as but a point in the firmament. He argued that the extreme
smallness of the earth is proved by the fact that it is possible to see
the middle of the firmament (_medietas firmamenti_) not only from the
center of the earth but also from the earth’s surface.[686] His
argument, which certainly proves nothing as it stands, is evidently a
confused reflection of Ptolemy’s reasoning in the _Almagest_.[687]

As to the actual size of our planet various figures were occasionally
quoted. The _De imagine mundi_[688] gives Posidonius’ estimate of the
circumference as 180,000 stades, or 12,052 miles (_duodecies mille
millaria et quinquaginta duo_). The _Image du monde_,[689] however,
gives 20,428 miles. Eratosthenes’ 252,000 stades appears in Lambert of
St. Omer’s _Liber floridus_[690] and John of Holywood’s _De
sphaera_.[691] In the latter work it is cited on the authority of
Ambrose, Macrobius, “et Eristenis philosophorum,” along with a brief
account of the great Alexandrian geographer’s method of measurement.


                 _ZONES, THE ANTIPODES, AND “CLIMATA”_

The surface of the terrestrial sphere, surrounded as it is by the
heavens, is naturally subjected directly to the influence of the
heavenly bodies. We must now examine those general phenomena of the
globe as a whole which were conceived to be consequences of the earth’s
shape and position in relation to the remainder of the universe,
postponing for a later chapter the study of the more local features of
the _oikoumene_ (or habited quarter), which also result from the same
circumstances.


                                 ZONES

The most primitive observation reveals the fact that the heavenly bodies
in their course through the sky revolve around two points and mark out
certain circles. Very elaborate and often admirable discussions of the
celestial poles, Arctic and Antarctic circles, equator, tropics, and
ecliptic, are to be found in the numerous astrological and astronomical
works of our period.[692] The study of these matters was already a
highly developed science, but except in its geographical bearing it does
not fall within our province.

We saw in Chapter I that ancient astronomers had drawn imaginary circles
around the terrestrial sphere corresponding to the circles of the
heavens and had designated these lines as the boundaries of zones on the
earth’s surface.[693] The classical theory of five zones, divided from
each other by parallels of latitude, was accepted by the geographical
writers of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, although, as in
classical times, opinions diverged widely regarding the characteristics
of each zone. All, however, believed that the two polar caps were cold
and that the equatorial regions were hot. For example Bernard Sylvester
says in his _De mundi universitate_:[694] Nous, or Providence,
“encompassed the earth with five parallels; on the one hand the extremes
are frozen, on the other the central portions are hot. Also she made
temperate two zones by placing on both sides of them the coldness of the
extremities and the course of the sun over the midst of the earth.”


           UNINHABITABILITY OF POLAR CAPS AND EQUATORIAL ZONE

Furthermore, a widely prevalent but not universal theory made the polar
caps and equatorial zones not only cold and hot but also uninhabitable.
The author of the _De imagine mundi_[695] and Gervase of Tilbury[696]
plagiarized what Isidore had written on this subject.[697] They called
the five circles separating the zones and the zones themselves from
north to south, respectively, _septentrionalis_ (our Arctic Circle and
North Polar zone), _solstitialis_ (our Tropic of Cancer and North
Temperate zone), _equinoctialis_ (our Equator and Torrid zone),
_brumalis_—or _hyemalis_ according to Gervase—(our Tropic of Capricorn
and South Temperate zone), and finally _australis_ (our Antarctic Circle
and South Polar zone). Of these they thought that only _solstitialis_
was habitable. William of Conches likewise believed[698] in
uninhabitable torrid and frigid zones, though he rejected the theory
that in the heavens above the sphere of the moon there are qualities of
heat and cold corresponding to those of the terrestrial zones.


                AUSTRAL CONTINENT AND ANTIPODAL REGIONS

Speculation was rife as to what lay beyond the equatorial zone and in
those mysterious parts of the earth of which man had no knowledge.
Rumors and conjectures of an austral continent and of antipodal regions
figure widely in the geographical literature of the age. A fourth
continent beyond the equatorial ocean (or Mare Rubrum) is shown on all
the Beatus maps. It is represented as a strip of land along the
southernmost edge of the earth (see Figs. 2 and 4, pp. 69 and 123,
above). A legend, taken from Isidore, informs us on the St. Sever map
that “In addition to the three parts of the world, there is a fourth
part beyond the ocean in the midst of the south and unknown to us on
account of the heat of the sun. Within its confines the antipodeans are
fabulously said to dwell.”[699] The Osma Beatus map locates the
_skiapodes_, or sun-shade-footed men, here (see Fig. 4). Confusion
between true antipodal regions on the opposite side of the world and an
austral continent lying south of the equator was not uncommon in
antiquity and during the Middle Ages.[700] Belief in the latter did not
necessarily involve belief in a spherical earth, and it has been argued
that the Roman cartographers (whose maps may have inspired Beatus)
showed such a fourth continent south of the equator, even though they
did not deem the question of the sphericity of the world worthy of
serious consideration. The Beatus maps themselves may easily be
reconciled with an implicit belief in a flat world disk.

While this may be true of the Beatus maps, it cannot be said of the
_mappamundi_ of Lambert of St. Omer or of references to the antipodes
elsewhere in the literature of our period where it is impossible to
question the conviction in the cartographers’ or writers’ minds that the
earth is a sphere.

On Lambert’s map the austral continent occupies half of the circle of
the earth. A long legend explains,[701] in terms similar to those of the
St. Sever Beatus map, that this region is unknown to mankind because of
the sun’s heat; that philosophers say the antipodeans dwell here; and
that winter prevails during our summer. In addition to the austral
continent, Lambert indicates without a shadow of doubt his faith in the
existence of other antipodal regions. A large island on the western
margin of his map is labeled, “Here dwell the antipodeans, but they have
a different night and opposite days.”[702] We know from other parts of
the _Liber floridus_ that Lambert was strongly influenced by Macrobius.
A Macrobian sketch of a spherical world showing the five zones is
inserted in the Ghent and other manuscripts. This reference to the
antipodes can only apply to the unknown regions on the opposite side of
the globe, beyond the meridional ocean which, as we have seen in Chapter
I, had been described by Crates of Mallos and popularized in Macrobius’
_In somnium Scipionis commentarius_ and in Martianus Capella’s _De
nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii_. Belief in a spherical world is
essential to belief in these theories.


                          THE CRATESIAN THEORY

Crates of Mallos’ conception of the arrangement of the world, introduced
to Western knowledge through the works of Macrobius and Capella, was
well known in our period. William of Conches, Adelard of Bath, and
Bernard Sylvester all show the influence of the Crates-Macrobian system
in their belief in a great equatorial ocean.[703] Giraldus Cambrensis
and the author of the _De imagine mundi_, by their explanation of the
causes of the tides, make it plain that they accepted the same opinion.
Geoffrey of St. Victor gives a clear exposition of it in his
_Microcosmus_.[704] Robert Grosseteste adopts it in his _De sphaera_,
explaining carefully the two seas that encircle the earth and calling
the equatorial sea “Occeanus” and that which includes the poles
“Amphitrites.” He believed that only one of the areas of land separated
by these seas is inhabited.[705] The same idea is reflected in words of
the _Image du monde_[706] to the effect that only a quarter of the
earth’s surface is inhabited and in the recommendation to the reader in
his imagination to cut the globe into four quarters like an apple and to
think of the habitable part as occupying the surface of one of the
quarters. Godfrey of Viterbo points out the significance of the golden
ball of empire which formed part of the regal insignia of the Holy Roman
Emperors upon which, he said, the fourfold division of the lands of the
earth’s surface was shown.[707] Among the imperial treasures
(_Reichskleinodien_) in Vienna the golden apple dating from the twelfth
century is of this form. Two bands encircling the regal ball at right
angles represent the Cratesian idea of oceans girdling the earth.[708]

In one version of the legend of St. Brandan there is a curious passage
where not only the possibility of antipodal regions is indicated but the
pious necessity of belief in such regions.[709] St. Brandan is here
reported to have read in an old book that beneath this earth there is
another world, where day prevails when it is night with us. Unable to
accept such a story, Brandan burned the book in a fit of exasperation;
and as a punishment for his incredulity God made him voyage nine years
upon the seas. What the book was we are not informed, but perhaps we do
not err in assuming that the poet had in mind a copy of the _In somnium
Scipionis commentarius_ or possibly the _De nuptiis Philologiae et
Mercurii_.


      PERSISTENCE OF BELIEF THAT ANTIPODAL REGIONS WERE INHABITED

An essential feature of the theory as it had been expounded by Macrobius
and Capella, however, was the insistence that the other three temperate
areas are inhabited by races of men like our own. As belief in the
existence of inhabitants in the antipodal regions rested in our period
on the authority of Capella and Macrobius and was subjected to lively
discussion and controversy, it is not out of place for us to observe
what these two writers had actually said.

Capella, after briefly stating that three out of the five zones are
uninhabitable on account of cold and heat, declared that the other two
are tempered by a wind which encourages life.[710] The inhabitants of
the quarter south of us, beyond the equator, he called _antoikoi_; those
of the quarter also in the southern hemisphere but beyond the
north-south ocean, who have winter when we have summer, _antichthones_.
Those in our own temperate zone beyond the ocean, who have the same
summer and winter as ours but who have night when we have day, he called
_antipodes_.[711] No commerce or communication is possible between us
and these other groups of human beings, nor between one group and any of
the others. Macrobius set forth this theory in similar terms,[712]
expressly emphasizing the point that reason teaches us that the southern
zone must be inhabited because its climate is temperate like ours.
However, he added, it is not peopled by men like ourselves—Greeks,
Romans, barbarians—nor shall we ever be able to learn what sort of men
the inhabitants actually are.

Though, as we have seen, out-and-out belief in antipodeans was heretical
during the epoch we are studying, there is plenty of evidence to show
that the possibility of such a thing was an attractive subject of
speculation. The legends on the Lambert maps to which reference has been
made above would alone be sufficient to convince us of this. William of
Conches spoke very guardedly on the matter;[713] his avowed theory was
that the other temperate regions were habitable but not actually
inhabited. But are we not justified in thinking that in denying the
existence of antipodeans he was merely making a verbal concession to
theological prejudice, especially when he went on to explain that, if
there were people dwelling in other quarters, they would be called
_antoikoi_, _antipodes_, and _antichthones_, and that some would have
summer when we have winter, others night when we have day?

Gervase of Tilbury relates a fanciful story which might be interpreted
to show that he too liked to dally with the pleasing fancy that there
may be antipodeans, even though elsewhere he rejects such a possibility.
He tells of a cave in a mountain belonging to the domain of the castle
of Bech in Great Britain.[714] From this there nearly always blew a
violent wind; but once, when the wind did not happen to be blowing, a
swineherd entered the cave to look for a breeding sow which had wandered
in. Here he found an open plain with cultivated lands and harvesters
bringing in their crops, and from the harvesters he recovered his sow.
To this Gervase adds, “It was an extraordinary circumstance that wintry
coldness coming from these subterranean harvest fields seemed to
penetrate into our hemisphere, which phenomenon I think ought to be
attributed to the sun’s absence and presence elsewhere.”[715]


               MANEGOLD’S ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS DOCTRINE

The most convincing proof of the persistence in the early twelfth
century of a tendency to believe in antipodeans is furnished by the fact
that Manegold in Alsace,[716] sometime after 1103, saw fit to write a
vigorous pamphlet attacking a certain Wolfelm of Cologne, whom he
accused of harboring an heretical opinion. Manegold’s _Contra Wolfelmum
opusculum_ illustrates admirably the orthodox, or even obscurantist,
point of view. He accused Wolfelm of adhering to Macrobius’ teachings
about the four inhabited quarters of the earth. Granting that there are
four such quarters, he demanded, how can the teachings of the Holy and
Apostolic Church, buttressed by all the authority of the Fathers, the
patriarchs, and the prophets from the earliest times, be true? And how
can we believe the prophecies that the Savior will come to bring
salvation to the entire human race, if these branches of the human race
are cut off from the rest, as Macrobius would have it, by the zones and
temperatures of the earth’s surface? How could the prophecy have been
true, “All the ends of the earth will bow down before our God (_salutare
Dei nostri_), if certain ends of the earth are inhabited by men to whom
the voice of the prophets and the apostles could not reach through
impassable tracts of water, of cold, and of heat?”[717]


                 HABITABILITY OF THE EQUATORIAL REGION

Macrobius’ theory was also contradicted from a position opposite to that
of the orthodox churchmen. The study of Moslem astronomy brought to
Europe the opinion that the equatorial zone itself was not only
habitable but actually inhabited. In the preamble to the _Marseilles
Tables_[718] of Raymond of Marseilles, which reproduces ideas expressed
by the Spanish-Moslem astronomer Az-Zarqalī, we have an explanation of
the current theory among “philosophers” of the uninhabitability of the
polar and equatorial regions. The latter the author of the treatise
refuses to believe because the city of Arin and the temple of “Jupiter
Arenosus” are both known to lie within the equatorial zone. He proceeds
then to explain why it is physically possible for the regions beyond the
equator to be inhabited.

Peter Alphonsi,[719] also influenced by Arabic reasoning, argued that
the existence of Arin on the equator was sufficient evidence of the
habitability of the equatorial regions and gave a glowing account of the
temperate climate and attractions of those parts of the world. Man can
live throughout the entire area covered by the seven climates, he
maintained, and, as his interpretation of ancient authorities led him to
suppose that the first climate began at the equator, he was convinced
that the equator also would support human life. On the other hand, he
did not agree with the preamble to the _Marseilles Tables_, for he
maintained that the parts of the earth in the southern hemisphere beyond
Arin were not habitable. This was because the sun, on account of the
eccentricity of its orbit, approaches much nearer the earth in those
climes than it does in more northern latitudes. In this way he accounted
for the excessive cold of the Arctic and polar regions and a (supposed)
excessive heat of the trans-equatorial zones.

Plato of Tivoli’s translation of Al-Battānī’s work brought to Western
knowledge another Arabic discussion of the probable characteristics of
the areas of the earth’s surface unknown to man.[720] As to the equator,
Al-Battānī said, it was uncertain whether men had actually been there or
not. The climate, however, could not be excessively hot, because the sun
in crossing the zenith, as it does twice a year between the tropics,
does not remain directly overhead very long. Al-Battānī saw no reason
why winters and summers should not be temperate in countries along the
equator and believed that these latitudes must have, in fact, a climate
not greatly unlike that of Aden and Yemen, which, however hot it may
seem to the European, apparently did not impress the Arabs by its
torridity. The unknown districts of the world, Al-Battānī went on to
explain, comprise eleven-twelfths of the whole. Though no man had ever
reached them, he thought it not irrational to suppose that they were
like the known parts, for the sun and stars must pass across them and
produce in the same way winter and summer, the tides of the sea, and
animal and vegetable life.


            GROSSETESTE ON THE HABITABLE PARTS OF THE EARTH

When we come to the close of our period, we find that Robert
Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln, and after him his more famous pupil
Roger Bacon, like Peter Alphonsi, took over from the Moslems much
geographical and astronomical lore which they interpreted and freely
criticized.

In a book entitled _De lineis angulis et figuris_ Grosseteste elaborated
some general principles relating to the incidence and reflection of rays
from celestial bodies. The _De natura locorum_ is an attempt to show how
far these principles may be used to account for various phenomena of the
earth’s surface. Grosseteste conceived of celestial rays and influences
as emanating in an infinite number of cones, or “pyramids,” as he called
them, the apexes of which were the celestial bodies; the longer and more
oblique these pyramids, the weaker the effect of the rays upon the
earth’s surface and vice versa.[721]

Let us see how Robert applied the principle of the pyramids to explain
conditions in the equatorial zone, in the southern hemisphere, and in
the polar regions.


                         _The Equatorial Zone_

Logically the equatorial zone should be scorched and burnt by the sun
because the pyramids are there the shortest and the angles at which the
rays reach the earth approach nearest to a right angle. As a matter of
fact, Robert had it on the authority of Ptolemy and Avicenna that,
whereas the subtropical regions are intensely hot, the subequatorial
zone is not only temperate but extremely temperate (_temperatissimus_);
indeed, he said, theologians place Paradise under the equator in the
Orient. A modification of the principle of the pyramids was therefore
necessary. In his readiness to admit such modifications of rules that he
had laid down, Robert showed an open-minded and a scientific spirit. In
order to allow for the circumstance of a supposedly temperate equatorial
region, he stated that the heat received during the daytime must be
neutralized by the coolness of the nights, since day and night between
the tropics are always approximately the same length, as they are in the
latitudes of Europe during spring and autumn only.[722]


                       _The Southern Hemisphere_

The southern hemisphere, on the other hand, Robert thought to be
uninhabitable on account of the intense heat of summer and bitter cold
of winter. The excessive heat he ascribed to the fact that the
eccentricity of the solar orbit around the earth brings the sun no less
than five degrees nearer the earth during the southern summer than it
approaches during the northern summer.[723] The pyramids, or lines of
heat radiation, are therefore shorter and the heat is more intense.[724]
Conversely the southern winter must be colder than that of the north
because the sun at that season is farthest from the earth.

Granting a geocentric universe, this reasoning was sound though its
consequences were exaggerated. It is quite true that the earth is nearer
the sun in the summer of the southern than in the summer of the northern
hemisphere, yet no extreme results flow from this circumstance, and
there is no great difference in the amount of heat received by each
hemisphere.[725]

An exaggerated idea of the differences in temperatures north and south
of the equator led Robert,[726] and after him Roger Bacon,[727] to doubt
the validity of the theory of the precession of the equinoxes. This
phenomenon would inevitably produce a gradual shifting of the climatic
conditions of the southern hemisphere to the northern, and, as a result,
the latter would presumably in the course of time become uninhabitable.
Since this seemed incredible to Grosseteste and Bacon, they were
impelled to deny the possibility of its cause.


                          _The Polar Regions_

In discussing the climate and habitability of the polar regions,[728]
Robert cites a work, _De vegetabilibus_ (erroneously ascribed to
Aristotle in the Middle Ages) and a commentary upon it. Here the
extraordinary view was expressed that no plants or animals could survive
in the polar zone because the heat of the sun would burn them up! This
view originated in the known fact that the sun shines continuously for
half the year at the pole and at no time sinks very far below the
horizon. The commentator pointed out that the sun never retires more
than 23° out of sight and that it is capable of illuminating and heating
the atmosphere at 18° below the horizon. The theory, however, failed to
take into account the very important fact that the sun’s rays reach the
polar regions at a sharply oblique angle and that consequently their
powers of generating heat are limited. This circumstance together with
the “observations and reasoning of Aristotle, Ptolemy, and other
authorities” led the Bishop of Lincoln conclusively to reject the
singular theory of the _De vegetabilibus_ and to attribute to the polar
zones a climate that, in so far as it was dependent upon the disposition
of the heavens, rendered these regions uninhabitable on account of the
cold. Nevertheless, he recognized that there might be accidental local
conditions, such as the presence of mountains of peculiar shape, capable
in the polar regions of producing areas of intense heat or of
delightfully temperate climate. But to this subject we shall revert in a
later section devoted to the influence of mountains on climate.[729]




                              CHAPTER VII
                             THE ATMOSPHERE


At the present time we divide the study of the atmosphere into the
sciences of meteorology, devoted to the investigation of individual and
local atmospheric phenomena, and climatology, devoted to the
investigation of the geographical distribution of weather conditions
throughout the world as observed during long periods of time. We may
make the same arbitrary division in dealing with the theories current in
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Meteorology and climatology,
however, merge into each other. Some understanding of one is absolutely
essential to an understanding of the other, and hence we must take
certain meteorological theories into consideration before attempting to
deal with the more truly geographic subject of climatology.


                             _METEOROLOGY_

Probably the most complete and satisfactory extant treatment of
meteorology from our period is to be found in the writings of William of
Conches, whose interest in physics and in the natural sciences led him
to study carefully the views of Seneca and also to express at great
length opinions of his own about the atmosphere.[730]


                     COMPOSITION OF THE ATMOSPHERE

In the first place, William had very definite ideas concerning the
composition of the air. The aerial and aqueous spheres, he said, act as
intermediaries between the spheres of fire and earth.[731] The qualities
of the two latter are opposite; but the atmosphere partakes more or less
of the qualities of each, for neither sphere is made up exclusively of
one element. William was an atomist: he thought that matter is composed
of minute atoms and that each atom is the smallest conceivable particle
of one of the four elements.[732] He explained that the atmosphere,
which extends up as far as the moon’s orbit, contains in addition to the
aerial atoms a certain number of aqueous particles in its lower levels
and of fiery atoms higher up. Hence its density and humidity decrease
progressively from the earth’s surface upward; the higher air is clear
and lucid, the abode of good demons or angels, messengers of God to man,
whereas the lower air is full of clouds and constitutes the abode of
evil spirits.[733]

These parts of the atmosphere formed two out of five concentric regions
into which William divided the entire universe.[734]


                              TEMPERATURE

With much acuteness of observation, William recognized the fact that the
sun’s influence on the denser air of low altitudes is far more potent
than it is on the rarer strata above.[735] Though heat comes from the
sun, he said, it is not apparent until it becomes mingled with humidity.
In valleys the air, lying stagnant and damp, is easily heated, whereas
the dry upper levels remain cold even though the sun’s warmth passes
through them. The presence of this coldness explains why snow is found
on the summits of the highest mountains, for the belief that mountain
snow is due to cold north winds William branded as false, observing that
snow often occurs on the south as well as on the north sides of the
peaks. Robert Grosseteste also held that the air at high altitudes is
much colder than it is near the surface.[736] This, he said, was because
the heating effect of the sun’s rays is inoperative on account of the
transparency of the medium. At the surface heating takes place as a
result of reflection and condensation of the solar rays.[737] The cold
air at high levels explains the origin of perpetual snow on mountain
tops. Hail is generated in these strata, rain at lower levels. Robert
cited as proof of this the fact that birds of prey fly high in summer to
cool off and that cranes and many other birds descend into the valleys
to escape the icy chill but fly up the mountain sides to avoid the
heat.[738]


                     UPPER LEVELS OF THE ATMOSPHERE

In contrast with these opinions of William of Conches and Robert
Grosseteste, which were based apparently on more or less direct
observation, we find echoes in our period of a doctrine that had its
roots in classical mythology—the doctrine that above a certain height on
mountain peaks the air is undisturbed by wind and unsullied by
clouds.[739] Hermann the Dalmatian hints at this in his _Liber de
essentiis_. In the course of a discussion of the dimensions of the
habitable area of the earth’s surface that had probably been suggested
by the reading of Arabic works he explains that the living offspring of
the earth require for the maintenance of life a certain heavy, “greasy”
terrestrial vapor which, “as Aristotle determined from the height of
Olympus, does not rise more than sixteen stades above the earth’s
surface. Here consequently would seem to be the upper limit of our
habitable zone. Possibly this might be measured by means of the rainbow,
which, according to the description of Hipparchus, reaches from the
clouds themselves down to the surface of the earth. But since
Hipparchus’ description is not accurate nor is the figure of the rainbow
a semicircle, we leave the matter for whosoever may wish to prove
it.”[740] Peter Alphonsi, who was also influenced by Moslem thought,
placed the upper limit of the clouds at sixteen miles,[741] a figure
which may have been derived from the same origin as Hermann’s sixteen
stades. Peter Comestor inserted in his _Historia scholastica_ some
observations in regard to the tranquillity of the summit of Mount
Olympus and the physiological effects of the rarity of the
atmosphere.[742] So quiet and untroubled by winds is this peak that
letters written there in the dust remain legible for a year. The air is
too thin even to support the life of birds, and several philosophers who
climbed the mountain would have been unable to remain on top if they had
not held to their faces sponges soaked with water and in this way made
it possible to breathe by attracting denser air to their nostrils.[743]


                                 CLOUDS

In this connection a puzzling question seems to have occurred to William
of Conches. If the general rule holds that the atmosphere is rarer
higher up than on the earth’s surface, how then does it happen that the
upper air so often becomes dense in the form of clouds? To this William
gave the correct answer,[744] that clouds are not composed of air of
greater density than the surrounding parts of the atmosphere, but that
water vapor arising from below is turned into clouds by the cold. True
as it may be, this idea does not fit in very well with William’s theory
of the coldness of the higher altitudes. First he maintains that one of
the main reasons why the upper air is cold is because it lacks dampness;
then he goes on to explain that dampness rising to a great elevation is
converted by the cold into clouds. Though there is no direct
contradiction of two statements here, one cannot but sense inconsistency
and looseness of thought of a sort that pervades all medieval natural
science, though William of Conches on the whole was rather less
illogical and less inconsistent than most of his contemporaries.

Much the same explanation of the effects of cold on the condensation of
water vapor is found in the _Dialogus_ of Peter Alphonsi,[745] where it
is shown that the sun draws a damp vapor from the sea and a dry humor
from the land. Out of a combination of these, clouds are formed which
rise until they reach a height of about sixteen miles. Here, coming in
contact with strata of cold air, they are prevented from ascending any
higher, and the damp vapor may be precipitated in the form of rain.


                             PRECIPITATION

William of Conches also endeavored to explain rainfall.[746] This
phenomenon may result, he said, from various causes: either from the
conversion into drops of water of dense vapors arising from the earth,
from the actual transformation of air into water through the influence
of cold, from the tumbling back to earth of some of the water which the
sun raises to itself for its own nourishment,[747] or, finally, from
water swept up by the winds off the surface of streams, lakes, and
swamps. That the last was possible he believed to be demonstrated by the
fact that frogs sometimes fall with raindrops![748]

Theodoric of Chartres gives a clear statement[749] of the theory of
evaporation, condensation, and precipitation in terms that sound almost
modern. Heat, he says, causes water to ascend into the atmosphere in
minute drops which form clouds. If the heat increases, these droplets
turn to pure air; if it diminishes, they coalesce into rain. The most
minute drops are constricted by a cold wind into snow; when the drops
are large they are converted into hail by the same agency.[750]

Topographic influences on precipitation were partially understood by
Giraldus Cambrensis, who believed that the influence of
land—particularly hilly land—frequently tends to change the vapors of
the air into mists and clouds, or rain and snow.[751] In the seas off
Ireland, for instance, water is attracted into the atmosphere in immense
quantities; the temperature being equable, the water is neither consumed
by an excess of heat nor turned to snow by an excess of cold but is
altered into rain, a process greatly facilitated by the presence of many
mountains in Ireland.


                           FLOODS; THE DELUGE

An excess of rainfall results in floods. William of Conches believed
that under normal conditions the warmth of summer counteracts the
excessive dampness of winter but that a long series of cool, damp
summers will end in floods and, conversely, a series of hot, dry summers
will end in droughts. But, however many local floods there may be, only
one _diluvium_, or deluge, is possible.[752]

Whence came the waters of the Deluge? This was a question which puzzled
some of the commentators on Scripture during the Middle Ages. Adelard,
though he did not believe it himself, cited a theory that the purpose of
the waters above the firmament was to furnish these waters.[753] Peter
Comestor,[754] followed by Gervase of Tilbury,[755] said that they came
partly from the bowels of the earth and partly from the air above and
that they rose higher than the tops of the mountains of today,[756] to
the level to which the vapors of burnt offerings ascend. Gervase also
spoke of a curious theory that there may have been no rain in Paradise
nor anywhere on the earth until the time of the Deluge.[757] The
vegetation in the Garden was watered in these early days by the heavenly
dew. The argument that no rain fell until the Deluge was based, he said,
on the words of God to Noah: “I will no more curse the earth for the
sake of men; ... seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter,
night and day shall not cease” (Gen. viii, 21–22). Gervase adds:
“Perhaps the four seasons were not yet fully distinguished one from the
other, since not until the time of the Deluge were the waters gathered
into clouds.”[758] According to the _Liber divinorum operum_ of
Hildegard the temperature was far hotter before the Deluge than it has
been since, and “the men of that time possessed great bodily strength in
order that they might endure this heat. The Deluge reduced the
temperature, and men since have been weaker” (Thorndike).[759]


                                 WINDS

The winds interested the men of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries
even more than rainfall. Popular notions of winds, rain, and storms as
manifestations of magical powers or evil spirits,[760] though
universally believed among the unlearned, were not given serious
consideration by the majority of scholars. Isidore, Bede, Raban Maur,
and those who copied from them during our period—the author of the _De
imagine mundi_[761] and Gervase of Tilbury in his _Otia
imperialia_—defined wind as air in a disturbed and agitated
condition,[762] Adelard of Bath said it was dense air moving in a
particular direction,[763] and William of Conches used Seneca’s
definition, “Wind is air flowing one way.”[764]

Hildegard of Bingen made the winds play a supremely important part in
the dynamics and physics of the universe. To the winds she ascribed the
movement of the firmament from east to west and of the planets from west
to east.[765] Were it not for the winds, she said, the fires of the
south, the waters of the west, the shadows of the north would burst
forth over the earth. The four winds are the wings of God’s power; were
they to move forward at once all the elements would be confounded and
split asunder, and they would shake the sea and dry up its waters.[766]
As the body of man is held together by the soul, so the whole firmament
is kept intact by the winds lest it be corrupted; and the winds are
invisible like the soul, which comes from the mystery of God[767] (see
Fig. 5, p. 149).

What causes the wind? William of Conches made one of the most elaborate
attempts in many centuries to answer this,[768] for, though borrowing
largely from Seneca, he added some significant observations of his own.
In the first place he argued that local winds are produced by various
local causes, as, for instance, when air enters a cavern, on account of
its _labilitas_, or fluidity, it tends to force out the air already
there and thus to make a commotion which generates wind. We may be
allowed to suppose here that William has in mind a cavern with two
entrances, for it is difficult to understand how such an effect could be
produced in a cavern with only one. Similarly, William thought that
waters entering the hollows of the earth tend to force out the vapors
therein contained and thus to produce blasts and even earthquakes. A
damp vapor in rising might cause a wind to blow on account of the
removal of its weight (_ex ponderatione sua_). William borrowed the idea
that winds may result from the destruction and flattening out of clouds
directly from the ἐκνέφτα, or “cloud breezes,” of Aristotle and Seneca.
Adelard of Bath also attributed the origin of certain winds to local
exhalations of vapors off the surface of land and water. “Marshes and
valleys give up a great deal of dense air, which in the natural course
of things rises upward; further, when they are loosened, they give back
to its natural position much moisture of water which they had previously
held imprisoned; add to this that I do not exclude from my statement the
actual air which is the content of earth” (Gollancz’s translation).[769]


                       _Atmospheric Circulation_

The most original theory of the winds was not any of those which
attempted to account for purely local breezes but an explanation
propounded by William of Conches of the circulation of the atmosphere as
a whole. Unlike our modern conceptions of atmospheric circulation based
on the observation of facts, William’s ingenious theory seems to have
been the product of his own vivid imagination. It was founded on a
persistent idea, dating back to classical times, that disturbances in
the water can produce currents of air. Gervase of Tilbury, for example,
states in so many words that “mountains and water cause winds” and that
the swift-flowing Rhone makes the _mistral_ that blows over Provence and
Dauphiny.[770] William of Conches[771] believed that there are two ocean
currents trending east and west out of the equatorial ocean. Each of
these was supposed to divide in two at the extremities of our
_oikoumene_, making four currents which collide at the North and South
Poles in the ocean perpendicular to the equatorial ring (Amphitrites).
The cardinal winds are generated at four points, at the two junctions of
the oceans where the currents divide and at the poles where they
collide. The western division gives rise to Zephyr, the eastern to
Eurus, the collision at the North Pole to Boreas, and the one at the
South Pole to Auster. It may happen, however, that one of the currents
will on occasion flow more strongly than its opponent and will push the
point of collision beyond the pole. This displacement of the point of
collision explains the blowing of the collateral winds. Absurd as it may
be in itself, this theory is of interest to us mainly because it shows
that William understood that a broad system of atmospheric circulation
is possible and assigned to it, as well as to local breezes, a purely
physical cause. Curiously enough, it is the exact reverse of our modern
conception of the usual relation existing between atmospheric and ocean
currents, for now we understand that the winds are more effective as the
cause of the ocean currents than vice versa.

William also maintained, as we shall see later,[772] that the tides are
produced by the impact of ocean currents. Why then, it was asked, if the
tides are of daily, periodic occurrence, do not the winds, which he
tells us result from the same cause, show a similar periodicity? To this
William replied[773] that the winds in fact do show such regularity but
that it is not apparent to us for two reasons: in the first place, wind
produced by these causes does not always reach the part of the earth
where we happen to be; and, secondly, the resulting wind may blow at
such a high altitude as not to be noticed by men on the ground—an
observation now well known to be true.


                          _Names of the Winds_

Classical names for the winds were almost universally employed. The
distinction between cardinal and collateral which was made by William of
Conches goes back to the Greeks,[774] who had conceived of four cardinal
and four, six, seven, or eight collateral winds. Seneca’s[775] rose of
twelve winds, the idea of which in its essentials had been derived from
Posidonius, Timosthenes, and, ultimately, from Aristotle, was adopted by
Isidore, who passed it on to the Middle Ages, though terrible confusion
(which, happily, it is not necessary for us to unravel) reigned at all
times regarding the names employed to designate its elements.[776] In
addition to the classical terms, our modern names were already familiar.
In the Ghent manuscript of Lambert of St. Omer’s _Liber floridus_[777]
there is a diagram in which the winds are called “ost-ost,” “sud-ost,”
“sud-sud,” “sud-west,” “west-west,” “nord-west,” “nord-nord,” and
“nord-ost.” This terminology was used in the time of Charlemagne[778]
and is probably of Anglo-Saxon origin,[779] although it has been
suggested that the terms are corruptions of Latin words—“ost” from
“Augustus;” “ovest,” or “west,” from “ob est;” “nord” from “novus
arctus,” etc.[780]


                        _Qualities of the Winds_

To the various winds classical and medieval writers liked to attribute
qualities—or, at any rate, descriptive adjectives, “cold” or “hot,”
“dry” or “damp,” “stormy” or “calm,” and the like—but there was little
enough uniformity in making these distinctions. Some writers of our
period seem to have been content merely to repeat what had been said in
classical times; others, like William of Conches or Giraldus Cambrensis,
showed more independence. Boreas was probably universally regarded as
cold and Auster as hot, but beyond this we cannot generalize.[781]
William of Conches[782] conceived of the winds as partaking of the
qualities of the regions over which they blow: Auster, coming from the
South Pole and hence originally frigid like Boreas, in its passage
across the torrid, equatorial zone becomes hot and dry—an observation
which may perhaps be founded on some knowledge of the _sirocco_ of the
Mediterranean. On the other hand, Giraldus Cambrensis, undoubtedly from
personal acquaintance with the water-laden south and southwest gales of
the British Isles, calls Auster damp and rainy in winter. Similarly
Giraldus breaks with classical tradition when he speaks of the east
wind, or Eurus, as pure and clear, a bringer of fair summer weather,
strikingly different from Zephyr, wet and cloudy from the sea.[783]


                             _Local Winds_

We find occasional descriptions—some of them from personal observation,
no doubt—of winds peculiar to particular parts of the world. Gervase of
Tilbury, as we have seen, tells of very violent blasts in the Rhone
valley,[784] supposedly generated by the current of the river in a
region now famed for the furious _mistral_ that sweeps across Dauphiny
and Provence from the north. In another connection[785] he tells of a
valley in the Kingdom of Arles, once so shut in by precipitous mountains
that no winds at all entered it and that it consequently was sterile and
useless. In the time of Charlemagne, however, Caesarius, the archbishop
of Arles, filled his glove with sea breezes and let them forth in the
valley; thus originated a wind known as _pontianum_, which wrought an
immediate change in the character of the place and caused it henceforth
to become fertile and healthy. This wind was doubtless the breeze now
called _pontias_ that blows at Nyons in the Department of the Drôme; but
as to its miraculous origin Gervase is merely repeating one of many
popular medieval stories.[786]

William of Tyre[787] describes in vivid terms the _simoom_ of the
Arabian desert and how men have to lie flat on the ground at the time of
its passing: equal to a storm at sea, it sweeps down upon the traveler
waves of sand as huge as those of the sea and causes grave danger to
persons who would cross the desert.


                             _CLIMATOLOGY_

The most important factor in determining the atmospheric climate of any
given region is the amount of sunlight and heat received. This, in turn,
depends largely on geographical latitude. As we have already discussed
the broad climatic divisions of the earth’s surface in zones, it remains
here for us to deal merely with what was known of climatic conditions
within the _oikoumene_.


                         HOT AND COLD CLIMATES

Climatic differences between northerly and southerly latitudes were well
understood. Classical writers had told of the coldness of the regions
beyond Thule, and in the _De imagine mundi_[788] we read that in those
parts the sea is frozen and perpetual cold prevails. An interpolation
into Solinus’ _Collectanea rerum memorabilium_ dating perhaps from our
period contains a vivid and possibly exaggerated description of the cold
of Iceland: “These people also are good Christians, but in winter they
dare not leave their underground holes on account of the terrible cold.
For if they go out they are smitten by such terrible cold that they lose
their color like lepers and swell up. If by chance they blow their nose,
it comes off and they throw it away” (Nansen’s translation).[789]
Giraldus Cambrensis praises the temperate climate of Ireland, placed
between the torrid warmth of Spain and the rigors of Iceland;[790] and
the chroniclers and historians of the Crusades give evidence of
first-hand knowledge of the terrific summer heats in the Holy Land.[791]
Ambroise says, for example:

                 “Ca c’est entur la seint Johan
                 Que la chalur tote rien seche
                 En la terre, tele est sa teche.”[792]

Benjamin of Tudela’s extensive travels made him familiar with countries
of widely different climate. The peculiarities of some of these he notes
briefly. Writing of Russia, for example, he remarks that “no one issues
forth from his house in winter time on account of the cold. People are
to be found there who have lost the tips of their noses by reason of the
frost” (Adler’s translation).[793] Similarly it was his belief that in
Khulam (or Quilon) in southern India no one left his home all through
the summer on account of the sun.[794] A hint of the intensity of the
Mesopotamian summer is given in a description of a hospital in Baghdad,
which Benjamin had perhaps seen, “where they keep charge of the demented
persons who have become insane through the great heat ... and they chain
each of them with iron chains until their reason becomes restored to
them in the winter time” (Adler’s translation).[795]


                        DISTRIBUTION OF CLIMATES

William of Conches, in his usual manner, tried to generalize on
climates. He said that our habitable portion of the earth’s surface is
not of an even temperature throughout. The parts nearest the torrid
zone, Ethiopia and Libya, are hot and dry; the northern parts near the
frigid zone are cold and damp. Furthermore, though for us it is less
easy to see exactly why, the West is cold and dry, and the East warm and
damp. The symmetry of the system is perfect: climates vary in a direct
ratio with distance, or, as William puts it, “Aequaliter vero distans,
aequaliter est temperata.”[796]


               CLIMATIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EAST AND WEST

Men were not so well agreed in the Middle Ages regarding differences of
climate between East and West as regarding those between North and
South. Bartholomew Anglicus[797] believed the West to be cold and damp
and the East hot and dry, an opinion unlike that of William of Conches
in that it may well have been based on actual observation rather than on
theory. Giraldus Cambrensis in the _Topographia Hiberniae_ gives a long
discourse[798] on climatic and other differences between the Orient and
Occident, in which his main contention is that, though the air is
clearer, finer, and more “subtle” in the East, the stormy and damp
climates of the West are better for the health. The true climate of the
Orient—that is of the Levant—had been made known to the Occidental world
through the Crusaders, who often dwelt with insistence on its
disagreeable and injurious qualities, especially the heat, dust, and
thirst of the Syrian summer, which dried cisterns and carried disease
and death in its train. In the East, Giraldus says, everything threatens
the traveler, and he writes a word of warning against doing many of
those very things which the modern wanderer in the Levant knows to be
imprudent: such as going uncovered, sitting on rocks, or
overeating.[799]


                  TOPOGRAPHIC INFLUENCES UPON CLIMATE


                               _The Sea_

During our period we find several descriptions of local climatic
conditions and of variations due to topographic features like sea and
mountains. A vivid impression of the wild marine weather of the North
Atlantic off the coast of Ireland is given us in the narrative of St.
Brandan’s wanderings. The saint and his companions were forced to remain
three months on an island because of storms with furious gales, rain,
and hail.[800] Giraldus Cambrensis[801] pictures the turbulent climate
of Ireland, an isle surrounded by vast seas, unprotected and exposed to
all the blasts. He was especially struck by the thick and rainy westerly
gales, Zephyr and Corus, which bend over the trees in the seaward parts
of the island. However violent the winds, Giraldus maintained that
Ireland is the most temperate of all lands:[802] snow there is
infrequent and when it comes lasts but a short while. Though cold
weather accompanies all the winds, it never becomes too cold, and green
grass grows in the pastures at all times of year. Yet so constant is the
dampness, so prevalent the rain and clouds, that a clear day is rare
indeed.


                              _Mountains_

William of Conches speaks in general terms of the influence of mountains
on climate. We have seen how he recognized the fact that the tops of
mountains are colder than the valleys below.[803] In another
connection[804] he explained that places cut off from the north winds by
mountains have dry, warm conditions and are good for winter residence,
though less desirable in summer. The opposite is true of places on the
north sides. Similarly, places exposed to the east are warm and damp
with a pleasant autumn but bad spring weather, and the converse is true
of places with a western exposure. This systematic arrangement is
deduced from William’s fundamental and oversymmetrical conception of the
various climatic characteristics of the cardinal points of the compass.

Gunther of Pairis, in his _Ligurinus_,[805] embellishes a description of
the mountain ranges of Italy with an imaginative discourse on how they
influence the climate: the Apennines temper the moist, summer heat of
the south wind, and the crags of the Alps cut off the cold northerly
gales of Boreas and Arctos. Giraldus Cambrensis says[806] that Ireland,
like all other mountainous districts, produces an abundance of rain. In
the _Itinerarium Kambriae_[807] he explains that the lake of Brecknock
(Llangorse) in Wales is encircled north, west, and south by high
mountains. The great range of Cader Arthur to the south, by cutting off
the rays of the sun, renders the climate in the vicinity of the lake
both pleasant and healthy. The valley of Ewyas, completely surrounded by
mountains (now the Black Mountains), is constantly the resting place of
clouds, strong gales, and rain, which make it, in Giraldus’ opinion, an
extremely healthful locality.[808]

We cannot leave this subject without alluding again to the theoretical
discussion of the influence of mountains on the climate of the polar
regions that is found in that most interesting treatise of Robert
Grosseteste, the _De natura locorum_. The bishop of Lincoln recognized
the fact that insolation is greatly reduced in high latitudes owing to
the obliquity of the sun’s rays and that the climate normally should be
too cold to sustain life. He believed, however, that the presence of
very high mountains, Rhipaean, Hyperborean, and others to which the
authorities referred, might totally neutralize the effects of position
in relation to the sun’s rays. “Some of these mountains,” he wrote,[809]
“are smooth of surface, like the salt or rock hills that are found in
many places, and others are in the nature of crystal, as divers authors
and explorers testify, so that the reflection from them is good. As a
result of this they are able to cause the rays all to converge and to
produce a powerful effect. From these two accidental causes, that is
from the smoothness of the mountains and from their concave shape, there
is an intense heating of the air in certain regions around the pole. The
great height of some of these mountains also cuts off the cold of the
north, and thus certain localities may well be intensely hot.” On the
other hand, Grosseteste had learned from Capella, Pliny, Solinus, and
“many others who describe the regions of the world that in the
Hyperborean Mountains next to the pole there are men who are called
Hyperboreans from these mountains. And they enjoy the most temperate and
healthy of climates and as a result live to such an age that they grow
tired of life and without other cause throw themselves off of high rocks
into the sea and die. The cause of this may be assigned to the form of
the mountains beneath which they dwell, inasmuch as these mountains are
smooth and of even surface, nor are they concave but are elongated
(_oblongam_) and convex or of some other shape which does not
concentrate the heat in those regions but on the contrary renders the
climate temperate.”[810]


                      INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE ON MAN

In the literature of our period we find several observations about the
influence of climate on man. Gervase of Tilbury[811] maintained that the
character of the different European peoples varies with varying climatic
conditions. “According to the diversities of the air the Romans are
grave, the Greeks fickle and unreliable, the Africans sly and crafty,
the Gauls fierce, and the English and Teutons powerful and robust.”

In another connection[812] he explains that the violent _mistral_ of the
Rhone valley generates in this region men who are windy, empty-headed,
inconsistent, and most unreliable in their promises. The supposedly
mollifying influence of a warmer climate on the Lombards is hinted at by
Otto of Freising.[813] Otto believed that these tribes gave up their
ferocity on settling in Italy, where they adopted Italian customs,
partly because they married Italian women but partly also because of the
nature of the country and climate (_ex terris aerisve_). We have already
seen how Giraldus Cambrensis stressed the healthy qualities of damp and
humid Ireland in contrast with the disease-breeding Orient. Even the
most delicate persons thrive in Ireland, he said, and though the Eastern
air may endow men with keener wits and intelligence, the West gives them
stronger bodies and a more martial spirit.[814]


                            CLIMATE OF ROME

If we may believe Otto of Freising[815] and Gunther of Pairis,[816] the
climate of Rome was even more noxious and dangerous in the twelfth than
in the nineteenth century. Otto tells us that Frederick Barbarossa’s
army arrived in Rome in midsummer when the Dog Star was on high. It was
a time when the ponds, caverns, and ruinous places around the city were
exhaling poisonous vapors, and the air in the entire vicinity had become
densely laden with pestilence and death. Gunther enlarges on this,
giving a circumstantial, though probably fanciful, account of the
effects of the terrible Roman summer on the German army, especially of
the disease and malaria engendered by the climate and foul condition of
the city.[817]




                              CHAPTER VIII
                               THE WATERS


                    _THE WATERS ABOVE THE FIRMAMENT_


                         RATIONALISTIC BELIEFS

“And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the
firmament from the waters which were above the firmament” (Gen. i, 7).

We saw in Chapter II that this text had induced many of the earlier
Church Fathers to devise strange theories about the waters above the
firmament. The idea of Jerome, Josephus, Ambrose, Isidore, and Bede that
these waters were in crystalline, or frozen, form met with opposition
from those who were influenced by classical science and especially by
the writings of Aristotle. Abelard in his _Expositio in hexaemeron_[818]
discussed in considerable detail various opinions about the existence of
solidified water above the firmament, though personally he was inclined
to think that the air sustains the water in the form of very fine drops.
That much heavier objects may sometimes be supported by air or water he
proved by citing examples of cases where this is actually known to
happen, as where a needle may be made to float on water. Theodoric of
Chartres and William of Conches approached the problem from an even more
rationalistic standpoint. Theodoric[819] held that water, when subjected
to sufficient heat, turns into “pure air.” On the second day of the
Creation the fire element heated the water element in such a way that
large portions of the latter rose as high as the moon and were there
suspended in vaporous form “above the top of the sky” (_super summam
coeli_). As a result the atmosphere became intercalated between the
liquid water of the earth’s surface and this water vapor above the
firmament. The firmament itself, Theodoric contended, was merely the air
and was so called either because it “firmly” supported that which was
above it and enclosed that which was below it or else because it
“firmly” gripped the earth on all sides. William of Conches also argued
against the possibility of frozen water above the firmament.[820] This,
he declared, is quite contrary to reason: frozen water is solid and
heavy, and the place for solid and heavy substances in the constitution
of the universe is either on or beneath the earth’s surface. Then again,
water in or near the celestial sphere—which is the abode of fire—would
either extinguish the fire or else itself be consumed. William objected
to juggling with the Aristotelian laws of physics. He explained the
Biblical text by asserting that the firmament is the atmosphere and that
the waters “above” it are in reality nothing more than the clouds within
it.[821] On the whole, he concluded that the text should be interpreted
allegorically rather than literally.


                            LITERAL BELIEFS

In decided contrast with these more or less rationalistic theories was
Michael Scot’s bold assertion that beyond the realm of fire and above
the eighth heavenly sphere comes a “multitude of waters,”[822] or
Gervase of Tilbury’s extraordinary account of a sea either in or above
the atmosphere. To prove the existence of such a sea Gervase told[823]
how “in his time some people coming out of a church in England found an
anchor let down by a rope out of the heavens, how there came voices from
sailors above trying to loose the anchor, and, finally, how a sailor
came down the rope, who, on reaching the earth, died as if drowned in
water” (White).[824] William of Auvergne, Platonist of the early
thirteenth century and staunch opponent of Aristotelianism, also found
no difficulties in the way of literal belief in the waters above the
firmament. Ignoring the arguments of Peripatetic physics, he wrote:[825]
“Nobody in the world is either amazed or horrified at the presence of
fire beneath the waters and more especially beneath the earth. This is
proved to the eye by the fiery outbreaks from three mountains (that is
Vulcano, Etna, and Chimaera). Why then should one wonder so much that
water is found above the heavens?”

Hildegard of Bingen gave expression to some views, probably original
with her, regarding the waters above the firmament. In the _Causae et
curae_ she speaks of “the waters of the great sea which surrounds the
world and forms as it were a flank to those waters which are above the
firmament, because the height (_summitas_) of those which are above and
the extreme edge (_extremitas_) of those which are below the firmament
are mutually joined together.”[826] In the _Solutiones_ she
characterized the celestial waters, asserting that they neither increase
nor decrease (implying perhaps that they are disturbed by no tides) but
that they have remained just as they are now since God created them.
They are unlike the waters of the earth inasmuch as they are far more
fine in texture and entirely invisible to human eyes.[827]


                         PURPOSE OF THE WATERS

What purpose is served by the waters above the firmament? Gervase of
Tilbury declared that they supply the earth with dew.[828] Abelard said
that there were two opinions on this subject.[829] The first was that
the waters were originally placed in the heavens in order to be used in
the Deluge. To this he was opposed, because the Psalms show that the
waters were still in existence in David’s time, long after the Flood. If
there had not been waters above the firmament in David’s time, how could
the latter have sung: “Praise ye the Lord ... ye heavens of heavens and
let all the waters that are above the heavens praise the name of the
Lord”?[830] Abelard was more inclined to favor the second theory, that
the waters were intended to temper the heat of the upper celestial
fires. He felt, however, with more or less reason, that this entire
problem presents great, if not insoluble, difficulties.


                      _THE CONGREGATION OF WATERS_

There is an abundance of evidence that the authority of the Bible was
invoked to support a theory that the waters beneath the firmament must
constitute one unit, or “congregation of waters.” This view, as we saw
in Chapter II, was based on the assertion in Genesis that God “gathered
together the waters in one place.” Peter Abelard,[831] Peter
Comestor,[832] and Hugh of St. Victor[833] all maintained that there are
great subterranean reservoirs connected with the seas and rivers of the
surface in such a way that the whole hydrographic system of the earth
forms a single unit. Prior to the action of God in gathering them
together these waters in the primordial chaos were supposed to have been
disseminated in the form of vapor, which took up vastly more room than
the liquid into which God’s power later concentrated them.


                   CONNECTION BETWEEN SEAS AND RIVERS

That many writers believed in the connection between the seas and the
rivers and in the consequent unity of the waters is shown by numerous
passages. Medieval thinkers, as we have seen, were constantly
preoccupied by the doctrine of the microcosm, the theory that the human
body includes all the elements which constitute the universe and is
indeed in itself a miniature replica of the universe. This appears in a
statement in the _De imagine mundi_ that the whole interior of the earth
is filled with channels like the blood vessels that permeate the
body.[834] Whenever and wherever a man digs into the ground he is sure
to find water. A constant circulation is maintained between the ocean
and the waters of the surface of the land through these passages and
through the air.[835]

William of Conches held that the great ocean in the equatorial zone is
the source of all dampness in the earth (_fons humoris_) and that the
land is seamed with canals full of water derived from that source.[836]
Peter Alphonsi describes the circulation of the waters from the sea into
the atmosphere by evaporation, thence in the form of rain to the rivers,
and so back to the sea.[837] Peter Comestor, however, held that the
river which springs from Paradise and divides in four is the source of
all the water of the earth;[838] and Gervase of Tilbury, who follows
Comestor in this respect, mentions in another connection that springs
have their sources in the sea.[839] Perhaps if he had analyzed the
question he would have said that the waters of the sea must find their
way at some time through the rivers of Paradise and thence to the
springs.


                  THE EARTH ESTABLISHED ON THE WATERS

The phrase in the Psalms, that God established the earth above or on
(_super_) the waters,[840] also proved puzzling to the thinkers of our
period. The easy explanation that such a phenomenon might be due to the
arbitrary working of God’s will was not always readily accepted. Some
commentators on the Psalms observed dubiously that it surpassed their
understanding.[841] Alexander Neckam stated that it might possibly refer
to waters beneath the earth, since “Alfraganus [Al-Farghānī] says that
the sphere of the waters and of the earth are one.” Saints who had
expounded the phrase, he added, tried to explain away the difficulty by
referring to the colloquial manner of saying that Paris is founded “on
the Seine.” “The truth of the matter, however, is that the terrestrial
paradise is above the waters, since it is above the sphere of the
moon.”[842] An allegorical interpretation was also resorted to, and the
reader was told to conceive of “earth” as being the Church and “the
waters” as the many peoples upon which the Church is founded.

Peter Abelard, in an interesting passage in the _Expositio in
hexaemeron_,[843] gave an interpretation of this phrase as well as of
the text about the “congregation of the waters” which seems to
foreshadow a theory later to be elaborated by Brunetto Latino and
destined to gain a firm grip on the hydrographical conceptions of many
individuals until as late as the eighteenth century. Abelard wrote:
“When the waters receded into one part of the earth, the other parts
were uncovered, as was written: ‘God, who established the earth on the
waters.’ As any globe may be immersed in water in such a way that one
part of it rises above the water, even so the globe of the earth rests
in the waters so that one side of it is contiguous with the sea and
causes the sea to permeate through its veins, whence springs and rivers
take their rise. The waters of this sea, in truth, are congregated into
one place and are consequently deeper than if they were diffused,
unless, perchance, the fact that they may be drawn off through the veins
of the earth makes them less deep.” We have seen that Abelard and
William of Conches compared the universe to an egg in which the four
parts correspond to the four elements, fire, air, water, and earth.[844]
This was the theoretical arrangement of the elements according to the
logical application of Aristotle’s physical laws. As a matter of fact,
the aqueous sphere does not completely envelop the earth, as it should
if this theoretical arrangement were carried out in nature. How, then,
could it be explained that a portion of the earth’s surface is not
covered by water? Robert Grosseteste, without attempting a physical
explanation, answered this question from the teleological point of view,
echoing the words of Genesis. “Truly it is a fact,” he wrote, “that, in
order that the animals of this earth might have a habitation and refuge,
the water receded into the concave parts of the earth and the surface of
the land appeared dry and distinct. And so the land with the waters
contained upon it is like a sphere of earth.”[845] Later writers were
not willing to accept such a simple declaration and looked for physical
and mechanical explanations. For instance, Brunetto Latino assigned to
the spheres of earth and of water each a different center, placed in
such positions in relation to one another that the aqueous sphere covers
the sphere of earth to a great depth on one side (the southern
hemisphere) but on the opposite side leaves dry the portion inhabited by
man.[846] Certainly the passage we have quoted above shows that Abelard
may well have had something of this sort in mind.


                         _THE OCEANS AND SEAS_


                     RELATIVE AREAS OF LAND AND SEA

We saw in Chapter I that two theories prevailed in ancient times as to
the distribution of land and water: the oceanic theory, that the
_oikoumene_ is surrounded by water; and the continental theory, that the
oceans of the earth occupy relatively small and enclosed basins. Though
the writers of our period held to the oceanic hypothesis, they had
various and conflicting notions in regard to the size of the ocean or
oceans which surround the known world. The great popularity of Martianus
Capella and Macrobius, who both held the doctrine that there are three
areas of land corresponding to our _oikoumene_ in the three quarters of
the earth’s surface, must have rendered impossible any widespread
acceptance of a theory like the one hinted at by Abelard, that all of
the earth’s surface except the _oikoumene_ is covered by water; and the
definition of the ocean as a zone or hem surrounding the inhabited
world, not infrequently given in our period, certainly does not imply
the existence of water areas of immense size in comparison with the land
areas.[847] Furthermore, the Second Book of Esdras, which, though
apocryphal, enjoyed high authority in the Middle Ages,[848] gave the
reader an opposite impression. Here it was stated: “Upon the third day
thou didst command that the waters should be gathered in the seventh
part of the earth: six parts hast thou dried up, and kept them, to the
intent that of these some being planted of God and tilled might serve
thee.” “Upon the fifth day thou saidst unto the seventh part, where the
waters gathered, that it should bring forth living creatures, fowls and
fishes: and so it came to pass.” Roger Bacon uses this text from Esdras
to reinforce his argument that, relatively speaking, the water surface
of the world is very restricted in comparison with the land
surface.[849]


              EXPLANATION OF UNIFORM LEVEL OF SEA SURFACE

Into the sea there pours at all times a vast volume of water from the
rivers. Neckam moralized mournfully on this[850] and compared the flow
of fresh water into the salt depths with the way in which greater powers
absorb lesser and the way in which the voluptuousness of this world—a
sham sweetness—is turned to bitterness and salt; but he did not attempt
to explain the puzzling physical problem of why the surface of the sea
fails to rise and overflow the lands.[851] Most writers who dealt with
the latter problem appealed to the theory of the _congregatio aquae_:
since all the waters of the earth form one unit, they must inevitably
make their way back from the sea through various routes to the sources
of streams.[852] Other explanations, however, were sometimes brought
forward. Adelard of Bath believed that the stars and sun absorb a
certain amount of water.[853] The author of the _De imagine mundi_ was
convinced that the fresh water entering the sea is partially consumed by
the salt of the deeps and partially evaporated by the winds and taken up
into the sun.[854]


                          SALINITY OF THE SEA

The two characteristics of the oceans that distinguish them from bodies
of fresh water and have always aroused men’s curiosity are their
saltness and their tides. The _De imagine mundi_ gives a popular
etymology of the word _mare_ from _amarum_, meaning bitter or
salty.[855] Though there is no attempt in this book to show reasons for
the salinity of the sea, the author followed Isidore and Bede in the
opinion that the water at great depths is more bitter and salt than near
the surface and that evaporation draws off the fresh water only and
leaves the bitter and dense elements behind; similarly, that part of the
sea water makes its way back to the sources of the springs, deposits its
salt in the land, and bursts forth fresh and purified from its passage
through the earth. In the _Image du monde_, on the other hand, there is
a naïve explanation of why the sea is salt.[856] Great saline mountains
in the deeps are said to be constantly dissolving away and thereby
imparting a peculiar character to the water. Adelard of Bath, Gervase of
Tilbury, and William of Conches treated the subject a shade more
rationally, perhaps, in attributing the saltness to the influence of
heat. Adelard says,[857] “I consider the cause of the saltness of the
sea to be the heat of the sun and planets. For, since the true ocean
passes through the heart of the torrid zone and since the course of the
planets runs through the same zone, though obliquely, the ocean must of
necessity be heated by such a great heat of the heavenly bodies that it
is thereby rendered salt.” This explanation, he adds, is even subject to
proof: for along coasts nearest the ocean, sea water “when dried in the
sun on the rocks” may readily be converted into salt without any
artificial aid; in more distant seas the water must be boiled and
reboiled before this effect is produced. Furthermore, in summer all sea
water is salter than in winter.

William of Conches[858] and Alexander Neckam[859] also followed
Aristotle in believing that water in its purest form has an insipid
taste but that it is thickened and rendered salt by the sun’s heat in
the torrid ocean, whence it is distributed to the other seas by
currents. Gervase of Tilbury tends to exaggerate this theory: we read in
the _Otia imperialia_[860] of a lake in the County of Aix, near Arles,
the waters of which are congealed into ice by the cold of winter and
into salt by the heat of August. This led Gervase to conclude that it
would be impossible to sail around the earth, because the all-encircling
ocean would be frozen stiff in the north and thickened into solid salt
in the south.


                                 TIDES

If we discard fanciful ideas like that of Richard, prior of St. Victor
in Paris (died 1173), to the effect that the tides are produced by the
breathing of some great submarine monster or spirit,[861] we find two
distinct groups of tidal theories prevalent in the twelfth century: as
Duhem defines them, the physical and the astrological. The astrological
theories, which explained the tides by the influence of the moon, had
been expounded before the period we are studying by Posidonius, Pliny,
Bede, and the Moslem Abū Maʿshar. The physical theories had been set
forth by Macrobius, who had believed that the tides were due to the
impact of ocean currents, and Paul the Deacon, who had attributed them
to the action of great whirlpools. Although twelfth-century students
added little to these earlier opinions, they made some remarkable
combinations of them, and their observations were distinguished by a few
close records of actual tidal phenomena.[862]


                           _Lunar Causation_

Bernard Sylvester explained the tides by lunar causation alone[863] and
attributed to the moon the power of attracting and repelling not only
the waters but also terrestrial substances,[864] inasmuch as the moon is
the nearest planet to the earth, the largest, and consequently the most
powerful.[865]

In the following century we find that Robert Grosseteste saw in the
effects of lunar rays upon the bottom of the sea sufficient cause for
the ebb and flood. If in their broad outlines the ideas of the bishop of
Lincoln are plain enough, the individual steps of his argument are
neither clear nor coherent. They are of sufficient interest,
nevertheless, to justify an attempt at interpreting them.[866] We have
already alluded to Robert’s theory of rays emanating from the celestial
bodies in the shape of cones or “pyramids” and to his principle that the
power of these rays is inverse to the obliquity of the angle at which
they meet the earth’s surface and to the length of the pyramids.[867]
When the moon is rising, Grosseteste explains in the _De natura
locorum_,[868] the rays are very oblique and the pyramids long: hence
the power of the rays is much too weak to disperse vapors that have
accumulated on the sea floor or to draw these vapors up into the air.
The result is that the vapors tend to displace the waters in the depths,
to rise in bubbles to the surface, and thus to produce flood tides. As
the moon approaches the meridian the rays become less oblique, the
pyramids shorter, and the lunar power consequently greater. The moon now
disperses and consumes the vapors and draws them up into the air from
the depths of the sea. By the time our satellite reaches the meridian,
the vapors are entirely consumed, “and, since the cause ceases, the
effect also ceases; and the waters of the sea naturally flow back into
their proper place in order not to create a vacuum.” Hence the ebb
begins.

Grosseteste does not make clear what generates the vapors, though he
probably meant us to assume that they were produced by the heat due to
the reflection of the moon’s rays upon the sea floor. In another
treatise, the _De impressionibus elementorum_,[869] he explains how
reflected rays, though not necessarily the rays of the moon, in passing
through a transparent body of water may create heat at the bottom.

The problem of the flood tide when the moon is in the opposite
hemisphere of the heavens still remained. Grosseteste’s obscure
explanation of this runs about as follows: “Many try to give a reason
for this difficult circumstance on the grounds that opposite quarters of
the universe are of the same composition (_commixtionis_) and
consequently produce the same effects. But this explanation falls short,
since it is false to assert that there are any actual replicas of the
stars of one quarter of the heavens in another quarter, inasmuch as the
earth interposes its bulk between a planet in one quarter and the
quarter opposite. Moreover, even were this explanation true, an
explanation of the original cause would be required. That is to say, it
would be necessary to ask why the opposite quarters are of the same
composition and consequently exert the same effect. The fact is that the
reflection of rays solves this problem, since the rays of the moon are
multiplied on the stellar heaven. Because the stellar heaven is an
opaque body, we are consequently not able to see it, though it
nevertheless is very luminous according to Alpetragius and
Messalahe [_sic_]. Other reflected rays fall on the opposite quarter at
right angles.”[870]


                        _Terrestrial Causation_

Most writers found that the astrological, or lunar, theory alone was
insufficient to explain all the peculiarities of the tides and made
appeal, as well, to physical theories—in particular to that of
Macrobius. This is given in varying terms by Adelard of Bath, Lambert of
St. Omer, William of Conches, and Giraldus Cambrensis. Macrobius, as we
have already observed, had conceived of four ocean currents issuing out
of the great equatorial ocean and flowing north and south in the
girdling ocean which includes the poles.[871] These currents run
together somewhere in the polar regions; the waters rebound on
themselves (_ex repercussione ingurgitur retro mare_) and in this way
cause the ebb and flow. Lambert of St. Omer in his _Liber floridus_
seems to have accepted the Macrobian theory much as it stands,[872] but
Adelard harbored doubts as to the sufficiency of the impact of the
waters against each other to produce a tidal rebound and thought that
some mountain or other mass of land must interpose to produce such an
effect.[873]

William of Conches cites two theories of tidal controls:[874] the first
is that of Macrobius; the second, confusingly stated, suggests Adelard’s
hypothesis of an interposing mass of land. William says, in effect, that
the tides are due in part to the existence of mountains submerged
beneath the sea, against which the waters are attracted forward and then
repelled, producing an oscillating motion. As to this, we may well be
led to inquire how Macrobius, Adelard, and William explained this
oscillating motion, for certainly two steadily flowing currents meeting
each other or running against submerged reefs would not create any such
motion. Unfortunately in this we are left unsatisfied by our medieval
writers, who characteristically here, as often elsewhere, were content,
when stating that one phenomenon causes another, to leave entirely to
the imagination the explanation of the manner in which such causation is
actually effected.

William did not rule out all lunar control over the ebb and flood but
explained the spring and neap tides by variations in the moon’s power of
heating and drying the atmosphere. This power, he thought, is at a
minimum both when the moon is full and when it is new. Consequently we
have high spring tides at these times, and vice versa. William’s theory
is the reverse of Abū Maʿshar’s:[875] that the tides are caused by the
active attraction by the moon of the humid elements on the earth’s
surface. William fails to show us why the tides should be in flood when
the moon is rising toward the meridian and why spring tides should occur
when there is a full moon. Abū Maʿshar, on the other hand, fails to
explain why there is a flood tide when the moon is on the other side of
the earth, in the opposite celestial hemisphere.

Alexander Neckam gives what is, to say the least, an unsatisfactory
treatment of the tides.[876] After quoting the scientific opinions of
others, he remarks that to explain the ebb and flow of the waters is a
problem that cannot be solved. Then, in his customary vein, he adds the
moral observation that the tides are like the persecutions of the
Christians and that they should not fill one with too much despair, for
after they have risen they always subside again in the due course of
time.[877]

William the Breton wondered at the tides but, like Neckam, refrained
from trying to explain their cause and said that God alone understands
this and no man can comprehend it either now or ever.[878] He was amazed
that such a wide, deep, and powerful stream as the Seine at Rouen could
be forced back upon itself by the waters of the sea and made to flow in
the opposite direction through a space of land across which its normal
current could scarcely pass in three days. Was this due to the fact that
fresh water is less powerful than salt? Or does the fresh water find the
salt water odious and recoil before it? Or does the stream do reverence,
as it were, to its mother, the sea, falling back before her and then
when the tide turns following behind her respectfully? None of these
explanations was William ready to accept as true. “For us who live our
human lot here below, it is sufficient to know the fact; it is not
allowed to us to know the cause.”[879]


                  _Giraldus Cambrensis’ Tidal Studies_

The most elaborate tidal studies of our period are in the pages of
Giraldus Cambrensis’ _Topographia Hiberniae_, where we find a
combination of the astrological theory of Abū Maʿshar, the whirlpool
theory of Paul the Deacon, and the ocean-current theory of Macrobius.
Giraldus said that when the moon passes the meridian the waters begin to
recede from the coasts of Britain and to retire into hidden submarine
reservoirs.[880] The moon, being the heavenly body that controls all
things humid on the earth, when full causes the tides to rise to unusual
heights. A little further on in his discussion, Giraldus explains that
at the four opposite parts of the ocean there is a force that violently
attracts the sea water, producing a sort of periodic swelling and
sinking; this is connected in some manner with a belief in Giraldus’
mind that greater quantities of fresh water enter the sea at the
extremities of the earth and in the vicinity of the poles than
elsewhere, though on what he based this supposition and how it produced
the results which he ascribes to it, he does not explain. Giraldus’
theory also owes much to Macrobius’ hypothesis of the effects of the
collision of ocean currents on the tides, as well as to Paul the
Deacon’s whirlpool theory, for he explains elsewhere[881] that
philosophers mention the existence of four whirlpools at the opposite
ends of the earth and that some people attribute to these the causation
of tides and storms of wind. Each of the whirlpools resembles a great
vortex in the northern seas towards which the waters of the sea rush
together, to be absorbed in secret caverns as if in an abyss; ships
approaching too near are sucked in and destroyed.

The most interesting feature of Giraldus’ tidal studies, however, are
not these general speculations regarding causes but some very neat
observations made on the British and Irish coasts. In the first place,
he remarks on the choppy water of the Irish Sea, which presumably he
connects with tide rips.[882] He then goes on to discuss the difference
in the hour of high water at various Irish ports, at Milford Haven in
Wales, and at Bristol in England. When the tide is at the half-ebb in
Dublin, at Milford Haven it is at the half-flood, and near Bristol just
beginning the rise. Let us see what the facts of the case are at the
present day.[883] On February 1, 1919, half-ebb occurred at Dublin at
about 2:30 P. M., half-flood at Milford Haven only about an hour and a
half later, and low water had occurred at Bristol half an hour earlier.
In other words Giraldus’ observations on the relative times of the tides
at these three points were unusually accurate. Furthermore, he explains
that at Wicklow, on the Irish coast opposite Wales, the water falls at
the same time that it rises throughout the sea in general. When Giraldus
here speaks of the “sea in general” he perhaps had in mind tidal
observations made at other points on the coast not far to the south.
Modern tide tables show that near Arklow, only about fourteen miles
away, it is low water some two hours and a half earlier than at Wicklow.
The water, consequently, is rising at Arklow for two hours and a half
while it is still falling at Wicklow. That Giraldus was familiar with
Arklow is shown by the fact that he mentions a river entering the sea
there and describes a curious rock in the harbor.[884]

Finally, Giraldus states[885] that when the moon has passed the meridian
the waters first recede from the coasts of Britain but that on the Irish
coasts in the vicinity of Dublin full flood corresponds to this
recession of the waters. In the vicinity of Wexford, however, flood
waters do not correspond with the flood at Dublin but rather with the
flood waters on the British coast at Milford Haven. Giraldus was
mistaken, if we are right in interpreting his words to mean that he
thought that the tidal undulation which produces high water at Dublin is
a different wave from that of Wexford or Milford Haven. No tidal
undulation enters the Irish Sea from the north, and consequently the ebb
and flood at all of these places is caused by the same wave. On the
other hand, this wave reaches Dublin nearly five hours later than it
reaches Wexford and Milford on the opposite shore, and the accuracy of
Giraldus’ data on the time of these tides is further confirmed by modern
tide tables, which show that flood water at the Welsh port may occur
only twenty-four minutes earlier than at Rosslare Point, the entrance to
Wexford Harbor.

It would be interesting if we could know how Giraldus gathered these
data. Probably they were pieced together from incidental observations of
sailors or fishermen, for certainly no systematic investigation of tidal
phenomena could well have been undertaken at Giraldus’ time.[886] It is
typical of an immense amount of close and accurate knowledge that has
always existed along with ignorance and superstition among the more
humble workers of this world, knowledge that until recent years has but
rarely found literary expression.


                OTHER MARINE PHENOMENA NOTED BY GIRALDUS

Giraldus certainly was not always so fortunate in his discussion of
marine phenomena. He taxes our credulity a little when he tells of a
rock in Arklow harbor on one side of which the water rises while it is
falling on the other,[887] though this may perhaps have resulted from
some local play of currents and eddies. It is less easy to find an
explanation of a story which he relates of a recession of the sea at
“Crebonensus” (Proconnesus?) near Constantinople.[888] Here, during
eight days at the time of the festival of St. Clement, the waters fell
back in order to allow pilgrims to go to the saint’s shrine. This kind
of miracle, to be sure, had the support of Biblical authority in the
story of the parting of the waters of the Red Sea to permit the passing
of the children of Israel; and we find a similar tale in the _Otia
imperialia_,[889] where Gervase asserts that the Sea of Pamphylia was
divided for Alexander the Great, because God wished to destroy the
Persian kingdom by means of the Macedonian. The lake (or river) which in
the legend surrounded the church of St. Thomas in India was also said to
go dry at regular intervals to permit pilgrims to approach.[890]

In his description of South Wales, Giraldus Cambrensis gives an account
of marine encroachments on the land and perhaps of coastal subsidence. A
great storm on this sandy coast laid bare a forest hitherto covered by
the waters. Trunks of trees appeared with marks of the ax upon them,
fresh as if cut only the day before. Giraldus was convinced that the
marks dated from inconceivable antiquity, perhaps even from the time of
the Flood.[891] The wood was overwhelmed, he said, by the constant and
ever increasingly violent advance of the sea; and certainly it is well
known in modern days that the waves long have been eating into the coast
of Pembrokeshire and that the uncovering by storms of buried forests and
stumps is a commonplace occurrence there. Perhaps we are justified in
interpreting Giraldus’ remarks by assuming that the forest had not, as
he states, previously been covered by water but more probably by marine
sands or muds, which subsequently were removed from the stumps by storm
waves.


                 ST. BRANDAN AND THE SPIRIT OF THE SEA

Less scientific—or perhaps we had better say less prosaic—than the
writings we have just been discussing but fully as replete with
understanding of the ocean and its various moods, is the legend of the
wanderings of St. Brandan. The style and spirit of this entire story
shows that it must have been composed by men filled with a sense of the
immensity and mystery of the Atlantic.[892] Probably the tale had its
roots in the reports of actual voyagings of Irishmen blown far out to
sea. Although there is much of the marvelous and supernatural borrowed
from older tradition, the tone of the legend as a whole rings true to
nature. Certainly it was not written by a landsman. At one time St.
Brandan and his companions sailed north for three days, and the sea
became “as it were coagulated through an excess of calmness.”[893] It
has been suggested that this refers to the semi-solid “Liver Sea” of
Germanic legend, itself perhaps an echo of the reports of Pytheas and
other classical writers about clotted sea waters north of Thule and in
the Western Ocean.[894] On another occasion the travelers came in sight
of a high column of clearest crystal apparently not far away, though it
took three days to reach it.[895] So great was its height that they
could scarce discern the summit, and as they drew near they saw that it
was covered by a silvery canopy of marvelously fine texture. They passed
through a hole in the canopy and entered a sea whose waters were so
clear that the base of the column could be seen resting on the earth at
the bottom of the sea. For an entire day they sailed along one side of
the column. If we discard from all this what is obviously fabulous or
borrowed from the vision of Ezekiel[896] or from the description of the
New Jerusalem in Revelation,[897] may we not be justified in supposing
that the sight of a great iceberg flashing in the sun gave rise to the
story of the crystalline column and that the canopy represented curtains
of fog hanging about its flanks?

St. Brandan and his crew also had other glimpses of the bottom of the
sea[898] through waters of such remarkable transparency that they
thought they could almost touch the beasts of various kinds lying there.
When mass was said on board, these beasts rose and circled about the
ship but did not molest the saint and his party. After seven days’
voyage with sails set they had scarcely crossed this stretch of
translucent water.


                           BOTTOM OF THE SEA

We find other accounts of the bottom of the sea and even of visits made
to it, in the legendary writings of our period. Gervase of Tilbury[899]
tells of an individual named Nicholas Pappas, a dweller on the shores of
the Strait of Messina, who was forced by King Roger II of Sicily to dive
into the waters. Being well known to the submarine monsters, he escaped
all danger from molestation by them and afterwards used to tell about a
grove beneath the “Strait of Pharo,” how the tides wash first one way
and then the other through the branches of the trees, and how he had
seen submarine mountains, valleys, fields and woods, and trees with
acorns on them. Gervase adds that our faith in the truth of this story
may be increased by noting the fact that acorns are often washed ashore
along the neighboring coasts. Nicholas also used to occupy himself by
warning ships of the approach of storms and showing sailors how to calm
the waters with oil. At a later period the legend became current[900] of
a man named “Piscis” or “The Fish” (possibly this should be substituted
for the “Pappas” of Gervase) who was accustomed to swim under the Strait
of Messina, having been sent there in the first place to rescue a
chalice cast into the sea by King Roger.

Alexander the Great, according to one version of the Romance of his
adventures, also made a visit to the sea floor.[901] After he had
crossed a desert infested with ferocious beasts, he called his
companions together and complained that, in view of the fact that he had
conquered the greater part of the world, he knew enough about the
inhabitants of the land and now wanted to learn something of the
inhabitants of the sea. He then proceeded to descend in a glass cask to
the bottom of the deeps; there, among other things, he noted that the
large fish eat the small ones, an observation whose novelty hardly seems
to have justified the effort expended to make it.


                       _THE WATERS OF THE LANDS_

Let us turn now to the waters of the lands—ground water, sources (wells,
springs, fountains), rivers, and finally lakes.


                              GROUND WATER

In our period the existence of water in various forms underneath the
surface of the land was well understood. Bernard Sylvester says:[902] “A
watery humor is diffused all through the lap of the land and makes
streams and rivers, swamps and lakes.” William of Conches
attributed[903] the origin of the water in springs and wells to (1)
underground streams, or, as he called them, “cataracts,” which pass
through wells en route from one part of the earth to another, and (2)
the sweat of the earth (_sudor terrae_), or minute particles of water
percolating through small holes in the earth much as human sweat
percolates through the pores of the body. William maintained that the
existence of underground watercourses as a source of well water was
proved by the fact that wells near rivers are constantly full and that
whatever happens to the water of a well in a given district is likely to
happen to the water of all the other wells in the vicinity, showing that
there must be some intercommunication between them. That springs and
wells were constantly replenished in dry times was proof to William—as
to modern geographers—of the existence of the sweat of the earth, or
what we now call “ground water,” which permeates the interstices in
rocks, gravel, and sand alike. It is possible, however, that William
believed that the _sudor terrae_ was actually generated by the earth.
This was undoubtedly the opinion of Adelard of Bath, who discusses the
subject in terms very similar to those of William.[904]


            THE SEA AS THE SOURCE OF THE WATERS OF THE LAND

Most of this subterranean water, as we have already seen, was supposed
during the Middle Ages to come from the sea, whence it made its way
inland either through the atmosphere in the form of rain or directly
through the land. We need cite but two texts to show how firmly this
idea was rooted in the medieval mind. One is from a sermon of Bernard of
Clairvaux, the other from a questionnaire prepared by the Emperor
Frederick II. It would perhaps be hard to find two men who stood at more
diametrically opposite intellectual poles, and yet both, in this case,
shared the same conviction.

Bernard, characteristically, treated the matter symbolically. “The sea,”
he said, “is the source of fountains and rivers; the Lord Jesus Christ
is the source of every kind of virtue and knowledge.... What? Are not
pure purposes, just judgments, holy aspirations, one and all streams
from that same source? If all waters seek incessantly to return to the
sea, making their way thither sometimes by hidden and subterranean
channels, so that they may go forth from it again in continual and
untiring circuit, becoming visible once more to man and available for
his service, why are not those spiritual streams rendered back
constantly and without reserve to their legitimate source, that they may
not cease to water the fields of our hearts? Let the rivers of divers
graces return from whence they came, that they may flow forth anew. Let
the heavenly shower rise again to its heavenly source that it may be
poured anew and still more plentifully upon the earth” (Eales’s
translation).[905]

Frederick II propounded to Michael Scot a list of questions on matters
of cosmology and physical geography. Regarding most of these matters the
Emperor was in doubt and perplexity, but concerning the waters of land
and sea he was sure. “For we greatly wonder at these things,” he said,
“knowing already that all waters come from the sea and passing through
divers lands and cavities return to the sea, which is the bed and
receptacle of all running waters” (Haskins’ translation).[906]

A most elaborate discussion of the qualities of the waters of the lands
is found in the _Causae et curae_ of Hildegard of Bingen.[907] Hildegard
likewise assumed that the water of wells, springs, and rivers is derived
from the ocean which surrounds the earth.[908] She also believed that
the nature of the water varies widely in different parts of the ocean
and consequently that the quality of the water of the land depends on
the part of the ocean from which it comes. Furthermore, she maintained
that some of the waters of the sea do not lose their salinity in passing
through the land but that other waters are rendered fresh before they
appear upon the earth’s surface. Upon the basis of these assumptions
Hildegard proceeded to analyze the qualities, sanitary, medicinal, and
gastronomic, of waters both fresh and salt according to their derivation
from the four cardinal points and from the northeast and northwest. Her
analysis was meant as a practical guide for those who wished to use
water for drinking and bathing with a minimum risk of disease, though
she fails to explain how one is to determine the ultimate source of a
specific spring, well, or river. Without undertaking a detailed
examination of Hildegard’s argument, we may note that, unlike Giraldus
Cambrensis, who regarded the East as the fountain of poisons, she
believed that the waters of the Orient were the purest and most
healthful of all. On the other hand, she held that the putrid and
corrupt elements of the earth were concentrated in the Western Sea and
that waters coming from that quarter were very dangerous unless
boiled.[909] The Southern Sea harbored an immense quantity of venomous
worms and small animals, and consequently waters from it were not good
for cooking or drinking. As we shall see in the next chapter,[910]
Giraldus Cambrensis’ discussion of the different qualities of the East
and West was probably based in some measure on observation. The same can
hardly be said of Hildegard’s theories. We cannot but feel that they
were the offspring of an unusually ingenious imagination, though the
prophetic abbess undoubtedly attributed them to divine inspiration.

Hildegard went on to assert that swamp waters are dangerous from
whatever part of the earth they come, since they contain vile and
noxious damp elements of the ground and the poisonous spume of worms.
Such waters should not be used unboiled except for washing. Well and
spring waters which flow from swamps are equally bad, though as a
general rule all waters arising from an unsanitary source become purer
the farther they flow. Water from deep wells is usually better and
smoother (_suavior_) for cooking, drinking, and other uses of man than
the water of flowing springs; the latter, in turn, is better than river
water, which should be avoided because of the impurities it receives
from the air. The water of small, clear, pure rills is excellent for
both men and cattle.


             EFFECT OF LAND ON WATERS WHICH SPRING FROM IT

The land itself might produce varying effects on the water within it,
and thus on the wells and fountains which spring from it. In summer,
William of Conches tells us,[911] the pores of the earth are open, and
the warm vapor (_fumus_) contained therein can escape. Consequently the
heat of the earth is loosed, and the springs and wells are cooler than
in winter, when the cold constricts the earth’s pores and keeps the heat
in. It is very easy to understand what gave rise to such a theory when
we consider the fact that water always preserves a more uniform
temperature than the surrounding air. Hot and putrid springs, the _De
imagine mundi_ tells us,[912] are caused by the ground water coming into
contact with subterranean caves full of sulphur that is sometimes
ignited by the winds. In some places serpents, by poisoning the earth
and the ground water which passes through it, indirectly cause the water
sources of a region to become noxious.[913] Michael Scot, in a somewhat
repetitious and not wholly clear passage, explained in effect that the
hot and boiling springs of Italy and Sicily are produced by waters
arising out of subterranean cavities where the native heat of the
interior of the earth in combination with the winds produces a violent
combustion of sulphur and “white-hot rocks” (_petre calidissime_).[914]


                 MIRACULOUS WELLS AND SPRINGS; GEYSERS

Wells and springs, like lakes, seem to have appealed to the imagination
of men at all times, and the description of their peculiarities occupied
disproportionate space in medieval books of marvels. Giraldus Cambrensis
mentions wells with petrifying properties in Ulster, Norway, Britain,
and Cappadocia;[915] and Saxo Grammaticus expresses great wonder at a
spring in Iceland the exhalation or foam of which is capable of turning
the softest substances almost instantaneously into the hardest
stone.[916] Gervase of Tilbury describes a salt well in the diocese of
Worcester.[917] Though these are reasonable enough, it is a little more
difficult to explain Giraldus’ belief in wells which ebb and flow like
the tides,[918] especially when he insists that some of them are
situated far from the sea.

Giraldus describes an absolutely miraculous spring in the province of
Munster in Ireland.[919] When touched or even looked at by a man, this
spring will proceed to inundate the entire province with rain. The rain
does not stop until a priest, virgin from birth and especially deputed
for the purpose, celebrates mass in a chapel not far away and, having
blessed the waters, conciliates the spring by sprinkling into it the
milk of a one-colored cow. Giraldus remarked parenthetically that this
was a barbaric ceremony and quite lacking in reason. Gervase of Tilbury
tells of a lake in Great Britain which would produce a storm when
certain words were chanted over it and of a fountain in the Kingdom of
Arles which would cause rain if a stick or stone were thrown into
it.[920] These tales, indeed, are but examples of a widespread belief
among primitive and ignorant folk that man can attain the secret of the
magical control of the elements. Sir James G. Frazer cites them with
similar examples from other peoples and ages as illustrations of the
doctrine that a “way of constraining the rain-god is to disturb him in
his haunts. This seems to be the reason why rain is supposed to follow
the troubling of a sacred spring.”[921]

In treating the water element in his _De naturis rerum_, Alexander
Neckam rushes over the problems of the four rivers of Paradise and of
why the sea is salt to come to a discussion of springs,[922] about which
he relates many marvels, appending to each a little moral lesson. For
example, he tells of two founts in Italy, one of which turns the
feathers of white birds black, and the other the feathers of black birds
white. He suggests the analogy of the former to contemporary worldly
knowledge that darkens minds glowing in the brightness of innocence; and
of the latter to true wisdom that renders serene minds obscured by the
shades of vice.[923] Then he goes on to discourse about springs that
rise when some one throws a red cloth into them; a spring that boils up
with much noise, as if in annoyance, when men talk near it; a spring
that gives flame to an unburnt torch and puts out a lighted one; and a
spring whose water, when thrown upon a certain rock in its neighborhood,
causes a storm of wind, rain, and hail to arise. These are but a few of
many remarkable sources that Neckam describes and places in various
parts of the world, drawing on Solinus, Isidore, and the mass of
medieval pseudo-science that flourished in all countries.

More convincing is Saxo Grammaticus’ circumstantial account of certain
water holes in Iceland. In these the water sometimes wells up in
abundance and is thrown high into the air in a shower of drops. At other
times the flow is quiescent, and the water seems to be sucked into the
holes deep in the earth where it scarce may be seen. This description is
obviously based on reports Saxo had received from eyewitnesses of the
geysers of Iceland.[924]


                         THE FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH

The most remarkable and most sought-for of sources has always been the
Fountain of Youth. In the first letter of Prester John we find the
description[925] of a grove at the foot of Mount Olympus, not far from
Paradise, in Central Asia. In this grove there is a spring that wafts
forth odors of all kinds, varying from hour to hour, by day and by
night. Its waters give eternal youth to any one who bathes therein,
restoring him to the bodily strength and vigor that he possessed at the
age of thirty-two. Closely parallel to this account, though probably not
derived from it, is a description in the Romance of Alexander[926] of a
fountain that receives its waters from the Euphrates, one of the four
rivers of Paradise, and which four times daily has the power of
rejuvenation. Two old men who jumped in emerged looking exactly as if
they were thirty years old. Akin to the Fountain of Youth, but less
powerful in its action, is a spring described by Gervase[927] in
Staffordshire, England, to which he attributed the ability of restoring
energy to men when weary. But this is true of any fresh mountain pool.


                                 RIVERS

As to the source of rivers, we need add nothing to what has already been
said about the “congregation of waters” (_congregatio aquae_) and about
springs and fountains. It was commonly thought in medieval and classical
times that two or more rivers may rise from one source and flow off in
diverse directions. The most striking example of this was furnished by
the Scriptural four rivers of Paradise, which, though rising from one
stream, were believed to find their way to at least three different
seas. In commenting on the rivers of Paradise, Gervase of Tilbury
expressly asserts[928] that not only is it possible for more than one
stream to rise from the same headwaters but that the same rivers may
again mingle and again separate their waters. Giraldus Cambrensis
describes[929] how the Shannon of Ireland rises in a lake between
Connaught and Munster and thence divides into two branches flowing in
opposite ways, one southward to the “Sea of Brandan,” the other
northward into the Northern Ocean. It is true that in regions of
imperfect drainage development, like Ireland, northern North America,
and parts of the Amazon Valley, two small streams occasionally do spring
from a single source. On the other hand, it is entirely contrary to the
laws of hydrography that two or more full-grown rivers should either
leave a lake and depart across country in different directions or,
except in the case of deltas, owe their origin to the separation of the
waters of a single large stream. Classical and medieval geographers,
however, were not acquainted with this law, and the words of the Bible
justified the writers of geographical books, even down to as late a date
as the eighteenth century, in making broad rivers divide into separate
branches and wander at random over the country.

Giraldus Cambrensis noted several other peculiarities of rivers.[930]
For example, he remarked that the stream at Wicklow which flows across
the harbor (we may presume in a channel through mud flats) is brackish
at ebb tide; a similar river at Arklow is fresh.[931] Tide water, he
said, does not mingle with the River Conway in North Wales.[932]
Elsewhere he observed that the term _aber_ in Welsh is applied to all
those places where one stream flows into another.[933] The River Dee is
not affected by rains, but the winds make it rise.[934] It changes its
bed every year, and, as its course forms the boundary between England
and Wales, these changes are interpreted as omens foretelling whether
the English or the Welsh are going to be the more successful in their
combats with each other during the succeeding year.[935]


                             THE NILE FLOOD

In his consideration of the problem of the flood of the Nile, Abelard
gives a curious example of the symbolic interpretation of scriptural and
geographic matters which was also characteristic of the writings of
Bernard of Clairvaux.[936] Isidore had followed earlier classical
authorities in describing the flood as due to the building up, by the
etesian winds, of sand bars at the mouth of the river during the
winter.[937] Abelard, from Bede’s rendering of Isidore’s text,[938]
adopted the same theory in his discussion of the Nile in the _Expositio
in hexaemeron_.[939] He also discussed the Nile flood in a sermon on the
text, “And the Lord, the God of hosts, is He who toucheth the earth, and
it shall melt: and all that dwell therein shall mourn: and it shall rise
up as a river and shall run down as the river of Egypt” (Amos ix, 5). In
the sermon[940] he compared the rising of the Lord at the resurrection
to the Nile: as the river fructifies the land, so the Lord strengthened
the despairing hearts of his disciples. Abelard then quoted the passage
from Bede just mentioned, and proceeded to interpret it as follows: The
Nile coming down from Paradise is like unto the wisdom of God descending
from above to give us to drink as from a fountain. Egypt is like unto
the carnal darkness of this world. Its river enters the sea through
seven mouths, which are obstructed when the wind blows and causes the
backing up of the waters that can find no outlet. Thus, after the
resurrection of the Lord but before the sevenfold grace of his spirit
could find its way out into the broad sea of the nations, it was impeded
as were the waters of the Nile. In other words, the apostles, through
fear of the Jews, were held in Judea blinded, as it were, and for some
time were not permitted to go forth as if from Egypt and through their
preaching to bring about a rebirth of mankind. What does the wind
represent, Abelard asks, if not the temptation of the devil? And what
the sand, if not those men who at the turning of the ages wavered this
way and that, held fast by earthly desires and temptations? [941]

It is hardly necessary to point out the contrast between this sort of
geographical speculation and that of William of Conches. Better perhaps
than any other text with which the writer is familiar, these ideas of
Abelard illustrate that absorption, so often characteristic of medieval
thought, of scientific and geographical interests into those of
theology.


                                 LAKES

Abundance of lakes is characteristic of glaciated countries like New
England, Switzerland, Scotland, Sweden, Wales, and Ireland. Giraldus
Cambrensis was impressed by the number of lakes in Ireland, where, he
says,[942] they are more numerous than in any other part of the world.
Giraldus and Gervase of Tilbury describe many lacustrine marvels.

In tracing the history of Ireland, Giraldus says [943] that about three
hundred years after the Deluge four ponds suddenly broke forth from the
bowels of the earth and that this was repeated at the time of the third
colonization of Ireland under Neimhith.[944] Two ponds in Wales [945]
were said to have burst their bounds and overflowed the neighborhood on
the night of the death of Henry I. Before a great war, during which a
province of central Wales was ravaged, a certain lake turned green, and
old men described a similar portent just before the devastation of Wales
by “Hoel, son of Moreduc” (Howel, son of Meredith).[946] The Lake of
Brecknock in Wales appears sometimes a greenish color and sometimes
ruddy as if penetrated by veins of blood.[947] Perhaps Giraldus was
reminded of this by the mud-streaked appearance of mountain tarns after
a rain, but it is less easy to explain the buildings, pastures, gardens,
and orchards which he declares were occasionally visible beneath the
surface. On the other hand, all who are familiar with inland waters in
cold latitudes know the booming sounds they emit when frozen, which
Giraldus compares to the moaning of a large herd of animals. These
noises, he said, were caused by the sudden outrush of air imprisoned
beneath the ice. At the top of Mount Snowdon, according to Giraldus,
there are two lakes, one containing a floating island blown by the
winds.[948] The most interesting lake with which Giraldus deals,
however, is Lough Neagh in Ireland. This, he said,[949] lies in Ulster
and is of remarkable size, thirty miles by fifteen. Though the relative
proportions are right, the actual size is exaggerated, the dimensions
being fifteen English miles long by from five to eight broad. The origin
of the lake he attributed to an inundation that came as a punishment for
the unnatural crimes of the natives of the region. This led him to a
comparison of the story of Lough Neagh with the Biblical history of the
destruction of the Pentapolis and the origins of the Dead Sea.

The Dead Sea has always exerted a potent fascination over the minds of
men. The uncanny natural features of its basin, and the terrible story
associated with them, have been objects of curiosity from the very
earliest times. Gervase of Tilbury goes into some detail on the
subject.[950] The five cities, he says, were submerged, on account of
the sins of their inhabitants, in a salt and sterile lake called the
Dead Sea, where neither bird nor fish can live. The sea is open to no
ship; nay, it even rises over everything not impregnated with bitumen,
probably because of the living men within it. If any one by any means
immerses a living creature in it, the living being immediately leaps
out.[951] A burning torch will float on the lake, an extinct one will
sink. There was certainly an infernal quality about the Dead Sea, and it
was even supposed that beneath its waters there was an entrance into
Hell.

Gervase tells of the discovery of another mouth of Hell near Pozzuoli in
southern Italy.[952] A bishop John of Pozzuoli was said to have
discovered a pond whose waters were opaque but would become clear and
translucent when oil was thrown upon them. Exploring about its shores
one day, the bishop heard the sounds of lamentation coming from beneath
the waters and, casting oil upon them, was horrified to behold, far down
in the depths, the gateway to the infernal regions! Elsewhere[953]
Gervase tells of a lake on the summit of Mount Cavagum (Canigou) in
Catalonia, inhabited by devils, who raise a storm when stones are thrown
in to disturb them.




                               CHAPTER IX
                               THE LANDS


The inquiring curiosity of men as well as of children is not first
stimulated by those things which seem most usual and commonplace. The
latter are taken for granted. Science originates rather in the wonder
aroused by the extraordinary or by the impressive. Only after a long
process of development does it turn to the study of the homely and the
obvious.

The truth of this is illustrated in the medieval geography of the lands.
Geomorphology, or the science of land forms, was very much in its
infancy during our period and for many centuries thereafter. Only rarely
did the man of the Middle Ages seek for an explanation of the origin of
the familiar features of the earth’s surface which he saw around him day
by day. If he described a landscape in terms that often reveal love of
its beauty or, at least, appreciation of its productive capacity, he was
almost totally blind to the possibilities of profounder analysis of its
nature. A plain was a plain, a valley a valley because God had made it
so.

The present chapter will deal mainly with the character of these
external, unscientific descriptions of land forms. The attempt will be
made, however, to point out a few notable exceptions to the general
rule, a few cases where men sought for a deeper meaning in the aspects
of nature than the meaning written upon the surface.


                     _CLASSIFICATION OF LAND AREAS_


               QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE SUBDIVISIONS

There are two ways of subdividing and classifying areas of land, the
quantitative and the qualitative.

Adelard of Bath gives us an example of a quantitative subdivision where
he tells in his _De eodem et diverso_[954] that the inventor of geometry
split the known world into parts (or, perhaps, continents), the parts
into provinces, the provinces into regions, the regions into localities,
the localities into territories, the territories into fields, the fields
into centuries, and the centuries into _jugera_ (acres).

The author of the _De imagine mundi_, borrowing from Isidore,[955] makes
a qualitative subdivision.[956] Land, he says, may be grouped under six
different heads, _terra_ being the name applied to the entire element of
earth. The six kinds of _terra_ are: (1) _tellus_, fertile; (2) _humus_,
infertile, because of an excess of moisture; (3) _arida_, waterless,
like Libya, dried up by the sun; (4) _sicca_, rather less dry than
_arida_, but where, nevertheless, all precipitation quickly disappears,
as in Judea; (5) _solum_, so called from its solidity, as mountainous
land (_a soliditate ut sunt montana_); and, finally (6) _ops_, or
wealthy land, like that of India, where gold and gems abound.[957]

In addition to such variations in the character of the lands, it was a
common view that certain localities are by nature either peculiarly
noxious or else peculiarly free from poisons. Gervase of Tilbury
notes[958] an area near Pozzuoli which resembled a dried-up swamp but
proved fatal to all animals venturing upon it. Elsewhere[959] he
repeats, in connection with the tree of life spoken of by Alexander in
his supposed letter to Aristotle, a widespread tradition of a land where
no man could die even though he were decrepit with old age and might
wish for relief from the cares of this world.[960] The _Image du
monde_[961] attributes a similar quality to an island in the northern
seas. When the inhabitants wished to die they had themselves taken to
Tylle (Thule), where they might expire in peace. Giraldus Cambrensis
describes[962] such an island in a lake in Ireland, as well as an island
where no females could live.


            GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS’ COMPARISON OF EAST AND WEST

Probably, however, the most striking study of the varying qualities of
different regions is Giraldus Cambrensis’ elaborate comparison of Orient
and Occident.[963] In Chapter VII we discussed this writer’s belief that
the atmosphere of the West is far healthier than that of the East. But
not only is the air better, he asserted, but also the land itself, and
of all the lands Ireland is the most healthy. No venomous reptiles can
exist in the Emerald Isle. Giraldus attributed this phenomenon not to
the beneficent work of St. Patrick in driving out the snakes[964] (this
story, he said, was merely a pleasant fiction) but rather to some
natural deficiency in Irish soil that had existed long before St.
Patrick’s time. He explained further that no poisonous reptiles could
survive in Ireland even when they were brought there;[965] toads, when
carried over on ships, burst open as soon as they are thrown ashore; and
the dust of Ireland, when sprinkled on poisonous creatures of any sort,
kills them instantly.[966] The East, on the other hand, Giraldus
called[967] a fountain of poisons (_fons venenorum_), and he waxed most
eloquent on its terrors:[968] poisonous animals abound, the waters are
always polluted, and death lurks on every hand; but the farther away
from this Oriental source of poison one travels, the less its effect,
until in the extreme West it exerts no influence at all, just as the
sun’s rays are weaker the farther one goes from beneath the zodiac.

This distinction between Eastern and Western climate and conditions of
terrain may to a limited extent have been based on actual observation.
Undoubtedly the pilgrim and Crusader suffered more from disease and
hardship when traveling in the Orient than they did at home, because
they were not acclimatized to Levantine conditions of life and did not
understand what was necessary for the preservation of health; and this
may well have produced the unfavorable impression of the East which
found its way in exaggerated form into the pages of the _Topographia
Hiberniae_.


                              _MOUNTAINS_

Mountains are the most imposing natural features of the lands.[969]
Though there did not exist in the Middle Ages anything comparable to
that love of mountains for their own sake which developed later and of
which we see an early manifestation in the ascent of Mont Ventoux by
Petrarch in April, 1336, the very bulk of the hills, nevertheless,
impressed men’s imaginations, and medieval literature is full of notices
concerning mountains.


                          ORIGIN OF MOUNTAINS

In regard to their origin, Peter Comestor asserts that the mountains may
not have been as high at the time of the Flood as they now are,[970] and
Gervase of Tilbury cites the opinion of some that there were no
mountains at all on the face of the earth before the Deluge.[971]
Bartholomew Anglicus[972] conjectured that in the very beginning the
earth was a plain covered with waters, the movements of which produced
the valleys, while the heights were the ridges that remained separating
the valleys; many mountains also were the result of great telluric
convulsions and were full of caverns that give forth immense volumes of
water and form the sources of rivers.

In a translation by Alfred of Sareshel of an Arabic work,[973] perhaps
that of Avicenna, we have a strikingly modern description of the
geological processes resulting in the production of mountains by the
forces of erosion and by the accumulation of soil and earth. “Mountains
may arise from two causes, either from uplifting of the ground, such as
takes place in earthquakes or from the effects of running water and wind
in hollowing out valleys in soft rocks and leaving the hard rocks
prominent, which has been the effective process in the case of most
hills. Such changes must have taken long periods of time, and possibly
the mountains are now diminishing in size. What proves that water has
been the main agent in bringing about these transformations of the
surface is the occurrence in many rocks of the impressions of aquatic
and other animals. The yellow earth that clothes the surface of the
mountains is not of the same origin as the framework of the ground
underneath it but arises from the decay of organic remains, mingled with
earthy materials transported by the water. Perhaps these materials were
originally in the sea which once overspread all the land” (Geikie’s
translation).[974]

If, in reading the above passage, we feel that we are dealing with ideas
that could well stand in the light of modern science and that in this
passage at least geomorphology has emerged from its infancy, we are
brought back to the Middle Ages when we turn to Rupert of Deutz’s
teleological explanation of the reasons why God created deep valleys and
high mountains on the land. According to this mystic, these features
were made to serve as a protection to the human wanderer upon the
surface of the earth from the violence of the winds which would
otherwise have unlimited power over all things, as they do on the Libyan
desert or on the ocean.[975]


                         THEIR SIZE AND HEIGHT

The fact that, great as mountains may appear to men, they are in reality
but insignificant in comparison with the size of the entire earth, was
partially appreciated by the author of the _De imagine mundi_, when he
remarked[976] that, if we could look down on the earth from the air
above, the entire height of the mountains and depth of the valleys would
seem less than the width of the fingers of one who holds a very large
ball in his hand.

We find occasional speculations regarding altitudes. Peter Comestor,
followed by Gervase of Tilbury, asserted[977] that Olympus reaches up
into a region of calm, windless air; and William of Conches held[978]
that the presence of snow on mountains is due to the rarity of the air
at high altitudes. Gervase stated,[979] on the authority of Posthumianus
in the _Dialogue_ of Sulpicius Severus[980] (a historian of the fourth
century of our era), that Sinai is so lofty that its peak is very near
the heavens and that consequently it is impossible to go there.[981]


                         _Miraculous Mountains_

Mountains and hills might have miraculous qualities. Giraldus Cambrensis
told[982] of heights in Mona and in the northern part of Britain, beyond
the Humber, over the crests of which no shouts could be heard; and
Gervase of Tilbury described[983] Mount Cavagum (Canigou) in Catalonia,
with a miraculous lake, the dwelling place of devils, on its summit; on
one peak there lies perpetual snow and ice in a spot where the sun never
shines, and a river of golden sand flows from its base. In the Romance
of Alexander, the conqueror was said to have passed near a mountain
which made brave men cowards and cowards brave.[984] On another
occasion,[985] Alexander and his army became lost in a perilous valley
among wild peaks; they could not find their way out unless one man
sacrificed himself for the others by remaining in the valley. Alexander
himself volunteered to remain, and the army escaped in the midst of
fearful tempests; but subsequently Alexander was conducted out by a
devil whom he found in the place and to whom he did a good turn.


              ACCURATE OBSERVATION OF OROGRAPHIC PHENOMENA

On the other hand, during our period there was not a little reasonably
accurate observation of the phenomena of mountains. Bernard Sylvester,
for example, pointed out that mountains are bad plowland largely because
of the thinness of the soil on their steep slopes.[986] Gervase of
Tilbury noted that many of the high hills of Wales, though they might
have firm and rocky bases, were characterized by watery and boggy
summits.[987] Giraldus Cambrensis pictures the characteristics of the
Welsh hills and brings out their combination of crag and pasture land.
In one passage he tells of Mount Ereri—called by the English “Snowdon,”
or mount of snows—which has such an extent of pasture lands upon it that
it could supply the flocks of the whole of Wales.[988] The land of
Meiryonidd (Merioneth) he spoke of as a wild, rough region, with
mountains so broken and irregular that it frequently took all day for
the shepherds to gather together in one spot,[989] even though they
might have been within earshot of one another in the morning.


                APPRECIATION OF THE BEAUTY OF MOUNTAINS

It is not hard to believe that during our period some men had the
beginnings of a genuinely esthetic appreciation of the beauty of
mountains. Bernard Sylvester tells of the orographic systems of the
world in terms not lacking in color and poetic appreciation.[990] He
writes that the world is strung with mountains like nerves in a body and
goes on to enumerate and describe them: “Clear Olympus, which looks down
on the clouds; Parnassus, with double yoke; Lebanon, in its woods;”
Sinai, Athos, Eryx, Pindus, Othrys, Pelion, Caucasus. Though he merely
repeats classical names and classical designations, the whole long
passage could hardly have been written by a man wholly blind to the
grandeur of his subject. Giraldus Cambrensis tells about the Church of
St. David, now known as Llanthoni Abbey, in the midst of the hills of
southern Wales. “Here the monks, when they sit down in their cloister to
rest and take the air, see in all directions over the high gables of
their roofs the peaks of the mountains bounding their horizon and, as it
were, touching the sky. They see the wild deer pasturing on their
summits, and at about the hour of the prime or shortly before in clear
weather they see the sun appearing over the mountain crests.”[991] This
certainly shows that the writer found delight in the restful qualities
of a highland landscape.

If Walter of Châtillon had not at some time in his life felt the elation
of a view at dawn from a mountain summit, he could hardly have written
the brilliant description in the _Alexandreis_ where he tells how
Alexander, at the moment when the sun began to gleam upon the surface of
the sea, rushed forth from his camp and climbed upon a steep peak whence
his vision embraced the bounds of Asia. Looking out over fields green
with crops, over many a forested mountain and meadow lavish in its rank
grass, over many a city with its encircling walls and many a vineyard
and elm tree entwined with vines, the conqueror exclaimed: “Enough! my
friends: this land alone satisfies me. To you I leave Europe and your
native country.”[992]


                  RELIGIOUS ATTITUDE TOWARDS MOUNTAINS

Ganzenmüller in his book on the feeling for nature in the Middle Ages
cites several important texts which illustrate the religious attitudes
towards mountains that must have prevailed throughout our period. We
shall see a little later that Bernard of Clairvaux in one of his letters
spoke of mountains as symbolizing the aspirations of the haughty and
worldly.[993] But others believed that there is a godly quality about
the heights. The biographer of bishop Altmann of Passau, writing in the
twelfth century, tells us that one day the bishop, accompanied by an
immense crowd of people, climbed a mountain near Mautern in Lower
Austria firmly believing that those who serve God here below will climb
to the corners and bounds of heaven.[994] Eadmer records of Anselm of
Canterbury that on one occasion, when the latter happened to find
himself on a high summit, he was so refreshed by the clear air and
solitude that he remarked: “Here is my resting place: here will I
dwell.”[995] St. Francis of Assisi must have felt the same mystic love
of mountains that he felt for birds and animals and that he expressed so
beautifully in his hymn to Brother Sun, for did he not in 1224 go into
retreat at La Verna, a remote, forest-covered peak in the
Casentino,[996] and did he not, as he left, turn back and bless the
mountain as he had blessed the birds? At the present time the lower
slopes of La Verna are bare and sun-baked. The summit, buttressed by
massive ledges, is covered with a beautiful wood, and from it the eye
wanders over Tuscany, across the ranges of the Apennines, and to the
eastward catches a glimpse of the Adriatic. That St. Francis should
deliberately have chosen this place of exceptional charm for a retreat;
that he should have made a long, hard journey to reach it; and, above
all, that here he received the supreme glory of his life reveal to us
something far deeper than mere esthetic satisfaction in the beauty of
nature. To St. Francis the quiet summit of the mountain was a symbol of
the peace and tranquillity of heaven and of eternity.


                NORMAL MEDIEVAL FEELING ABOUT MOUNTAINS

But for the most part mountainous regions were regarded as places of
grimness and horror. The many journeys over the Alps made in the Middle
Ages by pilgrim, soldier, and trader brought forth few comments on aught
else than the hardships of the way. Otto of Freising tells[997] how in
September, 1155, Frederick Barbarossa’s army passed through a narrow
gorge in the Alps above Verona where robbers impeded its passage. Otto’s
description is very brief and simple; the road, he says, runs between
high cliffs on one side and the unfordable river on the other. Gunther
in the _Ligurinus_[998] elaborates on this by the copious addition of
words emphasizing the terrors of the route: the narrow track wide enough
for only one person at a time to proceed; on one side the “cloud-swept
crags of the jagged Alps,” on the other a chaotic, whirling stream;
these combined to fill the passer-by with fear.

Perhaps the most striking narrative of a mountain passage dating from
our period tells of the crossing of the Great St. Bernard Pass by the
abbot of St. Trond and the archdeacon of Liége in 1128.[999] Having
celebrated Christmas at Piacenza, the travelers arrived at the beginning
of winter in the village of Restopolis (Étrouble) in the valley leading
to the pass, Mons Jovis; here they were snowbound until after New Year’s
Day. Finally the native guides were able to conduct them on to St. Rhémy
farther up the valley close to the final ascent. “Frozen as it were in
the jaws of death” they remained here a day and a night, constantly
menaced by the gravest danger. The small village was full of travelers,
many of whom had been overwhelmed by the avalanches which kept falling
from the high cliffs on either side. Some of these unfortunates had been
suffocated, and others so badly hurt that they were disabled.[1000] The
ecclesiastics were obliged to spend several miserable days in this
“accursed spot,” but at last they were able to prevail on their guides
to lead them onward. A procession was organized, the guides in the lead,
clad in thick felt hats, gloves, and with spikes in their boots to
enable them to cross the ice; then came other storm-bound travelers; the
horses and the clergy, who were physically the weakest, brought up the
rear. Just before leaving, the party stopped for mass in a chapel. While
the service was going on, ten of the guides who had gone ahead were
engulfed by an avalanche and killed. This so alarmed the prelates that
they retreated to Restopolis; but at last good weather came, and on
January 6 they managed to get across the pass with no great difficulty.

In 1188 John of Bremble, a monk of Christ Church, Canterbury, visited
the Great St. Bernard Pass. He wrote about it as follows to his
sub-prior, Geoffrey, and gave expression to what Gribble correctly calls
the “normal medieval view of mountains:”[1001] “I have been on the Mount
of Jove; on the one hand looking up to the heaven of mountains, on the
other shuddering at the hell of the valleys, feeling myself so much
nearer heaven that I was sure that my prayer would be heard. ‘Lord,’ I
said, ‘restore me to my brethren, that I may tell them that they come
not to this place of torment.’ Place of torment, indeed, where the
marble pavement of the stony ground is ice alone, and you cannot set
your foot safely; where, strange to say, although it is so slippery that
you cannot stand, the death into which there is every facility for a
fall is certain death” (Gribble’s translation).


                                GLACIERS

As a general rule the medieval traveler took no interest in glaciers.
Journeys across the Alps were such hazardous undertakings that even the
traveler of scientific tastes could have had little opportunity or
inclination to investigate the phenomena of the ice. A passage in the
_Gesta Danorum_ of Saxo Grammaticus, therefore, is doubly remarkable
because it gives us some specific details regarding the glaciers of
Iceland. After speaking of the ice floes breaking on the shore, Saxo
writes: “There is also there another type of ice which runs between the
rocks and passes of the mountains. This undergoes certain changes: it is
subject to a process of transposition in which the upper parts sink down
to the bottom and the lower parts arise to the surface. It is reliably
asserted that persons who happened to be passing over the flat surface
of the ice have fallen into crevasses and gaping fissures and that, soon
after, their dead bodies have been recovered without a trace of ice
above them. This circumstance has led many people to believe that
whomsoever the icy caldron takes into its lowest depths, it will deliver
again shortly after upside down.”[1002] Though this passage shows that
Saxo did not have a clear conception of what he was trying to describe,
it was certainly based upon some knowledge, though slight, of glacial
phenomena. It is a well-known fact that on its arrival at the lower
portion of a glacier, ice that at higher elevations was at the bottom
often comes to the surface and brings with it materials scraped from the
glacial bed or objects that may have fallen into the crevasses. This
passage of Saxo has been cited as the earliest occasion in literature in
which the motion of glacial ice was recognized.[1003]


                      _VOLCANOES AND EARTHQUAKES_


                          VISITS TO VOLCANOES

Volcanoes are a type of mountain that attracted particular attention,
and, though the men of medieval and ancient times were certainly not
mountain climbers,[1004] there are a few records of their having
deliberately visited volcanoes out of curiosity or scientific interest.
It is well known that Pliny the Elder perished in an attempt to
investigate the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 A. D., and during the twelfth
century the Sicilian scholar and administrator, Henricus Aristippus, is
said to have made a careful study of the volcanic phenomena of Etna, not
without danger.[1005] In the legend of St. Brandan’s voyage we find an
account of the manner in which a companion of the saint lost his life in
an attempt to scale a fiery peak on an island in the northern
seas.[1006]

The writer of the second verse redaction of the _Image du monde_ also
tells us that he himself had made the ascent of Mongibel (Etna), and his
observations are so detailed and realistic that we cannot but believe
that he is telling the truth.[1007] His object was to see what comes out
of the smoking mouth of the mountain. He noticed that the fire which
issues forth soon turns to vapor and smoke; that the rocks of the
mountain resemble “foam of iron” (_escume de fer_—pumice or some other
volcanic ejecta); that the land about the mountain is broken (_esparse_)
and appears to be blasted and burned (_bruslée et arse_). The volcanic
heat touched (_ting_) his bare hand, and a gentle sweat broke out over
his body; but near the summit he was able to slake his thirst from
frozen snow. On the way down he had the curious experience of hearing
thunder in the clouds below him. When he finally got back to the city,
the people thought he was a fool (_musard_) for venturing into a place
with such a bad reputation. He adds that some people say that Mongibel
is the highest mountain in the world. That it is much higher than
appears from below, he himself had demonstrated. It can be seen from no
less than two hundred leagues away at sea.


              VOLCANIC REGION OF SOUTHERN ITALY AND SICILY

The two volcanic regions known to the medieval world were Southern Italy
and Sicily on the one hand and Iceland on the other. Gervase of Tilbury
describes Vesuvius and the volcanic features about Naples;[1008] he says
that in the vicinity of Pozzuoli there are hills with sands near the
summit so hot that they hinder persons from ascending across them. On
the very outskirts of Naples he speaks of a high mountain, called Mons
Virginum, overlooking the sea and the surrounding country. In the month
of May it belches forth a terrifying smoke with firebrands that turn to
the color of carbon when burnt out. This would seem to indicate the
presence of a vent connecting the mountain with the infernal regions.
(“Unde illic quoddam inferni terreni spiraculum asserunt ebullire.”) The
south wind blows a hot dust from the volcano which ruins the crops and
fruits of the neighborhood and tends to render the land barren and
sterile. To this fairly clear description of a volcano Gervase adds a
fantastic tale about the preventive measures which Virgil[1009] took to
avert the disaster caused by the hot winds; the poet erected a statue
holding a horn which automatically tooted whenever the south wind began
to blow, and for some reason repulsed the blast.[1010] Recently,
however, the statue had either gone to pieces with age or else had been
destroyed by malice, for the damage done by the volcanic blasts was once
more repeated as in bygone days.

The traveler Conrad of Querfurt looked with interest upon the volcanic
features of the Phlegraean Fields to the northwest of Naples and drew
attention to the confused labyrinth of passages in the interior of Monte
Barbaro and to the hot springs, subterranean channels of boiling water,
and other wonders of the region.[1011]

Guy of Bazoches, who passed through Sicily on the way to the Holy Land,
included in a letter to his nephews a striking word picture of Etna.
“Sicily,” he wrote, “fears not to pierce the clouds with its immense
mountain summits. Etna towers above all of these with its flaming crests
upon which the opposing elements strive with each other tirelessly and
indomitably in an immense conflict. For though Etna incessantly sends
forth scorching heat, its summit, none the less, is white with snow, and
with a wintry garment it covers its burning shoulders.”[1012] Guy
mentioned also the “Isles of Vulcan” in the Sicilian Sea, “the interior
of which were said to glow with eternal fires. Eolus once dwelt in these
isles and was in the habit of dispensing their smokes, which were
stirred up by the winds, and hence he came to be called the king of the
winds.”[1013] The _Image du monde_ refers to a volcano two leagues
distant at sea from Sicily; this may have been Vulcano or possibly
Stromboli, though in any case the distance was underestimated.[1014]


              _Michael Scot on the Eolian Isles and Etna_

Michael Scot brought together information about the volcanoes of the
Eolian (Lipari) Islands and of Sicily which he included in a discourse
on natural phenomena that he prepared for his patron Frederick II.[1015]
He speaks of “Strongulus” (Stromboli), “a mountain which is in the midst
of the sea,” of “Strongulinus” (Strombolicchio), “Vulcanus” (Vulcano),
“Vulcaninus” (Vulcanello?), “Moncibellus” (Etna), and the isle of
Lipari, “on which there are all manner of fine trees and grains.” From
the summit of Stromboli and “Strongulinus,” a lesser mountain than
Stromboli, great fiery flames are continuously emitted. The other four,
he declares, emit flames only when the south wind (_Auster_) blows; and,
when the flames cease, a mighty smoke issues from them. The eruptions
are often accompanied by showers of scorched rock and sometimes with
roots of trees (? _sticiones lignorum_) and cinders; the ground is
covered and the air obscured as stream waters are clouded with sand.
Glowing bombs are hurled aloft like sparks from a furnace; when these
fall to the ground they burst into fragments, great and small, and in
these fragments is found the pumice which writers use. This pumice
floats on the sea and is carried ashore, where the people collect it for
building walls and for uses similar to those to which we put bricks.
Liquid sulphur is also gathered by sailors from the surface of the sea
thereabouts in baskets and bowls. The nearer this may be obtained to the
mountains whence it boils forth, the better its quality.


                          VOLCANOES OF ICELAND

In the _Topographia Hiberniae_ of Giraldus Cambrensis we find a
description of the volcanic eruptions of Iceland.[1016] After remarking
that thunder and lightning are rare in the northern isle, he goes on to
explain that there is another and even worse affliction than these;
every year or two fire bursts out of a certain part of the island like a
whirlwind with a violent gale and melts everything in its path; he adds
that the cause of this phenomenon and whether it originated above or
below ground are unknown. Into two manuscripts of Solinus, the oldest of
which dates from the twelfth century, there was inserted some additional
information about the northern isles. We are told that the marine ice on
the coasts of Iceland “ignites itself on collision, and when it is
ignited it burns like wood” (Nansen’s translation).[1017] Adam of Bremen
had also spoken of ice that appeared to be black and dry on account of
its age and burned when kindled.[1018] Though it has been suggested that
this impression may have been derived from mists arising from the ice,
the story was perhaps, as Nansen observes, “due to statements about
volcanoes and boiling springs which have been confused with it. The
black color and dryness of the ice may have been due to confusion with
lava or with floating pumice stone in the sea.”[1019]

More definite information concerning the volcanic activity of Iceland
reached Saxo Grammaticus about a century after the time of Adam of
Bremen. Saxo refers to a mountain there which perpetually glows like a
star with its burning flame, and it seemed to him no less marvelous that
the eruption could occur in a region of such extreme cold.[1020] In the
_Historia Norwegiae_ the fiery outbreaks of Mons Casule (Hekla) are
likened to those of Etna, and an immense submarine eruption is
described; over a space three miles wide the sea had boiled and bubbled
as in a caldron; the earth was upheaved and out of the submarine depths
there arose fiery fumes, and a mighty mountain sprang from the
sea.[1021] This perhaps refers to a submarine eruption that took place
off Cape Reykyanes in 1211.[1022]

In the _King’s Mirror_ the volcanic activity of Iceland is compared with
that of Sicily, and the curious statement is made that, unlike the
subterranean fires of the Mediterranean isle, those of Iceland will burn
neither wood nor earth. On the other hand, they will burn the hardest
stones and pieces of rock just as easily as oil.[1023]


                 ST. BRANDAN’S VISITS TO VOLCANIC ISLES

St. Brandan in the course of his wanderings came across two fiery
islands.[1024] The first was eight days’ sail to the north of the
mysterious crystal column we have already mentioned. It was a rough,
treeless, and rocky isle covered with the forges of smiths. Though the
saint wished to keep clear of this dangerous spot, a wind sprang up
which drove his vessel towards it. One of the smiths threw a gigantic
mass of molten slag at the voyagers; but luckily he missed the ship, and
the slag fell into the sea, sending up huge clouds of steam. This was a
signal for all the smiths to start heaving lumps of molten ore at the
vessel, running back and forth from their forges to heat them. Soon the
entire island was burning and blazing like a furnace, and the sea around
boiling like a kettle. The saint and his party miraculously escaped from
this peril, but throughout the entire day they could hear an immense din
and shouting from the isle; and even when they had drifted out of sight
the tumult came to their ears, and their nostrils were afflicted by a
terrible stench. Soon the wanderers approached the second fiery isle;
their first sight of it revealed a mighty mountain on the northern
horizon, with its peak enveloped in what appeared to be a thin cloud but
in reality was smoke. They landed on the shores of the island, and one
of Brandan’s companions who endeavored to climb the steep, high crags
and investigate the summit was burned to death by the fires. Happily for
the others, a wind arose which drove the ship southward, whence they saw
the island now clear of smoke and spouting flames into the air, so that
the whole mountain appeared to be aglow.

It has been suggested that these stories were derived from classical and
Celtic mythology. The first island brings to mind pagan tales mingled
with Christian traditions of devils and the infernal regions; perhaps it
owes something to the Homeric account of the isle of the Cyclops. But
why, we may ask, did Irish writers place such fiery phenomena in the
cold and rainy seas surrounding their home? Is it not possible that
early Irish poets had heard vaguely of the volcanoes of Iceland and that
nebulous reports of them, modified by the influence of classical and
Christian traditions, took the form which we find in the legend of St.
Brandan’s voyagings? May it not be significant that the fiery islands of
St. Brandan were reached only after northerly wanderings?


                       VOLCANOES AS GATES OF HELL

Volcanoes were often popularly supposed to be the entrances into Hell or
else little independent scenes of punishment and dwelling places of
devils. Michael Scot would not decide “whether the gate to the lower
regions is” in the volcanoes of the Lipari Islands and Sicily “or in the
northern isle seen by St. Brandan....” But, he said, “whatever the way
in, Hell is in the bowels of the earth, and there is no way out”
(Haskins).[1025] St. Brandan, seven days’ journey to the south of the
second island just described, found Judas sitting alone on a rock in the
midst of the sea.[1026] In the course of their conversation, Judas
explained that he was imprisoned every day excepting Sundays and
Christmas in the mountain which they had seen erupting. On these days,
through the infinite mercy of Jesus Christ, he was permitted to come out
and cool off. The bishop of Pozzuoli, Gervase of Tilbury tells us,[1027]
on several occasions heard the wailings and lamentations of the damned
during his walks in the volcanic country near his city and had actually
seen the gates of Hell in a lake near by. Icelandic mythology conceived
of a gigantic hell under and inside of Mount Hekla.[1028] The _King’s
Mirror_ placed in the volcanic fires of Iceland a scene of punishment
for souls.[1029] In addition it speaks of a cold hell, belief in which
seems natural to Northern peoples and is also expressed in Saxo
Grammaticus’ description of the moanings and wailings to be heard in the
clashing of ice floes on the cliffs and crags of the Icelandic
coast.[1030]


                          CAUSES OF VULCANISM

Medieval writers did not add much to what the Greeks and Romans had said
in regard to the causes of vulcanism. In general they accepted the
theories of Isidore and Pliny. Sicily, a typical volcanic region, was
supposed to be cavernous and full of sulphur and bitumen strata which,
when ignited and kept burning by the air, throw off smoke, vapor, and
flames and, when a strong wind blows upon them, vomit forth masses of
sand and rocks.[1031] Gervase of Tilbury elaborates confusedly on this
theme,[1032] saying that there are many fires and earthquakes in Sicily
because beneath that land there is a mighty abyss, the bottom of which
is unknown to man. Near at hand are immense caverns and broad caves,
wherein winds are conceived from the whirling of the waters, for
mountains and waters create winds—mountains by offering an obstacle to
the air. Though he does not say so specifically, we may conclude that
Gervase believed that earthquakes and other volcanic phenomena were
caused by these winds trying to escape from the interior of the earth.
This was certainly the opinion of Michael Scot, who pointed out that
masses of sulphur and other white-hot rocks (_petre calidissime_) are
made to burn by the native heat of the earth’s interior and by the winds
which enter the earth’s crust in remote regions (_in extremis partibus_)
and force their way downward through passages, tubes, and caverns. These
winds are volatilized and given explosive force by contact with the
sulphur and hot rocks. When they burst forth again into the atmosphere
they have all the attributes of fire and flame—sparks, ashes,
cinders—and are supposed by many people to be genuine fire, though as a
matter of fact they are by nature quite different because the waters
ever present in the subterranean cavities fail to extinguish them. So
intense is the heat produced by the sulphur and other combustible
materials that the world would be entirely consumed by the winds that
would blow over them if they were on the earth’s surface. Hence it is a
great mercy of God that he has hidden them away in the depths of the
ground and has thus made impossible the destruction of the world by this
cause and that he has permitted men to dwell and cultivate their fields
on the mountains beneath which such evil forces are buried.[1033]

Alexander Neckam defined a volcano as a subterranean fire which, though
bound to the earth with one foot, seeks to spring aloft with the other.
He believed that volcanic rocks contain gases within them which when
kindled produce eruptions.[1034]

Though these passages reveal to us belief during the Crusading age in
the presence of heat and fire in the inside of the earth, the teachings
of Plato and many of the Church Fathers that the sources of volcanic
fires spring from immense subterranean reservoirs of fire do not appear
to have been given much credence. Though the earth’s crust and even its
innermost heart might be interpenetrated with cavities into which air,
water, and fire enter, confidence in the essential solidity and
massiveness of the earth prevailed, and theories which would admit of
the presence of bodies of water or of fire of any great extent within
the heaviest and most solid of the elements were not regarded as worthy
of serious consideration. Hell, however, was almost universally placed
at the very center of the earth by medieval theologians and geographers
alike.[1035]


                              EARTHQUAKES

The majority of medieval writers believed that earthquakes are caused by
the same physical forces as those which produce volcanic eruptions, the
violent stirring of winds,[1036] vapors, or exhalations within the
earth’s crust.[1037] In the _Quaestiones naturales_ of Adelard of Bath,
which takes the form of a dialogue between uncle and nephew, the nephew
finds it difficult to reconcile the stability and immobility of the
earth, which his uncle had just demonstrated, with the well-known fact
that the earth sometimes quakes and trembles. To this Adelard replies
that, while it is true that the earth may occasionally move in
particular localities, it does not move as a whole[1038] and that
earthquakes are caused by the air contained within the earth and have
nothing whatever to do with the intrinsically stable qualities of the
earth as a globe. He then proceeds to give the Aristotelian explanation
of the causes of earthquakes.[1039] The _De imagine mundi_, followed by
the _Image du monde_ and by Bartholomew Anglicus,[1040] also assigns the
same causes; and William of Conches explains[1041] that earthquakes are
the result of waters descending into underground hollows where they
encounter vapors, condensed into cloudlike form by the coldness of the
earth’s interior; these vapors, in turn, produce telluric movements by
forcing their way to the surface. Neckam repeats much the same
explanation but adds the usual allegorical lesson:[1042] the land
symbolizes the Church, which, although on the whole serene and firm, may
well be shaken now and then by purely local troubles and disturbances.

The medieval chronicler took delight in mentioning prodigies of nature
that came to his attention, and of these prodigies earthquakes were
among the most striking. The _Gesta regis Henrici Secundi_, under the
year 1178, records a terrific earthquake at Oxenhale in England:[1043]
some land owned by Hugh, bishop of Durham, rose up like a tower, so that
its highest point was on a level with the summits of the hills and
higher than the highest pinnacle of the churches (_templorum_); after
remaining like this from nine o’clock until nightfall, it collapsed at
sunset with a terrific noise that frightened all the onlookers. The
earth then absorbed the tower of land and in its place there remained
until the time of writing a well of immense depth as a perpetual
testimony to the occurrence of this phenomenon. In the same chronicle,
under the date of April 15, 1185,[1044] we find a more typical and less
fantastic description of an earthquake felt throughout almost the entire
length of England; rocks were shattered, stone houses fell in ruins, and
the metropolitan church of Lincoln was broken asunder from top to
bottom.


                               _DESERTS_

The deserts of the Orient impressed the medieval writer in much the same
way as mountains, by the obstacles and difficulties which they presented
to the traveler. William of Tyre dilates[1045] on the terrors of drought
in the desert and explains how the Saracens carry in great sacks on
camels water sufficient to serve man and beast for many days at a time;
he pictures impressively the horrors of the sand storms that may spring
up at any time. In the Egyptian desert, he says, the land is so dry and
barren that no manner of tree can grow there. The features of the desert
are also described in the _Letter of Prester John_.[1046] This fabulous
Christian potentate of the East tells us that in the great Sandy Sea
which lies in his country the sands are disturbed by the wind and form
endlessly moving waves like the waves of the real sea. But the analogy
with the sea is carried a trifle too far when he goes on to assert that
fish are found in the Sandy Sea. He adds that from certain mountains,
three days’ journey away, a river of stones flows down and, running
three days a week, sweeps both rocks and logs into the Sandy Sea, but
they disappear in the sands and are never seen again. If we remove the
halo of fable surrounding all this, we discern here an account of a
desert of dunes, with dry watercourses entering it, a feature common
enough in southwestern Asia and northern Africa. On the whole, however,
little was known of deserts in Western Europe in the Middle Ages, and,
though the waste places of Asia and India are constantly mentioned in
the Romance of Alexander, the descriptions of them are wholly fanciful.


                               _ISLANDS_


                                ORIGINS

The men of the West at this time were familiar with many islands.
Giraldus Cambrensis takes up the problem of the origin of the islands of
the earth and in particular the question of whether they were formed at
the time of the Deluge or long before or long after.[1047] His opinion
seems to have been that some time after the Flood the lands became
replete with animal life and that it was then that the islands came into
existence, not violently and suddenly but little by little out of
alluvial deposits.[1048] In his emphasis on the gradual and
non-catastrophic manner of their formation, Giraldus by hazard
enunciates a sound geological doctrine which contrasts favorably with
the theories he elsewhere expresses about the violent and sudden
appearance of lakes.


                           MIRACULOUS ISLANDS

Like mountains and lakes, islands were convenient topographic units to
which the medieval mind was wont to attribute fabulous and supernatural
qualities. Gervase of Tilbury, for example, describes a certain isle in
the sea off the coast of the Kingdom of Arles—Lirniensis, perhaps the
Isle de Lérins—where no worms ever are found.[1049] He was unable to
decide whether this was due to the extreme holiness of a colony of monks
which once dwelt on the island or to some natural peculiarity of the
soil. At all events, this reminds us of the tradition about the
inability of poisonous reptiles or noxious animals of any kind to exist
in Ireland.

Giraldus Cambrensis speaks of a floating island in a lake on the summit
of Mount Snowdon.[1050] This was said to be blown about by the winds,
and shepherds were much startled now and then to see their cattle
transported on it from one side of the lake to the other. Giraldus
explains this reasonably enough as follows: a portion of the shore had
become bound together and made firm and solid as if by ropes formed from
the roots of the willow and other plants. After being gradually
increased in size by the addition of alluvium it finally broke off. The
violent winds prevalent in the vicinity then drove it back and forth
over the surface of the lake. This story undoubtedly had a basis of
truth, for it is well known that sod floats about on the surface of one
of the lakes near Snowdon, but that it could carry cattle upon it is a
decided exaggeration.


                         ISLANDS OF ST. BRANDAN

The most marvelous of the islands mentioned in medieval legend were
those which St. Brandan visited.[1051] The first one he came to, a high
and rocky crag rising abruptly out of the sea, was doubtless suggested
to the mind of the poet by one of the forbidding islets in the seas off
the western coast of Ireland. Thence the saint and his crew voyaged in
turn to an island entirely covered with sheep, to one that proved to be
the back of a gigantic fish called Jasconius, to one full of miraculous
birds that could speak, to one that put them in mind of Paradise, to a
rocky isle full of forges and smiths, to an isle where there dwelt a
certain hermit, Paul, who had lived there forty years without food but
for thirty years had been fed by a certain beast;[1052] and finally the
saint himself attained the island which was the goal of all his
wanderings, the Saints’ Land of Promise (Terra repromissionis
sanctorum), or Paradise—a reminiscence perhaps of the Hesperides, or
Happy Islands, of Greek mythology.

Giraldus describes an isle off the Irish coast which would seem to be
akin to Brandan’s Jasconius.[1053] Doubts were raised as to whether this
peculiar island was a whale or some other monster or whether it was
really land; for some youths had tried to disembark upon it, but, just
as they were about to set foot ashore, it disappeared beneath the waves.
The next day it reappeared and the same thing was repeated. Finally, on
the third day, one of the young men shot a red-hot arrow into it; this
seems to have stabilized it, for the island did not disappear again and
ultimately proved to be habitable. From this Giraldus argued that as
fire is the most noble of the elements no phantasm can withstand its
power.


                _INFLUENCES OF GEOGRAPHICAL ENVIRONMENT_


                        ON PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE

In the writings of the Crusading age we find a few scattered remarks on
the relationship between geographical features and environment and the
life of man and animals, or on those branches of our science now called
biogeography and anthropogeography. The writings of Bernard Sylvester
furnish us with some striking examples. The Platonic and realist
conception of the unity of all matter, which was exemplified in the
theory of a World Soul and expounded in vivid terms by Theodoric of
Chartres, led Bernard in his _De mundi universitate_ to emphasize the
close interrelations of all natural phenomena and the influences of the
various elements and parts of the universe upon each other. He stressed,
for example, the importance of astrological influences, by attributing
to the moon control over the tides and other terrestrial
phenomena.[1054] In geography he emphasized the influences of terrain on
plant and animal life. Thus he says “fruitful land gives birth to
wolves, desert to lions, arid land to serpents, woods to bees.”[1055]
Elsewhere he explains how the plane tree grows in flat country, the
alder in valleys, the box among rocks, the willow on the banks of
streams, the fragrant cypress in the mountains, the sacred vine on the
slopes, and the olive in well-worked loam.[1056] Neckam also recognized
that the growth of plants was governed by the qualities of the
earth.[1057] Only about the center of the globe is there really true
earth; the surface which we cultivate is not true earth because it is
intermingled with particles of air, fire, and other substances.
Consequently it follows that in the same territory there may grow herbs
by nature both warm and cold and that in certain places oats thrive well
and in others barley.

There is a very striking passage in Hildegard’s _Subtilitates_
explaining in much detail the influence of various kinds of soil upon
agriculture.[1058] Hildegard asserts that there are divers types of soil
(_terra_)—black, white, and red. White soil is pallid and sandy and
contains much humidity in the form of large raindrops: because of this
quality white soil produces great vines and apple orchards but is rather
less well adapted for the raising of grains. The latter may better be
cultivated upon soil characterized by humidity of finer texture and
minuter drops. Black soil contains too much cold and dampness to produce
more than a moderate yield; red soil, on the other hand, has the right
balance of dampness and dryness and hence produces a quantity of fruits,
which, however, through their very abundance fail to attain perfection.
And so Hildegard proceeds with a discussion that would have been of a
highly utilitarian character, had it only been based more directly upon
the observation of the facts of nature.


                                 ON MAN

The influence of geographical environment on man is also noted by some
of the writers of our period. Otto of Freising explains[1059] that the
Lombards on entering Italy gave up their wild customs and adopted
Italian ways, partly because they married native women but partly as a
result of the nature of country and climate. Giraldus tells how the
plains of southern Wales are far more pleasant to live in than those of
the north.[1060] The latter region, on the other hand, has not only
better natural defenses but a richer soil and is more fertile in
producing men of strength and power. Gunther in the _Ligurinus_[1061]
enlarged on Ragewin’s simple description (in his continuation of Otto of
Freising’s _Gesta Friderici_) of the wild ferocity of the natives of
Poland by saying that their fierceness and savagery is due partly to the
nature of the soil and partly to the influence of their neighbors.


                   _Topography As a Natural Defense_

In the same connection these authors try to show that topography may
often serve as a natural defense against hostile invaders. Giraldus
speaks of Wales[1062] as a country easily defensible because of the
depth of its valleys and the immensity of its woods, waters, and swamps.
The remnants of the ancient Britons who were driven here were able to
hold out and preserve their independence against both Angles and
Normans. On the other hand, those who were driven into the southern
promontory (Cornwall), where the land was not by nature so easy to
defend, yielded to the conqueror. In another connection[1063] Giraldus
speaks of the difficulties any one would encounter in trying to conquer
such a rough country as Wales and one so well fortified by nature.
Gervase of Tilbury also testifies to the strong natural defenses of
Wales,[1064] specifying how the Welsh, when enemies appear, take to the
bog lands on the mountains, which they can easily cross through an
agility resulting from long familiarity. Here they either escape from
their enemies or lie in wait to inflict grave harm on them.
Giraldus[1065] tells that the islands in the lakes of Ireland were used
for refuges as well as for dwelling places by the lords of the
surrounding districts; and Ragewin[1066] speaks of the natural defenses
of Genoa, hemmed in on one side by mountains and on the other by the
sea.


             _Theory of the Westward Flow of Civilization_

We may close this account of the relations of man with his geographical
environment with a few words about a strangely fatalistic theory which
prevailed among certain thinkers and in particular among the mystics. It
was a theory that civilization flows from the East to the West and that
when it reaches the uttermost limits of the West the human race will
meet its doom and extinction. Severian of Gabala had said in the fourth
century:[1067] “God looked into the future and set the first man in that
place [Paradise, in the East] in order to cause him to understand that,
just as the light of heaven moves toward the west, so the human race
hastens towards death; but that it is just as reasonable to expect a
future resurrection from death as it is to expect that the stars will
again rise in the east.” This idea appears in the writings of Hugh of
St. Victor, who states in the _De arca Noë morali_[1068] that the order
of places and the order of time run in series; that whatever happened in
the beginning of time happened in the Orient and that henceforth the
course of events has gradually been moving westward, until now it has
reached the end of the earth and we must face the fact that we are
approaching the end of the ages (_saeculi_). Shortly after the Deluge
the most important kingdoms and the capitol of the world were in the
East, in the lands of the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Medes; then the
supreme power passed to the Greeks; and finally, towards the end of the
ages, to the Romans who dwell on the confines of the world. In the _De
arca Noë mystica_ the front of the ark is said to face the east and the
rear the west “in order that the position of places shall correspond
with the order of time and the end of the world shall be at the end of
the centuries.”[1069] The ark is here supposed to represent a map of the
world, and the segment of the circle of the _orbis terrarum_ cut by the
ark and facing the east is the location of Paradise; the segment facing
the west will be the place of universal resurrection. Ideas very similar
to this are also found in the _De vanitate mundi_ of Hugh of St.
Victor.[1070]

Though it cannot be proved that Otto of Freising made use of these
works, nevertheless his philosophy of history is to a large extent based
on the theory of the westward flow of civilization.[1071] In the
prologue to his _Chronicon_ he queries, “Who can wonder that human power
is changeable, when mortal wisdom also is unstable (_labilis_)? What
great learning there was in Egypt and among the Chaldeans, from whom
Abraham derived his knowledge! But what now is Babylon, once famous for
its science and its power? A shrine of sirens, a home of lizards and
ostriches, a den of serpents! And Egypt is now in large part a trackless
and uninhabitable waste, whence science was transferred to the Greeks,
then to the Romans, and finally to the Gauls and Spaniards. And,” he
concludes, “let it be observed that because all human power or wisdom
began in the Orient and will end in the Occident, the mutability and
disappearance of all things is demonstrated. This I propose, with God’s
aid, to make clear in the work which follows.” Otto again hammers on
this theme in the prologue of his fifth book[1072] and finally, near the
close of the same book,[1073] remarks, “For behold, as I have explained
above, just as the heavens turn from east to west, so we behold worldly
affairs and powers revolving.” If human power is so changeable, he asks,
who can expect that the Kingdom of the Franks will last very long?

The idea that “westward the course of empire takes its way” was thus
raised in the Middle Ages to a position of theological doctrine and
philosophical principle.


                  _FEELING FOR LANDSCAPE AND SCENERY_

The pagan, or classical, attitude toward nature was characterized by a
subjective and esthetic enjoyment of beautiful scenery; the Christian
saw in nature the symbol and manifestation of the divinity.[1074] Both
points of view were represented in the literature of our age.


                      SPIRITUAL FEELING FOR NATURE

The more spiritual feeling found its expression in the writings of men
like Bernard of Clairvaux, Hugh of St. Victor, Francis of Assisi,
Alexander Neckam, and many others.[1075] Bernard of Clairvaux believed
that a man could learn more of the eternal verities through a reverent
contemplation of nature than through the study of books. He wrote to
Master Henry Murdach, an Englishman who afterwards became a monk of
Clairvaux: “Believe one who has tried: you shall find a fuller
satisfaction in the woods than in books. The trees and the rocks will
teach you that which you cannot hear from the masters. Do you think that
you cannot draw honey from the rock and oil from the hardest flint? Do
not our mountains drop sweetness? the hills flow with milk and honey?
and the valleys stand thick with corn?” (Eales’s translation).[1076]
Bernard was fond of complex and detailed allegorical comparisons of the
aspects of nature with the theological or spiritual concepts which he
believed they symbolize. In a sermon on Benedict he said: “St. Benedict
was a mighty fruit tree, like a tree planted by a watercourse. Where are
the watercourses? Truly they are in the valleys, because midway between
the mountains the water flows down. Who may not perceive that the
streams retreat from the steep slopes of the mountains and make their
way straight to the lowly midst of the valleys? Thus does God repulse
the haughty and give grace to the humble. Here you may set foot in
safety. Whoever of you are of the flock of Christ, place your trust in
his staff and follow the footpath in the valley. On the hillsides that
ancient serpent has ever chosen his abode which bites the horse’s hoof
and makes the rider fall back. Select rather the valley for your
wanderings and plantings. Do not seek the dry and rocky mountain side to
set out trees. In the valleys is abundance. There plants thrive, the
grass is lush, fruits grow, and, according to the words of Scripture,
‘the vales shall abound with corn.’”[1077]

It was in much the same vein that Bernard spoke of the sea as the origin
of all springs and rivers and compared it with Christ, the fount of all
virtue and wisdom.[1078] It was a wish to find an allegorical meaning in
the phenomena of nature that induced Abelard to compare the flood of the
Nile with the spread of Christian grace throughout the world.[1079]
These and the many other similar allegorical comparisons that are so
frequent in the literature of our period are not mere juxtapositions of
things that were seen to be alike. Bernard did more than liken the
valley to the humble of spirit. He implied that the valley itself
partook of the quality of humility and was thereby in some way more
divine than the mountain. But, if Bernard believed that mountains were
symbolical of pride and arrogance, others, like Altmann of Passau,
Anselm of Canterbury, and Francis of Assisi, were lovers of mountains in
a truly spiritual sense. To the twelfth-century mystic the beauty of
nature was more than a symbol of the divinity: it drew its very essence
from God. The love that St. Francis bore towards birds and animals,
mountains and fellow man was a love that arose out of his regarding all
of these as creatures of God impregnated with something of the divine.


                        ESTHETIC LOVE OF NATURE

The esthetic love of nature that existed during our period was very
different. It had its roots in a movement of protest and rebellion
against the austerity of the Christian life and ideals. Men wished to
enjoy the things of this world without thought of the next. What is
more, they sometimes actually dared to write about their pleasures.
These early stirrings of the humanistic spirit, the spirit of the Great
Renaissance, brought forth troubled protests and angry remonstrances
from men like Bernard and other reformers; but none the less love poems
were often composed in the monasteries, and vagrant poets wandered over
Europe singing the praises of earthly love, rejoicing in the springtime,
with little heed for aught but the beauty of the world. Popular wherever
they went, these wanderers exerted a great influence, and something of
their joyous, pagan spirit crept into more serious writings of the age.

It would be possible to quote at some length texts testifying to the
presence of an esthetic feeling for nature in the twelfth and early
thirteenth centuries.[1080] Two or three examples must here suffice.

One of the most enthusiastic observers of natural scenery was Guy of
Bazoches. He describes the environs of the castle of St. Gilles in
southern France about as follows:[1081] “Here smile cultivated and
fertile fields, and here the sides of the hills are adorned with
vineyards. The pleasing aspect of the shrubbery and the beauty of
gardens meets the eye, and oh! how the sweet smell of the grass fills
the air! Fruit trees groan under their load and lament their fertility,
and the warbling birds in the branches send forth rich harmonies. If we
look in a different direction we see the plain stretching out its level
lap covered with green meadows and alluring us with its beauty. The
Rhone, disdainfully cutting through the midst of the fields, rolls down
proud waters and, reaching its place of birth, flows forth into the
neighboring sea.”

Even more striking is a passage from a poem that has been ascribed to
Marbod of Rennes. “My uncle owns an estate in the forest where I am in
the habit of going to leave care behind and all that may trouble one.
The green grass, the silent woods, the soft and festive breezes, and a
lively spring in the meadow revive my tired spirit: they give me back to
myself and enable me to regain my poise (me mihi reddunt et faciunt in
me consistere). For who is not robbed of himself in the restless city,
roaring with a multitude of noises?”[1082] The writer goes on to
meditate in truly Roman fashion on the transitory character of all
things of this earth. Ganzenmüller comments on the subjective character
of these sentiments: “What a distance separates this from the attitude
towards nature of a Bernard of Clairvaux! Bernard ascribes loneliness to
God, our poet to himself. No longer did one seek in nature for God but
for one’s own self.”[1083]


                   PRACTICAL INTEREST IN COUNTRYSIDES

On the whole, however, the passages just quoted are more or less
exceptional. The majority of descriptions of countrysides that date from
our period reveal neither highly developed esthetic feeling nor
transcendental emotion. What they do reveal is the prevalence of keen
intellectual interest in detail. If a region was in any way unusual
either by reason of the richness of its produce or the marvelous tales
that were in circulation about it, that region was held to be worthy of
comment.

Dreesbach has clearly pointed out[1084] that the passages from the
French literature of the Crusading period which describe the Orient show
that the things which impressed themselves on the minds of historian and
chronicler and poet were the richness of gardens and orchards and the
fertility of the fields. Her fecundity, not her romantic or esthetic
qualities, made the average man of the Middle Ages love nature; and a
country not rich and prosperous hardly deserved any particular notice,
in his way of thinking. The descriptions of Syria in William of Tyre’s
history reveal a great number of observations like the following: “The
plain of Antioch, full of many rich fields for the raising of wheat and
abounding in springs and rivulets,”[1085] or the neighborhood of
Damascus, “where there are a great number of trees bearing fruits of all
kinds and growing up to the very walls of the city and where everybody
has a garden of his own.”[1086] Elsewhere William of Tyre emphasizes the
contrast between the sterility of the desert and the marvelous fertility
of Egypt, with its abundance of wheat.[1087] The same interest in the
economic qualities of the land appears in the few local descriptions
that we find in the writings of Otto of Freising. Otto speaks[1088] of
the forested region about the Rhine, near Worms, as being “rich in
produce and wine, abundant in hunting and fishing,” and for this reason,
he adds, the region was pleasing to the princes who came from across the
Alps to take part in the Diet at Worms. In detailing the life of
Corbianus, founder of the church at Freising, he gives us a
topographical account of the vicinity of this city.[1089] A hill, he
says, situated in a most beautiful and delicious spot, overlooks like a
watchtower the whole region, through which can be seen the swift stream
of the Isar. In the days of Corbianus (about 745 A. D.) this territory
was said to have been covered with woods and was a haunt of game; traces
of these woods were still to be found in the ancient tree trunks among
the thickets of the plains, and to Otto’s own day immense quantities of
deer and goats ran wild there. In the northern part of the district by
no means inconsiderable tracts of woodland, commonly called “the
forest,” were still in existence, and from them much useful building
material and fuel could be procured. The land contiguous to the hill was
inclosed by the rivers Isar on the south and Amper on the north, and
between the two streams it extended four German miles in the form of a
very fertile peninsula. At the end of this, where the two rivers come
together, was a place called Moosburg, beautiful and delightful, the
site of a congregation of clergy connected with the church of the
blessed Castulus.


             GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS’ EYE FOR LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY

Giraldus Cambrensis, more than his contemporaries, had an eye for local
topography. In spite of his taste for the marvelous, this impelled him
now and then to paint a fairly clear word picture of the appearance of
the countryside. He notes many things of a sort that do not usually
occur in other medieval works; for instance, the fact that in fair
weather it is possible to see the hills of Ireland from St. David’s Head
in Wales;[1090] that the fertility of the Irish soil lies in its
grassland rather than in its grain;[1091] that Ireland is rugged and
hilly, very damp and watery, full of woods, swamps, and trackless
wastes, with lakes at the foot of the hills and pools and bogs even on
the highest summits; that here and there one sees beautiful plains, but
in general open surfaces are of limited extent in comparison to
woodland; that the seacoasts are low, that hills and mountains are
restricted to the interior, and that both inland and along the shores
there is more sandy than rocky country.[1092] He was also impressed by
the barren and desolate character of many parts of Wales;[1093] the
“angle” of the land near St. David’s, he says, has a rocky, sterile
soil, with neither woods, nor rivers, nor orchards, but is open and
exposed to winds and storms. Mona also is arid and rocky, deformed in
appearance, and generally unpromising, though as a matter of fact vastly
more fertile and opulent than the adjacent portion of the Welsh
mainland.[1094]




                               CHAPTER X
             THE ASTRONOMICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE KNOWN WORLD


We have already examined the broader theories of astronomical geography
whereby the relation of the globe to the remainder of the universe was
explained. In this chapter we shall speak only of those aspects of
astronomical geography which were intimately connected with man’s
knowledge of the various parts of the known world, or _oikoumene_, as
distinguished from the sphere as a whole.


            PHENOMENA RESULTING FROM DIFFERENCES IN LATITUDE

Within the _oikoumene_ the phenomena resulting from varying elevations
of the ecliptic in different latitudes were fairly well understood. The
facts that there are two summers between the tropics (particularly in
India) and that the sun there passes vertically overhead twice a year
had been commented on by Pliny and Solinus, whose observations in this
connection found their way into Isidore’s _Etymologiae_[1095] and thus
to the works of the plagiarists of Isidore in our period. The _De
imagine mundi_,[1096] the _Image du monde_,[1097] Gervase of
Tilbury,[1098] and John of Holywood[1099] all tell us that the same
phenomenon was said to occur in Arabia which lies between the tropics.
Similarly the long days and nights of far northern latitudes were
described on the authority of Solinus and Isidore. In the _De imagine
mundi_,[1100] from which Gervase copies, it is said that in the island
of “Chili” (Thule) there are six months of daylight and summer and six
of night and winter. Giraldus Cambrensis also quotes Solinus[1101] and
Isidore[1102] to the same effect and adds a brief description of how the
sun continuously circles around the horizon during the long Arctic day
and how its light disappears completely when the luminary departs
southward towards the Tropic of Capricorn.[1103]


                               “CLIMATA”

The ancient geographers had divided the earth’s surface into _climata_,
or climates, which, as we have already seen,[1104] were not atmospheric
regions but mathematical strips running east and west and bounded by
parallels of latitude. Pliny,[1105] for instance, had conceived of seven
climates, the first in the latitude of India, where the length of the
longest day is fourteen hours, and the seventh in that of the
Borysthenes (Dnieper) and of Venetia, Umbria, Milan, and Aquitania,
where the longest day is fifteen and three-quarters hours. Martianus
Capella[1106] added an eighth climate in the north between the parallel
of the Borysthenes and that of the Rhipaean Mountains. Furthermore, he
applied names to the strips. It must be added, however, that neither
Pliny nor Capella were precise in the data they gave, and neither
indicated in degrees the latitude of the parallels which bound their
climates.

More definite is the information we find in the two works of Ptolemy.
The _Almagest_[1107] and _Geography_[1108] give accounts of the
characteristic astronomical phenomena that occur along a series of
parallels, thirty-eight in number according to the former, twenty-one
according to the latter.[1109] The positions of these were determined by
the length of the longest day at each one. Though there is no explicit
mention of the older division by climates in the text of either of
Ptolemy’s books, such a division not only appears upon the map of the
world made by Agathodaemon on the basis of material supplied by Ptolemy
but also upon certain of the special regional maps which were probably
the work of Ptolemy himself.[1110]

At all events, the conception of the seven or eight climates did not
disappear but at a very early period, whether by Ptolemy or not, was
correlated with the Ptolemaic parallels.[1111] That is to say, certain
of Ptolemy’s parallels were used to designate the imaginary lines
marking the centers and bounds of the climates. This practice was
adopted by the Arabs and from them transferred to the knowledge of the
Christian West in various astronomical treatises. Among the Latin
manuscripts of the _Toledo Tables_,[1112] for instance, there are series
of astronomical tables for each of the seven climates, according to
which the climates occupy the space between latitude 16° N., with a
longest day of thirteen hours, and 48° N., with a longest day of sixteen
hours. The length of the longest day and the latitude are given for each
parallel that bounds the climates. Except that Ptolemy notes minutes as
well as degrees and in the _Toledo Tables_ the minutes have in most
cases been omitted, the figures correspond essentially with those of the
_Almagest_ and _Geography_. Thus: Ptolemy’s eleventh parallel according
to the _Almagest_ (or tenth according to the _Geography_) has a longest
day of fourteen and a half hours and is at latitude 36°. In the _Tables_
the southern edge of the fourth climate likewise has a longest day of
fourteen and a half hours and is at latitude 36°.

Again, in John of Seville’s translation of Al-Farghānī’s
_Astronomy_[1113] and in the _De sphaera_[1114] of John of Holywood, who
had borrowed from Al-Farghānī in this matter, we find a similar
correlation. In both cases the figures of latitude correspond
essentially, though with slight divergences in detail, to those of
Ptolemy. The boundaries of each climate, however, have here been
displaced by one parallel to the south of the parallels used in the
_Toledo Tables_ and those which we may presume were the Ptolemaic
boundaries of the climates.[1115]

The table, Figure 11 (in the Notes to Ch. X), gives some idea of the
relative degree of accuracy of these figures as they were employed in
the West during the Middle Ages. But just as in the case of other
figures for latitude and longitude, as we shall shortly have occasion to
see, this material was not utilized for geographical purposes during our
age.


                        GEOGRAPHICAL COÖRDINATES

At the present time the study of regional geography is largely dependent
on a precise knowledge of the geographical coördinates of places. The
foremost duty of the explorer is to know where he is from day to day and
to find this out by astronomical means, if possible. In classical times
and among the Moslems the importance of such observations was not only
well understood, but several methods of carrying them through were
described by astronomers and geographers, and the latitudes of a great
many stations had been determined astronomically. Longitude, on the
other hand, long remained a stumbling block, and before the twelfth
century, certainly, no systematic attempts to ascertain the longitudes
of any large number of places had ever met with success.

A few relics of classical and Moslem study in this field became familiar
in the West as a result of the intense interest in Arabic astronomy
prevailing in Europe between the tenth and thirteenth centuries.[1116]

Various figures representing the results of Arabic corrections of and
additions to the data given in Ptolemy’s _Geography_ found their way
into Western astrological tables. The most interesting of these occur in
a list of the latitudes and longitudes of some sixty odd cities appended
to the Paris manuscript of the _Marseilles Tables_ of Raymond of
Marseilles[1117] and also to most of the Latin versions of the _Toledo
Tables_.[1118] This list and certain figures scattered through the
astrological tables and canons[1119] reveal the results of the
reductions made by Al-Khwārizmī and by Az-Zarqalī of Ptolemy’s gross
overestimate of the length of the Mediterranean, to which we have
referred in a preceding chapter.[1120] The European student of these
astrological works might have drawn a by no means contemptible map from
the figures to be found in them had he been interested in what these
figures could teach him of geography. Figure 6 is a map compiled from
the coöordinates given in the Paris manuscript of the _Marseilles
Tables_.

At the end of this list of geographical coördinates in many manuscripts
additional figures not derived from Moslem sources are given. These show
the positions of such points in Europe as London, Hereford, Paris,
Toulouse, Barcelona, Marseilles, Novara, Cremona, Florence, and
Naples[1121] (see Fig. 12, in Notes to Ch. X). They were undoubtedly
determined by observations made during our period or shortly after.

[Illustration:

  FIG. 6—Sketch map constructed from the list of geographical positions
    appended to the Paris manuscript of Raymond of Marseilles’
    _Marseilles Tables_. The outline of the coast, arbitrarily indicated
    by a shaded band, is shown merely to give some idea of the type of
    map that might have been constructed from the data given in the
    tables. This may be compared with the Henry of Mayence map (see
    above, p. 124) shown in outline in the inset. The original Henry of
    Mayence map reveals far greater detail and upon it east (not north,
    as in this figure) is at the top.

  This list is based on the observations of the eleventh-century Arabic
    astronomers Al-Khwārizmī and Az-Zarqalī. Cities and other points
    have been plotted according to the coördinates of this list. The
    resulting map of the Mediterranean region and the Near East is
    remarkable for its comparative accuracy. For a key to the names
    represented by the numbers on the diagram and for the figures for
    the latitudes and longitudes, see J. K. Wright, _Knowledge of
    Latitudes and Longitudes_, 1923, pp. 87–88.
]


               METHODS OF FINDING LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE

That such observations were carried out is entirely possible, for there
is absolutely no doubt that methods of finding latitudes and longitudes
were well understood in theory and were sometimes put to practical use.
Rules are given for finding latitude in Az-Zarqalī’s _Canons_, in Plato
of Tivoli’s translation of the _Astronomy_ of Al-Battānī, and in many
other astronomical and astrological treatises.[1122] Two principal
methods were recommended. You may either measure with the astrolabe the
altitude of the sun above the horizon at noon at the spring or autumn
equinox and find the latitude by subtracting this angle from 90° or you
may measure the altitude of the celestial pole above the horizon, which
is the same as the latitude. As to longitude, the fact that there are
differences in local time between points east and west of each other was
recognized and clearly explained by several writers of our age.[1123]
The _Marseilles Tables_ give a rule for finding longitude by the
observation of eclipses. Roger of Hereford indicates that he himself, by
observing an eclipse in 1178, ascertained the positions of Hereford,
Marseilles, and Toledo in relation to Arin, the world center of the
Moslems.[1124] Gerard of Cremona describes a method of finding longitude
by noting the distance of the moon from a given point in the heavens and
thereby dispensing with eclipses,[1125] though it is doubtful whether
this method was used until the sixteenth century. The lack of accurate
instruments for ascertaining time must have rendered it extremely
difficult to calculate longitude under any circumstances. Making
allowances for this, it is surprising to find how accurate the few
coöordinates that have come down to us seem to be, if our interpretation
of them is correct.[1126]

The geographical interest of these figures and of investigations of this
sort was not appreciated by the majority of the men of our age. The
application of astronomical considerations to the problems of navigation
was still in its infancy. The purpose of the investigator of the twelfth
and early thirteenth century in finding geographical coöordinates was
astrological. He wished to make use of them to transpose tables made
originally for the meridian and parallel of one station to the meridian
and parallel of another. Their influence on the cartography of the age
was absolutely _nil_. It is probably safe to make the categorical
statement that the maps and geographical treatises of the century and a
half preceding the year 1250 were drawn and written with almost complete
disregard of any astronomical considerations whatsoever.




                               CHAPTER XI
                              CARTOGRAPHY


The maps of our period give us the most convincing possible
illustrations of the geographical ideas that were current.[1127] Their
bright colors, naïve legends, childlike but often skillfully drawn
vignettes, and preposterous inaccuracy take us back into the atmosphere
of a credulous and uncritical age. We can catch much more of the flavor
of the popular geography of the Middle Ages by a hasty glance at one of
the crude Beatus representations of the world than by plowing through
many of the dry pages of compilations like the _De imagine mundi_.

In this chapter there will be given a brief analysis of these maps as
specimens of the cartographer’s art and an explanation of certain points
which all, or most, of them have in common.


                              _INACCURACY_

What strikes us first is their extraordinary inaccuracy. It is easy to
laugh at this because subconsciously but inevitably we compare the
outlines of seas, continents, and regions as represented in these maps
with the outlines with which we have become familiar in modern atlases.
We tend to forget that the contours of Europe, Asia, and Africa as we
now know them are not images that have been stamped upon the minds of
men at all times, that their accurate representation is the result of a
series of long and laborious observations completed only at a relatively
recent date. Hence it is somewhat unjust to reproach the medieval
cartographer with his inaccuracy, for the reason that accuracy in the
present-day sense was something impossible for him to achieve. The
Greeks and Moslems, to be sure, had made far better maps than did the
men of the Middle Ages; but, unfortunately, Greek maps had perished, few
Arabic maps came through to the West, and the prevalent ignorance of
Greek made it impossible for the Occidental scholar to gain inspiration
from treatises on cartography written in that tongue.


                     ACCURACY NOT DEEMED NECESSARY

Furthermore, it is a mistake to regard accuracy as the goal and ideal of
the medieval map maker. To gain a sympathetic understanding of his work
we must see what purposes he intended it to fulfill. He drew maps to
accompany and clarify the written texts to which they were usually
subsidiary. The maps were more or less in the nature of diagrammatic
sketches on which the features of the earth’s surface were shown in a
general way, and the draftsman understood perfectly well that all he
could hope to give was a rough approximation to relative positions. The
medieval scribe and map maker was an artist who took pride in the beauty
of his work. The same motives which impelled him to enliven his
manuscript with a multitude of miniatures led him to relieve the coldly
geometrical outlines of his map by lines and colors pleasing to the eye,
by entertaining sketches and readable legends. He was creating something
very different from the modern cartographic or topographic sheet that
stands on its own merits as an independently useful, scientific document
and from which we can get precise information about distances, heights,
positions, and terrain. He would have branded any man a fool who thought
that one could hope to determine from his map the distance from
Jerusalem to England or from the mouth of the Ganges to the mouth of the
Nile. In other words, most medieval maps—including wall maps—were
nothing more than rough diagrams converted into works of art.

When, during the latter years of the thirteenth century, the sailors of
the Mediterranean, driven by the necessity of securing reliable aids to
navigation, began piece by piece to construct marine charts upon which
the contours of the coasts were shown with an approach to modern
correctness, we have indeed a revolution in cartographic art and
geographical science.

Bearing in mind these considerations, we see that the major inaccuracies
of medieval maps are (1) exaggeration in the scale of particular regions
at the expense of others and (2) distortion, often amounting to a
complete failure to show places in their proper relative positions. The
first of these inaccuracies was usually deliberate, the second more or
less unavoidable. Both are well-known characteristics of our modern
American railway folder maps.


                              EXAGGERATION

The purpose of exaggeration was, of course, to emphasize the most
interesting and significant localities. For example, on many maps of the
world, Palestine—about which a good deal was known and in which interest
naturally was centered—is shown to be almost as large as all the rest of
Asia put together. The Jerome map of the East[1128] exaggerates Asia
Minor to an enormous size, making it a greater distance from
Constantinople to Mount Ararat than from Armenia to Taprobane (Ceylon).
On the other hand, the Jerome map of Palestine itself[1129] would lead
us to believe that the district lying between the Lebanon, the Jordan,
and the sea is at least three times as large as the Anatolian peninsula.
Certainly nobody ever thought that such proportions actually obtain in
nature. Similarly, the plans of cities that are not infrequently
included in maps are often immensely enlarged in relation to the
surrounding country, as, for example, in the case of London, Rome, Acre,
and Jerusalem on Matthew Paris’ pictorial itinerary[1130] and map of
Palestine,[1131] and Jerusalem on the “Situs Ierusalem”[1132] (see Fig.
7).


                               DISTORTION

Errors arising from distortion were due partly to ignorance and partly
to the necessity of making the map fit either the page upon which it was
drawn or else a preconceived idea of an oval, or circular world. The
“Cotton,” or “Anglo-Saxon,” map[1133] several of the Beatus
series,[1134] and even Matthew Paris’ maps of Britain[1135] (the best of
the whole period; see Fig. 9, p. 343, below) show a semi-rectangular
land mass corresponding to the pages of the codices. On the latter a
legend frankly admits that, if only the size of the page permitted, the
island would be shown longer than it is (“Si pagine pateretur, haec
totalis insula longior esse deberet”).[1136] The manner in which
geography was forced to conform to a circular or oval world is admirably
illustrated in the treatment of the islands of the ocean. On the Beatus
series[1137] and on Lambert’s _mappaemundi_,[1138] Britain and the other
islands appear as small, round, oval, or rectangular blocks more or less
regularly spaced in the circumambient ocean. Other maps, like that of
Henry of Mayence[1139] (see inset of Fig. 6, p. 245, above), fit the
islands into recesses in the oceanic shores of the continental areas so
that the smooth outlines of the whole land mass are preserved.

[Illustration:

  FIG. 7—The _Situs Ierusalem_, or plan of Jerusalem, illustrating the
    anonymous _Gesta Francorum Ierusalem expugnantium_ as reproduced by
    Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. iii, 1895, fig. 14, from map in Codex of
    St. Omer.
]

An extreme of confusion and disregard for reality is found in one of the
Beatus group[1140] preserved in Paris. Here it is difficult to make out
which continent is which. India, for instance, lies just across the Red
Sea from Spain (it is doubtful in what direction); Arabia would seem to
be in the farthest Orient, adjoined by Greece on one side and Thrace on
the other. Such absurdities are unusual, but even the best maps of the
period show serious errors when measured by modern standards. The
“Cotton,”[1141] for instance, in such a well-known part of the world as
Italy, locates Ravenna on the Mediterranean shore southeast of Rome and
shows an amazing eastward displacement of Arabia and the Red Sea, though
in many other respects its geography, relatively speaking, is very good.


                              _TECHNIQUE_

The diagrammatic character of these maps is evident in the technique of
their workmanship. They all show a tendency toward geometrical lines,
curves, and symmetry. This is carried further on some than on others
(as, for example, in the cruder specimens of the Beatus group[1142]);
but, in nearly all, the ocean is represented as a smooth circular band
of even width; and, in many, rivers and mountains follow direct lines or
regular curves. It is obvious that the ruler and compass were not
neglected.


                              CONVENTIONS

Moreover, certain cartographic conventions were followed. In the great
majority of cases east was placed at the top, and some authorities have
endeavored to trace this convention back to the maps of the
Romans.[1143] While this explanation of its origin may be true, the
traditions of the Church, which placed in the Orient the Garden of Eden
together with the fountain of the waters of the world and of human life,
must have had much to do toward perpetuating it. Conventions of a sort
were also observed in the use of colors on colored maps: seas and rivers
were nearly always blue or green, except for the Red Sea, which was
invariably red. Less uniform was the color used for mountains: on the
map of the world of Henry of Mayence[1144] and on one of Lambert’s
_mappaemundi_[1145] they are red; the “Cotton”[1146] shows them a
brilliant green; and one of the maps of Matthew Paris,[1147] a yellow.


                          SYMBOLS AND LEGENDS

Symbols representing the various features of the earth’s surface were
more or less conventionalized, though we can hardly say that any
definitely developed “conventional signs” were in use. It is the usual
intention of symbols as employed on modern maps to reproduce the
appearance of the various features more or less as they look when viewed
from above. This is relatively recent development; on medieval maps such
elements as mountains, forests, and cities were shown as they appear
from the side. In addition to symbols, legends were extensively employed
to explain details of the map’s surface, and sometimes these were
expanded to considerable length to include historical data and other
points of interest. A large variety of subjects were represented on
these maps by symbols, vignettes, and legends.

The atmosphere figures in the Turin Beatus[1148] in pictures at the four
corners of wind blowers seated astride of wind bags. On the Jerome map
of the East[1149] the names of certain of the winds are written along
the eastern border, and wind blowers were familiar figures in the
cartography of a later period than ours.

The ocean and inland seas, usually tinted green or blue, are generally
without symbols to emphasize their watery nature, except perhaps for
pictures of fish. On two of the Beatus series,[1150] however, lines are
drawn running parallel to the coasts, showing that the medieval
draftsman had hit upon and crudely executed a modern scheme of
representing water. The Guido map of Italy[1151] represents the sea by
scalloped lines. On the Guido map of the world[1152] the size of the
Mediterranean and its branches is enormously enlarged;[1153] whereas the
worst examples of the Beatus group[1154] show the inland seas as narrow
channels bounded by straight shores.

The width of rivers is nearly always immensely exaggerated; on some maps
rivers appear to be as wide as the seas themselves. Only the
“Cotton”[1155] forms an exception in representing them (except for the
Nile) as single lines. On the whole, hydrography is drawn arbitrarily.
Streams cross each other, separate, and connect one sea with another;
though the Jerome maps,[1156] certain of the Beatus series,[1157] and
the “Cotton”[1158] place the headwaters of many of the rivers of Asia
and Europe in mountain ranges.

Lakes are generally represented as bulb-shaped bodies from which rivers
rise or into which they expand.

No attempt was made to show by symbols different kinds of land surface,
except perhaps by Matthew Paris in one of his maps of Britain,[1159]
which differentiates the marshy country of the eastern shires from the
rest of the island. On certain members of the Beatus group[1160] we read
legends in Africa and Asia calling the country “deserta et arenosa;” and
legends appearing on Matthew Paris’ maps[1161] describe the boggy, wild,
and mountainous country of northern Scotland and Wales. The Paris Beatus
No. II[1162] has a legend in a remote part of Asia indicating “land
uninhabitable on account of the abundance of water.”

Mountain ranges were generally represented by jagged, saw-tooth lines
running parallel to straight lines;[1163] particularly high or famous
peaks, by a single great pyramid. Such pyramids are prominent features
in the Beatus series,[1164] where woods are often shown growing upon
them. The Hyrcanian Forest is depicted and labeled on the Jerome map of
Palestine,[1165] and the pepper forests of India are indicated on the
Jerome map of the East.[1166]

Among the works of man cities and buildings take a foremost place,
represented by vignettes of castles, towers, and churches. On several
maps[1167] especially notable works are depicted, as the lighthouse of
Alexandria, the tower of Babel, the columns of Alexander and Hercules;
and the seas are sometimes filled with ships. As to men themselves, the
legends give the names of cities, provinces, and countries. The Jerome
maps[1168] give a series of tribal names in Scythia. Adam and Eve with
the serpent were stereotyped features enlivening the East on many but by
no means all the maps of our age; and on the Osma Beatus[1169] we see
the uniformly gloomy features of the twelve apostles distributed over
the earth’s surface (see Fig. 4, p. 123, above).

The monsters of India were also represented by vignettes of a _skiapod_,
or shadowfoot, on two of the Beatus group,[1170] where this
uncomfortable creature is shown as the most prominent inhabitant of the
austral continent (see Fig. 4) and the existence of other monsters is
hinted at by legends referring to griffons, cynocephali, and the like.


                               _SUMMARY_

In surveying the extant maps of our period as a whole, and in comparing
them with one another, it is impossible to detect any appreciable
development from worse cartography to better. To be sure, Matthew Paris’
three maps of Britain[1171] (Fig. 9, p. 343, below), made at the very
end of our century and a half, are probably also the best. But they
represent a limited area; and among the maps of the world the “Cotton,”
or Anglo-Saxon,[1172] which possibly dates from the twelfth century but
may be very much older, holds by all odds the highest rank so far as
cartographic excellence goes. The complex and elaborate wall map of the
late thirteenth century in Hereford Cathedral[1173] and the immense
Ebstorf map at Hanover (dated 1284)[1174] represent the culmination of a
process in the direction of increasing elaboration that had been in
progress throughout the age. They do not indicate any improvement in
cartographic standards but rather, as was the case with some of the
great works of compilation of the time, a multiplication of fabulous and
incongruous detail. Beazley dismisses them rather summarily as
monstrosities. They are the cartographic counterparts of the _Image du
monde_ and the _Livre du trésor_ of Brunetto Latino.




                              CHAPTER XII
                           REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY


We shall not attempt the thankless and impossible task of giving a
complete conspectus of Western regional lore in the twelfth and early
thirteenth centuries. This chapter, like its predecessors, consists
largely of illustrative examples.


        _GENERAL CHARACTER OF REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PERIOD_


          GEOGRAPHY OF TRADITION AND GEOGRAPHY OF OBSERVATION

We explained in the Introduction that there were two kinds of
geographical information available in the Middle Ages—information
derived from earlier literature and information derived from
contemporary tradition and observation. In the period we are studying,
these were found among men of very different interests and activities,
and hence they usually failed to blend. It is true that now and then in
a work of erudition of the time we come across a report of some original
observation made by the writer himself or learned by him from a
contemporary; but these data were seldom really assimilated into the
body of the text, seldom used as a check on the assertions of older
authorities. They seem to float like drops of oil on the deep, or
shallow, waters of authoritative learning. Conversely, in works
recording contemporary events—histories, chronicles, letters—we often
come across facts and theories that were taken from older books; but
these were infrequently subjected to critical examination in the light
of contemporary knowledge. On the contrary, they were usually treated
with indulgence or respect merely because they were old, even when
observed phenomena seemed to prove them false.

In the present as in the foregoing parts of this book the attempt is
made to distinguish between these two distinct types of geographical
lore. For many regions the geographical ideas are indicated that were
derived from Pliny, Solinus, Isidore, Bede, and other encyclopedists and
that found expression in treatises like the _De imagine mundi_, the
_Otia imperialia_, and the _Image du monde_. In contrast to these there
is set forth the kind of information that was being gathered by
contemporary eyewitnesses.


                  GRADATIONS OF ACCURACY OF KNOWLEDGE

Maps are sometimes drawn at the present day to show the state of
progress of geographical knowledge. Upon these by various tints or
shadings are indicated tracts that are accurately surveyed, partially
surveyed, known only through route traverses, known only through reports
from natives, or totally unknown. No such map could be constructed to
show the character of regional knowledge in the Middle Ages, because our
sources of information are not sufficiently complete and because the
knowledge both actually and potentially available varied from country to
country, from community to community, even from individual to
individual. The printing press and facility of communication between the
peoples of the world has rendered scientific knowledge or, at any rate,
the possibility of obtaining scientific knowledge the common property of
all modern civilizations. An Australian student, for instance, if he is
willing to take the time and trouble, can learn through research
virtually all that is known to Danish or Icelandic scholars about the
geography of Greenland. In the Middle Ages, on the contrary, we may feel
certain that the Danes and Norwegians had at hand much detailed
information on Greenland and the Arctic shores of Europe that the
Italian had no means whatever of obtaining. Correspondingly, the Italian
trader of Genoa or Venice unquestionably knew a great deal about remote
parts of Asia and North Africa that could never reach the ears of an
author of a _De imagine mundi_ or of a Lambert of St. Omer, writing in
quiet cloisters of France or Belgium.

Yet if, for these reasons, we cannot show on a map the gradations in the
character and accuracy of Western geographical knowledge in the age of
the Crusades, such gradations nevertheless existed. From the point of
view of Western Europe as a whole they might be grouped in a broad way
as follows. First there were the well-known regions about which
knowledge was derived and kept fresh through active commercial,
diplomatic, ecclesiastical, military, and scholarly enterprise. These
regions may be said to have included most of Europe west of the Elbe and
Hungary. They also included the overland routes to Constantinople, the
shores of the Mediterranean, and the Holy Land. From the point of view
of the Scandinavian peoples, who were great travelers, they took in not
only the foregoing regions but also the Baltic coasts, southern Norway
and Sweden, and Iceland. Beyond the bounds of the well-known areas lay a
second group of areas about which a fair amount of reasonably
trustworthy information was at hand, derived from one of three sources:
(1) reports of occasional travelers; (2) more or less reliable hearsay;
(3) classical descriptions drawn from literary sources. Much of Western
Asia and North Africa fell within this category and, for the
Scandinavians, Greenland. Beyond lay the third group of regions known
only through the vaguest of rumors—the domains of fabulous monsters and
legendary men. To some writers India was such a land, to others Russia
and northern Scandinavia, to still others the legendary isles that lay
concealed in the Western Ocean. Finally, beyond them came those regions
lying without the known world, about which the men of the Middle Ages
themselves would have acknowledged that they knew nothing: the austral
continent, the countries of the antipodeans, _antoikoi_, _antichthones_,
which have been discussed in an earlier chapter. No boundaries could be
drawn setting off these various tracts from one another; the well-known
shaded off imperceptibly into the less well-known, and the vaguely known
merged into fairyland; within each well-known tract were islands of
doubt and mystery, and fabulous stories were told of even the most
commonplace features of the landscape.


                      _THE “OIKOUMENE” AS A WHOLE_

Before turning to the various regions of the known world—the
_oikoumene_, as the Greeks called it; the _orbis terrarum_ or
_habitatio_ of the Romans—something must be said concerning theories
about the _oikoumene_ as a whole, about its center, and about Paradise
and the four rivers of Paradise. It was usually supposed that the
_oikoumene_ itself occupies a relatively restricted part of the surface
of the globe. The words of Seneca to the effect that there is only a
short distance from Spain to India imply that the known world must
stretch out over much more than a half of the circumference of the
sphere.[1175] Though these words were often read in our period, scant
attention was paid either to them or to the Arabic interpretation of
Aristotle’s similar theory until a later date. Roger Bacon’s specific
explanation that the _habitatio_ extends around much more than half the
earth’s circumference represents an opinion that was exceptional.[1176]
The majority of the thinkers of the twelfth and early thirteenth
centuries who speculated on the subject at all were probably under the
spell of the theory fostered by Macrobius, which made our habitable
portion of the earth one of four similar regions separated from each
other by two oceans.[1177] This undoubtedly was the view most widely
accepted, but in addition the idea was perhaps already being propounded
early in the twelfth century that the lands of the known world form
merely a small portion of the surface of the terrestrial sphere emerging
above the surface of a larger, enveloping sphere of water.[1178]


                THE “OIKOUMENE” DIVIDED INTO THREE PARTS

The writers of the Crusading age were unanimous in dividing the
_oikoumene_ itself into three parts, Asia, Libya (or Africa), and
Europe. Bernard Sylvester said: “In two parts the ether, and likewise in
two parts the air, but in three parts you are to understand that the
land is divided,”[1179] almost as if a tripartite division of the lands
were in accord with a law of nature. This division was inevitable in
view of what was known of the arrangement of lands and seas.
Orosius,[1180] however, had spoken of certain writers who would split
the known world in two, making Africa a part of Europe “because of its
small size” and making Asia as large as Africa and Europe together.
Those who had preferred to conceive of Africa as a separate continent,
he had said, did so not on account of its size but because it is cut off
from Europe by an arm of the sea. These words of Orosius were quoted by
Otto of Freising[1181] and by Gervase of Tilbury.[1182] The theory that
Asia is equal in size to Europe and Africa put together is reproduced by
the author of the _De situ terrarum_,[1183] and upon it was based that
symmetrical division of the world’s surface which we find depicted on
the so-called T-O maps of the early Middle Ages.[1184]

Isidore of Seville drew largely from Orosius in writing his chapters on
geography. Theoretically he accepted the tripartite division,[1185] but
in his actual treatment of the countries of the world he appended a
discussion of islands to his discussion of the continents. In this he
was followed by the author of the _De imagine mundi_ and by many other
writers of the time,[1186] all of whom declared that the earth’s surface
is divided in three, but added chapters on the islands after their
descriptions of Asia, Africa, and Europe.


                    _THE CENTER OF THE “OIKOUMENE”_


                        JERUSALEM AS THE CENTER

During the Middle Ages the idea that Jerusalem is at the center of the
_oikoumene_ seems gradually to have gained ground. Arculf, a bishop of
an unknown see in Gaul and pilgrim to the Holy Land, so described it as
early as the close of the seventh century;[1187] but the tradition does
not appear to have become established in the cartography of the West
until the twelfth or even the thirteenth century.[1188] To place
Jerusalem at the center was to recognize the preëminence given that city
in Scripture, not only in the New but also in the Old Testament.[1189]
It is natural for primitive peoples to think that the most holy of all
places occupies a central position:[1190] the Greeks believed that
either Delphi or Olympus was the navel of the earth;[1191] the
Scandinavians thought the same was true of Asgard; the Hindus, of Mount
Meru; the Babylonians, of Nippur.[1192] Gervase of Tilbury argues in a
confused, semi-theological manner on the position of Jerusalem:[1193]
Augustus, he believed, had thought that Judea was the heart of the earth
because that Emperor had begun a survey of the provinces of the empire
there; in addition, from texts of the Bible Gervase attempted to
demonstrate that Jerusalem is halfway between the North and the South,
that by “antithesis” it must be halfway between the East and the West,
and consequently must be at the center of the known world.


                THE EXACT POSITION OF THE EARTH’S CENTER

There seems to have existed in the minds of writers some confusion as to
the exact spot that marks the navel of the earth. A map of the year 1110
identifies it with Mount Zion.[1194] The pilgrim Saewulf, who was in the
Holy Land in 1102 and 1103, says:[1195] “At the head of the Church of
the Holy Sepulchre, in the wall outside, not far from the place called
Calvary, is the place called Compas, which our Lord Jesus Christ himself
signified and measured with his own hand as the middle of the world,
according to the words of the Psalmist, ‘For God is my king of old,
working salvation in the midst of the earth.’ But some say that this is
the place where our Lord Jesus Christ first appeared to Mary Magdalene,
while she sought him weeping and thought he had been a gardener, as is
related in the Gospels” (Thomas Wright’s translation).[1196]

In certain astronomical notes of the early twelfth century an anonymous
writer (possibly Adelard of Bath) asserts that Mount “Amor reorum” is
the center of the earth and that he proved this to be the case by
experiment.[1197] It would seem that upon this mountain (possibly Mount
Moriah) he hung a log, twelve cubits long by three in diameter,
suspending it vertically in the air by means of a rope, and that at the
time of the summer solstice he observed that the shadow of the log was
directly beneath and circular in shape. This, he asserted, showed that
Mount “Amor reorum” was the center of the earth. To clinch the veracity
of his observation, he added that he had not been drinking wine and that
his eyes were not satiated with sleep. Although the sun is not directly
overhead at the summer solstice in Palestine, the same idea reappears in
the _Otia imperialia_ of Gervase of Tilbury.[1198] Gervase seems to
favor, as the center of the earth, the well where Christ spoke to the
Samaritan woman.[1199] He adds that this well has the characteristic
that philosophers attribute to wells on the Tropic of Cancer at Syene in
Africa, that is to say, that the sun shines directly into it at the
summer solstice every year.


                       _THE TERRESTRIAL PARADISE_


                          PARADISE IN THE EAST

Most medieval maps include in the eastern part of the world a picture of
the Terrestrial Paradise,[1200] surrounded by a high wall or mountain
range and containing within it figures of Adam and Eve and the
serpent[1201] (see above, Fig. 2, p. 69). “The first place in the East
is Paradise, a garden famous for its delights, where man can never go,
for a fiery wall surrounds it and reaches to the sky. Here is the tree
of life which gives immortality, here the fountain which divides into
four streams that go forth and water the world.”[1202] “Around Paradise
extends a savage, trackless waste, infested with wild beasts and
serpents.”[1203]

This was the orthodox medieval view, to be found in Peter Abelard’s
commentary on the Works of the Six Days,[1204] in the _De situ
terrarum_,[1205] and in the _Image du monde_.[1206] Gervase of Tilbury
copies it word for word from the _De imagine mundi_[1207] but gives
additional details in another connection,[1208]where he tells us that
Paradise was the seat of the first of the four universal monarchies,
that of Adam; that it was so called because of its delights, for
“delight” is the meaning of the word “Eden,” and that the Garden makes a
spot of marvelous deliciousness, separated from our inhabited earth by a
long tract of land and sea and elevated so high that it reaches the
sphere of the moon, so high that the waters of the Deluge failed to
disturb it.[1209] Peter Lombard explained why it is thought that
Paradise is in the East:[1210] Scripture, he said, teaches us that God
made man outside of Paradise and placed him ready-fashioned in the
Garden of Delights which had been planted by the divine power at the
beginning of time (_a principio_). In an old translation, Peter
explained, instead of this phrase, _a principio_, the words _ad
Orientem_ were given, and consequently the earlier translator would have
had us believe that Paradise was to be found in the eastern parts of the
earth. Peter added that a long stretch of land and sea cut Paradise off
from the regions inhabited by men and that it was situated on a height
touching the circle of the moon’s orbit, whence it came about that the
waters of the Deluge could not penetrate thither.

It was generally agreed that Paradise is in Asia,[1211] although this
was not a universal belief. Hermann the Dalmatian in 1143 asserted that
there was “no mean opinion” that Paradise lies beyond “Amphitrites,” the
ocean which encircles the earth from north to south, and that
indications of its presence had been found both to eastward and to
westward.[1212] Gervase said that it could be forcibly argued that the
Garden lies beyond the Torrid Zone and is inaccessible to man, though he
did not commit himself either for or against this theory.[1213] Robert
Grosseteste speaks of theologians who would place Paradise under the
equator.[1214] Otto of Freising’s words[1215] also seem to imply
indirectly that the Garden is not in Asia, for Otto tells us that
Alexander the Great conquered the entire Orient from Scythia to the ends
of the earth. The same idea may be gathered from the _De situ
terrarum_,[1216] which places the Seres and not Paradise in the farthest
East, and also from the cycle of romances of Alexander, which relate how
the Macedonian hero conquered all those Oriental regions where Paradise
was usually supposed to be. The _mappaemundi_ of Henry of Mayence[1217]
and of Lambert of St. Omer[1218] place Paradise on an island beyond the
easternmost limits of the habitable world; but St. Brandan found the
Saint’s Land of Promise (probably no other than Paradise) far out in the
Western Ocean.[1219] As a matter of fact there was no uniformity of
opinion regarding the geographical position of the Happy Land: St.
Augustine, whose works were read during our period, had even gone so far
as to state that Paradise had no real existence at all but was merely an
allegorical conception.[1220] A child is not worried about the latitude
and longitude of fairyland, and the average man of the Middle Ages was
just as little worried about the exact whereabouts of the Garden of
Eden.

Nevertheless, in one version of the Romance of Alexander a logical
outcome of the conqueror’s travels in the Far East was recognized. In
the _Iter ad Paradisum_[1221] Alexander is actually brought to the gates
of Paradise. When he had subjugated India he came to a broad river which
he understood to be the Ganges; embarking with five hundred men on a
ship that happened to be at hand, he arrived at the end of a month
before an immense city surrounded by a wall on all sides. Here, after
various adventures, he learned from a Jew that this city was the place
where the souls of the just were sojourning until the Last Judgment or,
in other words, that it was the Terrestrial Paradise.


                          JOURNEYS TO PARADISE

The _Iter ad Paradisum_ and the various versions of the legend of St.
Brandan’s voyage are examples of a type of story very common in the
Middle Ages, the story of actual journeys to Paradise by mortal
men.[1222] Among these we should include the account of the visit there
of Adam’s son, Seth, who brought back seeds from the tree of knowledge
which were planted in Adam’s mouth after the latter’s death; the seeds
ultimately sprouted into a great tree, the wood of which was used to
make Christ’s cross.[1223] Tales were told of the sojourns of pious
monks in Paradise and of how on their return to the homes of men they
found that what had seemed only three days in the Garden of Delights was
in reality a period of three hundred years. Godfrey of Viterbo in his
_Pantheon_[1224] relates a tale of a hundred brothers who, like St.
Brandan, made widespread explorations in the ocean before coming to
Paradise, a golden mountain redolent with wonderful odors and adorned
with an image of the Virgin and Child. Another story, dating from an
earlier time but undoubtedly well known during our period, was that of
the fabulous St. Macarius.[1225] Three brothers from a convent between
the Tigris and Euphrates set out to find the place where “the earth
joins the sky.” After crossing Persia they entered India—a land of
wonders, of cynocephali and of pygmies, of serpents and of darkness.
Here they came upon the altars set up by Alexander the Great to mark the
limits of his wanderings,[1226] and beyond them reached miraculous
countries filled with giants and birds that talked. At last, about
twenty miles from the Terrestrial Paradise, they found Macarius, a man
of hoary age, dwelling in a cave on friendly terms with two lions.
Macarius told them a romantic story, in the course of which he described
the wonders of Paradise but, alas, emphasized the fact that this
long-sought-for garden was absolutely inaccessible to human beings.


                         THE RIVERS OF PARADISE

The account of the four rivers of Paradise, like other passages in
Scripture, was interpreted both allegorically and literally. In the
religious art of our period these streams were often depicted in stone,
glass, or miniature as symbolizing the four evangelists spreading the
gospel throughout the world.[1227] Neckam, after mentioning Paradise and
the rivers, goes on to explain that, just as the world is watered by the
four streams, so “by the gift of the Holy Ghost the garden of the Holy
Church is irrigated by the four virtues, Justice, Temperance, Fortitude,
and Prudence.”[1228] Literal interpretation of the passage, on the other
hand, would present difficulties to the modern hydrographer, but these
difficulties were easily overcome in the Middle Ages by appeal to the
familiar theory of subterranean watercourses.[1229]

The author of the _De imagine mundi_,[1230] copying from Isidore,[1231]
makes the four rivers disappear into the ground, whence they spring
forth in lands far distant; and some of the maps of our period represent
all four rivers as rising from a central source within the Garden and
vanishing into the earth at its walls or not far beyond. The Psalter
map,[1232] on the other hand, shows no less than five rivers issuing
from an aperture leading out of Paradise and spreading out like a fan
over the interior of Asia. Abelard[1233] explains carefully that if we
interpret the Bible correctly there can be but one river within
Paradise, that this divides into four outside of the Garden, and that
the names given to each of the four are applied to those parts only
“which flow from their sources to the sea.” We may assume that he refers
here to the portions of the rivers between points where they issue from
their subterranean passages and their mouths. Some writers would seem to
imply, Abelard continues, that we cannot take literally the words of the
Bible because the sources of some of the four streams are known and
those of others are not. But, he asks, may not those streams, whose
sources are supposedly known, in reality arise elsewhere far away and
pass through numerous countries before issuing forth to the knowledge of
mankind? There is no question but that this is the case with many
streams, as is shown, he adds, by the statement in Boethius’ _De
consolatione philosophiae_ (a famous work of the sixth century much read
throughout the Middle Ages) that “the Tigris and the Euphrates spring
from one source.”

One version of the legend of Prester John informs us that the four
rivers of Paradise all arise in a spring in the mountains of India and
water the two Indias.[1234] Like most rivers of Prester John’s realm,
they give forth quantities of gold and precious stones at regular
intervals three times a year.

Discussion of the individual characteristics of each of the four rivers
falls more logically with the treatment of the ideas concerning the
countries through which they flow and will be reserved until later. In
most of the geographical works of our period, however, the rivers
receive special consideration immediately after the remarks on Paradise
and before the description of the regions of Asia. Their unusual origin
and character, as described in Scripture, entitled them to particular
distinction: they were holy streams to Jew and Christian alike. It is,
then, a peculiarly eloquent commentary on the paganism of Bernard
Sylvester to find that he mentions and describes the Euphrates, Tigris,
and Nile in his _De mundi universitate_[1235] without referring to
Paradise in connection with any of these three streams. To his thinking
they would seem to have occupied no higher or holier place among streams
than Tiber, Rhone, or Seine.


                                 _ASIA_

There are no more absorbing chapters in the history of geography than
those connected with the growth of European knowledge of Asia in
antiquity and during the Middle Ages [1236] and with its converse, the
growth of Oriental knowledge of the Occident.[1237] Of late years the
historical and archeological investigations of Albert von Le Coq, Sir
Aurel Stein, Edouard Chavannes, Paul Pelliot, and Albert Herrmann have
thrown a flood of light on the connections that existed in the earlier
medieval period between eastern and western Asia. While these early
connections may have brought some vague information regarding the Far
East to the Byzantine world, they probably exerted almost no influence
upon the conceptions of Asia prevalent in Western Europe before the
middle of the thirteenth century.


             THE OPENING OF ASIA IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY

Relations between the Far East and Far West, however, were profoundly
modified by certain events that took place during the first half of the
thirteenth century. As a result of these events, Farther Asia for the
first time in history was opened to Occidental travelers. Beginning with
the year 1245 no inconsiderable number of European missionaries and
traders made their way overland through the hitherto unknown heart of
the continent and penetrated to the mysterious region of Cathay (China)
at the ultimate point of the world. For somewhat more than a century the
veil of the Extreme Orient was drawn aside, but drawn aside only again
to be closed when the disruption of the Mongol empires and the rise of
the Ottoman Turks barred the overland routes. It remained for Portuguese
and Spanish seafarers of the great age of maritime exploration to
rediscover the Far East. The history of the earlier relations of eastern
and western Asia and of the opening of that continent in the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries, however, falls outside our province and cannot
be discussed in detail in the present volume. A few words, nevertheless,
must be said on this subject in order that the traditional geographical
lore of Asia in our period may be seen in its proper perspective.


                          THE MONGOL CONQUESTS

The events that led to the overland journeys sprang from the
establishment of what was probably the most extensive military empire
the world has ever known.[1238] Toward the end of the twelfth century,
Temujin, chief of a small tribe dwelling near the headwaters of the
Amur, consolidated his dominion over the neighboring Mongol peoples of
the steppes north and northwest of China. Proclaimed “Chinkkis Khan”
(Jenghiz Khan), or “Inflexible Emperor,” in 1206, he soon conquered
northern China and turned his hordes to the west; Turkestan was
subjugated, Persia was invaded, and in 1222–1224 a detachment overran
southern Russia in the course of a great whirlwind raid that completely
encircled the Caspian Sea. Jenghiz Khan died in 1227, but under his
successors the wave of conquest swept still farther westward. Toward the
close of the thirties the steppes of Russia were again overwhelmed, in
1240 Poland was devastated, and the Christian army of Henry of Silesia
was defeated in 1241 at Liegnitz, near Breslau. Meanwhile another Mongol
army was ravaging Hungary and had even driven the king of that country
to seek refuge in an island off the Dalmatian coast. Relief to the
stricken people of Central Europe came, however, in 1243 when news of
the death of the Great Khan caused the invaders to withdraw to the
plains of Russia, there to maintain their hold for many centuries to
come.

These visitations of the Tatars, as the Mongols were called, took Europe
unaware. “Barely a rumour” of the invasion of Russia in 1222 had
“reached western Europe,” writes Rockhill,[1239] “and contemporary
writers have left us but few brief references to it.” The first full
description of the Tatars is given in Matthew Paris’ _Chronica
maiora_[1240] for the date 1240, the following extracts of which, as
translated by Rockhill, are worth quoting: “That the joys of mortal men
be not enduring, nor worldly happiness long lasting without
lamentations, in this same year (i.e. 1240) a detestable nation of
Satan, to wit, the countless army of the Tartars, broke loose from its
mountain-environed home, and piercing the solid rocks (of the Caucasus),
poured forth like devils from the Tartarus, so that they are rightly
called Tartari or Tartarians. Swarming like locusts over the face of the
earth, they have brought terrible devastation to the eastern parts (of
Europe), laying it waste with fire and carnage.... They are inhuman and
beastly, rather monsters than men, thirsting for and drinking blood,
tearing and devouring the flesh of dogs and men, dressed in ox-hides,
armed with plates of iron, short and stout, thickset, strong,
invincible, indefatigable, their backs unprotected, their breasts
covered with armour.... They are without human laws, know no comforts,
are more ferocious than lions or bears, have boats made of ox-hides,
which ten or twelve of them own in common: they are able to swim or to
manage a boat, so that they can cross the largest and swiftest rivers
without let or hindrance, drinking turbid or muddy water when blood
fails them (as beverage).... They know no other language than their own,
which no one else knows; for until now there has been no access to them,
nor did they go forth (from their own country); ... They wander about
with their flocks and their wives, who are taught to fight like men....
It is believed that these Tartars, of cursed memory, are of the ten
tribes who, having forsaken the Mosaic law, followed after the golden
calves, and whom Alexander the Macedonian endeavoured at first to shut
up in the rugged mountains of the Caspians with bitumen-covered
rocks.[1241] When he saw that the undertaking exceeded the power of man,
he invoked the might of the God of Israel, and the tops of the mountains
came together, and an inaccessible and impassable place was made.... It
is written in sacred history that they shall come out toward the end of
the world, and shall make a great slaughter of men. There arises,
however, a doubt whether the Tartars now coming from there be really
they, for they do not use the Hebrew tongue, neither do they know the
laws of Moses, nor have they laws, nor are they governed by them....”

Despite the impression of extreme ferocity reflected in this passage,
after the warlike ardor of conquest had somewhat subsided, the Mongols
showed themselves not intolerant in their attitude toward strangers and
not unreceptive of foreign influence. The immediate result of their
withdrawal from Hungary to Russia and the consequent removal of the
direct menace to Central Europe was the dispatch of Christian
ecclesiastics as ambassadors to the Mongol lords. Rumors had come to
Europe that these nomads from the Far East were monotheists, and hope
sprang up that they might be converted to Roman Catholic Christianity
and used to offset the reviving Moslem power menacing the Christian
states of the Holy Land.[1242] The origin of the rumors which gave rise
to this elusive hope is to be sought in the fact that the Nestorian form
of Christianity had been firmly established among some of the Mongol
tribes north of the Great Wall of China and was represented even in
their ruling dynasty. Furthermore, these rumors seemed to confirm and be
confirmed by the reports that had been in circulation since the twelfth
century of the existence of a great Christian kingdom of Prester John in
the remote interior of Asia.[1243]


                      THIRTEENTH-CENTURY JOURNEYS

The journeys of the diplomatic missions sent out by Pope Innocent IV and
by Louis IX, King of France, in 1245 and the years immediately following
have often been described.[1244] The Pope’s envoy, John of Pian de
Carpine,[1245] and Louis’ representative, William of Rubruck,[1246]
reached the Mongol capital at Karakorum, near Lake Baikal, and on their
return wrote graphic narratives of their journeys, which have been
preserved and which give full account of the Tatars and their customs.
Many of the observations made by John of Pian de Carpine and by Simon of
St. Quentin (who took part in an expedition under Friar Ascelin, or
Anselm, sent by the Pope to a Mongol ruler in Persia in 1247) are
included in the _Speculum historiale_ of Vincent of Beauvais.[1247] The
geographical information acquired by Rubruck, although it was ignored by
other writers of the period, found its way to Roger Bacon, who
incorporated much of it in the _Opus majus_.[1248]

The way shown by Pian de Carpine and Rubruck was soon followed by Nicolo
and Maffeo Polo, whose incentive was commercial, and by their far more
famous son and nephew, Marco.[1249] Marco Polo’s amazing wanderings were
succeeded by the journeys of others, among them the wonderful missionary
enterprises of John of Monte Corvino, Riccold of Monte Croce, and
Orderic of Pordenone. The story of these and other travels of the
period,[1250] fascinatingly told in the third volume of Beazley’s _Dawn
of Modern Geography_, falls far beyond the limits of our subject.
Suffice it to remark, however, that the wanderings of the adventurous
traders and friars were generally forgotten in the West during the
centuries that followed and were largely ignored, even in the literature
of the time itself. Marco Polo was branded as an impostor, and the
traditional lore of eastern Asia that had come down from the days of the
Roman Empire, together with its accretions of legend and romance, was
held to be more worthy of credence than the observations of
eyewitnesses. We must now turn to this traditional lore as expressed in
the writings of the time of the Crusades.


                   THE GREAT MOUNTAIN SYSTEM OF ASIA

Asia, the author of the _De imagine mundi_[1251] tells us, quoting from
Isidore,[1252] derived its name from a queen of that name.

The great system of mountains which runs eastward through the heart of
the continent—the Caucasus, the ranges of northern Persia, the Hindu
Kush, the Himalayas—was well known to the Greek geographers, and the men
of our time had acquired some hazy notions about it through reading
Orosius and Isidore.[1253] Gervase of Tilbury,[1254] copying
Orosius,[1255] tells how the Caucasus, joined by the “Imabus” (Imaus),
divides India from Scythia and extends the entire length of Asia as far
east as the Seric Ocean, though bearing different names in its eastern
parts. Several of the maps show a straight range of mountains running
east and west across the continent and labeled with various names
(Taurus, Caucasus, Ceraunius, Paropamisus).[1256] The Jerome map[1257]
reveals, on the other hand, many mountains in Asia but does not make
them continuous.

According to the _De imagine mundi_, the Caucasus divides the countries
of southern from those of northern Asia. Among the former were India,
Parthia, Mesopotamia, and Palestine, reaching in a straight line from
the Far East to the Mediterranean.[1258] Egypt, which was regarded as
belonging to Asia by the Greek geographers and by Isidore, was held to
adjoin Palestine on the west, and to be part of this southern tier of
countries. North of the Caucasus were the lands of the Seres, Bactria,
Hyrcania, and Scythia, in the east, and in western Asia, Armenia, the
country of Mount Ararat, Cappadocia (“where mares conceive through the
wind alone and give birth to foals that live only three years”), and
finally Asia Minor, almost completely surrounded by the sea.[1259]


                        THE LAND OF THE “SERES”

At the eastern end of Asia, Gervase, following the Roman geographers,
had placed the Seres on the shores of an ocean named after them.[1260]
“Seres” was a classical designation of the people of China in so far as
that country was the terminus of the overland route toward the Far East
described by Pliny and Ptolemy. Beyond vast solitudes, the former had
said,[1261] you come to this remote land, where the people comb silk
from the trees; though they carry on an extensive trade in this
commodity, they avoid all personal dealings with strangers (whose
commercial morality must have been high) by leaving the silk on the
banks of streams to be picked up by those who wish to procure it.
Solinus [1262] copied Pliny’s account, but Isidore,[1263] followed by
the author of the _De imagine mundi_,[1264] gives us less detail, merely
stating that Seres is a city of the East, from which were named the
Seric region, the people, and a kind of cloth. Pausanias first among
classical writers had understood that silk comes from a worm. The silk
manufacture was introduced into the Byzantine Empire in 552 A. D., and
it may well be from Byzantine sources that there originated the more or
less correct understanding of its production revealed in the _Letter of
Prester John_,[1265] where we are informed that the salamander is a worm
which makes a sort of capsule (_pellicula_) around him, “as do the other
worms that make silk.”


                                 CHINA

If the land of the Seres lay at the end of the overland route eastward,
the sea route ended, according to the _Periplus of the Erythraean Sea_,
at the land of “Thin” (China), and according to Ptolemy’s _Geography_ at
the country of the “Sinae.”[1266] Here we have the first use in the West
of the word “China,” knowledge of which had probably reached the
Occident through Arabic channels, though not until the sixteenth century
was it recognized that the land of the “Seres” (Cathay) and “China” were
the same.[1267] An indication of the Ptolemaic “Sinae” is found in Plato
of Tivoli’s translation of Al-Battānī’s _Astronomy_:[1268] here a branch
of the Indian Ocean is described as reaching to the furthest point of
India where lies “Thiema” (China).

Benjamin of Tudela also speaks of the country of “Zin,” or China, in the
uttermost East near the reputed Sea of Nikpa, where violent and stormy
winds blow—possibly the typhoons of Far Eastern waters. Ships carried
into this sea by the winds stick fast there; their supplies of food give
out, and the crews often die of starvation. In order to avoid this fate,
some of the men, armed with knives, throw themselves into the sea and
are carried to shore in the talons of an enormous bird, the griffon. By
slaying the griffon with their knives they are able to escape.[1269]
This story reminds us, on the one hand, of Western reports of the
congealed sea[1270] and, on the other, of Arabic tales of the Rukh,
which reappear in Marco Polo’s travels.[1271]


                                 INDIA


                             _Subdivisions_

More abundant and somewhat more accurate information was to be had
regarding India. This name was applied loosely to cover all of Farther
Asia: the anonymous report of the visit of the Patriarch John of India
to Rome in 1122 calls India the ultimate border of the world. The
Pseudo-Abdias[1272] had quoted “certain historiographers” as asserting
that there are three Indias, the first facing Ethiopia, the second
facing the country of the Medes, and the third occupying the end of the
earth, with the realm of darkness on one side and the ocean on the
other. The threefold division of India was found on many of the
maps.[1273] It was adopted by Ordericus Vitalis in his _Historia
ecclesiastica_.[1274] It undoubtedly inspired the declaration in the
_Letter of Prester John_[1275] that that potentate rules over the “three
Indias,” and probably with it in mind Gervase of Tilbury[1276] spoke of
“India superior,” where St. Bartholomew, “India inferior,” where St.
Thomas, and “India meridiana,” where St. Matthew preached. On the other
hand, there is evidence of a twofold division of India in the
_Elysaeus_[1277] account of Prester John’s kingdom. The broad and loose
medieval usage of the term “India” is especially well shown in the
_Image du monde_, where it comprises not only what we now know as
Hindustan but also Persia.[1278]

Limiting ourselves to the narrower definition of India, the tract
between the Himalayas and the ocean, let us see what was believed to
exist there.


                       _Facts Known About India_

A few facts were known, many half-facts, and a great many more fables.
This knowledge and misinformation was based to a very large extent on
classical authority, for little new had been learned about these parts
of the world since the days of Pliny. First let us examine the facts and
half-facts.[1279] It was known that much of India lies beyond the tropic
so that the shadows fall south in summer and north in winter. It was
known that a giant range of mountains encloses India on the north, and
perhaps there was a hint of familiarity with the Himalayan forests in
the old story of trees so lofty that they touch the skies. It was
likewise known that the Ganges takes its rise in the mountains to the
north and is joined by many streams. According to Isidore, who was
followed by the _De imagine mundi_, Peter Abelard, Gervase of Tilbury,
Peter Comestor, and a host of other plagiarizers,[1280] the Ganges is no
other than the Pison, one of the rivers of Paradise, which springs from
Mount Orcobares and flows eastward to the ocean. Peter Comestor
explains[1281] that “Phison” may mean “flock,” because ten rivers join
to make this stream,[1282] an interpretation in which we see perhaps a
reflection of the true characteristics of the great stream of India, so
strikingly different from the other three “rivers of Paradise” by reason
of its multitude of tributaries. The same idea, or possibly even a
suggestion of the Ganges delta with its many outlets, is found in the
_Letter of Prester John_[1283] where the river Ydonus is mentioned as
one of the streams of Paradise, flowing across a pagan province of the
realm of the great Christian potentate and spreading its branches
throughout the entire area. The “Ydonus” doubtless means the Pison, or
Ganges. It was also known in the time we are studying that there are
other mighty rivers of India, among them the Indus, sweeping into the
ocean.[1284] Likewise it was appreciated that India supports an immense
population and enormous riches; that many of the people are
Brahmins—though little enough was understood about their religion; and
that some of them practiced the custom of suttee, which prescribed that
wives burn themselves on the funeral pyres of their husbands.

Benjamin of Tudela acquired (probably in Mesopotamia) some information
about Khulam, or Quilon, a great medieval seaport on the Malabar coast.
He comments briefly on the honesty and dark complexions of the natives,
the intense heat of the summer, the practices connected with the
cultivation of pepper, the customs of embalming the dead, and the
superstitions of sun worship.[1285]


                           _Marvels of India_

But India was above all else a land of marvels (Fig. 8). Here were
pygmies who fight with storks and giants who combat with griffons; here
were “gymnosophists” who contemplate the sun all day, standing in the
hot rays first on one leg and then on the other; here were men with feet
turned backward and eight toes on each foot; _cynocephali_, or men with
dogs’ heads and claws, who bark and snarl; people whose women give birth
to but one child and that one with white hair; races whose hair is white
in youth but turns dark with age; one-eyed men; people who shade
themselves from the sun by lying on their backs and holding up a single
huge foot (_skiapodes_); persons who live on the smell of food alone;
headless men with eyes in their stomachs; forest peoples with hairy
bodies, dogs’ teeth, and terrific voices; and a variety of horrible
non-human monsters combining the parts of several animals.[1286]

These marvels and more still are related by nearly all the Western
writers of our period who concern themselves with India and the Orient.
They originated, as we have seen, early in classical times. Collected by
Ctesias,[1287] Pliny, Solinus and others, they were passed on to our
age, when we find them faithfully retold by the author of the _De
imagine mundi_, by Gervase of Tilbury, by Rudolf of Hohen-Ems,[1288] and
in the _Image du monde_. They made their way into the Romance of
Alexander as exemplified by the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_ and the _Letter
from Alexander to Aristotle_. In short, the “marvels of India” were a
stock feature of medieval geography.[1289] They figure on maps and in
miniatures and even in architectural sculpture—a _skiapod_ helps adorn
the façade of Sens cathedral.

Two mythological personages and one historical character, the story of
whose exploits became mythological in the Middle Ages, were supposed to
have visited India. These were Bacchus (Liber Pater), Hercules, and
Alexander the Great. The Altar of Liber and the Column of Hercules are
shown on the Psalter map in the region between the Red Sea and
Paradise.[1290] On the Jerome map of Palestine two columns mark the
ultimate limits of the journeys of Alexander and of Hercules.[1291] _The
Letter of Alexander to Aristotle_ mentions the miraculous trees of the
sun and moon, which spoke oracular words to the Macedonian conqueror and
figured widely in the medieval geography of the Far East, appearing
prominently on many of the maps.[1292]


                    _Legend of St. Thomas in India_

Though classical antiquity was the main source of medieval knowledge and
fancy concerning India, it was not the only source. The mysterious
Ophir, whence came the gold and jewels of Solomon, was placed in India
on the Lambert map [1293] and on the Jerome map of the world.[1294]
There also early came into existence a well-rooted idea that this
country was the home of a large and flourishing Christian colony. The
origins of the latter belief are to be found in reports which had
filtered through to Europe at an early date of St. Thomas the Apostle’s
preaching of the gospel in India and of the existence of Nestorian
Christianity in southern Hindustan.[1295] The story of St. Thomas
contains some elements of geographical interest.[1296] Christ was said
to have sold Thomas to the merchant Habban in order that he might be
taken to India to convert the people. Once arrived there by ship, having
landed at a port of Sandaruk, or Andrapolis, he succeeded in gaining for
the Christian religion the king, Gundophorus, and his brothers. The
saint built for the king a palace in heaven. According to the original
story, this palace was not a real structure but merely the symbol of a
heavenly habitation for the monarch. As the legend was subsequently
developed, St. Thomas was represented as an architect whom Gundophorus
summoned to his court to build an actual dwelling, and one of the
miracles by which the saint succeeded in converting the Indian potentate
to Christianity was his almost instantaneous construction of the palace.
The legend then proceeds to relate how St. Thomas was conducted by one
Siphorius to the kingdom of a certain Mazdeus, of his martyrdom at the
hands of the latter, and of the subsequent removal of his body to Edessa
in Syria.

[Illustration:

  FIG. 8—Two sections from the Hereford map to illustrate the marvels of
    India. (From the reproduction accompanying Miller, _Mappaemundi_,
    vol. iv, 1896.)

  In this first section are shown, among others, a _skiapod_, or
    sunshade-footed man (to the left), and _cynocephali_, or men with
    dogs’ heads.
]

[Illustration:

  FIG. 8 (second section)—In this section is shown a _mantichora_, or
    beast with a man’s head and a lion’s body.
]

The stories of St. Thomas and St. Bartholomew were often retold during
our period, notably, for instance, in the _Historia ecclesiastica_ of
Ordericus Vitalis.[1297] The Osma Beatus map[1298] shows heads
representing the twelve apostles in the various countries of the world;
that of St. Thomas is placed in India (see Fig. 4, p. 123, above). The
unknown writer of the _Letter of Prester John_ was undoubtedly familiar
with the legend of St. Thomas, because he makes Prester John’s palace
correspond exactly to the palace built by the saint.[1299] This legend
was a favorite subject for representation in the sculptures of
cathedrals and stained glass windows of the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries.[1300]


               _Visit of Patriarch John of India to Rome_

Belief in the existence of a large Christian population in Asia was
reënforced by an obscure event that took place in Rome in 1122. We have
an anonymous account[1301] of the visit of a certain Patriarch John of
India in that year and of the stupendous sensation which it created in
the Roman curia and throughout the whole of Italy. The narrator informs
us that in the course of countless ages no native was ever known to have
come from those distant and barbaric Oriental regions, nor had any one
ever before been seen in Italy who had actually been there.[1302] The
purpose of the patriarch’s visit to the West originally was to procure
at Byzantium the pallium and the confirmation of his office, which he
had recently assumed on the death of his predecessor. At Byzantium,
however, being told that Rome was in reality the capital of the
world,[1303] he proceeded thither along with some homeward-bound Roman
ambassadors and while in Rome gave a lecture about his native country
before the papal curia. The principal city, he said, was Hulna, on the
river Pison, one of the four rivers of Paradise; the city was of huge
size, surrounded by gigantic walls and inhabited by faithful Christians.
Outside the walls there was a mountain encircled by a very deep lake and
on the top of the mountain was situated the Church of St. Thomas.
Surrounding the lake were twelve monasteries erected in honor of the
twelve apostles. The Church of St. Thomas was inaccessible except once a
year, when the waters of the lake disappeared, allowing pilgrims to
approach. The Patriarch John then went on to explain in considerable
detail the marvels and miracles connected with the church.

We should be inclined—and justifiably—to reject the story of Patriarch
John’s visit as wholly fanciful, did it not seem to be confirmed by a
letter[1304] to a certain Count Thomas written by Odo, abbot of St. Remi
in Rheims (1118–1151), who happened to be in Rome at the time John was
there. The report of Odo about this event was probably not derived from
the anonymous account, from which it differs in several minor details.
Among other matters, according to Odo, John speaks of a river, not a
lake, surrounding the shrine of St. Thomas and of how its waters
diminished as a result of drought and became passable to a boy of seven
years during eight days before and eight days after the festival of the
apostle. The whole clergy and (Christian) people of India were said to
gather here on this occasion.

We shall see shortly that these stories contributed to the formation of
the curious medieval belief in the existence of a great Christian
kingdom in the heart of Asia. First, however, we must consider what
notions were current regarding the seas and islands to the south of
India and the vast tracts to the northward beyond the Himalayan barrier.


                              INDIAN OCEAN

A very brilliant feature on the maps of our period is the Red Sea,
almost invariably colored red. This name was given to the entire Indian
Ocean, and the red color was applied to the Persian Gulf as well as to
the “Arabian Gulf,” or Red Sea proper. The name “Indian Ocean” was also
occasionally used, as, for example, on the Jerome map of the East.[1305]

The Greeks had acquired some fairly correct information about the
northwestern shores of the Indian Ocean and had heard vague rumors of
the great peninsula and islands east and south of India: Malaya, Ceylon,
Sumatra. Confused reports of the geography of Taprobane, or Ceylon, are
found in classical works as far back as the time of the expedition of
Alexander. Pliny, Solinus, Ptolemy, and others described Taprobane in
some detail but exaggerated its dimensions to enormous proportions.
Pomponius Mela had spoken of the islands of Chryse, lying off the
eastern promontory of Asia, and Argyre, off the mouth of the Ganges.
Perhaps these represented some vague knowledge of the Andamans or
Nicobars or the Malay Peninsula; and certainly we recognize the
last-named in the Aurea Chersonesus of Ptolemy.


                     _Islands of the Indian Ocean_

Some relics of this classical knowledge of Indian seas and isles was
retained in the Middle Ages. Isidore[1306] had spoken of “Chrisa” and
“Argare” as full of gold and silver and perpetually blooming flowers,
with mountains of gold guarded by dragons and griffons. This account
found its way into the _De imagine mundi_[1307] and was copied by
Gervase of Tilbury;[1308] the islands themselves, together with the
“Island of the Sun” of Pliny, Mela, Solinus, and others, figured on many
contemporary maps.[1309] Orosius had said that in Taprobane there were
ten cities.[1310] Isidore, whom Gervase of Tilbury copied, added that
the dimensions of the island were 875 by 625 miles, that it has two
summers and two winters each year, and that the vegetation always
remains green.[1311] Solinus had described[1312] Taprobane as being
divided in two by a river; one half, he said, was full of wild beasts,
but the other was inhabited by men. This division of the island is
perpetuated on the Henry of Mayence,[1313] Jerome,[1314] Hereford,[1315]
and Ebstorf maps.[1316]


                    _Al-Battānī on the Indian Ocean_

The geographical chapter in Al-Battānī’s _Astronomy_, probably compiled
from a redaction of Ptolemy’s _Geography_ and translated by Plato of
Tivoli in our period, gave a description of the seas of the world.[1317]
The Indian Ocean, Al-Battānī said, extends from the land of the negroes
to the extreme limits of India, a distance of 8000 miles. Its width was
2200 miles, of which 1900 (Plato of Tivoli mistakenly translated this
3900) reach south of the equator. What lands lay beyond are not
specified. From this sea four gulfs run into the land: first the
Barbaric Sea, which extends into the “land of the negroes,” or Ethiopia,
and may be the Gulf of Aden or possibly even Mozambique Channel; second,
the Green Sea (Mare Viride), or our Red Sea, which reaches towards Hyla
(Ailah?); third, the Persian Gulf (Mare Persicum); and, fourth, a second
Green Sea, running out to the east towards China (“Thinae”) and
representing the Bay of Bengal or possibly the China Sea. In the Indian
Ocean there are some 1370 islands, among them a very large one called
“Tibiariae” (Taprobane), or Sarandib (Ceylon), opposite the eastern
coast of India, 3000 miles in circumference, full of great mountains and
rivers, quantities of rubies and hyacinths, and surrounded by fifty-nine
lesser isles. The traditional account of the many isles of the Indian
seas so persistent in Arabic literature arose unquestionably from
familiarity with the vast Malay Archipelago or at least with its western
portion. On the other hand, whether we may assume, as some have done,
that the exaggerated classical and Arabic estimates of the size of
Ceylon had their origin in rumors of the existence of Australia[1318] is
an obscure problem which we cannot attempt here to solve.


                        SCYTHIA AND CENTRAL ASIA

North of the mountain barrier enclosing India lay lands about which
Western medieval knowledge was equally vague. “Upper Scythia, stretching
from the Caspian Sea to the Seric Ocean and southward to the Caucasus,
includes much habitable land but also much that is sterile: gold and
gems abound there, but men avoid them on account of the griffons. Lower
Scythia adjoins Hyrcania, so called from the Hyrcanian Forest, where a
marvelous bird is found whose plumage glows in the dark. Iranea, or
Iran, is next to Scythia on the west: a region of nomads who wander
widely because of the sterility of the soil and who are horrible and
ferocious (_portentuosi ac truces_), eaters of human flesh and drinkers
of human blood.” In about these terms the author of the _De imagine
mundi_ and Gervase of Tilbury, borrowing from Isidore,[1319] summed up
very nearly all that was known of Central Asia before the great overland
journeys of the thirteenth century to which brief reference has already
been made.[1320] Several of the maps show large rivers—Araxes, Oxus,
Oscorus, and even Acheron, the stream of Tartarus—rising in the Caucasus
and flowing northward into the Caspian.[1321] The latter, in accordance
with the usual classical tradition, is represented as a gulf of the
encircling Ocean Stream.


                   BENJAMIN OF TUDELA ON CENTRAL ASIA

Benjamin of Tudela, who himself journeyed at least as far east as
Baghdad, had opportunities for gaining information about Central and
Northern Asia more favorable than those of his less traveled
contemporaries. Samarkand he mentions briefly as a “great city on the
confines of Persia” inhabited by 50,000 Jews. “Thence,” he adds, “it is
four days’ journey to Tibet, the country in whose forests the musk is
found” (Adler’s translation).[1322] He quotes the reports of Persian
Jews that four of the lost ten tribes of Israel dwell in the mountains
of Naisabur (in eastern Persia). These people were said to be
independent and to dwell in a broad tract of land twenty days’ journey
in extent, with cities and large villages among the mountains.[1323]
Others associated the lost tribes with the abhorrent hordes of Gog and
Magog.[1324] Benjamin goes on to tell us that these Jews were in league
with the “Kufar-al-Turak, who worship the wind and live in the
wilderness and who do not eat bread nor drink wine but live on raw,
uncooked meat. They have no noses, and in lieu thereof they have two
small holes through which they breathe” (Adler’s translation).[1325] He
relates the confused story of wars between these undeniably Turanian
tribes of the steppes of Turkestan and the “King of Persia” (the Seljuk
Sultan, Sanjar), events which perhaps gave rise to a legend that became
widespread in twelfth-century Europe and to which we must now turn.


                              PRESTER JOHN

The legend was the romantic story that in these far regions there lay a
vast and powerful Christian kingdom ruled by a mighty potentate, Prester
John. This tradition was the most important contribution of our period
to regional geography, for, false as it was, it long persisted, became
an integral part of late medieval geographical theory, and exerted in
subsequent centuries a powerful influence on the course of exploration.
The thirteenth-century Oriental travelers were constantly on the lookout
for Prester John’s kingdom and, when it finally became obvious that
there was no such kingdom in Asia, Prester John was transferred to
Africa, where he was sought for by the Portuguese navigators of the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. How did this strange legend come
into existence, and what did it contribute to Western notions of Asia?


                        _Origins of the Legend_

Various elements seem to have given rise to it. Perhaps rumors of the
existence of a Christian nation in Abyssinia may at a very early period
have fostered belief in the existence of a great Christian potentate in
Asia. India in Asia and Ethiopia in Africa were often confused both in
antiquity and during the Middle Ages. Furthermore, the story of the
visit of the Indian archbishop or patriarch, already referred to,
encouraged belief in a numerous Asiatic Christian population. Some of
the elements of the patriarch’s report became an integral part of one of
the twelfth-century versions of the story of Prester John.

Then again, we have echoes of actual events in the East in Benjamin of
Tudela’s _Itinerary_, as we have just seen, and in Otto of Freising’s
_Chronicon_. Otto relates[1326] that in 1145 the bishop of Gabala in
Syria had come to Viterbo to report to Pope Eugenius III, among other
things, the fall of Edessa. Here Otto met the bishop, and what he
learned is recorded in the _Chronicon_. This was to the effect that, not
very long before, a certain John, king and priest, who dwelt in the Far
East beyond Persia and Armenia and who, together with his tribe
(_gens_), was a Christian, waged war with the Samiards (Saniards), two
brothers who were kings of the Medes and Persians. John captured
Ecbatana, the capital of the Samiards’ realm, defeated the brothers in
battle, and put them to flight. He then proceeded to advance to the aid
of the church at Jerusalem but was hindered from going very far by the
river Tigris. Turning northwards in hope that the river would freeze
over and thereby enable him to cross, he was finally constrained, after
several years had elapsed, to give up the enterprise because continued
warm weather prevented ice from forming. This John, Otto added, was said
to have come of very ancient lineage, in fact, to have been one of the
progeny of the Magi. The tribes under his command were perhaps the same
as the “Kufar-al-Turak” of Benjamin of Tudela.[1327]

Though the attempt has been made to identify the Christian potentate of
the legend with a chieftain of the Caucasus,[1328] the weight of
evidence would seem to favor belief that the story in its more specific
thirteenth-century form grew out of rumors of some Christian Mongol lord
of Central Asia.[1329] It is certain that the Nestorian form of
Christianity was strongly represented in Central Asia during this period
and that two powerful tribes of these distant regions, the Keraïts and
the Onguts, formed outposts of this faith. But, as Pelliot writes,
“whatever may have been the origin of the famous legend of Prester
John, ... it was to a prince of the Keraïts that the tradition was
applied during the first half of the thirteenth century. All the Keraïts
spoken of in the history of the Mongol dynasty seem to have been
Christians; in any case this is true of the majority of them. In fact it
was through marriage with Keraït princesses that Christianity penetrated
even into the family of Jenghiz Khan.”[1330] Many of these Asiatic
Christians bore Christian names preserved in Chinese forms, such as
Yao-su-mu for Joseph or K’wo-li-ki-ssö for George.[1331] We learn from
Marco Polo and other thirteenth-century travelers that Mongol princes
often submitted to baptism, though this was probably done out of
indifference to religion rather than as the expression of any
deep-seated convictions.

On such slender foundations as the report in Otto’s _Chronicon_ or the
anonymous account of the visit of the Patriarch John to Rome or on other
rumors of events in the heart of Asia of which no record has been
preserved, there was erected an elaborate, detailed, and wholly fanciful
series of descriptions of Prester John and his realm, embellished by
borrowings from the Romance of Alexander, from the legend of St. Thomas,
and from that world of fable which constituted the medieval European
conception of the Orient.


         _Prester John’s Kingdom As Described in His “Letter”_

The most important description of Prester John’s kingdom is contained in
the famous _Letter_, addressed in some manuscripts to Manuel, the
Byzantine Emperor, in others to Frederick, the Roman Emperor; in still
others, to the Pope. In this letter,[1332] the earliest version of which
dates from before 1177, John tells that he is superior in wealth and
power to all the kings of the world. His realm includes the three Indias
and St. Thomas’ shrine. It extends across the desert of Babylon to the
tower of Babel and contains seventy-two provinces, each ruled over by a
king. Prester John is lord of the Amazons and Brahmins. In one direction
his territory reaches out four months’ journey. In the other, no one can
tell how far. “Only if you could count the stars of the heaven and the
sands of the sea would you be able to form an estimate of our dominion
and our power.” Many are the extraordinary features of this realm which
abounds in milk and honey: here is one of the rivers of Paradise; here
are streams that give forth gold and jewels; here pepper is gathered;
here is the fountain of youth; and here a mysterious sea of sand fed by
a river of rocks, beyond which dwell the ten tribes of the Jews, who,
although they have their own kings, are nevertheless subject to the
mighty Christian ruler. In one of the provinces near the torrid zone the
salamander thrives, a “worm” which cannot live without fire and which
makes a chrysalis about himself as do the silkworms (an interesting and
unexpected bit of natural history embedded in the midst of fable).
Prester John takes particular delight in expatiating on the enormous
wealth of his country, on the virtues of its inhabitants—for among them
there are neither liars nor adulterers nor indeed vice or crime of any
description—and on their clemency and Christian piety. Every year the
king makes a pilgrimage with his army across the serpent-infested
Babylonian desert to the shrine of the prophet Daniel. A large part of
the _Letter_ is taken up with a minute description of the royal
palace—exactly like that which St. Thomas built for the King
Gundophorus, of the king’s household, the grandees who wait upon him,
the officials of the kingdom, etc., etc. In an early Latin version of
the _Letter_, written probably in England, we are informed that there
are people from all countries of the world at Prester John’s
court;[1333] among the personal servants of the king there are
Englishmen who wait upon him at table. No less than eleven thousand
Englishmen are in his bodyguard, and every Englishman who comes to the
court, whether clerk or knight, is invested with the order of
knighthood. The French and Italian versions of the _Letter_, which were
probably translated from this Latin text, substitute “François” and
“Franceschi” for “Anglici.”


                  _Alliance With Prester John Desired_

During the thirteenth century it was the vain hope of the Popes and of
the Christian kings of Europe to gain the alliance of some great power
in the East—either the Mongols or Prester John—as an offset to Turkish
encroachments on the Crusaders’ frontiers.[1334] Perhaps we may detect
the beginnings of this policy in a letter of Pope Alexander III (1177)
to John, “Magnificus rex Indorum sacerdotum sanctissimus.”[1335] The
Pope informs the great king that he has heard of his piety through a
certain Master Philip, papal physician, who had held conversation with
distinguished and honorable persons of his realm. Consequently Alexander
was sending this Philip to expound to him the tenets of Western
Christianity and to convert him to the true Catholic faith. It seems
probable that Alexander was acquainted with the supposed letter of
Prester John to the Byzantine Emperor, though there is also strong
probability that he had confused the stories of the Asiatic Prester John
with reports regarding the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia—a source of
much confusion at a later period than ours.


                             GOG AND MAGOG

The northern part of Asia was the reputed seat of the terrible tribes of
Gog and Magog, whose eruption at the Last Day was destined to bring
about the destruction of the human race. We have seen that Biblical
prophecies were combined with the story of Alexander the Great’s
enclosing of these tribes behind great walls. The legend appears in our
period under various forms. Most of the maps show Gog and Magog, usually
surrounded by a wall; some add disparaging epithets, such as “gens
immunda.” Matthew Paris on his map of Palestine indicates in the north
the walls whereby King Alexander the Great shut in Gog and Magog and
states in the explanatory legend that from this same direction came the
Tatars.[1336] In the _De imagine mundi_[1337] we find a simple statement
that between the Caspian Mountains and the sea of that name dwelt those
tribes who had been walled in by Alexander the Great, Gog and Magog, the
fiercest of all peoples, eaters of the raw flesh of wild beasts and of
human beings. The Moslems had placed Gog and Magog in the farthest
corner of northeastern Asia: and in John of Seville’s translation of
Al-Farghānī’s _Astronomy_ we find the land of Gog at the easternmost
extremity of the sixth and seventh “climates” (those farthest
north).[1338] Lambert li Tors speaks in the Romance of Alexander of “Gos
et Magos” among the vassals of Porus: though they came forth with four
hundred thousand men, Alexander, after he had defeated Porus, chased
them back into the defiles of the mountains, where he shut them in with
a great wall.[1339] In a later part of the Romance, the subdivision of
Alexander’s kingdom at his death is explained: to Antigonus was given
Syria and Persia as far as Mount Tus, together with the duty of standing
guard over Gog and Magog.[1340] Otto of Freising also mentions these
tribes.[1341] He derived his information from Frutolf’s
_Chronica_,[1342] whence, in turn, it had come from the version of the
Romance of Alexander known as the _Historia de praeliis_. In the days of
Heraclius, Otto says, the “Agareni” (Saracens) devastated the lands of
the empire and destroyed part of the army of Heraclius. In revenge the
latter opened the Caspian Gates and let out those most savage tribes,
which Alexander the Great had enclosed along the Caspian Sea on account
of their heinousness, and inaugurated a war against the Saracens. By
night, as a punishment sent by the Deity for this sacrilegious act,
fifty-two thousand of Heraclius’ army were struck down by lightning,
and, as a result of this terrible visitation, Heraclius himself died in
the twenty-seventh year of his reign.

There were many variations of the legend of Gog and Magog. Elsewhere in
Otto of Freising’s _Chronicon_[1343] we find an account, taken from
Orosius, of the way in which Artaxerxes forced many of the Jews to dwell
in Hyrcania near the Caspian Sea. It was believed that these people had
multiplied greatly,[1344] and they were expected to burst forth on the
world in the days of Antichrist. Though not here expressly called Gog
and Magog, the connection is plain; and Godfrey of Viterbo relates how
Alexander enclosed Gog and Magog, the “eleven [_sic_] tribes of the
Jews.”[1345] We have already quoted[1346] Matthew Paris’ description of
the Tatars who, he said, might be the same as the tribes whom Alexander
enclosed—the ten tribes of Israel.


                              WESTERN ASIA

When we turn from the remote parts of the Orient to Western Asia we find
ourselves in regions much better known to the Western world, though the
traditional geography of these regions, founded on classical and
Biblical authority, persisted in encyclopedic writings hardly influenced
at all by the contacts that in reality had been established. The _De
imagine mundi_, Gervase of Tilbury’s _Otia imperialia_, and other
similar works add little to what Isidore and Orosius had written.
Between the Indus and Tigris lie many countries, Arachosia, Parthia,
Assyria, Persia, Media, all forming a harsh and mountainous tract called
in Scripture “India” but more generally known as Parthia. Fire had been
discovered in Persia.[1347] The Tigris, so called because it is as swift
as a tiger, rises from a common source with the Euphrates in the
mountains of Armenia.[1348] Thence the two rivers separate, leaving a
long space between them known as Mesopotamia; the Tigris encircles
Assyria and empties into the Dead Sea! Peter Comestor and the author of
the _De imagine mundi_ accepted the views of Isidore regarding the
source of the Tigris in the highlands of Armenia,[1349] but the latter
adds to the already prevailing confusion by stating that both rivers of
Mesopotamia debouch into the Mediterranean Sea. Gervase, on the other
hand, corrects the error of the author of the _De imagine mundi_ by
making them flow into the Red Sea (or Indian Ocean),[1350] as was
depicted on most maps.


                             _Mesopotamia_

Mesopotamia was said to be famous as the site of Nineveh and of Chaldea,
where astronomy was discovered;[1351] and Gervase of Tilbury dilates on
the immense size of the walls of Babylon.[1352] Regarding Babylon, it is
refreshing to find in Otto of Freising’s _Chronicon_ some really
up-to-date information which he had derived from Frutolf.[1353] In the
first place, he makes a careful distinction between Babylon and Cairo,
to which the name of Babylon was commonly given. “Old Babylon,” he
added, “as we learn from reliable men from across the seas, is partly
inhabited at the present day and now called Baldach [Baghdad]. Part,
however, as you would expect from the words of prophecy, is a desert
waste extending for ten miles as far as the tower of Babel. The part
which is inhabited and called Baldach is very large and populous.” He
explains that here is the seat of the greatest priest of the Persians,
whom they call “Caliph,” and who holds in some respects a position among
these pagans parallel to that which the Pope at Rome holds among
Christians.

With Baghdad we have at last come to a city that was actually visited
and described during our period by Western Europeans whose descriptions
have come down to us. The Jewish travelers, Benjamin of Tudela and
Petachia of Ratisbon, appear to have sojourned in the Mesopotamian city
in the seventh and ninth decades of the twelfth century respectively.


                    _Benjamin of Tudela on Baghdad_

Benjamin’s personal familiarity with Baghdad saved him from making
Frutolf’s and Otto’s mistake of confusing the Abbasid capital with old
Babylon. We gather from Benjamin’s _Itinerary_ that the latter is three
days’ journey distant and that “the ruins of the palace of
Nebuchadnezzar are still to be seen there, but people are afraid to
enter them on account of serpents and scorpions” (Adler’s
translation).[1354]

Baghdad, Benjamin writes (our quotations are from Adler’s translation),
“is on the River Tigris,” which “divides the metropolis in two parts.”
The city “is twenty miles in circumference, situated in a land of palms,
gardens, and plantations, the like of which is not to be found in the
whole land of Shinar. People come thither with merchandise from all
lands. Wise men live there, philosophers who know all manner of wisdom,
and magicians expert in all manner of witchcraft.”[1355] Benjamin was
particularly interested in the Caliph, of whose palace, park, family,
and widespread authority he writes in no little detail and in highly
commendatory terms,[1356] for it seems that the Caliphs were more
tolerant toward the Jews than were most Christian monarchs of the age.
Besides treating of the Caliph, Benjamin tells about the “Head of the
Captivity,” another powerful ruler whose headquarters were Baghdad and
in whom the Caliph had vested authority over all the Jewish communities
throughout the eastern Moslem world. A descendant of David, King of
Israel, he was a man of great dignity and rank, held high in the esteem
of the Mohammedans. His power extended “over all the communities of
Shinar, Persia, Khurasan, and Sheba, which is El-Yemen, and Diyar Kalach
(Bekr) and the land of Aram Naharaim (Mesopotamia) and over the dwellers
in the mountains of Ararat and the land of the Alans, which is a land
surrounded by mountains and has no outlet except by the iron gates which
Alexander made but which were afterwards broken. Here are the people
called Alani. His authority extends also over the land of Siberia
[Sikbia?] and the communities in the land of Togarmim[1357] unto the
mountains of Asveh and the land of Gurgan, the inhabitants of which are
called Gurganim who dwell by the river Gihon (Oxus?); and these are the
Girgashites who follow the Christian religion. Further it extends to the
gates of Samarkand, the land of Tibet, and the land of India. In respect
of all these countries the Head of the Captivity gives the communities
power to appoint Rabbis and Ministers who come unto him to be
consecrated and to receive his authority. They bring him offerings and
gifts from the ends of the earth.”[1358]

Whether or not Benjamin was personally presented to the Head of the
Captivity we are not informed. In any case he undoubtedly came into
contact at Baghdad with Jews from all over Central and Western Asia and
from them was able to gather those details regarding the Jewish
communities which form such an important and interesting part of his
_Itinerary_. Most striking in this connection are the data which he
furnishes us about the Jews of Arabia.


                     _Benjamin of Tudela on Arabia_

The interior of that great peninsula until recently has remained very
vaguely known to Western Christians, and in the Middle Ages there
reigned almost complete ignorance regarding it. Gervase of Tilbury tells
us (from Orosius) that Arabia lies between two seas and is the country
of Mount Sinai, of the Queen of Sheba, and of frankincense.[1359] Beyond
this and a few details about the Bedouins picked up by the Crusaders,
nothing was known. Hence the information which Benjamin gives on the
Jewish communities is of exceptional importance. If we may trust his
figures, it would seem that there was at this time a large Jewish
population both in Yemen and farther north. Benjamin’s conception of the
geography of the peninsula, however, is remarkably confused. He tells us
that at a distance of twenty-one days’ journey through the deserts from
Hillah in Mesopotamia one comes to the land of Saba, or El-Yemen. Here
he places the great Jewish cities of Tanai, Tilmas, Teima, and Kheibar.
Neither Tilmas nor Tanai have been definitely identified. To the former
Benjamin assigned a population of 100,000 Jews; to the latter, with the
district surrounding, a population of no less than 300,000 Jews. They
may represent Jewish settlements in Yemen, though Benjamin’s statement
that Tilmas is only three days from Kheibar would seem to preclude this
possibility. Tanai, on the other hand, has been thought to be Sanaa.
Kheibar (to which Benjamin assigns 50,000 Jews) and Teima have long been
well-known towns of northern Arabia not far from Medina. Now inhabited
by half-breed negroes, these places were the centers of a Jewish
population from before the times of Mohammed until as late as the
sixteenth century.[1360]

Ina totally different connection Benjamin refers to Jews of the “land of
Aden,” which he believed to be part of India, taking India to include
southern Arabia and Ethiopia. Their country he describes as mountainous.
The Jewish element in the population, he adds, “are not under the yoke
of the Gentiles but possess castles on the summits of the mountains from
which they make descents into the plain country called Libya, which is a
Christian empire” (Adler’s translation).[1361] This is indeed confusing.
If by Libya Abyssinia is meant—which is likely, for Abyssinia was a
Christian kingdom from very early times—it seems peculiar that Benjamin
makes no mention of the Red Sea intervening between the land of Aden in
Arabia Felix and the African coasts which would have to be crossed by
Jews of the Aden highlands in making war on the Abyssinians. Possibly
Benjamin, like Marco Polo a century later, conceived of Aden as lying in
Africa.[1362]


                         _Syria and Palestine_

Unlike all the rest of Asia, Syria and Palestine were well known at
first hand to many European Christians. Yet, in writing about them, the
makers of compilations like the _De imagine mundi_ and the _Otia
imperialia_ were content to do little more than copy Isidore’s dry
catalogue of the names of places rendered famous through Scriptural
associations.[1363] The Dead Sea with its sinister neighborhood was the
only natural feature of this part of the world which seems to have made
a strong enough appeal to the imagination of these writers to impel them
to add anything to what Isidore had said long before.[1364]


           _Geographical Knowledge Enlarged by the Crusades_

On the other hand, the Levantine countries were familiar through the
journeys of Western travelers, though their observations were not
incorporated into the works of the scholarly compilers. Many were the
motives that induced men of the West to visit the Nearer East. Religious
enthusiasm and the desire for commercial gain, however, were paramount.
The Crusades contributed more than any great series of events between
the time of Claudius Ptolemy and the middle of the thirteenth century to
the broadening of man’s geographical horizon, and, with it, the
broadening of the whole range of human activity. We cannot attempt to
discuss these wider aspects of the Crusading movement in any detail, but
a few words must be said about the dissemination of regional knowledge
that resulted from it. Feudal nobility, soldiers, pilgrims, and
adventurers of all sorts and from all parts of the West were joined by
Italian merchants in the great enterprise, the object of which was not
only to redeem the holy places from the infidel but also to profit from
the Levantine trade. Men of all ranks and callings, coming from every
part of Christendom, made their way by land and sea to the Holy Land.
Peasant, serf, and petty townsman, as well as powerful noble and church
dignitary, were torn from old and familiar environments to wander
through countries about which they had hitherto known next to nothing.
In some cases the stories of their travels and adventures were preserved
in chronicles and poems, but in most no permanent record was left.
Nevertheless, the geographical knowledge of the average man was widened
to an extent which we can scarcely appreciate at the present day. Before
the Crusades communities throughout the greater part of Europe had lived
very much to themselves, in limited contact with the outside world; but
by the year 1200 it is safe to infer that practically every town and
village of France, England, Germany, and Italy held someone who had
visited the East and was not unready to tell about what he had seen
there and on his way out and back. Just as the War of 1914–1918 has
taught the world much European geography, so the Crusades taught all
classes of Europe about the Holy Land and the routes thither. But the
Crusades did more than give the people a wider knowledge of places: they
brought them into contact with new customs, new religions, new ideals
and modes of life, as well as with new types of landscape and terrain.
All this tended to displace men from habitual and local modes of
thought; Europe became more cosmopolitan, and the way was prepared for
that profound change in man’s entire attitude towards life which we now
call the Renaissance.


                 _Occidental Population of the Levant_

We can merely hint at these general results of the extension of
geographical contact with the Levantine world and turn to the more
specific problem of the limits to which Western penetration was actually
pushed. The Occidental population of the states established after the
First Crusade along the eastern border of the Mediterranean was composed
primarily of the Frankish nobility and soldiery and of Italian
traders.[1365] The former had established themselves in castles and
garrisons, from which they ruled over widespread manorial estates tilled
by native Syrians. The traders occupied large foreign quarters in such
commercial centers as Acre, Jaffa, Ascalon, Tyre, and Tripoli on the
coasts, and in the interior at Jerusalem. Trading privileges and the
right to build up commercial colonies in the towns were granted to
Genoese, Pisans, Venetians, and others in return for services rendered
the Crusading armies by the Italian navies in the conquest of the coast
towns and in the transportation of military forces. Through the reports
brought back to Europe by returning soldiers, adventurers, and
merchants, Syria and Palestine became more widely and accurately known
in the West than most parts of Europe itself.


                     _European Occupation of Syria_

First-hand acquaintance with the Levant, however, did not, either in the
twelfth or in the thirteenth century, necessarily lead to first-hand
acquaintance with the neighboring countries that still lay under the
domination of the Turk. At the time of its greatest extent the Kingdom
of Jerusalem reached eastward to the edge of the desert plateau beyond
the Jordan and Dead Sea and southward to Ailah on the Gulf of Akaba.
Northeastward the upper Tigris marked the frontier of the County of
Edessa. Beyond these restricted borders lay Saracen territory into which
traders from the West did not dare to venture. Southern Mesopotamia was
virtually _terra incognita_; and the men who held the small garrison
posts along the eastern border of the states of the Crusaders were not
prone to undertake rash enterprises in the enemy’s country.

The danger of such enterprises is illustrated by the fate of a Christian
naval expedition sent down the Red Sea from Akaba in 1182–1183.[1366] A
small fleet, fitted out by Reynauld of Châtillon, lord of the castle of
Kerak beyond the Jordan, succeeded in getting almost as far as Yembo,
the port of Medina. We are not told of its true purpose by the Arabic
historians, who alone seem to have recorded this adventure, though the
Arabs certainly believed that the Crusaders were bent upon plundering
the tomb of the prophet at Medina. Perhaps its leaders harbored a
fanatic hope of attacking the holy cities of Islam. At all events, the
navy of Saladin, hastily summoned from Egypt, soon overtook and defeated
the little squadron at Haura, and those of the Crusaders who escaped
ashore were either killed by the Bedouins or sold into slavery.

But though, with a few exceptions, Europeans themselves did not go
beyond these bounds of the Crusaders’ states, commercial relations were
established with the more eastern regions.[1367] Antioch and Laodicea
were the termini of two trade routes from Aleppo, whence came merchants
from Rakka on the Euphrates and ultimately from Mesopotamia, Persia, and
Central Asia. Asiatic goods were also sold at a great open fair in the
Hauran country, at one time in the territory of the Kingdom of Jerusalem
and undoubtedly frequented by Westerners. And the harbors of the kingdom
were the _entrepôts_ of an extensive traffic from Arabia Felix and India
by the Red Sea and across the Isthmus of Suez. At all of these points
the Italians established connections with the Oriental merchants and
learned from them much about Oriental lands and their products.


                              _Asia Minor_

During the early thirteenth century Asia Minor also became familiar
ground to the men of the West.[1368] The establishment of the Latin
Empire at Constantinople in 1204 during the Fourth Crusade was mainly
responsible for this; but even before the close of the twelfth century
the Venetians had become preponderant from a commercial point of view in
the districts that had hitherto formed parts of the Byzantine Empire,
and after 1204 they were in a position to conclude advantageous treaties
with their Anatolian neighbors, Greek, Seljuk, and Armenian. Venetian
merchants were to be seen in the important towns and along the highways
of the peninsula. Italians, with Provençaux in their train, exploited
the trade of the small Christian kingdom of Little Armenia (the ancient
Cilicia) and penetrated from the Mediterranean into and across the
Seljuk sultanate of Iconium, whose rulers were disposed to look with
fairly friendly eyes on the Frankish trader. Even the Empire of Nicaea,
a small remnant of the Greek dominions which had managed to preserve its
independence after the Fourth Crusade, was constrained in 1219 to grant
extensive trading privileges to the Venetians.


              _Western Asia As Described by the Crusaders_

The knowledge of Western Asia acquired in these various ways was
naturally enough reflected in the works of the historians, chroniclers,
and poets of the Crusades, many of whom had themselves visited the
places they describe. Their fresh and realistic accounts contrast
strikingly with the sort of geographical writings we have so far been
discussing in this chapter. From Dreesbach’s study of the Orient as
described in the early French Crusading literature we may gain a concise
idea of the sort of thing that impressed itself on the mind of the
Occidental.[1369] His impressions of climate and landscape need not
detain us here, as they have already been explained in early
chapters.[1370] Of the natural resources, the wealth of the fruits of
Syria, grapes, figs, pomegranates, almonds, olives, and locusts, were
often the subject of wonder and admiration, and William of Tyre speaks
enthusiastically of the great sugar plantations at Sur.[1371] Of the
animals,[1372] the Arab horse and the camel attracted most attention;
and the usefulness of the latter was known both as a beast of burden and
as a swift traveler through the desert. A lively sketch of a man leading
a camel laden with a large cask figures prominently on one variant of
the Matthew Paris map of Palestine, and a legend reads: “Here abound
camels, buffaloes (_bubali_), mules, and asses, which are used by the
merchants trading between the peoples of the Orient and of the
Occident.”[1373] Bears and lions, serpents and tarantulas, and carrier
pigeons also invited notice; and the mosquito is mentioned by Ambroise,
who says that though very small it has a terribly poisonous bite, bad
enough to make every one, old and young alike, appear to be leprous:

                  “Que chescons, vielz ou damoisels,
                  Sembloit a estre tut mesels.”[1374]

Concerning the people[1375] of the Levant we find that the distinction
between the nomadic desert-dwelling Bedouins and the bearded
turban-wearing Saracens (townsfolk) was well understood. The
Bedouins—contrary to their present reputation—were looked down upon as
cowards in battle, and William of Tyre relates with some disgust that it
was their custom to hang about on the outskirts of a fight until they
saw which side was going to win and then to join the victors.[1376]

In commenting on the religion[1377] of the Saracens the medieval
Christians made the fundamental error of supposing that Islam is an
idolatrous cult and that Mohammed was worshipped as a god. Nevertheless
they were far from inaccurate in their remarks on the various customs,
habits, and minor beliefs of the Moslems, on such matters, for example,
as the pilgrimage to Mecca, the prohibited eating of pork and drinking
of wine, the importance of ablutions, polygamy, and the customs of
divorce. William of Tyre describes[1378] the division of the Mohammedans
into two great groups, Shiah and Sunni, and explains how the former held
that Ali (“Haly”) was the only true prophet and the latter that Mohammed
was the one messenger of God. Baghdad was referred to as the seat of the
great “apostle” of the Saracens, or caliph, whom William of Tyre spoke
of as a sovereign prince and chieftain whom all must obey; Cairo in
Egypt was recognized as the capital of the caliphs of the rival Shiah
persuasion.

Benjamin of Tudela also acquired some fairly clear ideas of Islam during
his visits to Baghdad and to Egypt. He states that the Abbasid Caliph at
Baghdad “is head of the Mohammedan religion, and all the kings of Islam
obey him” and likens his position to that of the Christian Pope.[1379]
In writing about Cairo he tells us that the subjects of the Emir were
followers of Ali (hence Shiites), that they rose against the Abbasid
Caliph of Baghdad, and that a lasting feud was kept up between the two
factions.[1380]

Particular terror was inspired in the hearts of the Crusaders by that
strange sect of Assassins,[1381] whose principal seat was at Alamut in
Persia, the stronghold of the notorious Old Man of the Mountain, though
most of the Crusaders mistakenly thought that the outlying fortress of
Massiat in Syria was the abode of the Old Man. William of Tyre
dilates[1382] on the treachery and murderous nature of this people; and
in Ambroise’s _Estoire_ we find[1383] a vivid account of how the
children of the Assassins were brought up to do the bidding of the Old
Man in every detail and in particular to bring about the murder of his
enemies.[1384]


                                _AFRICA_


                         EGYPT AS PART OF ASIA

Both the author of the _De imagine mundi_ and Gervase of Tilbury include
an account of Egypt with their descriptions of the countries of Asia.
They then take up the remainder of Asia and Europe before finally
returning to Africa toward the close of the geographical parts of their
books. This order of treatment, which accorded with classical
traditions, usually included Egypt with Asia or at least, as in the _De
imagine mundi_, made the Nile rather than the Red Sea the boundary
between Asia and Africa.[1385] Certainly from an historical and cultural
point of view Egypt has been more closely related to the Asiatic than to
the African continent, even though geographically it forms a portion of
the latter.[1386]

The description of Egypt in the _Otia imperialia_[1387] was copied in
large part from the _De imagine mundi_,[1388] and this in turn had
closely followed the words of Isidore.[1389] It ran somewhat as follows.
Surrounded by the course of the Nile, which forms a letter
_delta_,[1390] Lower Egypt comprises five thousand country estates;
these are not watered by rainfall but by the floods of the river alone,
for the skies of Egypt are never obscured by clouds. The capital of
Egypt is Babylon (Cairo), built by Cambyses. Close to Thebes—a city
founded by Cadmus, Agenor’s son and founder of Boeotian Thebes as
well—are vast solitudes where there used to dwell a great company of
hermits. The _De imagine mundi_ speaks of the island of Meroë and of
Syene on the tropic in Upper Egypt, the latter famous for the well built
there by the philosophers, into which the sun shines directly in the
month of June.[1391] The Jerome map of Palestine also shows Egypt in
considerable detail, one of the most important features being the
lighthouse at Alexandria.[1392]


                         DESCRIPTIONS OF EGYPT

Egypt, like the Holy Land, was frequently visited by Western merchants
throughout our entire period. Benjamin of Tudela testifies to the
enormous trade carried on there with the West. Alexandria was the
principal port whence the spices and luxuries of the Far East were
transshipped to Europe. Benjamin spoke with high appreciation of the
wide straight streets of the city and of the architectural beauty of its
buildings. He was much impressed by the swarm of merchants from all over
the world who congregated in its streets and markets.[1393] William of
Tyre enlarged on the commercial importance of the great port and
explained that the peppers, spices, ointments, drugs, lectuaries,
precious stones, and silks of the Orient were brought first to Aden on
the Red Sea and thence transported direct to Alexandria. He pointed out
that Alexandria was also important as the meeting place of the river and
maritime trades, and he gave a description of the local topography of
the city.[1394] Merchants from various Occidental nations and city
states of Italy had _fondachi_, or trading stations, in this
cosmopolitan metropolis, which was, as Schaube says, more subjected to
European influences than any other city of Islam.[1395] The Church
endeavored to place severe restrictions on commerce with the infidel, in
particular by the prohibition of the importation into Egypt of wood and
iron, two materials of vital importance to the Saracens and much in
demand. The restrictions, however, were disregarded, and trade
flourished between Southern Europe and Egypt throughout nearly the
entire twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, except for a short
interruption at the time of the Third Crusade. In 1215–1216 there were
said to be no fewer than three thousand Frankish merchants in
Alexandria.[1396] Egypt was the objective of the Crusaders of the Fifth
Crusade, who seized and held the city of Damietta from 1219 to 1221, and
again under Louis IX of France, who held it from 1248 to 1249; but in
the interval between these two Crusades the Emperor Frederick II was on
friendly and even intimate terms with the sultans.[1397]

William of Tyre, who knew Egypt at first hand, gives a vivid picture of
the fertile strip of country, hemmed in on either side by two deserts
“in which the land is so burned and sterile that it supports no herb and
no manner of tree, except where the river Nile waters the ground when it
is in flood; in these parts alone a great abundance of wheat can
grow.”[1398] He speaks of the flood of the Nile, between the months of
June and September, and how it leaves a rich deposit of silt; of the
palm gardens like a forest along the banks of the stream; and of the
extensive orchards of fruit trees in the neighborhood of
Alexandria.[1399] He also fully describes the caliph’s palace at Cairo
and the Mamelukes, or sultan’s bodyguard, recruited from the children of
captured enemies.[1400]

Benjamin of Tudela also marveled at the agricultural wealth of the flood
plain of the Nile. The river alone, he said, irrigates and fertilizes
the land, for “no rain falls, neither is ice or snow ever seen” (Adler’s
translation). Among other curiosities he described the Nilometer, which
measured the height of the flood waters, and he gave details regarding
the agricultural crops and fruits. Benjamin quoted the correct
explanation of the flood: “The Egyptians say that up the river, in the
land of Al-Habash (Abyssinia), which is the land of Havilah, much rain
descends at the time of the rising of the river, and this abundance of
rain causes the river to rise and to cover the surface of the land”
(Adler’s translation).[1401]


                          AFRICA WEST OF EGYPT

To the west of Egypt, according to the _De imagine mundi_, lies Africa,
stretching from the Nile to the ocean. Here in order are the provinces
of Libya, named from a queen of that name; Cyrenaica, called from the
city of Cyrene; Pentapolis, from the five cities of Berenice, Arsinoë,
Ptolemaïs, Apollonia, and Cyrene; Tripolis, from the three cities of
Occasa, Berete, and Leptis Magna; Heusis, containing the site of
Carthage; Getulia; Numidia, with Hippo, the home of St. Augustine; and
Mauretania.[1402] The two Syrtes (Major and Minor), or shallow bays of
the north coast of Africa, are shown on the Henry of Mayence map
immediately to the west of Egypt.[1403] In the extreme west of Africa
the _De imagine mundi_, with characteristic confusion, places Gades
(Cadiz), from which the adjacent sea is called the Sea of Gades; and, on
the borders of the ocean, Mount Atlas, a mountain of immense height,
named after Atlas, once a king of Africa.[1404] These mountains also
appear prominently on the St. Sever Beatus map as a long range running
parallel to the Atlantic[1405] (see Fig. 2, p. 69, above). Other maps of
the same group[1406] show two great peaks on the western coast of
Africa, which seem to represent a confusion of the Atlas Mountains with
the famous Pillars of Hercules. A legend on the St. Sever Beatus map in
the neighborhood of Tangier (Tingi) draws attention to the fact that
“this region produces monkeys and ostriches,”[1407] true certainly at
the present day in regard to the former.

In the fourth and fifth decades of the twelfth century the Norman king
of Sicily, Roger II, the patron of Edrisi, conquered many of the seaport
towns along what is now the coast of Tunis; and, though the Latins were
expelled from this region by the powerful Moroccan dynasty of the
Almohads,[1408] who during the following decade came to supersede the
Almoravids in the domination over North Africa and Spain, close
commercial relations were maintained between the northern and southern
coasts of the Mediterranean Sea throughout the century and a half with
which we are concerned.[1409] The Genoese held the foremost place in the
North African trade; but Pisan, Venetian, Massiliot, and Catalan
merchants also frequented the markets of the seaboard towns. Under the
Almohads, Ceuta and Bugia were important _entrepôts_ of Genoese trade;
and when the Almohad dominions split up in the early years of the
thirteenth century (1212–1238), these two towns fell into the hands of
Genoa.[1410] Genoese fleets also ventured through the Strait of
Gibraltar and not only tapped the commerce of the western coasts of the
Iberian Peninsula but penetrated as far as Saleh on the Moroccan shore.
Christians also found their way in various capacities into the interior
of Maghreb, as the Moslems termed these western territories of Islam.
During the Crusading epoch many Christians were taken captive in the
wars in Spain and by pirates on the high seas; most of these were sold
into slavery in the markets of the sea ports of Morocco, Algeria, and
Tunis and sent to drag out lives of suffering in the towns of the
interior. Towards the close of the twelfth century a Christian religious
order was formed for the purpose of ameliorating the sufferings of the
captives and of bringing about their redemption by exchange with Moslem
captives held in Christendom.[1411] We have evidence that these
“Redemptorists,” and the Franciscan and Dominican friars who were soon
to follow them in the same work and who also served as ministers of the
Christian religion to the European merchants engaged in business in
Moslem countries, were not at all inhospitably received.[1412] Their
work was facilitated by almost uniformly friendly relations between the
papacy and the rulers of Morocco, and the number of Christians in this
part of the world became so great by the fourth decade of the thirteenth
century that an episcopal see was established in Fez (1233),
subsequently to be removed to Morocco City.[1413] Another tie between
Morocco and the Latin West was created by the maintenance at the court
of the Almohads and their successors of a mercenary force composed for
the most part of Spanish Christians from Catalonia and Aragon.[1414]

On certain of the Beatus maps a “sandy desert” is shown between Egypt,
western Africa, and Ethiopia;[1415] and on the Psalter map it appears as
a well-defined strip of territory labeled “sandy and sterile
land.”[1416] This of course is no other than the Sahara,[1417] of which
little or nothing was known, except that the Henry of Mayence map
shows,[1418] far back in the desert, the Temple of Jupiter (Ammon), in
the oasis of that name, known since antiquity, and the St. Sever Beatus
map represents certain immense _salinae_, or salt pits (the two squares
west of the Nile on Fig. 2, p. 69, above), said to wax and wane with the
moon.[1419]


                                ETHIOPIA

South of Egypt and the Sahara lies Ethiopia. In the minds of medieval
writers this name was not restricted to the region beyond Upper Egypt
but was applied to the entire southern part of the known world, just as
“India” sometimes was applied to the entire Far East. Indeed, from early
classical times Ethiopia had itself been confused with India, and some
of the writers whose works we are studying believed that the two regions
were coterminous.

Nearly all the maps of the period carried the extremities of Ethiopia
far to the east and minimized the size of the Red Sea and Indian Ocean
in such a way as to bring Central Africa within no great distance of
India. On the Jerome map of Palestine two tracts called “India Egyptii”
and “India Ethiopie” were placed along the shores of the Red Sea
opposite the mouths of the Indus.[1420] Gervase of Tilbury speaks of
three peoples inhabiting Ethiopia: the Hesperi in the west, the
Garamantes in the center, and the “Indians” in the east,[1421] and adds
that there are one hundred and twenty provinces “from India into
Ethiopia.”[1422] The _De imagine mundi_ places Saba, the city of the
Queen of Sheba, in the easterly part of Ethiopia.[1423] It was conceded
that Ethiopia is terribly hot on account of the proximity of the sun and
that the soil there for the most part is dry and desert. Gervase speaks
of the mighty Mount Climax of Ptolemy, Orosius, and other ancient
writers in the midst of Ethiopia, a home of bearded women and similar
marvels.

Some of the Beatus maps designate Ethiopia as a country “where there are
races horrible on account of their strange faces and monstrous
appearance. It extends as far as the borders of Egypt. It also abounds
in wild beasts and serpents; and precious stones, cinnamon, and balsam
are found there.”[1424] In fact, all remote parts of the world were made
the habitats of marvels in the Middle Ages, and few parts of the known
world were more remote than Ethiopia. In addition, the intimate
connection between India and Ethiopia, which had persisted in the minds
of men throughout so many ages, seems to have brought about a
transference thither of many of those marvels and monsters that
originally had been placed in the Far East. A most entertaining example
of the peopling of Ethiopia by monstrous creatures is provided by the
Psalter map and by the Ebstorf map of a period later than ours.[1425] On
these the entire shore of the equatorial ocean along the southern border
of the known world is lined with men that are tongueless, earless,
noseless, or men that have four eyes or mouths and eyes on their
breasts, and with cannibals, _cynocephali_, snake-eating troglodytes,
and the like.


                          SOURCES OF THE NILE

The main interest in Ethiopia, however, lay in the fact that from this
country comes that great river the problem of whose sources has puzzled
mankind from the earliest ages down nearly to our own day. In classical
times three theories had prevailed concerning the headwaters of the
Nile.[1426] The correct theory, that of Eratosthenes and of Ptolemy,
that the river rises in Ethiopia itself but far to the south, met with
no recognition in our period. The second theory placed the sources in
India and was closely allied with the very old belief that tended to
confuse Ethiopia itself with India and can be traced back to Homeric or
even pre-Homeric times.[1427] The third theory, which probably
originated in vague rumors that reached the Carthaginians and later the
Romans and still later the Moslems, of the eastward-flowing course of a
great river south of the Sahara (a river which we now know to be the
Niger), placed the headwaters of the Nile either in a great lake or else
in the Atlas Mountains in western Africa close to the ocean.

Traces of each of the last two theories are to be found in the writings
of our period. According to the accepted interpretation of Scripture,
the Nile was the same as the Gihon, one of the four rivers of Paradise,
and its ultimate source must therefore have been in the east, where
Paradise was nearly always thought to be. It is also possible that early
Christian monks in Abyssinia may have learned of the course of certain
of the eastern tributaries of the Atbara which rise close to the Red
Sea, and this information, in the devious course of its transmission to
Western Europe, may have been confused in such a way as to foster belief
that one of these minor streams was the headwaters of the main river
itself.[1428] In any case, Orosius,[1429] whose words were copied by
Gervase of Tilbury,[1430] made the Nile spring from the ground near
Mossylon Emporium on the shores of the Red Sea and, after flowing
westward for some distance, turn north to enter Egypt. But he also said
that other authorities state that the river rises far in the west and
that, after an underground course through the sands and thence through a
great lake, it runs eastward across the Ethiopian desert even as far as
the ocean and then turns to the left into Egypt. In any case, he adds,
it is true that there is a large river which has exactly such a source
and produces all the monsters that the Nile does. The barbarians who
dwell near its source call this latter river the Dara, but other natives
name it the Nuchul. The Dara is mentioned by Pliny and the Nuchul by
Mela; perhaps they represent a reminiscence of the generally
eastward-flowing Niger. Orosius suggested that this river, coming from
the west, may well contribute by an underground channel to the
westward-flowing stream that springs from the earth near the Red Sea.
Isidore seems to have derived from Orosius the idea of a West African
origin of the Nile, its disappearance under ground, and subsequent
emergence on the shores of the Red Sea and thence of its encircling of
Ethiopia before flowing down into Egypt,[1431] and in this idea he was
followed by the author of the _De imagine mundi_.[1432]

Orosius’ and Isidore’s theories are graphically represented on the maps.
Several of the Beatus maps simply show the river springing from
mountains in the western part of the continent and swinging east and
north into the Mediterranean.[1433] The symbols and legends on the St.
Sever Beatus[1434] indicate (see Fig. 2, p. 69, above) that the river
originates in the neighborhood of the Atlas Mountains; thence, passing
beneath the sands, it expands into a vast lake, whence it flows toward
the east through an immense swamp, like the Maeotic Swamp, but
surrounded by mountains. After this it turns to the left, envelops the
Isle of Meroë, and flows down into Egypt. Other maps, like the Cotton,
Henry of Mayence (inset on Fig. 6, p. 245, above), and Jerome map of
Palestine are even more faithful to the Orosian description. The sources
of the Nile proper are shown near the Red Sea in the eastern part of
Ethiopia, but another large river is also depicted, coming from the far
west near the Atlas range and emptying into a large lake not far from
the sources of the Nile, with which the lake may communicate. The Cotton
map[1435] splits this river into two sections and calls the upper
section “Dara” and the lower “Fluvius Nilus.” On the Jerome map of
Palestine[1436] it is called “Nuchul” and made to flow into a lake of
the same name. Henry of Mayence[1437] names it “fl. Gion.”


                   TRADITIONAL VIEW OF CENTRAL AFRICA

As a matter of fact, no new information about Central Africa was brought
to light during our entire period or had been during many centuries
before, and no new theories were propounded. Old and hackneyed notions
were handed down from one writer to another. Simar, in a recent
admirable study of the geographical ideas regarding Central Africa in
antiquity and in the Middle Ages, trenchantly sums up the whole matter
with the following words, which might equally well be applied to ideas
regarding many other parts of the world: “These meager notions soon
became stereotyped and were repeated by the scholars of the Middle Ages,
who vied with each other in their unalterable ardor. From Martianus
Capella in the fourth century to Honorius of Autun [here the author of
the _De imagine mundi_ is meant] in the twelfth, passing by Macrobius,
Priscian, Saint Avitus, Gregory of Tours, Jornandes, the Venerable Bede,
Raban Maur, Dicuil, Alfred the Great, Alfric, Adelbold, Richer, Asaph,
Hermann Contractus, Robert of St. Martin of Auxerre, Otto of Freising,
Hugh of St. Victor, and even, later, the historian Joinville, men copied
Solinus, Orosius, and Isidore and adopted like them a round _oikoumene_
separated from the _terra incognita_ by an impassable equatorial ocean,
the uninhabitability of the torrid zone, the limit of Africa this side
of the equator, the sources of the Nile in Mauretania, its course
through Ethiopia from west to east, its ultimate origin in the
Terrestrial Paradise situated to the east of India, and its submarine
course as far as its emergence in the western part of Libya.”[1438]


                        _THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA_


                        THE NAME “MEDITERRANEAN”

To the great chain of inland seas that lies between Africa, Asia, and
Europe the Romans had applied the name of _mare internum_ or _mare
nostrum_. Solinus was probably the first to describe these as
mediterranean seas, and Isidore the first to convert the term
“mediterranean” into a proper name.[1439] The authority of Isidore was
sufficient to make this designation familiar to future ages; and it was
used by the author of the _De imagine mundi_ and by Gervase of Tilbury
with the same connotation that it enjoys at the present day.[1440] The
term, however, was not firmly established in popular use in our period
and is conspicuously absent from most of the maps, which as a rule
either give no name at all for the sea as a whole or else employ some
vague designation like _mare nostrum_ or _mare magnum_.[1441]

Gervase of Tilbury says[1442] that the Mediterranean is shaped like a
letter Y with two branches, a longer one extending from the entrance
(Strait of Gibraltar) to the Hellespont, and a shorter one forming the
Sea of Alexandria or of Syria. This comparison suggests that Gervase
must have had before him a typical medieval map of the world with east
at the top. More detailed is the account of the Mediterranean in Plato
of Tivoli’s translation of Al-Battānī’s _Astronomy_.[1443] Here the
“Roman Sea” is described as extending a distance of 5000 miles [!] from
the Isle of Gadir (Cadiz) to Tyre and Sidon; it has various branches,
one running off towards the Narbonnese, one called Adriatic, another
called Pontus; and it contains a total of one hundred and sixty-two
inhabited islands, of which five are especially noteworthy on account of
their size.


                 THE MEDITERRANEAN DURING THE CRUSADES

During the Crusades the Mediterranean served as one of the main highways
from the West to the Holy Land, and hence the men of Europe were enabled
to learn much of its waters and coasts. Though the principal armies of
the First Crusade had proceeded overland, in the years that followed the
establishment of the states of the Crusaders there was constant coming
and going by sea between the Levant and the ports of Italy, France, and
England. The sea route was the way taken by the armies of Philip
Augustus and Richard Coeur-de-Lion in 1190; by the cosmopolitan army
that captured Constantinople in 1204; by Frederick II and the
ill-starred expedition of St. Louis to Egypt; as well as by innumerable
pilgrims, soldiers, merchants, and other individuals unconnected with
any definite Crusading enterprise.


            INSTRUCTIONS FOR NAVIGATION IN THE MEDITERRANEAN

Perhaps the most attractive account of the Mediterranean derived from
the literature of the Crusaders is to be found in the chronicles and
histories recording the expedition of Richard Coeur-de-Lion. The _Gesta
regis Ricardi_, mistakenly attributed to Benedict of Peterborough, and
the _Chronica_ of Roger of Hoveden contain descriptions of routes and
coasts, parts of which were undoubtedly drawn from manuals of
navigation. Here we find much the same sort of data that at the present
time is incorporated in our Coast Pilot books, a combination of
practical advice to sailors with useful and interesting information
about the waters, islands, and shores. Great care is taken to inform the
navigator of the best and most practicable routes for him to follow. For
example, two ways are mentioned of going from Marseilles to Acre, one
through the open sea and the other near the coast.[1444] If the wind is
favorable you can proceed by the first, leaving Sardinia and Sicily out
of sight to the left, though you must constantly be on your guard
against running too far to the right and falling afoul of the barbarian
shores.[1445] With a good breeze this journey can be made in fifteen
days,[1446] and vessels are safer on it from the menace of pirates than
when they follow the coastwise route. On the other hand, the navigation
is more difficult, and under no circumstances should this route be
attempted by galleys, which might easily be sunk if a storm should come
up. In the account of the coastwise route various menaces and dangers to
ships are carefully pointed out. For instance, off the coast of Greece,
about twenty miles from land and fifty from Modon, there is a low round
rock called Triffar; and in order to avoid it ships are warned not to
stand too far out to sea. West-bound vessels, however, are advised,
instead of passing through the channels between “Chefeline”
(Cephalonia), “Fale de Campar” (Ithaca), and the neighboring islands to
keep out to sea, placing these islands on the right. Navigators are
cautioned to beware of a sand bar in Corfu harbor with only four and a
half _ulnae_ of water upon it. The dangers of the narrow and crooked
channel between Corfu and the mainland make it advisable for vessels en
route to Italy to avoid taking this passage and, by steering out to sea,
to leave Corfu on the right. The harbor of Karentet (Santa Quaranta) is
said to be a fine one, except for submerged reefs at the entrance and
extending under about half of its area; the best approach for ships is
not far from the Corfu side.

We find also many full and practical details regarding the distances
between various points along the coasts, the width of straits, the
length of islands; the names of seaport towns and now and then their
products and other distinguishing features are mentioned, for example,
the fact that Marseilles has an excellent harbor surrounded on all sides
by hills, or that Almeria in Spain is far-famed for its manufacture of
silk. Prominent landmarks are carefully pointed out: great mountains
making promontories on the coast of Spain, sand banks, the mouths of
rivers (like the Ebro, or the Salef in Asia Minor, “in which Frederick
Barbarossa was drowned and from the neighborhood of the sources of which
the three wise men were said to have come”), the high peaks in the
interior of Crete, or the volcanoes of Sicily and the Lipari Isles.
Marine life, such as the flying fish of the waters near Corsica and
Sardinia as well as less credible monstrosities of the Gulf of Satalia
on the southern coast of Asia Minor, also seems to have aroused the
curiosity of the navigator and chronicler.[1447]


                      ISLANDS OF THE MEDITERRANEAN

Most medieval maps show the islands of the Mediterranean scattered about
with scant respect for their actual locations and relative sizes. The
Guido map of the world, for instance, indicates but one island by name
in the entire Mediterranean, and that is “Baleares.”[1448] The most
important islands are fairly well represented on the St. Sever
Beatus[1449] (Fig. 2, p. 69, above), but the draftsman of the Osma
Beatus did not have room enough for Tenedos and Rhodes in the
Mediterranean (Fig. 4, p. 123, above), and hence placed then in the
circumambient ocean to the east of Taprobane![1450] In the _De imagine
mundi_ and in the _Otia imperialia_ the islands are described in a dull
and catalogue-like manner from the data given by Orosius and other
classical authorities.[1451] The accounts of the Mediterranean in the
chronicles which we have just been discussing also add little beside
scattering details on Corfu and Cyprus and a significant observation
that, owing to the danger from pirates, a large number of the islands of
the Greek archipelago had been deserted by their inhabitants.[1452]

Guy of Bazoches, who journeyed overseas with the Crusaders to Syria in
1190, told in a letter to his nephews[1453] that on the third morning
out from Marseilles they were in sight of Corsica and the many and
varied inlets and promontories of its broken coast. The following day
Sardinia was visible, likewise on the left. Sardinia, Guy wrote, might
almost have been called free from poisonous serpents, were it not for
one variety, the _solifuga_, which took the place of all the others,
since the poisonous virulence of all serpents was concentrated in this
one. Besides this there was a violently poisonous plant in Sardinia. On
the other hand, these pests were compensated for by the presence of hot
springs in several parts of the island which prevailed against the
_solifuga_ and were good for broken bones and for the eyes. We have
already spoken[1454] of Guy’s description of Sicily, which was reached
soon after Sardinia was left behind. From Sicily Guy came to Crete, “a
famous island and once powerful with a hundred cities.” Crete was
blessed with an absence of all kinds of serpents, though the place of
serpents was taken by a small animal called a _spalangius_, the bite of
which was deadly. In the sea where Crete lay were the Cyclades, forming
a circle around Delos, and Cyprus, more pleasing to the eye because of
the richness of its fields, the delights of its vineyards, and its
far-famed fertility.


                                _Sicily_

The critical position of Sicily on the routes between East and West and
North and South, its peculiar volcanic phenomena, as well as the
establishment of a Norman kingdom there, brought that island to the
attention of the outside world.[1455] Sicily came inevitably to figure
in the poetry and legend of the period both in France and in the isle
itself. The song of Roland and the Breton cycle of legends of King
Arthur were sung and related on Sicilian soil, and echoes of these
popular romances found their way into the Latin literature of our age.
One story had it that the peers of Charlemagne had passed through Sicily
on their return from Jerusalem and had named mountains after Roland and
Oliver. Godfrey of Viterbo wrote: “There stands a great mountain which
was called Roland and another similarly called Oliver, and these names
were applied by the bold dukes as memorials.”[1456] Gervase of Tilbury
was inclined to treat skeptically the report of how, in his own day,
King Arthur, said to have been enclosed within Mongibel (Etna), had
appeared miraculously on the outside of the mountain.[1457] King Arthur
also was associated in a French poem, _Florian et Florete_, with a
distinctively Sicilian fairy, Morgain—who gave her name to the _fata
morgana_, or mirage, over the Strait of Messina, and with Mongibel, an
abode of supernatural beings. French poets writing of Sicily from far
away often revealed an amazing ignorance of the geography of the isle,
as is well shown by the _Dolopathos_ of Jean of Haute Seille, in which
not only is the city of Mantua placed in Sicily but the insular
character of the latter is entirely overlooked.[1458]

The travelers Conrad of Querfurt and Guy of Bazoches both discuss the
phenomena of Etna[1459] and Scylla and Charybdis and refer to the
stories of Arethusa and of the rape of Proserpina.[1460] Conrad
identifies Taormina with the home of the minotaur.[1461] These
twelfth-century travelers were well read in the classical mythology of
the places they chose to visit.

With this mythical lore of the Mediterranean island should be contrasted
a few excellent and graphic accounts given by eyewitnesses. The
troubadour Ambroise, who sings of the expedition of Richard
Coeur-de-Lion, tells us something of the contemporary population of
Messina, consisting of Lombards, “Griffons” (or Greeks), and “persons of
Saracen extraction.”[1462] The latter, he complained, treated the French
pilgrims abominably, insulting them with evil gestures, calling them
dogs, and acting in an especially objectionable manner when the
Frenchmen tried to take liberties with the Saracens’ wives, a naïve
admission not to the credit of the Frenchmen. We have already alluded to
the graphic descriptions of Etna in the letters of Guy of Bazoches and
in the second redaction of the _Image du monde_.[1463]


                                _EUROPE_


                          NORTHEASTERN EUROPE

Eastern and northeastern Europe were quite as shadowy and unfamiliar to
the men of the West during our period as Central Asia or the heart of
Africa. Classical tradition had placed in the northern part of Europe a
range of mountains not far from the Ocean Stream, the Rhipaeans—perhaps
an echo of some very early acquaintance with the Urals.[1464] Between
these and the Ocean, so Gervase of Tilbury[1465] affirmed, there was a
land in the vicinity of the “septentrional” circle (called thus from the
“seven stars” and known to the Greeks as the “Arctic circle”) so cold as
to be constantly frozen and uninhabitable. Another tradition dating back
to remote antiquity placed the Hyperboreans far north in a region of
temperate climate. Robert Grosseteste and Roger Bacon tried to prove
that such a climate might be produced by the character of the mountains
at very high latitudes.[1466] The rivers of Scythia, among them the
Lentulus and the Tanaïs (Don), were said to have their sources in the
Rhipaean Mountains, and of these the Tanaïs, which was the largest,
after flowing past the altar of Augustus, constantly poured an immense
volume of water into the Euxine (Black Sea) near Theodosia.[1467]


                                 RUSSIA

More recent information about Russia had been acquired by men of the
West, though it had not been widely disseminated. In regard to northern
Russia the Northmen were in possession of much valuable knowledge. We
have already mentioned their adventurous voyagings in the Baltic and
around the North Cape into the White Sea to a region which they had
called Biarma.[1468] There is evidence that their trade with Biarmaland
was maintained throughout our period, although only three actual voyages
after the tenth century are recorded: one in 1090, one in 1217, and one
in 1222.[1469] A member of the expedition of 1217, however, crossed
Russia to the Black Sea and penetrated ultimately to the Holy Land
before returning to Norway.

Of southern Russia and the northern coasts of the Black Sea some slight
knowledge had undoubtedly filtered into the West through the medium of
the Italian merchants. Though Genoese, Pisans, and Venetians penetrated
these regions in the twelfth century,[1470] the great expansion of
Occidental commerce into the steppes and thence into the heart of Asia
came only after the establishment of the Latin Empire in Constantinople
in 1204 and after the conquest of the Ukraine and Crimea by the Mongols,
whose relatively tolerant rule was favorable to the presence of European
colonies and mercantile enterprise. Otto of Freising mentions the tribes
dwelling to the north and east of Hungary on the plains of Russia,
Petchenegs and Komans, devourers of raw and foul meats, such as those of
horses and cats—tribes who inhabited a land which, though rich in game,
had never felt the plow or rake.[1471] The Komans were also spoken of by
Robert de Clari (died 1216) in his _Prise de Constantinople_ as a
tent-dwelling folk, living on cattle, cheese, and milk and possessed of
large herds of horses.[1472] We have already quoted from Matthew Paris’
graphic description of the Mongols,[1473] who swept into Russia in
1222–1224 and later, in 1240–1243, menaced Central Europe itself.


                                 POLAND

Northwest of these tribes lay Poland, of which Ragewin gave a brief
description in his continuation of Otto’s _Gesta Friderici_.[1474]
Dwelling in a country bounded by the Oder on the west, the Vistula on
the east, the Ruthenians and the Scythian Ocean on the north, and the
Bohemian Forest on the south, the Poles, he tells us, are well protected
by the character of the land on which they live. They are almost a
barbaric people and are very quick to fight, partly because of their own
inherent ferocity but partly too because of contact with more ferocious
neighbors on the shores of the sea that washes their coasts.[1475]


    SLAVIC EUROPE AS DESCRIBED BY BENJAMIN OF TUDELA AND PETACHIA OF
                                RATISBON

The Hebrew travelers Benjamin of Tudela and Petachia of Ratisbon also
wrote of Slavic Europe, the former from hearsay, the latter from
personal observation. Benjamin stated that Russia was “a great empire
stretching from the gate of Prague to the gates of Kieff, the large city
which is at the extremity of that Empire. It is a land of mountains and
forests, where there are to be found animals called _vair_ [a species of
marten], ermine, and sable”[1476] (Adler’s translation). It seems that
Benjamin would include in Russia much of Bohemia, Galicia, and Poland,
together with the Carpathian Mountains. Petachia, who traversed Russia,
Caucasia, and Armenia on his way from Prague to Baghdad, was one of the
few Occidental travelers of the Middle Ages who ventured into the land
of the steppes before the overland journeys of John of Pian de Carpine,
William of Rubruck,[1477] and others to the Mongol court during the
middle and closing years of the thirteenth century. Petachia commented
on the absence of mountains in Russia. He described accurately the
tent-dwellers of Kedar, or the Ukraine (Petchenegs and Komans), noting
especially the horsehide rafts on which they cross the great rivers;
their diet of rice and millet boiled in milk and of raw flesh which they
warm under the saddles of their horses; their custom of drinking from
vessels of copper cast in the shape of a human face; their government in
the hands of princes and nobles rather than of kings. He gave some
details about that portion of the Sea of Azov now known as the Putrid
Sea, telling us that when the wind blows from its foul surface in the
direction of the Black Sea it causes the death of many people![1478]


                                HUNGARY

With Pannonia, or Hungary, Western Europe was in much more intimate
contact than with Russia and Poland. Gervase of Tilbury, to be sure,
adds little to what Orosius had told about this country,[1479] but in
Otto of Freising’s _Gesta Friderici_ there is a description of both land
and people.[1480] Otto writes that Pannonia is enclosed by woods and
mountains, particularly by the range of the Apennines (_sic_); it forms
a wide and well-watered plain, fed by springs and rivers; there are a
great many woods stocked with game of every variety, and the land
abounds in fields so rich and fertile that they can be likened either to
the Paradise of God or else to Egypt. The aspect of the country is
beautiful but rendered so rather by nature itself than by the work of
man, for, owing to the barbaric state of civilization in which the
people remain, walls and buildings are very rare. Boundaries are marked
by the courses of great rivers and not by woods and hills. The names
which Otto assigns to the borders of Pannonia have a distinctly modern
sound, contrasting with the classical geographic nomenclature used by
Gervase for all this part of the world. “Eastward, where the famous
river Sawa (Save) is received by the Danube, Pannonia borders on
Bulgaria; westward on Moravia and the eastern marches of the Teutons;
southward on Croatia, Dalmatia, Hystria (Istria), or Carinthia; and
northward on Boemia (Bohemia), Polimia (Poland), Ruthenia, etc.; to the
northeast are the Pecenati (Petchenegs) and Falones (Komans), and to the
southeast is Rama.” Otto also describes rather fully the tent-dwellers
of the Hungarian plain. The country, he says, has suffered much through
the invasions of barbarians, and hence no wonder it remains a land where
the people are of rough speech and little culture. First the Huns
overran this region, then the Avars, eaters of raw and unclean meat, and
finally the Hungarians from Scythia. The latter have deep-set eyes, are
ugly and small, wild and barbaric in speech and customs; and one is
constrained to wonder at the injustice of fate, or, even more, at the
patience of God, for giving such a beautiful country to such a monstrous
folk. Otto then adds further details about the customs of the people:
their deliberation in council, their unlimited obedience to the
tyrannical and arbitrary authority of their kings, the rigid
requirements of their military system. Their dwellings in the villages
and towns are primitive to an extreme, the houses nearly always built of
reeds, rarely of wood, and almost never of stone. As a matter of fact,
the majority of the people lived both winter and summer in tents.

Relations between France and Hungary were fairly close in the twelfth
century.[1481] Intermarriages between members of the reigning houses had
induced many of the Hungarian nobles to imitate French manners and
customs. French teaching monks and military orders (Templars and
Hospitalers) had established themselves in the Danubian plain before the
close of the century, and during the Crusades many Frenchmen found
occasion to visit the eastern kingdom in one capacity or another.[1482]
In the thirteenth century the Gallic colonies in Hungary became even
more numerous than previously, and French merchants and architects were
well known among the Magyars.[1483] Conversely, this French infiltration
led to the dissemination of some knowledge of Hungary in France and to
frequent mention of that country in the _chansons de geste_, though the
phrase “to go to Hungary” was held to be synonymous with visiting any
extremely distant and unknown region.[1484] It was not in the nature of
the _chansons de geste_ to supply detailed geographical information,
least of all about a remote country; and consequently the presence of
any testimony at all of a geographical nature in them justifies our
belief that the troubadours knew more of Hungary than their songs at
first glance would seem to indicate. We are told that among the products
of the Magyar kingdom were horses, mules, and donkeys, which were
exported to France; that the gold of Hungary was well known in the West;
and that there were many cities in this realm, though only one of these,
Striguus, is mentioned by name.


                            BALKAN PENINSULA

Quite characteristically, in dealing with Hungary and the Balkan
Peninsula, such writers as the author of the _De imagine mundi_[1485]
and Gervase of Tilbury [1486] merely copied from Isidore and Orosius,
who in turn had derived their knowledge from much earlier sources. The
accounts of this part of Europe in these standard authorities of our
period, though fairly full, were nearly a thousand years out of date.
Even so, it comes as something of a shock to find that on the Jerome map
of the East, drawn as late as 1150, a legend near the Ister (Danube)
informs us that in this locality “the pygmies fight with the
cranes.”[1487]

More recent information seems to have been gathered by Arnold of Lübeck.
In the _Chronica Slavorum_[1488] he speaks of a city of Ravenelle,[1489]
where the river Ravana flows into the Morava. This city, he says, lies
in the midst of a wood, and its inhabitants are called Servi. They are
sons of the devil, heathens, ravenous for meat, and worthy of their
name, for they are the slaves of all low and foul passions and live like
beasts but are even wilder than beasts. In such uncomplimentary terms
Arnold describes the ancestors of the modern Serbians and adds that they
were subjects of the kings of the Greeks, i. e. the Byzantine emperors.

In regard to the Balkan Peninsula as well as to Hungary, however, much
knowledge had undoubtedly been gained through the Crusaders. The main
route from the West to Constantinople by way of the Morava and Maritsa
valleys was taken in the First Crusade by Godfrey of Bouillon; in the
Second by Louis VII and Conrad III (1147); and, in the Third, Frederick
Barbarossa followed it as far as Adrianople, whence he made his way into
Asia Minor through Gallipoli and across the Dardanelles. Other leaders
of the First Crusade had traveled overland from the Adriatic at Durazzo
and Avlona to Thessalonica and thence eastward along the shore to the
Bosporus. During the Fourth Crusade the Latin fleet coasted Dalmatia,
Greece, and the Archipelago; and the founding of the Latin Empire, with
its petty Frankish principalities in Greece and among the isles,
inevitably established a connection between those parts of the world and
Europe beyond the Alps.

Knowledge of Balkan countries was also derived from trade as well as
from the enterprise of the Crusaders. In the twelfth century, Occidental
colonies were to be found in practically all the important cities of the
Byzantine Empire. Heyd in his _Histoire du commerce du Levant_[1490]
gives a summary of the evidence on this subject, which shows that before
the Fourth Crusade (1203–1204) there were in existence colonies, mostly
of Italians from Genoa, Venice, and Pisa. Thessalonica harbored in its
foreign quarter not only Italians, but Spaniards, Portuguese, and
French. As commerce went mainly by sea, an important traffic had sprung
up among the islands of the Archipelago and especially between Euboea,
Crete, Rhodes, Lemnos, and the West, though prior to the Fourth Crusade
Western merchants avoided penetrating the interior of Greece.


                            _Constantinople_

Constantinople was a great meeting place of merchants from all quarters
of the known world and consequently a very important center for the
dispersal of geographical knowledge. During the twelfth century Pisan,
Venetian, and Genoese colonies flourished together there unharmoniously
and vied with each other for trade privileges, but after 1204 the
Venetians had matters very much in their own hands. Eustathius,
archbishop of Thessalonica, says[1491] that in 1180 there were no fewer
than 60,000 Latins in Constantinople and that the majority of these were
Italians. Benjamin of Tudela[1492] and other writers also tell of
merchants here from Babylon, Mesopotamia, Media, Persia, Armenia, Iberia
(in the Caucasus), Egypt, Palestine, Russia, Hungary, the country of the
Petchenegs, Bulgaria, Spain, France, and Germany, though the Latins were
by all odds the most numerous among this multitude. After the
establishment of the Latin Empire in 1204 we hear of the presence of
Provençaux, Spaniards, citizens of Ancona, and even Danes and
English,[1493] though the latter were probably mercenaries rather than
traders. With this motley population Constantinople was preëminently the
great cosmopolitan city of the world and as such served as a vast
clearing house for geographical information brought thither from all
four corners of the earth.

Benjamin of Tudela described the Constantinople of his day in graphic
terms,[1494] alluding especially to the busy activity of its merchants,
the costly magnificence of its buildings (notably the Church of Santa
Sophia and the Palace of Blachernae), as well as to the wealth of its
Greek inhabitants, who “go clothed in garments of silk with gold
embroidery and ride horses and look like princes” (Adler’s translation).
He was impressed by the great shows given annually on Christmas Day at
the Hippodrome, the like of which were to be seen in no other land;
here, in accord with the old Roman custom, lions, leopards, bears, and
wild asses were made to engage in combat. The Jews of Constantinople
were segregated in the quarter of Pera, where their condition was very
miserable, and they were subjected to many indignities. “Yet,” Benjamin
adds, “the Jews are rich and good, kindly and charitable, and bear their
lot with cheerfulness.”


                                 ITALY

Otto of Freising’s _Gesta Friderici_[1495] probably contains one of the
best general descriptions of Italy dating from the time of the
Crusades.[1496] Otto says that the Italian peninsula as a whole is
divided into three parts. The districts that once constituted the Roman
_colonia_ form _ulterior Italia_, which consists of Venetia, Emilia, and
Liguria, with Aquileia, Ravenna, and Milan respectively as capitals. The
part “within” the Apennines, where Rome and Tuscany are situated, is
known as _interior Italia_. Beyond these mountains (to the south) are
the fields from which Campania derives its name. This part of the
peninsula extends as far as the Faro, or strait cutting off Sicily from
the mainland—Sicily itself being counted with Sardinia and other
neighboring isles as a part of Italy—and is known as _citerior Italia_,
or Magna Graecia. In Otto’s day this third portion was more commonly
called Apulia or Calabria. In conclusion Otto adds that some authorities
preferred to divide Italy into two parts only, _ulterior_ and
_citerior_, the latter consisting of the above-mentioned middle and
southern districts together.[1497]

Otto waxes particularly enthusiastic about Northern Italy, a region
which he conceived of as bordered or hedged in by the high and craggy
ranges of the Apennines and “Pyrenean” (_sic_) Alps, stretching out in
either direction, enclosing the region in their midst. Like a “garden of
delights” (the term frequently used to describe Paradise), this district
is bounded by the Pyrenean Alps on the north, the Apennines (vulgarly
called Mount Bardo) on the south, the Tyrrhenian Sea on the west, and
the Adriatic on the east. Watered by the course of the great river Po,
or Eridanus (which topographers considered one of the three most famous
streams of Europe, says Otto), and by other rivers, blessed with a rich
soil and a temperate climate, this land is most fertile in grain, in the
vine and olive, and produces such a variety of fruit trees—especially
chestnuts, figs, and olives—that it resembles an immense grove.[1498]

To the world beyond the Alps, Lombardy was the best-known part of Italy.
Godfrey of Viterbo[1499] dilates on its immense potential strength, with
thirty cities, the equal of any one of which could scarcely be found
elsewhere in the world. The population of Lombardy is thicker than the
hair on a woman’s head, and rare are the times when a ship cannot be
seen on the Po. Otto of Freising[1500] gives an account of the Lombard
invasion of Northern Italy, of the founding of Milan and its neighboring
cities, and of the free government and liberal democratic institutions
of the Italian city states.

Gunther of Pairis amplified and made more picturesque Otto of Freising’s
description of Italy, but it is doubtful whether he added any
observations resulting from first-hand acquaintance with the peninsula.
Whatever the sources from which he derived his descriptions of Lombardy
and Apulia—his own imagination, personal experience, the inspiration of
classical poetry, or the _Gesta Friderici_—if we compare them, we find
that the differences between the inhabitants of the northern and
southern parts of the peninsula were fully appreciated in the twelfth
century. The Lombards, Gunther says,[1501] are a keen, skillful, and
active people, foresighted in counsel, expert in justice, strong in body
and spirit, full of life and handsome to look upon, with light, supple
bodies that give them great powers of endurance, economical and always
moderate in eating and drinking, masters of their hands and mouths,
honorable in every business transaction, mighty in the arts and always
eagerly striving for the new. Lovers of freedom and ready to face death
for freedom’s sake, these people have never been willing to submit to
kings.

Apulia in the south, Gunther goes on to say, is also a fair country,
rich in all the blessings of this earth:[1502] fruit trees, vineyards,
pasture lands, towns and cities, all of which make a gloriously
beautiful prospect. But what a contrast its people present to the
Lombards, dirty, lazy, weak, good-for-nothing idlers that they are!


                                 _Rome_

Rome must have been in a sad state of decay and dilapidation, if we can
place any trust in the picturesque accounts of the city given by Otto
and Gunther.[1503] From our period there also dates a little booklet on
the topography and monuments of Rome, which exerted wide influence and
enjoyed great popularity during the thirteenth and later centuries. This
work, the _Mirabilia urbis Romae_, contains a discourse on the
antiquities and architecture of the Eternal City. It is in three parts.
Part One treats of “the foundation of Rome and of her chief monuments,
with chapters on the town walls, gates, arches, hills, baths, palaces,
theaters, bridges, cemeteries, places where the saints suffered
martyrdom,” and so on; Part Two contains “divers histories touching
certain famous places and images in Rome,” that is legends of both
classical and Christian origin; and Part Three is a “perambulation of
the city,” like Baedeker in its fullness of topographical and
architectural detail. Though this book is a dry catalogue, its very
existence and popularity are significant of the fact that antiquities
aroused interest in the twelfth century and that the archeological
tourist was not altogether a product of the days of the Renaissance.
Gregorovius, the historian of medieval Rome, says of the _Mirabilia_:
“In this curious composition ... Roman archeology, which has now
attained such appalling proportions, puts forth its earliest shoots in a
naïve and barbarous form and in a Latin as ruinous as its
subject.”[1504]

Another contemporary writer on Roman monuments, an unknown Master
Gregory, includes a description of six out of the seven wonders of the
world in his short tract on the marvels of the Eternal City![1505]


                             _Antiquities_

In a letter of the traveler Conrad of Querfurt describing a journey
through Italy[1506] we also find a strongly antiquarian interest in
evidence. Conrad’s primary concern was for the mythological and
historical associations of the places he visited, and he took a genuine
tourist’s pride in being able to say that he had seen with his own eyes
spots made famous by the poets. His route carried him over the Alps to
Mantua, thence down the length of the peninsula to the Strait of Messina
and into Sicily. He tells us that he would have been amazed at the
smallness of the famous Rubicon and that such a paltry stream could have
presented any kind of obstacle to Caesar, had not a native informed him
that in rainy weather the river was much wider. In the vicinity of
Naples he noted, besides the baths of Virgil at Baiae, certain natural
features: Mount “Veseus” (Vesuvius), which every ten years sends out
flames and stinking ashes, and the subterranean passages under Monte
Barbaro. Calabria, he says, is a rough and trackless country through
which it is necessary to pass in order to reach Sicily.


                                 SPAIN

Gervase of Tilbury[1507] adds little besides a list of the
archiepiscopal sees and their suffragans to the dry details which
Orosius[1508] and the _De imagine mundi_[1509] had furnished concerning
Spain. In the _Chronica_[1510] of Roger of Hoveden the story of the
passage of Richard Coeur-de-Lion’s fleet around the coasts of the
Iberian Peninsula was the occasion for a discussion of the geography of
that part of the world, together with a list of the towns of the coast.
Roger[1511] enumerates the bishoprics of Spain and, in his description
of Castile, mentions Toledo as the seat of the primate, under whom there
were twenty-one bishops. He says that there were two hundred castles in
Castile and, furthermore, that Castile contained a mountain from which
were taken daily many thousand camel-loads of earth. No matter how big
an excavation was made, if rain fell it was always filled up again on
the following day. This earth was sold in the surrounding countries for
washing the heads and garments of Christians and pagans alike. Roger
also is careful to bring out the distinction between Christian Spain,
consisting of Navarre, Castile, Portugal, Aragon, and the “lands of the
kings of St. James” (Leon), on the one hand, and Saracenic Spain,
comprising the kingdoms of Cordova, “Gahang” (Jaén), Murcia, and
Valencia, on the other.


                                THE ALPS

Otto of Freising asserted that the Alps and Apennines join near
Tortona,[1512] though he was not inclined to dispute a prevalent belief
that these two mountain systems form in effect one continuous
range.[1513] In order to demonstrate this, he says people assert that,
as viewed from the deck of a vessel lying off Genoa, the two systems
appear to be continuous and to constitute the same mountain range and
that, according to Isidore, Pannonia was enclosed by the Apennines, from
which it took its name. He argues that the portion of the Apennines
which encloses Pannonia certainly cannot be the same as that part which
is to be found in peninsular Italy and is there called Mount Bardo, but
must be a continuation of the “Pyrenean Alps.”

The Alps themselves not only are a great, wall-like barrier—broken, to
be sure, by relatively low breaches—between Italy and the North, but
themselves constitute a broad band of territory which until
comparatively recent times has been difficult of access and during the
Middle Ages was for the most part virtually _terra incognita_ to the
outside world. The existence of thickly populated centers of civilized
life on either side had, however, long before our age led to
familiarity with the main routes through the mountains. There were
four or five motives which induced men to cross the Alps in the Middle
Ages. Ecclesiastics traversed them when bound to and from Rome on
official missions. German emperors en route to Italy to be crowned and
to attempt to regulate Italian affairs led their armies over their
defiles. Pilgrims and Crusaders toiled painfully through their passes
towards Rome and the East; and merchants brought their wares across
the snows back and forth from the busy cities of Northern Italy.
Taking it all in all, there must have been a large number of men
scattered throughout Germany, France, England, and the Scandinavian
countries who were acquainted with the appearance of Alpine scenery
and the difficulties of Alpine travel. Between 1100 and 1250 seven
emperors made no less than thirty-nine journeys over Alpine
passes.[1514] The size of their armies varied greatly. The numbers
given for the immense concourse (30,000) which Henry V is said to have
mustered in 1110 at Roncaglia after conducting them through the
mountains were undoubtedly exaggerated.[1515] At all events, the army
was so great that Henry had to divide it and send part over the
Brenner Pass and part over the Great St. Bernard. The numbers of
Frederick Barbarossa’s armies probably ranged from 10,000 to 15,000.
The time of year chosen for undertaking the journey by those among the
medieval travelers who were free to make their own plans—notably the
pilgrims—was usually the month of August. Albert of Stade near
Hamburg, writing in his chronicle early in the thirteenth century,
says that the journey should be undertaken “about the middle of
August, since the air is then temperate, the roads dry, there is no
excess of water, the days are sufficiently long for traveling and the
nights for rest, and you will find at this time the storehouses full
of fresh fruits.”[1516] Political exigencies, however, forced the
emperors to conduct their hosts across at all seasons and under all
conditions of weather.[1517]

Of the many Transalpine routes, the Mont Cenis, Great St. Bernard,
Septimer, and Brenner were the most frequented during our period. These
were the passes over which trade flowed back and forth between Italy and
the North.[1518] English and North German pilgrims made frequent use of
the Mont Cenis route because it offered an easy way, a long and simple
ascent to and descent from the crest of the ridge, and no subsidiary
passes to surmount.[1519] Pilgrims from Iceland, though they also used
the Mont Cenis, seem to have preferred the Great St. Bernard;[1520] but
when bound for the Holy Land they would sometimes traverse the Carnic
Alps and embark from Venice.[1521] The Brenner Pass was, of course, most
used by the Germans and formed the grand highway of the imperial
expeditions. Out of the thirty-nine imperial crossings between 1100 and
1250 nearly half were made by the Brenner, four by the Great St.
Bernard, six by the Septimer, three by the Mont Cenis, two by the
Lukmanier, and six by other passes.[1522]


               USE OF TERMS “TRANSALPINE” AND “CISALPINE”

In classical times the terms _trans Alpes_ and _transalpinus_ always
referred to Gaul, Germany, and regions north of the mountains, for these
countries were beyond the Alps as viewed from Italy. This usage was
continued in the Middle Ages by writers who themselves dwelt north of
the Alps, and we find in our period that Otto of Freising speaks of
Germany as _trans Alpes_ and of Italy as _cis Alpes_.[1523] Ragewin,
Otto’s continuator, wrote more avowedly from the Germanic point of view
and on several occasions refers to Italy as _trans Alpes_.[1524]


                              “ALEMANNIA”

The name “Alemannia” as applied to the whole of Germany was also in use
in our period, although in the opinion of Otto it ought not to have been
so used. Otto says that the city of Turegum (Zurich) is situated on a
lake from which the river Lemannus flows and that from this river the
province of Swabia is sometimes called Alemannia. “From this
circumstance, some have come to think that the whole Teutonic land is
called ‘Alemannia,’ whereas this province only [i.e. Swabia] should be
called Alemannia, and its inhabitants only should be spoken of as
‘Alemanni.’”[1525] The question of the true etymology of the word
Alemanni is one that lies beyond our field.


                                GERMANY

Though the author of the _De imagine mundi_[1526] follows Isidore and
classical tradition in dividing Germany into two parts, “Germania
superior” and “Germania inferior,” in the description of this part of
the world he departs from his usual slavish habit of copying the words
of Isidore and actually gives us a little information derived from a
later source or, perhaps, even representing the result of personal and
original observation. “Germania superior,” he says, extends between the
Danube and the Alps and westward to the Rhine. Called also Rhaetia, it
is the land in which the Danube takes its rise (a river which, enlarged
by the junction of sixty great streams, discharges its waters into the
Pontic Sea through seven mouths, as does the Nile). Suevia (Swabia),
Alemannia (so called from Lake Leman), and Noricum (or Bavaria), in
which is the city of Ratisbon, are all parts of “Germania superior.” It
would almost seem as if the author of the _De imagine mundi_ goes out of
his way to mention Ratisbon, a fact that has been cited[1527] as
evidence (very slender evidence, it is true) that he may have been a
native of this city or was at least personally acquainted with Germany.
He carefully refrained from placing Isidore’s marvelous bird with
luminous plumage in the Hercynian Forest, but removed it to Hyrcania in
Central Asia, which seems to show that he was skeptical about the
possibility of such a bird being found in Germany.[1528] Yet, though
less lacking in originality than other parts of the work, the chapters
on Germany in the _De imagine mundi_ can hardly stand comparison with
the information to be found in Otto of Freising’s _Gesta Friderici_ and
in Gunther of Pairis’ _Ligurinus_, both of which bespeak undeniable
personal familiarity with the country. We have already noticed Otto’s
description of the local topography in the vicinity of Freising.[1529]
Elsewhere he mentions such matters as the good hunting and fishing in
the neighborhood of Worms, enjoyed by the Italian princes who came over
the Alps to take part in a diet held there.[1530] This territory, he
said, was divided by the Rhine, with Gaul on one bank and the confines
of Germany on the other. On the Gallic side stood the Vosges and
Ardennes; on the German, forests of considerable extent, which to Otto’s
day retained their barbaric place names (“barbara adhuc nomina
retinentes”). Godfrey of Viterbo[1531] also enlarges on the beauties of
the region about Worms, the wealth and numbers of its population, the
fields and the fish-filled streams which water them, flowing down from
wooded places.

Gunther’s description of the Main, Rhine, and Moselle country show that
he probably was better acquainted with this district than with any of
the other territories described in his poem.[1532] He cites, among
specific details concerning Mayence, the fact that the city is situated
on the Rhine a few leagues below the junction of the Main with that
stream and not at the junction, as had usually been stated
previously.[1533]

Hildegard of Bingen includes in her _Subtilitates_[1534] remarks about
the rivers of her native country, with cautions regarding their use. Her
introductory statement in this connection, that the sea sends forth
rivers by which the land is irrigated as is the human body by the blood
in the veins, should be interpreted in the sense we have already
explained in Chapter VIII.[1535] She writes of the Seh (possibly the
Selz, a stream that flows into the Rhine near Bingen), Rhine, Main,
Danube, Moselle, Glan, Nahe, and other rivers, repeating in each case
the assertion that the river arises from the sea. The bed of the Seh and
its sands, she says, are polluted like a swamp because the stream rises
and falls with the storms. Its waters should not be taken raw, nor even
cooked in food, for, since they come from the foam of the sea, they are
bad for the digestion and generally unsanitary. The Rhine is clear and
flows through sandy country; but its water, when drunk unboiled, causes
noxious blue fluids in the body. The sands of the Danube are clean and
beautiful, its waters clear and harsh but not very good for drinking;
the waters of the Main are insipid (_pinguis_); those of the Moselle
light and transparent; and so on.

We find in the German chronicles of the time of the Crusades and of the
century immediately preceding, some detailed notices about the northern
parts of Germany and the shores of the Baltic not to be found in earlier
works. In the middle of the eleventh century Adam of Bremen had
described Saxony as a generally flat, low region of roughly triangular
shape, lying between the lower Elbe and Rhine.[1536] The rivers Elbe and
Oder, he said, rise near each other in the forested mountains of Moravia
but flow off in opposite directions, the former to the northern sea, the
latter to the Scythian swamp, or Baltic.[1537] Saxo Grammaticus in the
geographical introduction to his _Gesta Danorum_ gives some fairly full
remarks on the configuration of the German Baltic coast and on the
peninsulas and islands of Denmark. The latter country, he says, is so
intersected and broken by arms and channels of the sea that it contains
few continuous tracts of land of any great size.[1538] Frisia Minor,
adjacent to Denmark, is so low that it is often swept by violent storms
and inundations which ruin the fields and destroy the houses.[1539]


                             BALTIC REGIONS

Adam of Bremen’s foremost interest was not Germany, however, but the
Scandinavian North and the wilder and little-known lands beyond the
Elbe, into which the frontier of Teutonic civilization was at this time
gradually being pushed eastward. Adam mentions Jumna,[1540] at the mouth
of the Oder, a great commercial city and gathering place of heathens and
Greeks, and adds that according to some authorities Jumna was the
largest city in Europe.[1541] Farther east lay various nations of
Slavonia—Pomeranians and Prussians—and beyond them other “islands,”
Samland, Kurland, and “Ehstland” (Esthonia), peopled by heathens.
Traveling still more remotely in this direction one came to Russia and
the fabulous regions of the North. Adam speaks well of the
Prussians,[1542] for though heathen, he said, they were good men, ready
to come to the aid of ships beset by pirates or in danger from the sea.
Blue-eyed, with red skins and thick hair, eaters of horseflesh and
drinkers of mare’s blood, they dwell in the midst of almost impenetrable
swamps. Helmold, a chronicler of the twelfth century, copies extensively
from Adam but adds many details regarding the religion and customs of
the Slavs and, in particular, describes their worship of a great idol of
the God Svantevith.[1543]

Saxo Grammaticus was better informed than Adam on the countries
bordering upon the southern and southeastern coasts of the Baltic, and
about them he supplies more or less extensive details.[1544] Though the
Greeks and Romans alike had believed that on the north of Germany lies
the ocean, in the midst of which are various islands—including Scandia
and Scandinavia, about which little was known—they certainly had no
adequate conception of the peninsular nature of Norway and Sweden. In
the ninth century Einhard had described the Baltic as a bay, and Adam of
Bremen quoted Einhard to this effect[1545] and it is also possible that
Adam may have learned something of the Gulf of Bothnia.[1546] Adam,
however, had no clear knowledge of the geography of this part of the
world for “he speaks of the countries of the North as islands, and he
seems to draw no sharp distinction between island and peninsula.”[1547]
Saxo, on the other hand, writing over a century later, harbored no
doubts whatever of the peninsular character of Scandinavia. He
maintained that the sea swings around the north side of Norway and with
constantly increasing breadth ends finally in a curved shore. This sea
was here called by the ancients Gandvic (the White Sea). A narrow
isthmus separates Gandvic from the sea to the south (the Baltic), and if
the isthmus did not exist, Saxo said, Norway and Sweden would be an
island.[1548]


                              SCANDINAVIA

Adam of Bremen enjoyed peculiar opportunities for gathering information
about the lands immediately to the north of Denmark through his
association with archbishop Adalbert of Bremen.[1549] Beyond Denmark, he
wrote, a new world was opened up. Norway, he believed, extended
northward to the limits of the known world, to the Rhipaean
Mountains.[1550] Through a second of his patrons, King Svend Estridsson
of Denmark, who had spent no less than twelve years in these parts, Adam
was enabled to learn something of the remote land of Sweden: a rich
country, the principal towns of which were Birka and Upsala, the latter
possessing a heathen temple, the scene of human sacrifices. Northward of
Sweden were regions inhabited by tribes of Finns of marvelous swiftness
of foot. These so-called “Finns”—probably in reality Lapps—are
frequently mentioned in medieval literature on Scandinavia and the
North.[1551] They are sometimes called “Scritefinns,” “Skritofinns,” or
“Skridfinns.” Saxo Grammaticus spoke of them as great hunters who can
climb over the rocky crags of the mountains to the very summits.[1552]
In the _Historia Norwegiae_ we are told that they “fasten smoothed
pieces of wood [literally, balks, stakes] under their feet, which
appliances they call ‘ondrer,’ and, while the deer [i.e. reindeer]
gallop along carrying their wives and children over the deep snow and
precipitous mountains, they dash on more swiftly than the birds”
(Nansen’s translation).[1553] Here we have one of the earliest accounts
of the use of skis.

Beyond the Finns Adam of Bremen placed the realm of fable that encircled
the medieval world,[1554] where were to be found a race of dwarfs and
bearded women inhabiting the Rhipaean Mountains; where were also
Amazons, Cyclopes, and monsters like those which other writers of our
age placed in the heart of Asia or of Africa.

Adam of Bremen, Saxo Grammaticus, and the author of the _Historia
Norwegiae_, though they included much that is fanciful in their
geographical chapters, also provided reliable data regarding the peoples
of the North. Ragewin, on the other hand, in the continuation of the
_Gesta Friderici_, and Gunther of Pairis give an account which
undoubtedly represented a more usual idea of these people in the minds
of Western Europeans. These northern folk aroused Ragewin’s disgust,
for, he said, they devour each other in time of famine. Owing to
perpetual frosts, agriculture is impossible in their country, and their
lives consequently are given over to hunting and killing. Well versed in
the arts of piracy, these treacherous tribes infest the shores and isles
of the ocean, Hibernia, Britain, Denmark, and other coasts.[1555]
Gunther in the _Ligurinus_[1556] enlarges and amplifies this
uncomplimentary description by drawing on his own imagination. He says
that the inhabitants of the isles of the “Scythian Sea” are strong in
the arm but weak in the head. They neither plow a soil made sterile by
the perpetual cold nor harrow their uncultivated fields. Neither do they
couple the vine to the elm, nor gather in the fruits of the trees,
autumn’s gifts, but seek their food by the chase and by frequent forays
and grow old in piracy on the tireless waves of the sea. And when long
privation aggravates a famine—horrible to relate and scarce to be
believed, though report would have it so!—these miserable creatures bite
and lacerate their own limbs. Father does not know enough to spare his
son, nor brother his brother, and the daughter finds refreshment by
devouring the boiled body of her mother!

We certainly must not take this effusion as a literally exact account of
the customs of the Scandinavians at a time when they were far from being
sunk in the abject state of savagery which Gunther pictures; but it
shows the terror which the Vikings had instilled into the consciousness
of Europe and also the very vague and hazy kind of reports which an
intelligent German of the twelfth century received in regard to regions
not very distant from his home. Furthermore, it is not at all improbable
that the story of cannibalism among these people may have arisen from an
actually existing practice of human sacrifice coupled with cannibalistic
rites at an earlier date.[1557]


                                 FRANCE

Otto of Freising regarded the Rhine as the boundary between Germany and
Gaul. Though he had studied at Paris, he used Orosius as the main source
for the description of Gaul in his _Chronicon_[1558] and discussed the
various parts of this country and the proper manner in which it ought to
be subdivided in a way that reminds us of Caesar. Authorities, he said,
declare that there are two main subdivisions; Gallia Cisalpina and
Gallia Transalpina. The former lies in Italy between the Po and the
Alps; the latter—our France—in turn may be divided into three parts (the
three parts made famous by Caesar), Belgian, Lugdunensian, and
Aquitanian. Otto then proceeds to a dry and technical discussion of how
these parts should be properly grouped in relation to an ill-defined
Celtic Gaul.


                                _Paris_

More full of color than the pedantic discussion of Otto is a picturesque
description of the Paris of the last half of the twelfth century in one
of the letters of Guy of Bazoches.[1559] “The city,” Guy writes, “lies
in the lap of a delightful valley crowned on both sides by hills which
Ceres and Bacchus make beautiful, striving with one another in their
eagerness. The Seine, by no means a humble stream among a host of
rivers, takes its rise in the east and in mid-course divides its proud
current into two branches, thus making an island out of the center of
the city. Two suburbs stretch forth on either side, and even the lesser
of these arouses the envy of many an envious town which it surpasses.
Connecting each suburb with the island is a bridge of stone, the name of
which is derived from the amount of traffic that falls to its lot. The
bridge facing the north, the sea, and England is styled the ‘great
bridge’ and the one which faces the Loire on the opposite side is called
the ‘little bridge.’” The so-called great bridge—

         “Densely crowded with a wealthy, bargaining throng,

                ·       ·       ·       ·       ·

         Swarms with boats, groans under riches, overflows
         With merchandise: for lo! there is nowhere its equal!”

The little bridge, on the other hand, is given over to walkers,
strollers, and disputers of logic. On the narrow strip of land that
forms the island the royal palace towers up to lofty heights and
audaciously overlooks with its shoulders the roofs of the whole city.
Reverence for it is commanded not so much by the marvelous structure of
the building as by the noble authority of its rule.

      “This is that house, the glory of the Franks, whose
      Praises the eternal centuries will sing.
      This is that house which holds in its power
      Gaul mighty in war, Flanders magnificent in wealth.
      This is that house whose scepter the Burgundian,
      Whose mandate the Norman, and whose arms the Briton fears.”

The description of Paris closes with a tribute to the island, from
ancient times the home of philosophy and of the seven sisters—the
liberal arts.


                                _Alsace_

Godfrey of Viterbo seems to have known something of Alsace, whose
attractions and beauties he highly praised.[1560] The Rhine, he said, is
enlivened with shipping. Flowing into Alsace from Basel it laves with
its waters wide fields through varied stretches of landscape and
traverses a rich countryside. To cross this region takes a traveler
three beautiful days’ journey, and such vineyards as flourish there the
poet sees nowhere else in the world, and the grainfields are marvelous
in their fertility. It is a land that can be aptly compared with
“Liguria” (Lombardy), for in like manner it is naturally defended by
rivers and mountains. The Lord, in his special love for Alsace, had made
its plain stand preëminent in beauty among the plains of the world. The
population is extremely numerous, and so great are the riches of the
people that England and Denmark look thither for markets. Dominating the
whole country is the city of Argentina (Strasburg), through which flows
the river Ill, rushing to pour forth its water into the Rhine.


                           _Southern France_

We find various passages in the _Otia imperialia_ of Gervase of Tilbury
revealing his familiarity with the south of France. On two different
occasions Gervase speaks of the three mouths of the Rhone, which enclose
the Sucades (or Sicades) Islands, “commonly called the Camargae.”[1561]
The earth here is rich in salt of a high quality, and the region as a
whole is incomparable for its sea and pond fishing, for the hunting of
game and birds, and for its pastures.[1562] Orosius[1563] and
Isidore[1564] had mentioned the Sicades, undoubtedly having in mind the
Stoechades of the ancient geographers, or what are now either the Iles
d’Hyères or else, possibly, the small islets just outside the harbor of
Marseilles. Gervase, on the other hand, identifies them undeniably with
the flat alluvial islands of the Rhone delta, the largest of which is
now called Camargue, as in Gervase’s day. He also mentions the famous
church of Saints Martha and Mary Magdalene on this isle, then, as at
present, a much frequented shrine of pilgrimage.[1565]

Gervase knew something of the Narbonnese.[1566] On the authority of the
_De imagine mundi_[1567] he states that this province was called
_togata_ because of the length of the togas worn there, but adds that
the description was no longer apt, because in his time the natives wore
shorter garments.

Concerning Provence, Gervase made observations intended to impress on
the Emperor Otto some idea of the strategic importance of this territory
to his empire.[1568] We have here an example of medieval political and
strategic geography, based in this case not on classical authority but
on what the writer actually had observed and thought. The argument,
curiously enough, arose out of the discussion we have already
mentioned[1569] of the effects of the _mistral_ on the character of the
people of the lower Rhone valley. Gervase concluded that not only does
the atmosphere exert an influence on everything upon which it bears down
but also that every weight, whether material or spiritual, affects in
some manner the objects upon which it rests. This led him to warn Otto
that it would be advisable to moderate his _imperium_ over Provence in
order to propitiate the people. This should be done because the
strategic position of that country—the old Kingdom of Arles—is of such
nature that it might prove either a great menace or else a great benefit
to the unity of the empire. Though admirably situated to threaten
France, Gervase explained that Provence is subject to easy invasion by
land from Spain, by sea from Africa, or across the Alpine passes from
Italy. The character of the people, furthermore, makes it particularly
important that they should be handled with circumspection. The
Provençaux are shrewd in council and effective in whatever enterprise
they undertake but false to their promises and without military
strength; owing to their poverty largely dependent on charity (_pro sua
paupertate in cibando larga_); insidious in crime (_nocenda_); but calm
in the face of trouble. If they have a stable ruler whom they honor, no
race is more quickly turned by good impulses, but no other race is more
prone to evil when not blessed by such a ruler. In addition, their land
is worth holding for its own sake, fruitful as it is above all countries
in its seas, fish, meats, and all kinds of hunting, precious stones,
swamps, lakes, mountains, rivers, springs and groves, and delicious in
its woods and pastures.[1570]


                    _ISLANDS OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN_

The Romans had discovered the Canary and Madeira groups and, owing to
the mild climate and favorable conditions, had associated them with the
“Islands of the Blest” of Greek mythology and hence had come to call
them the “Fortunate Isles.” In the Middle Ages these isles passed again
into the realm of the unknown, though their memory lingered on to adorn
the Western Ocean on the Beatus maps, together with more fabulous isles
and to serve as the datum point for the western prime meridian. The Cape
Verde group and the Azores were utterly unknown.

On most of the maps of the world of our period the islands are
arbitrarily squeezed within narrow confines of the encircling ocean, and
no attempt is made to represent them in their relative positions or to
indicate their distinctive shapes. On the St. Sever Beatus map[1571] all
islands are shaped like sausages (see Fig. 2, p. 69, above), whether in
the Mediterranean or in the ocean. Ireland lies off the coast of Spain
and is designated as “Insula Hibernia ab Scotorum gentibus colitur;”
Britain, separated from the coasts of Frisia, Gaul, Aquitania, and
Gascony by an “Oceanus Britannicus,” is said to be 800 miles long by 200
broad—figures taken from Orosius,[1572] who got them from Pliny.[1573]
Five cities are equally spaced from north to south, London, Lincoln,
Wroxeter, Seaton, and “Condeaco” (?). Indeed, among the maps of the
world the only one which represents the British Isles in recognizable
outline is the Cotton,[1574] and this probably dates from long before
our period. Here we may note, in pleasing contrast to the absurdities we
find elsewhere, such features as the westward extension of Cornwall and
Devon and of Scotland; Ireland in its correct position and approximately
its correct size; the Orkneys to the north of Scotland, and even Man and
the Scilly Isles.


                             BRITISH ISLES

The medieval reader of the _De imagine mundi_ could certainly have
gained no very accurate impression from the chapter devoted to the
British Isles. This is worth translation in order to demonstrate the
utter futility and antiquated character of this much-quoted and at one
time, perhaps, unduly popular work:[1575]

“Over against Spain toward the setting sun are the following islands in
the ocean: Britain, England, Hibernia, Thanet—the earth of which,
wherever it may be carried, will destroy serpents—the thirty-three
Orkneys on the Arctic Circle where the solstice occurs, Scotia and Chile
(Thule)....” This is all the _De imagine mundi_ tells us of the British
Isles!

For more ample data we must look to such native authorities as Giraldus
Cambrensis, Alexander Neckam, Gervase of Tilbury, Matthew Paris, and the
various British historians and chroniclers.

Gervase of Tilbury adds some details from Geoffrey of Monmouth to the
brief notices which he took from Orosius on the dimensions of Britannia
Major.[1576] His account, though not thoroughly up-to-date in any sense
of the term, is fuller and less misleading than that of the _De imagine
mundi_; and we certainly do not gain from it any impression like the one
we derive from the latter work, that Britain, England, and Scotland are
three distinct islands. Geoffrey of Monmouth had told how Great
Britain—as distinguished from Britannia Minor, or Armorica (Brittany) on
the Gallic side of the Britannic sea—was divided in ancient times into
four parts: Cornwall (Cornubia) to the west; Cambria, called vulgarly
Wallia, to the north of this; Albania, called also Scotia, in the far
north; and Loegria, or Loegrino, called also Anglia, in the middle and
south; and that the rivers dividing these provinces were the Waja (Wye),
Sabrinus (Severn), Boecura (?), and Deia (Dee).


                          _Cities of Britain_

Alexander Neckam, in the _De laudibus divinae sapientiae_, also regales
us with a rambling poetical description of the marvels of Britain and of
its principal cities.[1577] Fame, he says, rejoices in placing Exeter
before all other cities: but as for himself he would give New Troy
(London) the first place, on account of its glory, wealth, customs,
charm, and situation. The walls of London, he adds, would be worthy to
hold a Helen. Among other famous cities he mentions Winchester, known in
early times for its wealth, and also Canterbury, York, Lincoln, Durham
(famous for its associations with the Venerable Bede), Gloucester,
Verolamia (St. Albans), where took place the martyrdom of St. Alban, and
Colchester. In the same poem Neckam discourses on the streams of England
and Ireland when discussing the principal rivers of the world.[1578] In
connection with the Thames, he retells the mythological story of the
founding of London. The Severn, he says, delights in the cities of
Worcester and Gloucester on its banks, and its waters are augmented by
those of the Usk. He points out that Britain contains several streams
named Avon besides the one upon which Bath stands; that the Trent sends
its fish to London; and that the Humber, unsafe for shipping on account
of its tides, disdains to see a city but flows through the open fields.


               _Giraldus Cambrensis on Ireland and Wales_

Gervase of Tilbury and Alexander Neckam give us more or less hackneyed
and stereotyped descriptions of the British Isles. Far greater
originality is revealed in the works of Giraldus Cambrensis. In many
other connections we have spoken of the _Topographia Hiberniae_ and
_Descriptio Kambriae_, which are the most complete and satisfactory
geographical descriptions of limited regions dating from our period. The
introduction of a long series of fables into the treatise on Ireland
tends to blind us to the merits of those parts of the work that have
real scientific or historical value. In the beginning of the second
“Distinctio” of the _Topographia Hiberniae_, Giraldus says that, as the
prodigies of the East have long since been made familiar by the writings
of diligent authors, he proposes to throw some light on the prodigies of
the West. This he proceeds to do in a highly competent manner, wholly in
keeping with the style of Solinus, that master among the “diligent
authors” to whom he refers. The Englishman of the time who sat down with
Giraldus’ work on Ireland before him gathered from it quite as much
fabulous and fantastic lore as he could have gathered from the pages of
Solinus, but in this case it was lore of countries near at hand. It
would almost seem that Giraldus, like a novelist, deliberately set out
to throw a glamour of romance over familiar scenes and places. But,
however this may be, Giraldus, unlike his model, Solinus, was more than
a mere spinner of yarns. His works show that in many respects he was a
close and accurate, if not always critical, observer; and certainly he
had a vivid and lively interest in nature and mankind.


                               _Ireland_

Ireland, he writes, after Britain is the largest of islands. It lies one
rather short day’s journey to the west of Wales. Between Ulster and
Galloway in Scotland the intervening arm of the sea narrows to about
half its average width, and the promontories on either side can be seen
across the straits in clear weather. South of Ireland, at three days’
sailing, is Spain; and northward at an equal distance, Iceland, the
greatest of the northern isles.[1579] Cut off by the sea, Ireland is
almost like another world and contains many phenomena not found
elsewhere.[1580]

After discussing in detail various earlier theories about the dimensions
of Ireland—what Solinus, Orosius, Isidore, and Bede had
said[1581]—Giraldus proceeds to give some observations of his own on the
healthful qualities of the climate, the character of the terrain,[1582]
and the fertility[1583] and products of the soil. Ireland is a land full
of pastures and of rich meadows flowing with milk and honey; wine is
drunk there, but, as there are no vineyards, it has to be imported from
Poitou in exchange for ox-hides and the skins of other cattle and of
wild beasts. Owing to the presence of a certain poisonous wild yew tree
and also to the violence of the rainy winds, not nearly so many bees are
kept in Ireland as one would expect.[1584] Giraldus also remarks that
there are more lakes in Ireland than in any other country,[1585] a
statement which, though perhaps not true literally, shows that he was
aware of one of the differences, if not of the reasons for the
difference, between glaciated and nonglaciated countries. These lakes
and the rivers abound in fish, many of which are peculiar to the
island.[1586]

Giraldus gives a legendary account of the clearing of the Irish forests
in the days of Partholan,[1587] who was supposed to have come there only
three hundred years after the Deluge. At that time the whole
landscape—with the exception of a few mountains—was covered by an
immense forest; and even in his own time, Giraldus adds, the area under
cultivation was very restricted in comparison with the woodlands.

His attitude toward the Irish people is neither sympathetic nor
complimentary.[1588] A rude and inhospitable race, he says, they live
like beasts and have scarcely advanced beyond a primitive pastoral stage
of civilization. Their fields are used only to a limited extent for
pastures, even less for raising of flowers, and less still for the
sowing and cultivation of crops. What cultivated fields there are, are
very poor; but this condition is the fault of the farmers rather than
the result of defects in the soil, which is extremely fertile. There are
few fruit trees, the metallic veins of the country are not worked, and
there are neither manufacturing, trade, nor mechanical arts. But the
people are great musicians![1589]

We ought not to place too much faith in the accuracy of this account of
the Irish people. As Dimock points out in his introduction to the “Rolls
Series” edition of the _Topographia_, Giraldus’ acquaintance with them
was in all probability limited to a few clergy and to those elements of
the population who could still submit “to exist in degradation under the
grinding rule of the English invaders.”[1590] Giraldus was also
prejudiced by the feeling of contempt for a supposedly “inferior race”
which nearly always results from the conquest of one people by another.

Though his travels in Ireland were not extensive, the Welshman had
acquired a superficial and inexact acquaintance with the topographical
features of the island and, in particular, with its river systems.[1591]
The existence of nine principal rivers, he says, dates back to the
earliest times, although more recently other streams of no less size had
sprung into being. The Shannon is by far the most important. Rising in a
large and beautiful lake which divides Munster from Connaught, it
separates into two branches that run off in opposite directions. One
turns south and, forming the border between the two parts of Munster,
flows into “St. Brandan’s Sea.” The other divides Meath and Connaught
from Ulster and after a winding course debouches into the Northern
Ocean. The western quarter of the island is thus separated from the
other parts by this “mediterranean river” (_mediterraneum flumen_) from
sea to sea. Giraldus was accused in the seventeenth century by a violent
Irishman[1592] of either “raving or dreaming” when he made the Shannon
divide Ulster from Connaught. It has nevertheless been shown that,
though the Welshman’s hydrographic theories were false, there was some
justification for his mistaken statements. Certainly, from very near the
headwaters of the Shannon other rivers flow away to the north, and a
hasty observer might easily have believed them to arise from the same
source.[1593]


                                _Wales_

Giraldus was far better acquainted with his native country, Wales, about
which his two treatises give us much accurate information regarding the
mountain ranges and river systems, the types of terrain, and the
character and customs of the people. He brings out the contrast between
North and South Wales.[1594] South Wales, he says, is pleasanter by
reason of its flat plains, but North Wales is stronger in its defenses,
more productive of powerful men, and also more fertile. Merioneth,
however, and the land of Canani are the roughest and most inaccessible
of all parts of Wales.[1595] The Welsh people dwell for the most part in
sequestered isolation and not in cities, villages, or castles.[1596]
Their houses are of the simplest construction. They possess neither
gardens nor orchards, and the land is little used for aught else than
pasturage. The inequalities and natural defensive strength of the ground
make Wales a very difficult region to conquer.

The character of the topographic detail which Giraldus gives reveals his
extensive personal acquaintance with the country. We have already had
occasion to mention[1597] his graphic description of the mountains
around the Lake of Brecknock, of the valley of Ewyas, of the quicksands
and submerged forests along the southern coast, and of the pasturage on
Snowdon. His knowledge of the Welsh rivers (Severn, Wye, Usk, Dee), the
mountains in which they take their source, and their courses seaward was
far more accurate than his knowledge of the streams of Ireland.
Certainly among the works of our period there is none that vies with the
_Descriptio Kambriae_ either in richness and correctness of detail or in
vividness of presentation.

We must say a few words about a chapter which Giraldus introduces on the
dialects spoken in Wales,[1598] the only discussion of linguistic
geography that the writer has found in the literature of the time.[1599]
The Welshman points out that the British tongue spoken in North Wales is
more delicate, beautiful, and generally more praiseworthy than that
spoken elsewhere, because this region had been subjected to the
intermixture of foreign peoples. The speech of Cardiganshire, however,
though this province lies in the heart of South Wales, was also said to
be very distinguished and praiseworthy. The natives of Cornwall and
Brittany made use of tongues much alike and nearly always comprehensible
to the Welsh, because originally the language of all these people was
the same. Cornish and Breton, however, in so far as they were more
lacking in delicacy and form than Welsh, approached more closely to the
ancient British idiom. Similarly the English spoken in southern England,
and especially in Devonshire, seemed to Giraldus to be far less correct
and more archaic than the tongue of the northern parts of the island,
which had been modified by the incursions of the Danes and Northmen. We
thus see that Giraldus was broad-minded enough to grant that a language
could be materially enriched by contact with alien speech and by the
infusion of foreign expressions.


                    _William Fitzstephen on London_

Any discussion of the medieval geographical lore of the British Isles
would be inadequate without some mention of a famous account of London
that forms part of the preface of William Fitzstephen’s life of Thomas à
Becket.[1600] The highly colored picture that William draws surpasses in
superlatives Guy of Bazoches’ contemporary description of Paris.[1601]
Even in the twelfth century local pride might lead to the innocent
exaggeration of merit. William tells us that “among the noble cities of
the world celebrated by Fame, the city of London in the kingdom of the
English is the one seat that pours out its fame more widely, sends to
farther lands its wealth and trade, lifts its head higher than the
rest.” He goes on to specify how fortunate is London in its mild
climate, piety, fortifications, site, manners and customs, and the
character of its citizens. London’s piety is shown by the presence not
only of an episcopal church but of no less than thirteen “larger
conventual churches besides one hundred and twenty-six lesser parish
churches.” “Above all other citizens,” he says, “the citizens of London
are regarded as conspicuous and noteworthy for handsomeness of manners
and of dress, at table and in the way of speaking. The city matrons are
true Sabine women.” The city is very well organized so that the
different businesses are distributed in different quarters. In the
suburbs are “spacious and beautiful gardens” “planted with trees.” To
the north lie pastures and meadowland with streams flowing through them,
“where the turning wheels of mills are put in motion with a cheerful
sound.” “The tilled lands of the city are not barren gravel but fat
plains of Asia that make crops luxuriant and fill their tillers’ barns
with Ceres’ sheaves.” Nevertheless “very near lies a great forest with
woodland pasture, coverts of wild animals, stags, fallow deer, boars,
and wild bulls” (Morley’s translation).[1602] In the long account of the
sports of the London youth with which William Fitzstephen closes we see
that even at this early period the English were devoted to outdoor
athletics and games. Besides shows and cockfights we are told in detail
of ball games, gymnastics, wrestling, dancing, and more strenuous
horseback exercises, sham battles, tourneys, and combats in the water
with lances. In winter, when the “great fen or moor which waters the
walls of the city on the north side” was frozen, boys and girls engaged
in sports upon the ice. Nor were young people alone interested in
athletics, for in the twelfth, as in the twentieth century, “the ancient
and wealthy men of the town came forth to see the sport of the young men
and to take part of the pleasure in beholding their agility” (Stow’s
translation).[1603]


                    _Matthew Paris’ Maps of Britain_

If Giraldus Cambrensis’ treatises are the best descriptions of regional
geography in the literature of our period, the best regional maps were
also the work of a native of the British Isles. In their relative
accuracy and fullness of detail, as well as in their freedom from
servile dependence on acknowledged authorities, Matthew Paris’ three
maps of Britain occupy a place by themselves in medieval cartography. By
far the best way to gain an idea of what they are like is to examine
them in reproduction[1604] (one herewith in Fig. 9). It will not be
amiss, however, to point out a few significant details.

[Illustration:

  FIG. 9—One of the three maps of Britain by Matthew Paris, that on
    London Codex Claud. D VI, folio 8 vo. (From Miller, _Mappaemundi_,
    vol. iii, 1895, fig. 23).
]

On one map a legend in the middle informs us that “Britain, which
includes Scotia, Galloway, and Wales, is now called England.”[1605]
Another legend on a different map gives the dimensions (800 miles in
length from St. Michael in Cornwall to Caithness, and 300 miles from St.
David’s to Dover)[1606] and says that there are two archiepiscopal and
thirty-two episcopal sees. The outlines of the coasts are in general
admirably shown, especially the west coast, with the westward-reaching
promontories of Galloway, Wales, and Cornwall. The east coast is less
satisfactory, for neither the indentation of the Wash nor the broad
eastward projection of Norfolk appear, and by some confusion a point on
the coast of Suffolk is taken as the southeastern corner of Britain,
with the result that the Thames is shown as debouching into the English
Channel. In the far north, the sketchy outlines of Scotland show that
relatively little was known of this remote part of the island. Indeed,
on two of the maps the Firths of Clyde and Forth join in such a way as
to cut off “Scocia Ultramarina” from the remainder of Britain, with
which it is connected by a bridge (see Fig. 9). The courses of the main
rivers, Severn, Humber, Avon, Thames, on the whole are well delineated.
A large tract in the east is labeled _mariscus_ to designate the Fen
country, and the mountains Snowdon, Plynlimon, and Cheviot appear in
their correct positions.[1607] The northern Scottish Highlands are
described by long legends as mountainous and woody regions which
generate an uncultivated and pastoral people, inasmuch as a great part
of this area is boggy and full of reeds.[1608] Argyll is a “trackless
and watery district well adapted to cattle and pasturage,”[1609] and
South Wales is spoken of in much the same terms.[1610] Among the islands
off the coast we notice Sheppey, Thanet, Wight, possibly some of the
Channel Islands, Portland Head, Scilly, Lundy, Anglesey, Man, Tiree,
Iona, and, to the east of Scotland, the Orkneys.[1611] The Hebrides are
conspicuously absent, and in their place a legend reads “immense and
trackless sea.” A large number of cities are placed more or less in
their proper positions, together with the names of counties and other
territorial divisions; and finally the Roman walls from Forth to Clyde
and from Carlisle to Newcastle make the most prominent feature among the
works of man.


                        _Orkneys and Shetlands_

Returning to Giraldus, we find that among the islands in the
neighborhood of Britain he mentions Man, Mona (or Anglesey), the
Orkneys, and the Shetlands. Man, he remarks, should be considered as
belonging to Britain and not to Ireland. His criterion for so assigning
it was the fact that its earth does not resemble the earth of Ireland in
the property of killing venomous reptiles.[1612] The Orkneys and
Shetlands,[1613] in the northern ocean beyond Ulster and Galloway, were
subject to the Norwegian king, through whose piracy and prowess at sea
they were held in submission even though geographically they lay nearer
the coasts of other countries. Giraldus quotes Orosius and Isidore to
the effect that, of the thirty-three Orkneys, thirteen were inhabited
and twenty deserted, and he added that in his day, also, the greater
part of these isles were uninhabited.


                           ICELAND AND THULE

Giraldus writes of Iceland, three days’ sail to the north of Ireland,
and gives a few details regarding its people.[1614] The speech of the
Icelanders was brief and truthful and they rarely made oath; their king
was the equivalent of a priest; and government was in the hands of a
bishop. Though thunder and lightning were rare in this distant isle,
there was another curse far more terrible: volcanic eruptions and lava
flows.

Apparently Giraldus did not associate Iceland with the Thule of the
ancients, an isle which he was at a loss to identify.[1615] In regard to
the latter, he remarked that it was strange that this island, the nature
of which was so well known to the Orientals, should remain unknown to
the people of the West. After quoting what Solinus and Isidore had
written about it, he added that no island familiar to the men of the
Occident partook of the qualities which these writers attributed to
Thule and that consequently it must either be fabulous—as well as
famous, he naively remarks—or else hidden away in the far corners of the
Boreal Ocean under the Arctic Pole.

The Emperor Frederick II in his treatise on falconry says that the
gerfalcons come from a certain island between Norway and Gallandia
(Greenland) called in Teutonic “Islandia,” which may be translated as
“frozen” or “region of ice.”[1616]


                   _Iceland in Icelandic Literature_

Long prior to the beginning of our period Iceland had become the home of
an enterprising and cultivated Scandinavian people. From its shores
pilgrims found their way to Italy and the Holy Land, and navigators
sailed westward into the more mysterious recesses of the ocean. The
Sagas give us data regarding these voyages and incidentally throw light
on the geographical concepts in the minds of the Northern peoples
concerning the seas and islands of the North. The _Ílendingabók_ of Ari
Frodhi, dating from shortly after 1134, tells of the first Norse visit
to Iceland in 870 by Ingolf. Ari mentions it as significant that “at
that time Iceland was clothed with forest from the mountains to the
strand,” and that “there were Christian men here, whom the Norsemen
called Papar” (Nansen’s translation).[1617] It was supposed that these
men came from the British Isles because here were found Irish books,
bells, and crooks. In the _Historia de antiquitate regum Norwagiensium_
of the monk Theodricus we are told that certain merchants in the time of
Harold Fairhair had sailed to the Faroes but were driven out to sea by
storms and came “to a far distant land, which some think to have been
the island of Thule; but I cannot either confirm or deny this, as I do
not know the true state of the matter. They landed and wandered far and
wide; but although they climbed mountains, they nowhere found trace of
human habitation” (Nansen’s translation).[1618] In the _Historia
Norwegiae_, dating probably from the thirteenth century, we are told
that “next, to the west, comes the great island which by the Italians is
called Ultima Tile; but now it is inhabited by a considerable multitude,
while formerly it was waste land, and unknown to men, until the time of
Harold Fairhair” (Nansen’s translation).[1619] In the _Landnámabók_, of
about 1200, we have a vivid account of the first Norwegian discoverers’
ascent of a high mountain in this remote land. They “looked around them,
whether they could see smoke or any sign that the land was inhabited,
and they saw nothing.... As they sailed from the land much snow fell
upon the mountains, and therefore they called the land Snowland”
(Nansen’s translation).[1620]


                               GREENLAND

Greenland had been discovered about the year 900. In our period the
southwestern coast had become the seat of two small settlements, the
ruins of which may be seen at the present time.[1621] The population was
not great (less than two thousand), and yet this far outpost of European
civilization was large enough to be constituted an independent bishopric
about the year 1110. From its settlements, certainly during and after
the thirteenth century and probably in the course of our period as well,
regular summer seal-hunting expeditions were made to the north along the
coast, perhaps as far as Baffin’s Bay. The icebound east coast of
Greenland, on the other hand, was avoided by the Scandinavian seafarers,
although we read of frequent shipwrecks there. There is also a report of
a seal-hunting trip to this coast made in 1129. From the mid-thirteenth
century dates the work called the _King’s Mirror_, which gives us a
vivid account of the ice floes and icebergs that beset the inhospitable
eastern shore.

“Now in that same sea [i.e. the Greenland Sea] there are yet many more
marvels, even though they cannot be accounted for by witchcraft
[skrimslum]. So soon as the greater part of the sea has been traversed,
there is found such a mass of ice as I know not the like of anywhere
else in the world. This ice [i.e. the ice-floes] is some of it as flat
as if it had frozen on the sea itself, four or five cubits thick, and
lies so far from land [i.e. from the east coast of Greenland] that men
may have four or five days’ journey across the ice [to land]. But this
ice lies off the land rather to the northeast (landnorr) or north than
to the south, southwest, or west; and therefore anyone wishing to make
the land should sail round it [i.e. round Cape Farewell] in a
southwesterly and westerly direction, until he is past the danger of
[encountering] all this ice, and then sail thence to land. But it has
constantly happened that men have tried to make the land too soon, and
so have been involved in these ice-floes; and some have perished in
them; but others again have got out, and we have seen some of these and
heard their tales and reports.... These ice-floes are strange in their
nature; sometimes they lie as still as might be expected, separated by
creeks or large fjords; but sometimes they move with as great rapidity
as a ship with a fair wind, and when once they are under way they travel
against the wind as often as with it. There are, indeed, some masses of
ice in that sea of another shape, which the Greenlanders call
‘fall-jökla.’ Their appearance is that of a high mountain rising out of
the sea, and they do not unite themselves to other masses of ice, but
keep apart” (Nansen’s translation).[1622]


                               POLAR SEAS

In the boreal parts of the Atlantic the Northern writers of our period
placed great whirlpools and fabulous countries peopled by monsters. Adam
of Bremen tells of the explorations of certain noblemen of Friesland
during the time of the predecessor of archbishop Adalbert of Bremen.
Sailing beyond Iceland “towards the extreme axis of the north ... they
suddenly glided into the misty darkness of the stiffened ocean, which
can scarcely be penetrated by the eye” (Nansen’s translation).[1623]
Here they were caught by a terrible current and were almost sucked into
the vortex of the deep, only to be thrown forth away from danger by a
reverse tidal current. Thence they came to an island, fortified like a
town, where they found a race of giants whom they called Cyclopes and
from whom they barely were able to make their escape. Saxo Grammaticus,
writing about 1200, tells of the voyage of a legendary King Gorm of
Denmark and an Icelander Thorkill to an even more mysterious region
called “Farther Biarmaland,” north of Norway.[1624] Here too were
loathsome monsters, a river dividing the land of men from the land of
spirits, and many other wonders. In the _Historia Norwegiae_ we are also
told of a fabulous coast in the North Atlantic upon which sailors had
landed when on the way from Iceland to Norway. This country lay “between
the Greenlanders and the Bjarmas,” and the sailors “asserted that they
had found people of extraordinary size and the land of virgins
[‘virginum terram’] who are said to conceive when they taste water. But
Greenland is separated from these by ice-clad skerries [‘scopulis’]”
(Nansen’s translation).[1625] Yet more full of color is another
description in the same work. Beyond Norway “there is the very deep and
northerly gulf which has in it Charybdis, Scylla, and unavoidable
whirlpools; there are also ice-covered promontories which plunge into
the sea immense masses of ice that have been increased by heaving floods
and are frozen together by the winter cold; with these traders often
collide against their will, when making for Greenland, and thus they
suffer shipwreck and run into danger” (Nansen’s translation).[1626]

Possibly these accounts in the _Historia Norwegiae_ refer to Svalbard,
“the country of the cold coasts,” mentioned in the _Landnámabók_.[1627]
The discovery of Svalbard was placed by the _Icelandic Annals_ in
1194,[1628] and it may well be that sailors in that year were driven out
of their course and landed on the inhospitable shores of
Spitsbergen.[1629]


                           WINELAND THE GOOD

The voyages of Leif Ericsson and others to the coasts of America,
though they had taken place over a century earlier, were doubtless
remembered by the Icelanders of the period we are studying. Ari Frodhi
in the _Íslendingabók_, written about 1134, refers to Wineland and to
the Skraelings as if they were entirely familiar to his
contemporaries.[1630] There is also a record in the _Icelandic
Annals_, under the date 1121, that the Bishop Eric of Greenland
actually sought Wineland, though we are not told whether his search
was successful or whether he made any important discoveries in
prosecuting it.[1631] The detailed stories of the Wineland voyages
which were current in oral tradition during the eleventh century were
undeniably put into written form long before 1250, although the
versions in which we now have them, the _Saga of Eric the Red_ and the
_Flatey Book_, are of later date.[1632]

The true position of Wineland has for many years been a matter of
acrimonious dispute among historians and geographers, but it is beyond
our province to enter upon this controversy. On the other hand, it is of
interest to point out that the Icelanders themselves or some of them, at
least, must have believed that Wineland lay in relatively southern
latitudes, for an Icelandic geographical description of the world,[1633]
dating perhaps from our period, contains the following remark: Not far
from Markland is “Wineland the Good, which some affirm extends from
Africa; and, if this is so, an arm of the sea separates Wineland and
Markland.”[1634] In Europe outside of the Scandinavian countries
practically nothing was known of Wineland. The earliest mention of it is
in the pages of Adam of Bremen’s description of the North, where we read
the following brief passages: “Moreover he [King Svend Estridsson] spoke
of an island in that ocean discovered by many, which is called Wineland,
for the reason that vines grow wild there, which yield the best of wine.
Moreover, that grain unsown grows there abundantly is not a fabulous
fancy, but from the accounts of the Danes we know to be a fact”
(Reeves’s translation).[1635] Ordericus Vitalis in his _Historia
ecclesiastica_ includes Wineland in a list of countries made subject to
the king of the Norsemen but gives no details.[1636]

Adam of Bremen or a later interpolator[1637] adds to the passage just
quoted a description of the Northern Ocean, which he erroneously places
beyond Wineland. He says: “Beyond this island, it is said that there is
no habitable land in that ocean, but all those regions which are beyond
are filled with unsupportable ice and boundless gloom, to which Marcian
thus refers: ‘One day’s sail beyond Thile the sea is frozen.’ This was
essayed not long since by that very enterprising Northmen’s prince,
Harold, who explored the extent of the Northern Ocean with his ship but
was scarcely able by retreating to escape in safety from the gulf’s
enormous abyss, where before his eyes the vanishing bounds of earth were
hidden in gloom” (Reeves’s translation).[1638]


                             FABULOUS ISLES

Until modern times the Atlantic has been an ocean filled by the
imaginations of the coast-dwelling peoples of the Old World with
fabulous and fantastic isles. In the _De imagine mundi_ we read of the
Isle of the Gorgons and of the Hesperides,[1639] “among which was that
great land described by Plato as having been submerged beneath that part
of the sea now coagulated—an isle greater in extent even than Africa and
Europe.” In this story we recognize the old legend of Atlantis which had
been the subject of speculation and discussion ever since the time of
Plato. The _De imagine mundi_ then goes on to speak of “Perdita,” or the
Lost Island, which far exceeded all the surrounding countries in the
delightfulness and fertility of all things to be found therein. Though
as a general rule unknown to man, this isle was sometimes to be found by
hazard, though never found when looked for. Hence it was called
“Perdita,” or “Lost.” To it St. Brandan was said to have gone in the
course of his wanderings.


                         _St. Brandan’s Isles_

For a full account of the islands visited by St. Brandan we must look to
the famous narration of his voyages. Ernest Renan poetically
characterizes this legend as follows: “In the midst of these dreams
there appears with surprising truth a feeling for the picturesque in
polar navigations: the transparence of the sea, the aspects of the ice
floes and icebergs melting in the sun, the volcanic phenomena of
Iceland, the playing of the cetaceans, the characteristic appearance of
the fiords of Norway, the sudden fogs, the milklike sea, green islands
covered with grass which overhangs into the waves....”[1640] In the most
widely known Latin version, which was translated into English and French
during our period,[1641] we are told[1642] that Brandan, the abbot of a
large monastery in Munster, received information from a certain
Barinthus of marvelous isles that the latter had visited in the western
seas and in particular of the “Terra repromissionis sanctorum,” or
Saints’ Land of Promise. Taking seven companions, the saint set out in a
ship built especially for the voyage and wandered for seven years from
one marvelous isle to another. After forty days’ sailing in a northerly
direction they came to an islet, where they entered into a narrow harbor
between high and precipitous rocks. This harbor mouth, just wide enough
to admit a ship, was typical of the ragged western coasts of Ireland and
Scotland and was doubtless suggested to the poet by some bleak cove
among the rocks of St. Kilda or the Outer Hebrides. After leaving the
islet the wanderers reached an isle covered with sheep—perhaps a
reminiscence of the Faroes, the sheep of which had long before been
described by Dicuil.[1643] Beyond this they came to a smooth islet
lacking verdure and with no sand upon it; this turned out to be a sea
monster, which dived beneath the waves when the saint and his companions
tried to light a fire upon its back. Their fortunate escape from the
monster was followed by wanderings that brought them to an isle full of
birds in such numbers and of such brilliant plumage that the voyagers
could scarce see the branches of the trees. Some of the birds could
talk; and one spoke words of prophecy foretelling the future course of
Brandan’s journeys. Thence they came to yet another isle, where they
entered a port with a narrow entrance and found a monastery; then to an
isle with a fresh-water spring which put each brother to sleep for a
period corresponding to the number of cups he drank. After that they
made their way still farther north, where the sea was coagulated, and
then returned to many of the isles already visited in the course of
their earlier sailings and also to fresh marvels—seas of miraculous
clearness, terrible volcanoes, Judas’s rock, the islet of Paul the
hermit.[1644] Finally, after seven whole years, they attained a broad
and spacious country full of trees bearing apples as if it were the
autumn of the year, a land where no night was ever known. Here a youth
greeted Brandan and said that this was the country for which he had been
seeking. Then Brandan sailed back to Ireland, where he lived out the
remainder of his earthly life, and, after his death, returned forthwith
to this “land of promise of the saints,” or Paradise, which for so long
had been his goal.




                              CHAPTER 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.”

[Illustration:

  Fig. 10—Diagram to illustrate John of Holywood’s reasoning that the
    earth is in the center of the universe.
]

  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_.

[Illustration]

[Illustration:

  FIG. 11 (in two sections)—Comparative diagram of certain parallels of
    latitude and of the _climata_ according to various ancient and
    medieval geographers. For explanation see the text, pp. 242–243, and
    notes 15, 17, 18, and 21 of this chapter.
]

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.

[Illustration:

  FIG. 12—Map showing the relative positions of certain points in Europe
    as indicated in astronomical tables of the twelfth and early
    thirteenth centuries. In the original tables a consistent error
    appears in the longitudes of all the cities in Italy. This has been
    corrected as discussed in the work cited in note 32 above.
]


                                 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.

      Chapter 17 is on geography and voyages.

  _DE_, etc. For anonymous works title of which begins with _DE_ see
      under initial letter of principal word of title.

  Decourdemanche, J. A. _Note sur l’estimation de la longeur du degré
      terrestre chez les Grecs, les Arabes, et dans l’Inde_, in: Journal
      asiatique, series 11, vol. 1, Paris, 1913, pp. 427–444.

      Presents a hazardous theory.

  De Goeje, M. J. See Goeje, M. J. de.

  Delaborde, H. F. See WILLIAM THE BRETON.

  Delambre, J. B. J. _Histoire de l’astronomie du moyen âge_, Paris,
      1819.

      Old but still a standard work on medieval astronomy.

  De La Roncière, Charles. See La Roncière, Charles de.

  Delisle, Léopold. See GODFREY OF VITERBO.

  Denis, Ferdinand. _Le monde enchanté: Cosmographie et histoire
      naturelle fantastiques du moyen âge_, Paris, 1843.

      Popular, though scholarly, work on medieval marvels.

  _DESCRIPTIONES TERRAE SANCTAE._ See Tobler, Titus.

  Detlefsen, D. _Ursprung, Einrichtung und Bedeutung der Erdkarte
      Agrippas_ (Quellen und Forschungen zur alten Geschichte und
      Geographie herausgegeben von W. Sieglin, no. 13), Berlin, 1906.

  Detlefsen, D. _Die Geographie Afrikas bei Plinius und Mela und ihre
      Quellen_ (Quellen und Forschungen zur alten Geschichte und
      Geographie herausgegeben von W. Sieglin, no. 14), Berlin, 1909.

      See also PLINY.

  _DEVISION, LA, DE LA TERRE DE OULTREMER ET DES CHOSES QUI I SONT_,
      edited by C. Hopf in: Chroniques gréco-romanes, Berlin, 1873, pp.
      30–34.

  De Wulf, Maurice. See Wulf, Maurice de.

  DICUIL. _De mensura orbis terrae_, edited by A. Letronne, in his
      _Recherches_, 1814. Also by Gustav Parthey, Berlin, 1870.

  Dietrich, ——. _Die geographischen Anschauungen einiger Chronisten des
      XI. und XII. Jahrhunderts_, in: Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche
      Geographie, vol. v, Vienna, 1885, pp. 95–103, 187–207.

  Dinse, Paul. _Die handschriftlichen Ptolemäus-Karten und die
      Agathodämonfrage_, in: Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde
      zu Berlin, 1913, pp. 745–770.

  DIONYSIUS PERIGETES. _Orbis descriptio_, in: C. Müller, _Geographi
      graeci minores_, 1882, vol. ii, pp. 103–176.

  Doberentz, Otto. _Die Erd- und Völkerkunde in der Weltchronik des
      Rudolf von Hohen-Ems_, in: Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie,
      vols. xii, Halle, 1880, pp. 257–301, 387–454, xiii, 1881, pp.
      29–57, 165–223.

      Important material in this monograph on the sources of the _De
      imagine mundi_.

  DOMINICUS GONDISALVI (GUNDISSALINUS). I. _De divisione philosophiae_,
      edited by L. Baur, in: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des
      Mittelalters herausgegeben von C. Baeumker, vol. iv, pts. 2–3,
      Münster, 1903. II. Translations of the _Physics_ and _De caelo_ of
      Aristotle. Unpublished. See Steinschneider, _Europäische
      Übersetzungen_, in: Sitzungsberichte, vol. cxlix, 1905, pp. 32,
      42, 43.

  Dozy, R. See IDRĪSĪ, Al-.

  Draper, J. W. _History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science_,
      New York, 1875. (Also other editions.)

      Endeavors to show the baneful influence of organized religion upon
      the development of science.

  Dreesbach, Emil. _Der Orient in der altfranzösischen
      Kreuzzugsliteratur_ (Dissertation, University of Breslau, 1901).

      A compilation of references to the Near East in the French
      literature of the Crusades, with explanatory comment.

  Duhem, Pierre. _Du temps où la scholastique latine a connu la physique
      d’Aristote_, in: Revue de philosophie, vol. xv, Paris, 1909, pp.
      163–178.

  Duhem, Pierre. _Le système du monde: Histoire des doctrines
      cosmologiques de Platon à Copernic_, 5 vols., Paris, 1913–1917.

      A work of fundamental importance. From the geographical point of
      view significant for the data it contains on the history of
      cosmography, of astronomical geography, and of theories of the
      tides. Contains valuable bibliographical references, though not
      always complete (see criticism in Haskins, _Studies_, 1924, pp.
      82–83).

  Eales, S. J. See BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX.

  _EDDAS, THE._ I. _SAEMUNDAR EDDA_, or _POETIC EDDA_. Text in: R. C.
      Boer, edit., _Die Edda, mit historisch-kritischem Commentar_,
      Haarlem, 1922; Eduard Sievers, edit., _Die Eddalieder_
      (Abhandlungen der sächischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
      Philologisch, historische Klasse, vol. xxxvii, no. 3), Leipzig,
      1923. English translation: H. A. Bellows, _The Poetic Edda,
      Translated from the Icelandic, With an Introduction and Notes_, 2
      vols., New York, 1923. II. _SNORRIS EDDA_, or _PROSE EDDA_. See
      SNORRI STURLUSON, II.

      See also Hermannsson, _Bibl. Eddas_, 1920.

  EDRISI. See IDRĪSĪ, Al-.

  EKKEHARD OF AURA. See FRUTOLF OF MICHAELSBERG.

  _ELYSAEUS ACCOUNT._ See PRESTER JOHN, II.

  Endrös, A. _Die Gezeiten, Seiches und Strömungen des Meeres bei
      Aristoteles_, in: Bayerische Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,
      Sitzungsberichte, Mathematisch-physikalische Klasse, Munich, 1915,
      pp. 355–385.

  ERATOSTHENES. _Die geographischen Fragmente des Eratosthenes_, edited
      with commentary by Hugo Berger, Leipzig (Teubner), 1880.

      See Mori, _Misuraz. eratos._, 1911; Scala, R. von; Thalamas, A.

  ERIGENA (or ERIUGENA), JOHN SCOT. See JOHN SCOT ERIGENA.

  Esposito, M. _On Some Unpublished Poems Attributed to Alexander
      Neckam_, in: English Historical Review, vol. xxx, London, 1915,
      pp. 450–471.

  Fant, C. _L’Image du monde, poème inédit du milieu du xiii^e siècle,
      étudié dans ses diverses rédactions françaises d’après les
      manuscrits des bibliothèques de Paris et de Stockholm_
      (Dissertation, University of Upsala, 1886.)

      Gives a summary of the contents of the poem.

  FARGHĀNĪ, Al- (ALFRAGANUS). _On the Elements of Astronomy._ See GERARD
      OF CREMONA, I; JOHN OF SEVILLE, I.

  FETELLUS (FRETELLUS). _Tractatus de distantiis locorum Terrae
      Sanctae._ Text in: Comte Melchior de Vogue, _Les églises de la
      Terre Sainte_, Paris, 1860, pp. 412–433; also in: Migne, _Pat.
      lat._, vol. clv, cols. 1037–1054. English translation by J. R.
      Macpherson, _Fetellus (circa 1130 A. D.)_, London, 1892 (in:
      Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, _Library_, 1897, vol. v).

  Fischer, Joseph. _Ptolemäus und Agathodämon_, forming supplement (on
      pp. 71–93) to von Mžik, _Afrika_.

  Fischer, Joseph. _Pappus und die Ptolemäuskarten_, in: Zeitschrift der
      Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin, 1919, pp. 336–358.

  Fischer, Joseph. _Ptolemaios als Kartograph_, forming supplement (on
      pp. 113–129) to Cebrian, _Geschichte der Kartographie_, 1923.

  FITZSTEPHEN, WILLIAM. Description of London in Latin forming the
      preface to his Latin life of Thomas à Becket, in: J. C. Robertson,
      _Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of
      Canterbury_ (Rolls Series, no. 67), vol. iii, London, 1877. Also
      in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxc, cols., 103–110; _A Survey of
      London by John Stow_, edited by C. T. Kingsford (2 vols., Oxford,
      1908), vol. ii, pp. 219–223. English translation in: _John Stow, A
      Survay of London ... 1598_, edited by Henry Morley, London, 1908,
      pp. 22–29, 117–119.

  Fobes, F. H. _Mediaeval Versions of Aristotle’s Meteorology_, in:
      Classical Philology, vol. x, Chicago, 1915, pp. 297–314.

  Frahm, Wilhelm. _Das Meer und die Seefahrt in der altfranzösischen
      Literatur_ (Dissertation, University of Göttingen, 1914).

  Francke, Kuno. _Zur Geschichte der lateinischen Schulpoesie des XII.
      und XIII. Jahrhunderts_, Munich, 1879.

  FRETELLUS. See FETELLUS.

  Fritsche, Franz. _Untersuchung über die Quellen der Image du monde des
      Walther von Metz_, Halle, 1880.

  FRODHI, ARI. See ARI FRODHI.

  FRUTOLF OF MICHAELSBERG (or of BAMBERG). _Chronica._ Edited as if the
      work of Ekkehard of Aura, in: _Mon. Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol.
      vi, 1844, pp. 33–231. See Bresslau, H.

  Ganzenmüller, Wilhelm. _Das Naturgefühl im Mittelalter_ (Beiträge zur
      Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters und der Renaissance
      herausgegeben von Walter Götz, vol. xviii), Leipzig and Berlin,
      1914.

      An attempt to interpret the medieval attitude toward nature “von
      innen heraus, aus der geistigen Eigenart des Mittelalters....” (p.
      4). German translations of many descriptions of landscape and
      scenery are included.

  Ganzenmüller, Wilhelm. _Die empfindsame Naturbetrachtung im
      Mittelalter_, in: Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. xii, Berlin,
      1916, pp. 195–228.

  GAUTIER DE CHÂTILLON (or DE LILLE). See WALTER OF CHÂTILLON.

  Geidel, Heinrich. _Alfred der Grosse als Geograph_ (Münchener
      geographische Studien herausgegeben von Siegmund Günther, no. 15),
      Munich, 1904.

  Geikie, Sir Archibald. _The Founders of Geology_, London, 1905.

  Geikie, Sir Archibald. _The Love of Nature Among the Romans During the
      Later Decades of the Republic and the First Century of the
      Empire_, London, 1912.

  GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH. _Historia Britonum_, edited by J. A. Giles,
      Caxton Society, London, 1844. An English translation entitled
      _Geoffrey of Monmouth’s British History_ by J. A. Giles, in:
      _Monkish Historians of Great Britain_, vol. iv, London, 1844 (also
      in Bohn’s Antiquarian Library, London, 1848).

  GEOFFREY OF ST. VICTOR (GODEFROI DE BRETEUIL). I. _Fons philosophiae_,
      edited by M. A. Charma in his _Fons philosophiae: Poème inédit du
      xii^e siècle, publié et annoté par —_, Caen, 1868. II.
      _Microcosmus._ Unpublished. See above, p. 428, note 135.

  _GEOGRAPHI GRAECI MINORES._ See Müller, C.

  _GEOGRAPHI LATINI MINORES._ See Riese, A.

  GERALD OF BARRY. See GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS.

  GERARD OF CREMONA. I. _Liber de aggregationibus scientiae stellarum et
      principiis coelestium motum_, a translation of Al-Farghānī’s _On
      the Elements of Astronomy_. See Woepcke, _Notice_, 1862, pp.
      117–120. II. Translation of Az-Zarqalī’s _Canons_ on the _Toledo
      Tables_. See above, pp. 399–400, notes 44–45. III. Translations of
      Aristotle’s _Meteorology_ (first three books), _Physics_, _De
      caelo et mundo_, and _De generatione et corruptione_. Unpublished.
      On manuscripts see Thorndike, _Magic_, 1923, vol. ii, p. 87; see
      also above, pp. 401–402, notes 59, 60, 61, 62. IV. _Theorica
      planetarum._ MS. in Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no.
      7421. This work was also printed in the fifteenth and sixteenth
      centuries. The edition referred to in the Notes of the present
      work as the “Renner edition” was printed in Venice “per Franciscū
      Renner de Hailbrun, MCCCCLXXVIII.” In the same volume is to be
      found the _De sphaera_ of John of Holywood, q. v. For references
      to other editions see Duhem, _Système_, vol. iii, 1915, p. 219,
      note 3.

      See Boncompagni, _Della vita_, 1851.

  GERBERT (SYLVESTER II). _Gerberti postea Silvestri II papae opera
      mathematica_, edited by Nicholaus Bubnov, Berlin, 1899.

  GERVASE OF CANTERBURY. I. _Chronica de tempore regum Angliae Stephani,
      Henrici II et Ricardi I_, edited by William Stubbs, in: _The
      Historical Works of Gervase of Canterbury_ (Rolls Series, no. 71),
      vol. i, London, 1879. II. _Mappamundi_, edited by Stubbs, _op.
      cit._, vol. ii, London, 1880, pp. 414–444.

  GERVASE OF TILBURY. _Otia imperialia_, edited by G. G. Leibnitz, in:
      _Scriptores rerum brunsvicensium_ (3 vols., Hanover, 1707–1711),
      vol. i, pp. 881–1004, vol. ii, pp. 754–784.

      See Liebrecht, F.

  Gilbert, Otto. _Die meteorologischen Theorien des griechischen
      Altertums_, Leipzig, 1907.

      Fundamental study of ancient meteorology.

  Giordano Carlo. _Alexandreis, poema di Gautier da Châtillon_, Naples,
      1917.

  GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS (GERALD OF BARRY). I. _Topographia Hiberniae et_
      (II) _Expugnatio Hiberniae_, edited by J. F. Dimock, in: _Giraldi
      Cambrensis opera_ (Rolls Series, no. 21), vol. v, London, 1867.
      English translation by Thomas Foster, _The Historical Works of
      Giraldus Cambrensis Containing the Topography of Ireland and the
      History of the Conquest of Ireland_, revised by Thomas Wright, in
      Bohn’s Antiquarian Library, London, 1863. III. _Itinerarium
      Kambriae et_ (IV) _Descriptio Kambriae_, edited by J. F. Dimock,
      _op. cit._, vol. vi, London, 1868. Sir R. C. Hoare’s English
      translation of 1806 appeared under the title _The Itinerary
      Through Wales and the Description of Wales by Giraldus Cambrensis_
      in Everyman’s Library, London and New York, 1908. V. _Symbolum
      electorum_, edited by J. S. Brewer, in: _Giraldi Cambrensis opera_
      (Rolls Series, no. 21), vol. i, London, 1861, pp. 199–395.

      See Lynch, J.

  Gisinger, F. “Geographie,” article in: _Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der
      classischen Altertumswissenschaft: Neue Bearbeitung, begonnen von
      Georg Wissowa_, edited by Wilhelm Kroll, supplementary vol. iv,
      Stuttgart, 1924, cols. 521–685.

  GODFREY OF VITERBO. I. _Pantheon seu universitate libri, qui chronici
      appellantur, XX, ... ab O. C.-1186._ Edited by B. J. Herold,
      Basel, 1559, and by J. Pistorius (3rd edition, edited by B. G.
      Struve, vol. ii, Ratisbon, 1726, pp. 2–392); also edited (in part
      only) in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxcviii, cols. 875–1044, and
      in: _Mon. Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol. xxii, 1872, pp. 107–307.
      II. _Denumeratio regnorum imperio subjectorum_, edited by Léopold
      Delisle in his _Littérature latine et histoire du moyen âge_,
      Paris, 1890, pp. 41–50.

  Goeje, M. J. de. _La légende de St. Brandan_, in: Actes du Huitième
      Congrès Internationale des Orientalistes, 1889, Leiden, 1891, pp.
      43–76. (Also printed separately, Leiden, 1890.)

  Goeje, M. J. de, on Edrisi. See IDRĪSĪ, Al-.

  Gollancz, Hermann. _Dodi ve-Nechdi (Uncle and Nephew), the Work of
      Berachya Hanakdan_, Oxford, etc., 1920. Pp. 87–161 consist of a
      translation of the _Quaestiones naturales_ of Adelard of Bath, q.
      v.

  GONDISALVI, DOMINICUS. See DOMINICUS GONDISALVI.

  GOSSOUIN OF METZ. Possibly author or co-author of the _Image du
      monde_. See above, p. 105 and p. 405, note 89.

  Grabmann, Martin. _Forschungen über die lateinischen
      Aristotelesübersetzungen des XIII. Jahrhunderts_, in: Beiträge zur
      Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters herausgegeben von C.
      Baeumker, vol. xvii, pts. 5–6, Münster, 1916.

  Graf, Arturo. _La leggenda del paradiso terrestre_, Turin, 1878.

  Graf, Arturo. _Roma nella memoria e nelle immaginazioni del medio
      evo_, 2 vols., Turin, 1882–1883.

  Graf, Arturo. _Miti, leggende e superstizioni del medio evo_, 2 vols.,
      Turin, 1892–1893.

      Much material and a wealth of references on legendary geography.
      Vol. i, pp. 1–193, deals with the legend of the terrestrial
      paradise.

  GREGORIUS, MAGISTER. See GREGORY, MASTER.

  Gregorovius, Ferdinand. _Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter_, 8
      vols., 1st edit., Stuttgart, 1859–1872. Translation from fourth
      German edition by Annie Hamilton, _History of the City of Rome in
      the Middle Ages_, 8 vols. in 13, London, 1894–1912.

  GREGORY, MASTER. _Magister Gregorius de mirabilibus urbis Romae_,
      edited with introduction by M. R. James in his _Magister
      Gregorius_, in: English Historical Review, vol. xxxii, London,
      1917, pp. 531–554.

  Gribaudi, Pietro. _La geografia di S. Isidoro di Siviglia_ (Memorie
      della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, series 2, vol. lv),
      Turin, 1905.

  Gribaudi, Pietro. _Per la storia della geografia, specialmente nel
      medio evo_, Turin, 1906. Fasc. I of this contains: _L’autorità de
      S. Isidoro de Siviglia, come geografo, nel medio evo_.

  Gribble, Francis. _The Early Mountaineers_, London, 1899.

  Gröber, G. _Übersicht über die lateinische Literatur von der Mitte des
      6. Jahrhunderts bis 1350_, in his _Grundriss der romanischen
      Philologie_ (2 vols., Strasburg, 1888–1902), vol. ii, pt. i, pp.
      97–432.

  GROSSETESTE, ROBERT (ROBERT OF LINCOLN). (I) _De sphaera_, (II) _De
      impressionibus aëris seu de prognosticatione_, (III) _De luce seu
      de inchoatione formarum_, (IV) _Quod homo sit minor mundus_, (V)
      _De lineis angulis et figuris seu de fractionibus et reflexionibus
      radiorum_, (VI) _De natura locorum_, (VII) _De impressionibus
      elementorum_, (VIII) _De finitate motus et temporis_, all edited
      by Ludwig Baur in his _Die philosophischen Werke des Robert
      Grosseteste, Bischofs von Lincoln_ (Beiträge zur Geschichte der
      Philosophie des Mittelalters herausgegeben von C. Baeumker, vol.
      ix), Münster, 1912. (IX) _Summa super libros octo Physicorum_
      (commentary on the _Physics_ of Aristotle), first printed in
      Venice in 1498, and subsequently frequently printed in the
      sixteenth century; no modern critical edition. On early editions
      and manuscripts see Baur, _op. cit._, pp. 19*-20*. (X)
      _Hexaemeron._ Unpublished. Baur, _op. cit._, p. 24*, note 1, cites
      MS. Brit. Mus. Bibl. reg. 6 E. V. (XI) _Summa philosophiae._
      Ascribed probably erroneously to Grosseteste. Edited by Baur, _op.
      cit._, pp. 275–643.

      See also Baur, L.; Little, A. G.

  GUI DE BAZOCHES. See GUY OF BAZOCHES.

  GUIDO. Encyclopedic compilation in six books containing geographical
      passages which in part are edited by M. Pinder and G. Parthey,
      _Ravennatis anonymi Cosmographia et Guidonis Geographica_, Berlin,
      1860, pp. 449–556.

  GUILELMUS, GUILLAUME, etc. See WILLIAM.

  GUNDISSALINUS, DOMINICUS. See DOMINICUS GONDISALVI.

  Günther, Siegmund. _Studien zur Geschichte der mathematischen und
      physikalischen Geographie_, 3 vols., Halle, 1877–1879. Parts i and
      ii consist of _Die Lehre von der Erdrundung und Erdbewegung im
      Mittelalter_; part iii, of _Ältere und neuere Hypothesen über die
      chronische Versetzung des Erdschwerpunktes durch Wassermassen_.

      See Marinelli, _Scritti minori_, vol. i, [1908?].

  Günther, Siegmund. _Die kosmographischen Anschauungen des
      Mittelalters_, in: Deutsche Rundschau für Geographie und
      Statistik, vol. iv, Vienna, 1882, pp. 249–254, 313–317, 345–352.

  Günther, Siegmund. _Notiz zur Geschichte der Klimatologie_, in:
      Bibliotheca mathematica, no. 3, Stockholm, 1887.

  Günther, Siegmund. _Wissenschaftliche Bergbesteigungen in älterer
      Zeit_, in: Jahresberichte der Geographischen Gesellschaft in
      München für 1894 und 1895, Munich, 1896, pp. 51–67.

  Günther, Siegmund. _Geschichte der Erdkunde_, Leipzig and Vienna,
      1904.

      A dry and compact summary of the history of geographical science
      and exploration from antiquity to modern times. Contains many
      valuable references.

  Günther, Siegmund. _Die antike Apokatastasis auf ihre astronomischen
      und geophysischen Grundlagen geprüft_, in: Bayerische Akademie der
      Wissenschaften, Sitzungsberichte, Mathematisch-physikalische
      Klasse, Munich, 1916, pp. 83–112.

  Günther, Siegmund. _Optische Beweisung für die Erdkrümmung sonst und
      jetzt_, in: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften,
      Sitzungsberichte, Mathematisch-physikalische Klasse, Munich, 1920,
      pt. 2, pp. 371–385.

  GUNTHER OF PAIRIS. _Ligurinus_, edited by C. G. Dümge, Heidelberg,
      1812; also in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. ccxii, cols. 327–476.
      German translation by T. Vulpinus, _Der Ligurinus Gunthers von
      Pairis im Elsass ... etc._, Strasburg, 1889.

      See Pannenborg, A.; Paris, G., _Dissertation critique_, 1872.

  GUY OF BAZOCHES. Selections from the letters in: W. Wattenbach, _Aus
      den Briefen des Guido von Bazoches_, in: Neues Archiv der
      Gesellschaft für Ältere Deutsche Geschichtskunde, vol. xvi,
      Hanover, 1891, pp. 69–113.

      See above, p. 414, note 152.

  Haag, Heinrich. _Die Geschichte des Nullmeridians_ (Dissertation,
      University of Giessen, 1913).

      The discussion of the prime meridians used in the Middle Ages
      appears to be based mainly on the now antiquated work of Lelewel.

      See Schoy, _Längenbestimmung_, 1915.

  Hammer-Jensen, Ingeborg. _Das sogennante IV. Buch der Meteorologie des
      Aristoteles_, in: Hermes: Zeitschrift für classische Philologie,
      vol. 50, Berlin, 1915, pp. 113–136.

  Haskins, C. H. _Adelard of Bath_, in: English Historical Review, vol.
      xxvi, London, 1911, pp. 491–498.

      See Below, Haskins, _Studies_, 1924.

  Haskins, C. H. _The Reception of Arabic Science in England_, in:
      English Historical Review, vol. xxx, London, 1915, pp. 56–69.

      See below, Haskins, _Studies_, 1924.

  Haskins, C. H. _Michael Scot and Frederick II_, in: Isis:
      International Review Devoted to the History of Science and
      Civilization, vol. iv, Brussels, 1921–1922, pp. 250–275.

      See below, Haskins, _Studies_, 1924.

  Haskins, C. H. _Science at the Court of the Emperor Frederick II_, in:
      American Historical Review, vol. xxvii, New York, 1922, pp.
      669–694.

      See below, Haskins, _Studies_, 1924.

  Haskins, C. H. _Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science_,
      Cambridge, Mass., 1924.

      A profound contribution, based largely on research in manuscript
      sources, to the history of science in the twelfth and thirteenth
      centuries. Traces the work of translators from the Arabic and
      Greek and deals with science at the court of the Emperor Frederick
      II. All the studies by Haskins referred to above appear in this
      volume in revised form.

  Haskins, C. H., and D. P. Lockwood. _The Sicilian Translators of the
      Twelfth Century and the First Latin Version of Ptolemy’s
      Almagest_, in: Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. xxi,
      Cambridge, Mass., 1910, pp. 75–102. See also: Haskins, C. H.,
      _Further Notes on the Sicilian Translators of the Twelfth
      Century_, in _ibid._, vol. xxiii, 1912, pp. 155–166.

      Important for material on early translations of the _Almagest_.

      See above, Haskins, _Studies_, 1924.

  Hauptmann, E. _Die Erdvermessung der Römer [im] Raum des heutigen
      Kriegsschauplatzes bis zur Rheingrenze ..., Zugleich Lehrbuch der
      antiken Erdmesskunst_, Bonn, 1915.

  Hauréau, B. _Singularités historiques et littéraires_, Paris, 1861.

  Hauréau, B. _Mémoire sur quelques chanceliers de l’église de
      Chartres_, Paris, 1883. Also in: Mémoires de l’institut Nationale
      de France, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, vol. xxxi,
      pt. 2, Paris, 1884, pp. 63–122.

  Hauréau, B. _Les oeuvres de Hugues de Saint-Victor: Essai critique_,
      new edit., Paris, 1886.

  Hauréau, B. _Thierry de Chartres, De sex dierum operibus_, in his
      _Notices et extraits de quelques manuscrits latins de la
      Bibliothèque Nationale_, Paris, vol. i, 1890, pp. 48–68
      (commentary, pp. 48–51; text, pp. 52–68).

  Heath, Sir Thomas. _Aristarchus of Samos_, Oxford, 1913.

  Heidel, W. A. _Anaximander’s Book, the Earliest Known Geographical
      Treatise_, in: Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and
      Sciences, vol. lvi, Boston, 1921, pp. 239–288.

  _HEIMSKRINGLA._ See SNORRI STURLUSON, I.

  Hellmann, G., edit., _DENKMÄLER MITTELALTERLICHER METEOROLOGIE_
      (Neudrucke von Schriften und Karten über Meteorologie und
      Erdmagnetismus herausgegeben von G. Hellmann, no. 15), Berlin,
      1904.

      Collection of texts dealing with meteorology from medieval
      authors.

  HELMOLD. _Chronica Slavorum_, edited by J. M. Lappenberg, in: _Mon.
      Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol. xxi, 1869, pp. 11–99. Also in:
      _Script. rer. germ. in usum scholarum_, Hanover, 1868. German
      translation by J. C. M. Laurent, Berlin, 1852; 2nd edit., Leipzig,
      1888 (not seen).

  HENRY OF HUNTINGDON. _Historiae Anglorum libri VIII_, edited by Thomas
      Arnold (Rolls Series, no. 72), London, 1879.

  HERMANN THE DALMATIAN (HERMANN THE CARINTHIAN, HERMANN THE SLAV,
      HERMANNUS SECUNDUS). I. _Liber de essentiis._ Unpublished. See
      Haskins, _Studies_, 1924, pp. 48–49, 56–66. On pp. 62–65 Haskins
      publishes for the first time the text of two interesting
      geographical passages. II. Translation of _The Great Book of the
      Introduction_ of Abū Maʿshar under the title _Liber introductorius
      in astrologiam_. See ABŪ MAʿSHAR. III. Translation of the
      _Khorazmian Tables_ of Al-Khwārizmī. No text of this is known. See
      above p. 95.

  Hermannsson, Halldór. _Bibliography of the Icelandic Sagas and Minor
      Tales_, in: Islandica, vol. i, Ithaca, N. Y., 1908.

  Hermannsson, Halldór. _The Northmen in America (982-c. 1500): A
      Contribution to the Bibliography of the Subject_, in: Islandica,
      vol. ii, Ithaca, N. Y., 1909.

  Hermannsson, Halldór. _Bibliography of the Sagas of the Kings of
      Norway and Related Sagas and Tales_, in: Islandica, vol. iii,
      Ithaca, N. Y., 1910.

  Hermannson, Halldór. _Bibliography of the Eddas_, in: Islandica, vol.
      xiii, Ithaca, N. Y., 1920.

  HERRAD OF LANDSPERG. _Hortus deliciarum_, edited by A. Straub and G.
      Keller, Strasburg, 1879–1899.

      See Le Noble, A.

  Heyd, W. _Histoire du commerce du Levant au moyen âge_, translated
      from the German into French by F. Raynaud, 2 vols., Leipzig,
      1885–1886. French translation reprinted, Leipzig, 1923.

      The French translation contains material not to be found in the
      German original. Still a fundamentally important work on medieval
      trade with the East.

  HILDEGARD OF BINGEN. (I) _Scivias sive visionum ac revelationum libri
      tres_, (II) _Liber divinorum operum simplicis hominis_, (III)
      _Liber vitae meritorum_, (IV) _Subtilitates diversarum naturarum
      creaturarum_, and (V) _Solutiones quaestionum XXXVIII_, all in:
      Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxcvii. (VI) _Causae et curae_, edited by
      Paul Kaiser, Leipzig (Teubner), 1903.

      For references to other editions, manuscripts, and secondary
      works, see Thorndike, _Magic_, 1923, vol. ii, pp. 125–126. See
      also Singer, _Visions of Saint Hildegard_, 1917.

  _Histoire littéraire de la France_, 35 vols., Paris, 1733ff. 35 vols.
      had appeared by 1921.

      A great collection of bio-bibliographical notices, printed texts,
      and critical discussions of the literature of Gaul and France.
      Publication was begun by the Benedictines of the Congregation of
      St. Maur in the eighteenth century and continued by the Académie
      des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres early in the nineteenth.

  _HISTORIA DE PRAELIIS._ See Landgraf, G.

  _HISTORIA NORWEGIAE_, edited by P. A. Munch, in: _Symbolae ad
      historiam antiquiorem rerum Norvegicarum_, Christiania, 1850. A
      more critical edition in: Storm, _Mon. hist. Norveg._, 1880, pp.
      69–124.

  Hoffmann, Immanuel. _Die Anschauungen der Kirchenväter über
      Meteorologie_ (Dissertation, University of Munich, 1907). (Also
      as: Münchener geographische Studien herausgegeben von Siegmund
      Günther, no. 22.)

  Hofmeister, Adolf. _Studien über Otto von Freisingen_, in: Neues
      Archiv der Gesellschaft für Ältere Deutsche Geschichtskunde, vol.
      xxxvii, Hanover, 1911–1912, pp. 99–161, 663–768.

  HONORIUS AUGUSTODUNENSIS, HONORIUS INCLUSUS, HONORIUS OF AUTUN. See
      _IMAGINE MUNDI, DE_.

  HUGH OF ST. VICTOR. I. _Adnotationes elucidatoriae in Pentateuchon_,
      in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. clxxv, cols. 29–114. II. _De arca Noë
      morali_, in: Migne, _op. cit._, vol. clxxvi, cols. 617–680. III.
      _De arca Noë mystica_, in: Migne, _op. cit._, vol. clxxvi, cols.
      681–704. IV. _De vanitate mundi_, in: Migne, _op. cit._, vol.
      clxxvi, cols. 703–740; also edited by Karl Müller, _Hugo von St.
      Victor soliloquium De arrha animae und De vanitate mundi_ (Kleine
      Texte für Vorlesung und Übungen, no. 123), Bonn, 1913. V. _De
      sacramentis_, in: Migne, _op. cit._, vol. clxxvi, cols. 173–618.
      VI. _De situ terrarum_ (not certainly the work of Hugh of St.
      Victor), forming bk. III of _Tractatus excerptionum_, in: Migne,
      _Pat. lat._, vol. clxxvii, cols. 209–216.

      See Hauréau, _Oeuvres_, 1886.

  IBN RUSHD (AVERROËS). Commentaries on the works of Aristotle. See
      [Bernard] Carra de Vaux, article “Ibn Rushd,” in: _The
      Encyclopaedia of Islam_, vol. ii, Leiden and London, 1918, pp.
      410–413.

      See also Renan, E.

  IBN SINĀ (AVICENNA). Commentaries on the works of Aristotle. See
      ALFRED OF SARESHEL, II; T. J. de Boer, article “Ibn Sina,” in:
      _The Encyclopaedia of Islam_, vol. ii, Leiden and London, 1918,
      pp. 419–420; and above, p. 401, note 60.

  IBN YŪNŪS. _Hākimī Tables._ Portions of these tables and the
      commentaries which accompanied them were published and translated
      by J. J. A. Caussin de Perceval in: _Notices et extraits des
      manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale_, vol. vii, Paris, An XII
      [1803–1804], pp. 16–240; for the description of the measurement of
      the circumference of the earth, see especially pp. 94, 96,
      footnote (2).

  IDRĪSĪ, Al- (EDRISI). _Geography_ (or _Roger Book_, or _Rogerian
      Description_), in: _Géographie d’Édrisi, traduite de l’Arabe en
      français_, by P. A. Jaubert (Recueil de voyages et de mémoires
      publié par la Société de Géographie, vols. v and vi), 2 vols.,
      Paris, 1836–1840. This is the only translation of the whole of
      Edrisi’s _Geography_. More recent and more critical translations
      of parts are (1) _Description de l’Afrique et de l’Espagne par
      Edrîsî_, Arabic text with French translation and notes by R. Dozy
      and M. J. de Goeje, Leiden, 1866; (2) _L’Italia descritta nel
      “Libro del Re Ruggero” compilato da Edrisi_, Arabic text with
      Italian translation and notes by M. Amari and C. Schiaparelli,
      Rome, 1883 (not seen).

      See also Pardi, G.

  _IMAGE DU MONDE, L’._ Metrical versions unedited. For text of prose
      version, see O. H. Prior, _L’Image du monde de Maître Gossouin_,
      Lausanne, 1913. For Caxton’s English translation of 1485, see the
      same, _Caxton’s Mirrour of the World_, London, 1913. On sources
      see Fant, C.; Fritsche, F.; Le Clerc, V.

      See also Langlois, C. V., _Connaissance_, 1911, ch. 5.

  _IMAGINE MUNDI, DE._ In: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. clxxii, cols.
      115–188, where it is attributed to Honorius of Autun. See above,
      p. 403, note 73; pp. 325–326, and p. 481, note 347.

      See Doberentz, O.

  ISIDORE OF SEVILLE. I. _Etymologiae sive originum libri XX_, edited by
      W. M. Lindsay, 2 vols., Oxford, 1911. Also in: Migne, _Pat. lat._,
      vol. lxxxii, cols. 73–728. See Brehaut, E.; Philipp, H. II. _De
      natura rerum_, in: Migne, _op. cit._, vol. lxxxiii, cols.
      963–1018. See also above, p. 387, note 79.

      See Blázquez y Delgado Aguilera, A.; Brehaut, E.; Gribaudi, P.

  _ITER AD PARADISUM._ See _ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF_, VI.

  _ITINERA ET DESCRIPTIONES TERRAE SANCTAE._ See Tobler, Titus.

  _ITINERA HIEROSOLYMITANA._ See Tobler, T., and A. Molinier.

  _ITINÉRAIRES À JERUSALEM._ See Michelant, H., and G. Reynaud.

  _ITINÉRAIRES DE LA TERRE SAINTE ... traduits de l’hébreu._

      See Carmoly, E.

  JACQUES DE VITRY. _Historia hierosolymitana_, in: J. Bongars, _Gesta
      Dei per Francos_, vol. i, Hanover, 1611, pp. 1047–1125. English
      translation by Aubrey Stewart, _The History of Jerusalem, A. D.
      1180, by Jacques de Vitry_, London, 1896 (in: Palestine Pilgrims’
      Text Society, _Library_, 1897, vol. xi).

  James, M. R. See GREGORY, MASTER.

  JEROME. _De situ et nominibus locorum Hebraicorum_ (or _De Palestinae
      locis_), in Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. xxiii, cols. 859–928.

  _JERUSALEM ITINERARIES._ See Carmoly, E.; Michelant, H., and G.
      Reynaud; Tobler, T.; Tobler, T., and A. Molinier.

  JOHANNES. See JOHN.

  JOHANNES, PRESBYTER. See PRESTER JOHN.

  JOHANNES HISPANENSIS. See JOHN OF SEVILLE.

  JOHN, PRESTER. See PRESTER JOHN.

  JOHN OF HOLYWOOD (SACROBOSCO). _De sphaera_, or _Sphaera mundi_, in:
      _Johannes de Sacrobusto anglici viri clarissimi Spera mundi,
      impressa Venetiis per Franciscū Renner de Hailbrun, MCCCCLXXVIII_.
      This text of the _De sphaera_ was printed in the same volume with
      the _Theorica planetarum_ of Gerard of Cremona, q. v. See also
      Duhem, _Système_, vol. iii, 1915, p. 239, note 4, and p. 240, note
      1.

  JOHN OF LUNA. See JOHN OF SEVILLE.

  JOHN OF SALISBURY. _Opera omnia_, edited by J. A. Giles, Oxford, 1848,
      and reprinted in Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxcix, cols. 1–1039. The
      _Policraticus, sive de nugis curialium et vestigiis
      philosophorum_, was edited by C. C. J. Webb, 2 vols., Oxford,
      1909.

  JOHN SCOT ERIGENA. _De divisione naturae_, in: Migne, _Pat. lat._,
      vol. cxxii, cols. 439–1022.

      See Rand, E. K.

  JOHN OF SEVILLE (JOHANNES HISPANENSIS, JOHN OF LUNA). I. Translation
      of the _On the Elements of Astronomy_ of Al-Farghānī was published
      by Johannes Petreius in Nuremberg, 1537, under the title _Brevis
      ac perutilis compilatio Alfragani, quod ad rudimenta astronomica
      est opportunum_. For references to manuscripts, see Woepcke,
      _Notice_, 1862, pp. 115–117. II. Translation of Abū Maʿshar’s _The
      Great Book of the Introduction_. See Haskins, _Studies_, 1924, p.
      45.

  JOHN OF WÜRZBURG. _Descriptio terrae sanctae_, in: Tobler,
      _Descriptiones terrae sanctae_, 1874, pp. 108–192, 415–448. Also
      in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. clv, cols. 1054–1090. English
      translation by Aubrey Stewart, _Description of the Holy Land by
      John of Würzburg (A. D. 1160–1170)_, London, 1890 (in Palestine
      Pilgrims’ Text Society, _Library_, 1897, vol. v).

  Jourdain, Amable. _Recherches critiques sur l’âge et l’origine des
      traductions latines d’Aristote et sur des commentaires grecs ou
      arabes employés par les docteurs scholastiques_, 2nd edit., Paris,
      1843.

  Jourdain, C. B. _Dissertation sur l’état de la philosophie naturelle
      en Occident et principalement en France pendant la première moitié
      du XII^e siècle_, Paris, 1838.

  Jourdain, C. B. _De l’influence d’Aristote et de ses interprètes sur
      la découverte du Nouveau-Monde_, Paris, 1861.

  Jowett, Benjamin. See PLATO.

  Jubinal, A. See BRANDAN, Saint.

  JULIUS VALERIUS. See _ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF_, II, III.

  Karl, L. _La Hongrie et les Hongrois dans les chansons de geste_, in:
      Revue des langues romanes, vol. li, Montpellier, 1908, pp. 5–38.

  Khvostov, M. _Istoriya vostochnoi torgovli Greko-Rimskago Egipta
      (History of the Eastern Trade of Greco-Roman Egypt)_, Kazan, 1907.

  KHWĀRIZMĪ, Al-. I. _Kitāb ṣūrat al-arḍ_, edited by C. A. Nallino, with
      commentary, under title _Al-Ḫuwârizmî e il suo rifacimento della
      Geografia di Tolomeo_, in: Memorie della Reale Accademia dei
      Lincei, series 5, Classe di scienze morali, storiche, e
      filologiche, vol. ii, pt. 1, Rome, 1894 (published 1896). See also
      von Mžik, _Ptolemaeus_, 1915; the same, _Afrika_, 1916; Nallino,
      _Al-Khuwarizmi_, 1896; Spitta, W. II. Astronomical tables known as
      _Khorazmian Tables_, in: H. Suter, _Die astronomischen Tafeln des
      Muḥammed ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī in der Bearbeitung des Maslama ibn
      Aḥmed al-Madjrīṭī und der latein. Übersetzung des Athelhard von
      Bath_, etc. (Mémoires de l’Académie Royale des Sciences et des
      Lettres de Danemark, series 7, Section des lettres, vol. iii, no.
      1), Copenhagen, 1914. As to the _Little Sindhind_ of Al-Khwārizmī,
      to which these tables were related, see above, p. 394, note 20.

  _KING’S MIRROR._ See _KONUNGS-SKUGGSJÁ_.

  Klotz, Alfred. _Quaestiones Plinianae geographicae_ (Quellen und
      Forschungen zur alten Geschichte und Geographie herausgegeben von
      W. Sieglin, no. 11), Berlin, 1906.

  Koch, Joseph. _Das Meer in der mittelhochdeutschen Epik_
      (Dissertation, University of Münster, 1910).

  Kohlmann, P. W. _Adam von Bremen: Ein Beitrag zur mittelalterlichen
      Textkritik und Kosmographie_ (Leipziger historische Abhandlungen,
      vol. x), Leipzig, 1908.

  _KONUNGS-SKUGGSJÁ._ _Speculum regale, ein altnorwegischer Dialog_,
      edited by Oscar Brenner, Munich, 1881. English translation by L.
      M. Larson, American Scandinavian Foundation, New York, 1917.

  Krabbo, Hermann. _Bischof Virgil von Salzburg und seine kosmologischen
      Ideen_, in: Mitteilungen des Institut für Österreichische
      Geschichtsforschungen, vol. xxiv, Vienna, 1903, pp. 1–28.

  Krabbo, Hermann. _Nordeuropa in der Vorstellung Adams von Bremen_, in:
      Hansische Geschichtsblätter, vol. xv, Leipzig, 1909, pp. 37–51.

  Krejcik, J. See DANTE, V.

  Kretschmer, Konrad. _Die physische Erdkunde im christlichen
      Mittelalter_, in: Geographische Abhandlungen herausgegeben von
      Albrecht Penck, vol. iv, pt. 1, Vienna and Olmütz, 1889.

      The best general summary of medieval theories of physical
      geography. See the critical review in Marinelli, _Scritti minori_,
      vol. i, [1908?], pp. 439–448.

  Krumbacher, K. _Geschichte der byzantinischen Literatur von Justinian
      bis zum Ende des Oströmischen Reiches (527–1453)_, Munich, 1890,
      2nd edit. 1897 (forming vol. ix, pt. 1 of Iwan von Müller,
      _Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft_).

  Kubitschek, Wilhelm. “Karten,” article in: _Paulys Real-Encyclopädie
      der classischen Altertumswissenschaft: Neue Bearbeitung, begonnen
      von Georg Wissowa_, edited by Wilhelm Kroll, vol. x, pt. 2 (20th
      half vol.), Stuttgart, 1919, cols. 2022–2149.

  LACTANTIUS. _Divinae institutiones_, edited by Samuel Brandt, in:
      _Corpus script. eccl. lat._, vol. xix, pt. 1, 1890.

  La Marche, R. A. Lecoy de. See Lecoy de La Marche, R. A.

  LAMBERT LI TORS. See _ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF_, VII.

  LAMBERT OF ST. OMER. _Liber floridus._ There is no modern edition. For
      a synopsis, see Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. clxiii, cols. 1003ff. For
      references to manuscripts see Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. iii,
      1895, pp. 43–46, and Beazley, _Dawn_, vol. ii, 1901, pp. 621–624.

  Landgraf, Gustav. _Die Vita Alexandri Magni des Archipresbyters Leo
      (Historia de preliis)_, Schweinfurt, 1885 (not seen).

  _LANDNÁMABÓK._ For editions see Hermannsson, _Bibl. Icelandic Sagas_,
      1908, pp. 70–72. English translations by T. Ellwood, _The Book of
      the Settlement of Iceland_, Kendal, 1898, and by Vigfusson and
      York Powell, _Origines Islandicae_, vol. i, 1905, pp. 2–236,
      266–274. For corrections of renderings given in the latter, see
      review by E. Magnússon, in: Saga Book of the Viking Club, vol. iv,
      pt. 2, London, 1905–1906, pp. 415–467.

  Langenmaier, Theodor. _Alte Kenntnis und Kartographie der
      zentralafrikanischen Seenregion_, in: Mitteilungen der
      Geographischen Gesellschaft in München, vol. xi, Munich, 1916, pt.
      1, pp. 1–144. Also published separately as a dissertation,
      University of Erlangen, 1916.

      An elaborate and detailed study covering the period from Ptolemy
      to the beginning of the eighteenth century. Extensive bibliography
      and lists of maps.

  Langlois, C. V. _Maître Bernard_, in: Bibliothèque de l’École des
      Chartes, vol. liv, Paris, 1893, pp. 225–250.

  Langlois, C. V. _La connaissance de la nature et du monde au moyen âge
      d’après quelques écrits français à l’usage des laïcs_, Paris,
      1911.

      Chapters on popular medieval encyclopedias in French. Throws light
      on medieval geographic ideas as expressed in these works. A useful
      bibliography is given (pp. 394–400) of eighty-eight titles of
      secondary works on references to natural phenomena in the Middle
      Ages.

  Langlois, E. _Tables des noms propres de toute nature compris dans les
      chansons de geste imprimées_, Paris, 1904.

      Includes geographic names.

  La Roncière, Charles de. _Histoire de la marine française_, 5 vols.,
      Paris, 1899–1920. Vol. i, 2nd edit., 1909.

  LATINO, BRUNETTO. _Le livre du trésor._ Edited by P. Chabaille, _Li
      livres dou trésor, publié pour la première fois_, Paris, 1863. See
      the references in C. V. Langlois, _Connaissance_, 1911, pp.
      328–337.

  Le C[lerc], V[ictor]. _L’Image du monde et autres enseignements_, in:
      _Histoire littéraire de la France_, vol. xxiii, 1856, pp. 294–335,
      836–837.

  Lecoy de La Marche, R. A. _Les connaissances géographiques au moyen
      âge_, in: Revue du monde catholique, vol. lxxix, July-Sept., 1884.

  Lelewel, Joachim. _Géographie du moyen âge_, 5 vols. and atlas,
      Brussels, 1852–1857.

      Poorly arranged and written in often incomprehensible French (the
      author was a Pole). A work of great erudition marred by the
      hazardous character of the theories put forth. For the most part
      on Moslem geography.

  Le Noble, Alexandre. _Notice sur le Hortus deliciarum, encyclopédie
      manuscrite composée au douzième siècle par Herrade de Landsberg,
      abbesse du monastère de Hohenbourg (Sainte Odile) en Alsace, et
      conservée à la Bibliothèque de Strasbourg_, in: Bibliothèque de
      l’École des Chartes, vol. i, Paris, 1839, pp. 239–261.

  Lenormant, François. _Magog: Fragments d’une étude sur l’ethnographie
      du chapitre X de la Genèse_, in: Le Muséon: Revue des sciences et
      des lettres, publiée par la Société Internationale des Lettres et
      des Sciences, vol. i, Louvain, 1882, pp. 9–48.

  LEO ARCHIPRESBYTER. See Landgraf, G.

  Lessert, C. Pallu de. _L’oeuvre géographique d’Agrippa et d’Auguste_,
      in: Mémoires de la Société Nationale des Antiquaires de France,
      vol. lxviii, pp. 215–298, Paris, 1909. (Also published
      separately.)

  Letronne, A. _Recherches géographiques et critiques sur le livre De
      mensura orbis terrae, composé en Irlande au commencement du
      neuvième siècle par Dicuil, suivi du texte restitué_, Paris, 1814.

  Letronne, [A.] _Des opinions cosmographiques des pères de l’église,
      rapprochées des doctrines philosophiques de la Grèce_, in: Revue
      des deux mondes, series 3, vol. i, Paris, 1834, pp. 601–633.

  _LIBER DE PROPRIETATIBUS ELEMENTORUM_ (or _LIBER DE ELEMENTIS_). Latin
      translation of an Arabic work falsely attributed to Aristotle in
      the Middle Ages. Duhem, _Système_, vol. ii, 1914, p. 226, note 3,
      refers to a text to be found on fols. 464 vo-469 vo in an edition
      of the works of Aristotle published in Venice, 1496, “per
      Gregorium de Gregoriis expensis Benedicti Fontanae.” On
      manuscripts, see Haskins, _Studies_, 1924, p. 24.

  Liebrecht, Felix. _Des Gervasius von Tilbury Otia imperialia_,
      Hanover, 1856.

      Selections from the _Otia imperialia_ with commentary to
      illustrate the development of Germanic mythology.

  Lippmann, E. O. von. _Chemisches und Alchemisches aus Aristoteles_,
      in: Archiv für die Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der
      Technik, vol. ii, Leipzig, 1910, pp. 233–300.

  Little, A. G., edit. _Roger Bacon Essays, Contributed by Various
      Writers on the Commemoration of the Seventh Centenary of His
      Birth_, Oxford, 1914.

  Lloyd, J. E. _A History of Wales from the Earliest Times to the
      Edwardian Conquest_, 2 vols., London, 1911.

  LOMBARD, PETER. _Libri quattuor sententiarum_, in: Migne, _Pat. lat._,
      vol. cxcii, cols. 519–962. Critical text in the edition of the
      _Opera_ of Saint Bonaventura, Quaracci, 1882–1889, vols. i-iv.

  Lones, T. E. _Aristotle’s Researches in Natural Science_, London,
      1912. A useful introduction.

  Lowes, J. L. _The Dry Sea and the Carrenare_, in: Modern Philology,
      vol. iii, Chicago, 1905, pp. 1–46.

      On the origins of Chaucer’s “Dry Sea” in the history of Prester
      John and elsewhere.

  _LUCIDARIUS_, edited from the Berlin manuscript by Felix Heidlauf, in:
      Deutsche Texte des Mittelalters herausgegeben von der Königlich
      Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, vol. xxviii, Berlin,
      1915.

      See also above, p. 404, note 82.

  Ludwig, Friedrich. _Untersuchungen über die Reise- und
      Marschgeschwindigkeit im XII. und XIII. Jahrhundert_, Berlin,
      1897.

      Important investigation of an interesting phase of medieval
      travel.

  Lutz, H. F. _Geographical Studies Among Babylonians and Egyptians_,
      in: American Anthropologist, vol. xxvi, N. S., Menasha, Wis.,
      1924, pp. 160–174.

  Lynch, Dr. John (“Gratianus Lucius”). _Cambrensis eversus, seu potius
      historica fides in rebus hibernicis Giraldo Cambrensi abrogata,
      1662_, edited and translated by Matthew Kelly for the Irish Celtic
      Society, 3 vols., Dublin, 1848–1851.

  MACROBIUS. _In somnium Scipionis commentarius_, edited by [J. M. N.
      D.] Nisard in _Macrobe (Oeuvres complètes), Varron (De la langue
      latine), Pomponius Mela (Oeuvres complètes), avec la traduction en
      français_ (Collection des auteurs latins, avec la traduction en
      français, publiée sous la direction de M. Nisard), Paris, 1883,
      pp. 9–116. Also edited by F. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1893.

  MAGISTER GREGORIUS. See GREGORY, MASTER.

  Magnússon, E. See _LANDNÁMABÓK_.

  Mâle, Émile. _L’art religieux du xiii^e siècle en France: Étude sur
      l’iconographie du moyen âge et sur ses sources d’inspiration_,
      Paris, 1898, 3rd edit., 1910. English translation by Dora Nussey,
      _Religious Art in France_, London, 1913.

      Explains, among other matters, the representation of geographic
      and cosmographic ideas in medieval sculpture, architecture,
      stained glass, and other forms of artistic expression.

  Mâle, Émile. _L’art religieux du xii^e siècle en France: Étude sur les
      origines de l’iconographie du moyen âge_, Paris, 1922 (not seen).

  Mandonnet, Pierre. _Les idées cosmographiques d’Albert le Grand et de
      St. Thomas d’Aquin et la découverte de l’Amérique_, in: Revue
      thomiste, vol. i, St. Maximin, 1893.

  Mandonnet, Pierre. _Siger de Brabant et l’Averroïsme latin au xiii^e
      siècle_, Fribourg, 1899; 2nd edit.: vol. i, constituting: Les
      philosophes belges: Textes et études, vol. vi, Louvain, 1911; vol.
      ii, pt. 1, chs. 1–2, constituting _op. cit._, vol. vii, Louvain,
      1908 (_sic_).

  MANEGOLD. _Magistri Manegaldi contra Wolfelmum Coloniensem opusculum_,
      in: L. Muratori, _Anecdota quae ex Ambrosianae Bibliothecae
      codicibus nunc primum eruit —_, vol. iv, Padua, 1713, pp. 163–208.

  Manitius, Karl. See PTOLEMY, CLAUDIUS, I.

  Manitius, M. _Beiträge zur Geschichte der römischen Prosaiker im
      Mittelalter_, in: Philologus: Zeitschrift für das classische
      Alterthum, vol. xlix, Göttingen, 1890, pp. 380–384.

  Manitius, M. _Philologisches aus alten Bibliothekskatalogen (bis
      1300)_, in: Rheinisches Museum, Ergänzungs-Heft, Frankfurt-a-M.,
      1892.

  Manitius, M. _Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters_,
      vol. i, Munich, 1911 (forming vol. ix, pt. 2, section 1, of Iwan
      von Müller, _Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft_).

  MARCO POLO. See POLO, MARCO.

  Marinelli, Giovanni. _La geografia e i padri della chiesa_, in:
      Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana, vol. xix, Rome,
      1882, pp. 472–498, 532–573. (Also printed separately, Rome, 1882.)
      Reprinted with additional footnotes by Carlo Errera in _Scritti
      minori di Giovanni Marinelli_, vol. i, [1908?], pp. 281–383 (see
      next title). German translation, with an introduction by Siegmund
      Günther, by Ludwig Neumann entitled _Die Erdkunde bei den
      Kirchenväter_, Leipzig, 1884.

  Marinelli, Giovanni. _Scritti minori di Giovanni Marinelli_: vol. i,
      _Metodo e storia della geografia_, Florence, [1908?]; vol. ii,
      _Corografia italiana e questioni didattiche_, Florence, [1920?].

      Collection of reprints of important monographs, all of which had
      appeared previously. Additional editorial notes and
      bibliographical references are given by the editors in the
      footnotes. The following are the titles of the most interesting
      monographs from the point of view of medieval geography, with
      references to the publications in which they were first published:
      (vol. i, pp. 63–98) _Note straboniane_, in: Cosmos di Guido Cora,
      vol. vi, Turin, 1880, pp. 161–180 (also printed separately); (vol.
      i, pp. 181–279) _Intorno agli studi del Dott. Günther sulla storia
      della geografia matematica e fisica_, in: Bollettino della Società
      Geografica Italiana, vol. xvii, Rome, 1880, pp. 309–332, 469–487,
      534–543, 585–596 (also printed separately; forms an extensive
      review and analysis of Günther, _Studien_, 1877–1879); (vol. i,
      pp. 281–383) _La geografia e i padri della chiesa_ (see preceding
      entry); (vol. i, pp. 385–438) _Gog e Magog: Leggenda geografica_,
      in: Cosmos di Guido Cora, vol. vii, Turin, 1882–1883, pp. 155–180,
      199–207; (vol. i, pp. 439–448) _Un nuovo lavoro sulla storia della
      geografia medioevale_, in: Bollettino della Società Geografica
      Italiana, vol. xxvii, Rome, 1890, pp. 232–238 (also printed
      separately; a review of Kretschmer, _Die physische Erdkunde_,
      1889).

  Marquart, Josef. _Über das Volkstum der Komanen_, in: Koenigliche
      Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Abhandlungen,
      Philologisch-historische Klasse, vol. xiii (N. S.), 1912–1914, pp.
      25–238.

  MARTIANUS CAPELLA. See CAPELLA, MARTIANUS.

  Mas-Latrie, L. de. _Traités de paix et de commerce et documents divers
      concernant les relations des Chrétiens avec les Arabes de
      l’Afrique septentrionale au moyen âge_, Paris, 1866.

      The introduction deals with the relations between Europe and North
      Africa in the Middle Ages and incidentally with the extent of
      European knowledge of North African geography.

  Masson, Gustave. _Biblical Literature in France During the Middle
      Ages: Peter Comestor and Guiart Desmoulins_, in: Journal of Sacred
      Literature, vol. viii (N. S.), London, 1865, pp. 81–106.

  MASTER GREGORY. See GREGORY, MASTER.

  MATTHEW PARIS. I. _Chronica maiora_, edited by H. R. Luard (Rolls
      Series, no. 57), 7 vols., London, 1872–1883. II. On maps see
      Miller, _Mappaemundi_, vol. iii, 1895, pp. 68–94.

  MAUR, RABAN. See RABAN MAUR.

  MELA, POMPONIUS. See POMPONIUS MELA.

  _METHODIUS, PSEUDO-._ See Sackur, E.

  Meyer, Paul. _Alexandre le Grand dans la littérature française du
      moyen âge_, 2 vols., Paris, 1886.

      Thorough study of the Romance in French literature. Also, in vol.
      ii, a general treatment of the Latin versions.

  MICHAEL PSELLOS. See Zervos, C.

  MICHAEL SCOT. I. _Liber introductorius._ Unpublished. On manuscripts
      see Haskins, _Michael Scot_, 1921–1922, p. 262, note 6; the same,
      _Studies_, 1924, p. 287, note 95. II. _Liber particularis._
      Unpublished. On manuscripts see Haskins, _Michael Scot_,
      1921–1922, p. 266, note 7; the same, _Studies_, 1924, p. 290, note
      117. III. Translation of Al-Bitrūjī’s _On the Sphere_,
      unpublished. On manuscripts see Haskins, _Michael Scot_,
      1921–1922, p. 251, note 3; the same, _Studies_, 1924, p. 273, note
      9. IV. Translation of Aristotle’s _De caelo_. Unpublished. On
      manuscripts see Haskins, _Michael Scot_, 1921–1922, p. 256; the
      same, _Studies_, 1924, p. 278, note 39.

      See Brown, J. W.; Haskins, _Michael Scot_, 1921–1922; the same,
      _Studies_, 1924, pp. 272–298.

  Michelant, H. See _ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF_, VII.

  Michelant, H., and Gaston Reynaud, edits. _ITINÉRAIRES À JERUSALEM ET
      LA DESCRIPTION DE LA TERRE SAINTE REDIGÉS EN FRANÇAIS AUX XI^e,
      XII^e, ET XIII^e SIÈCLES_, Geneva, 1882.

  Migne, J. P., edit. _PATROLOGIAE CURSUS COMPLETUS, SIVE
      BIBLIOTHECA.... OMNIUM SS. PATRUM, DOCTORUM SCRIPTORUMQUE
      ECCLESIASTICORUM, QUI AB AEVO APOSTOLICO AD USQUE INNOCENTII III
      TEMPORA FLORUERUNT...: SERIES LATINA_, 221 vols., Paris,
      1844–1864. (Referred to in the present work as Migne, _Pat. lat._)

      Great collection of the writings of the Church Fathers and other
      medieval authors. The texts in many cases are not critical.

  Miller, Konrad. _Die Weltkarte des Castorius, genannt die
      Peutinger’sche Tafel_, Ravensburg, 1888. Colored facsimile and
      explanatory text.

      More complete commentary in the same author’s _Itin. Romana_,
      1916.

  Miller, Konrad. _Mappaemundi, die ältesten Weltkarten_, 6 vols.,
      Stuttgart, 1895–1898.

      A series of critical discussions of medieval maps of the world
      with transliterations of the texts. Profusely illustrated with
      facsimiles.

  Miller, Konrad. _Itineraria Romana: Römische Reisewege an der Hand der
      Tabula Peutingeriana_, Stuttgart, 1916.

      An elaborate commentary on the Peutinger Table, its sources and
      influence.

  Miller, Konrad. _Die Erdmessung im Alterthum und ihr Schicksal_,
      Stuttgart, 1919.

      Summary and synthesis of recent investigations regarding ancient
      and Moslem estimates of the circumference of the earth. See,
      however, critical review in Petermanns Mitteilungen, vol. lxviii,
      Gotha, 1922, p. 27.

  _MIRABILIA URBIS ROMAE_, edited by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1869; also
      edited by H. Jordan in his: _Topographie der Stadt Rom im
      Altertum_, vol. ii, Berlin, 1871. English translation by F. M.
      Nichols, _Mirabilia Urbis Romae: The Marvels of Rome, or a Picture
      of the Golden City, an English Version of the Mediaeval
      Guidebook_, London, 1889.

  Molinier, A. See Tobler, T., and A. Molinier.

  Mommsen, Theodor. See SOLINUS.

  _MONUMENTA GERMANIAE HISTORICA_, folio series, Hanover, later Berlin,
      1826–1874; quarto series, Hanover, later Berlin, 1876ff.

      Great collection of historical sources in many volumes relating to
      the history of Germany and incidentally of Europe as a whole.
      Divided into five sections: (1) Scriptores; (2) Leges; (3)
      Diplomata; (4) Epistolae; (5) Antiquitates.

      Certain texts published in the _Monumenta_ are also edited in
      _Scriptores rerum germ. in usum scholarum_.

  _MONUMENTA HISTORICA NORVEGIAE._ See Storm, G.

  Moore, Edward. _Studies in Dante: Second Series_, Oxford, 1899.
      Contains _The Genuineness of the Quaestio de aqua et terra_, pp.
      303–374.

  Moore, Edward. _Studies in Dante: Third Series_, Oxford, 1903.
      Contains _The Astronomy of Dante_, pp. 1–108; _The Geography of
      Dante_, pp. 109–143. The last-named is translated into Italian and
      reviewed at length by G. Boffito and E. Sanesi, _La geografia di
      Dante secondo Edoardo Moore_, in: Rivista geografica italiana,
      vol. xii, Florence, 1905, pp. 92–101, 204–215.

  Mori, Assunto. _La misurazione eratostenica del grado ed altre notizie
      geografiche della “Geometria” di Marciano Capella_, in: Rivista
      geografica italiana, vol. xvii, Florence, 1911, pp. 177–191,
      382–391, 584–603.

  Mori, Assunto. _La geografia nell’opera di Dante_, in: Atti dell’ VIII
      Congresso Geografico Italiano, vol. i, Florence, 1922, pp.
      271–299.

      Deals with the traditional geography of Dante’s period and with
      the poet’s original contributions in the field of geography.

  Moritz, Eduard. _Die geographische Kenntnis von den Nord- und
      Ostseeküsten bis zum Ende des Mittelalters_, pt. 1, in:
      Wissenschaftliche Beilage zum Jahresbericht der Sophienschule zu
      Berlin, Berlin, 1904.

  Müller, Carl (Carolus Müllerus), edit. _GEOGRAPHI GRAECI MINORES_, 2
      vols., Paris, 1882.

      Important collection of the texts of the lesser Greek geographers,
      with Latin translations.

  Mžik, Hans von. _Ptolemaeus und die Karten der arabischen Geographen_,
      in: Mitteilungen der Kaiserlich-koeniglichen Geographischen
      Gesellschaft in Wien, vol. lviii, Vienna, 1915, p. 152–176.

  Mžik, Hans von. _Afrika nach der arabischen Bearbeitung der Γεωγραφικὴ
      ὑφήγησις des Claudius Ptolemaeus von Muhammad ibn Mūsā
      al-Ḫwārizmī_, edited and translated with commentary by ——
      (Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Denkschriften,
      Philosophisch-historische Klasse, vol. lix, Abhandlung 4) Vienna,
      1916.

  Nallino, C. A. _Al-Khuwarizmi et son remaniement de la Géographie de
      Ptolémée_, in: Bulletin de la Société Khédiviale de Géographie,
      series 4, no. 8, Cairo, Feb. 1896, pp. 525–543.

      See BATTĀNĪ, Al-; KHWĀRIZMĪ, Al-, I.

  Nansen, Fridtjof. _In Northern Mists: Arctic Exploration in Early
      Times_, 2 vols., New York, 1911.

      Elaborate history of theories and explorations. References to the
      sources and many translations.

  NECKAM, ALEXANDER. I. _De naturis rerum libri duo_, edited by Thomas
      Wright (Rolls Series, no. 34), London, 1863, pp. 1–354. II. _De
      laudibus divinae sapientiae_, edited by Thomas Wright (Rolls
      Series, no. 34), London, 1863, pp. 356–503.

      See Esposito, M.

  Neubauer, A. _Where Are the Ten Tribes?_ in: Jewish Quarterly Review,
      vol. i, London, 1888–1889, pp. 14–28, 95–114, 185–201, 408–423.

  Nichols, F. M. See _MIRABILIA URBIS ROMAE_.

  NIKULÁS BERGSSON OF THVERÁ, Abbot. Geographical description of the
      world and itinerary to Rome and the Holy Land (probably in part
      only the work of Abbot Nikulás). Icelandic text with Latin
      translation from MS. no. 194 in the Arne Magnússon collection at
      Copenhagen, in: Werlauff, _Symbolae_, 1821, pp. 9–34. Also in: C.
      C. Rafn and others, edits., _Antiquités russes d’après les
      monuments historiques des Islandais et des anciens Scandinaves_,
      published by the Société Royale des Antiquaires du Nord, 2 vols.,
      Copenhagen, 1850–1852, vol. ii, pp. 394–415.

      See above, p. 405, note 90.

  Norlind, Arnold. _Das Problem des gegenseitigen Verhältnisses von Land
      und Wasser und seine Behandlung im Mittelalter_ (Lunds
      Universitets Årsskrift, N. S., pt. 1, vol. xiv, no. 12), Lund and
      Leipzig, 1918.

      On the evolution of ancient and medieval theories regarding the
      relative positions of earth and water and the interpenetration of
      the land by channels of water.

  Oberhummer, Eugen. _Bericht über Lander- und Völkerkunde der antiken
      Welt_, in: Geographisches Jahrbuch, Gotha, vols. xix, 1896, xxii,
      1899, xxviii, 1905. (See also vol. xxxiv, 1911.)

      See above, p. 492.

  ODO OF RHEIMS. _Epistola ad Thomam comitem de quodam miraculo S.
      Thomae Apostoli_, in: Zarncke, _Priester Johannes_, Erste
      Abhandlung, in: Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 845–846 (also
      numbered 19–20).

  Oehlmann, E. _Die Alpenpässe im Mittelalter_, in: Jahrbuch für
      schweizerische Geschichte, Zurich, vol. iii, 1878, pp. 165–289,
      vol. iv, 1879, pp. 163–324.

  Oppert, Gustav. _Der Presbyter Johannes in Sage und Geschichte_, 2nd
      edit., Berlin, 1870.

  ORDERICUS VITALIS. _Historia ecclesiastica_, edited by Auguste le
      Prévost and Léopold Delisle (Société de l’Histoire de France,
      [publ.] no. 6), 5 vols., Paris, 1838–1855. Also in Migne, _Pat.
      lat._, vol. clxxxviii, cols. 47–984.

  _ORIGINES ISLANDICAE._ See Vigfusson, G., and F. York Powell.

  OROSIUS. _Historiarum adversus paganos libri VII_, edited by C.
      Zangemeister, Leipzig (Teubner), 1889. Also in: _Corpus script.
      eccles. lat._, vol. v, 1882. The geographical chapter alone in:
      Riese, _Geogr. lat. min._, 1878, pp. 56–70.

  OTTO OF FREISING. I. _Chronicon_, edited by Adolf Hofmeister, in:
      _Scriptores rerum germ. in usum scholarum_, Hanover and Leipzig,
      1912. This edition supersedes that in: Mon. Germ. hist.,
      Scriptores, vol. xx, pp. 116–301. II. _Gesta Friderici I
      imperatoris cum continuatione Rahewini_, edited by G. Waitz, in:
      _Scriptores rerum germ. in usum scholarum_, Hanover, 1884. This
      edition supersedes that in: _Mon. Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol.
      xx, pp. 347–491.

      See Hofmeister, A.

  Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society. _THE LIBRARY OF THE PALESTINE
      PILGRIMS’ TEXT SOCIETY_, 13 vols, and index vol., London, 1897.
      The individual texts, which were combined under this title, had
      been issued separately between 1885 and 1897.

      English translations of medieval pilgrims’ descriptions of the
      Holy Land.

  Pannenborg, A. _Über den Ligurinus_, in: Forschungen zur deutschen
      Geschichte, vol. xi, Munich, 1871, pp. 163–300.

  Pannenborg, A. _Magister Guntherus und seine Schriften_, in:
      Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte, vol. xiii, Munich, 1873, pp.
      227–331.

  Pannenborg, A. _Der Verfasser des Ligurinus: Studien zu den Schriften
      des Magister Gunther_, Göttingen, 1884.

  Paraskévopoulos, J. S. _The Etesiens_, in: Monthly Weather Review,
      vol. 50, Washington, 1922, pp. 417–422.

  Pardi, G. _L’Italia nel XII secolo descritta da un geografo arabo_
      (Memorie geografiche di Giotto Dainelli pubblicate come
      supplemento alla “Rivista geografica italiana,” no. 38), Florence,
      1919.

      A discussion of Edrisi’s geography of Italy.

  Paris, Gaston. _Dissertation critique sur le poème latin du Ligurinus
      attribué à Gunther_, Paris, 1872.

  Paris, Gaston. _La Sicile dans la littérature française du moyen âge_,
      in: Romania, vol. v, Paris, 1876, pp. 108–113.

      Aims to suggest possibilities of research rather than to stand as
      a finished study.

  Paris, Gaston. _La littérature française au moyen âge_, 3rd edit.,
      Paris, 1905; 5th edit., 1914. English translation by H. Lynch
      entitled _Medieval French Literature_ in Temple Primer Series,
      London, 1902.

      Covers the eleventh to the fourteenth centuries. A useful summary
      and interpretation by a foremost authority.

  PARIS, MATTHEW. See MATTHEW PARIS.

  Parker, H. _The Seven Liberal Arts_, in: English Historical Review,
      vol. v, London, 1890, pp. 417–461.

  PAUL THE DEACON. _Historia gentis Langobardorum_, in: _Mon. Germ.
      hist., Scriptores rerum langobardicarum_, Hanover, 1878. Also in:
      _Scriptores rerum germ. in usum scholarum_, Hanover, 1878.

  Pelliot, Paul. _Chrétiens d’Asie centrale et d’Extrême-Orient_, in:
      T’oung Pao, ou archives concernant l’histoire, les langues, la
      géographie et l’ethnographie de l’Asie orientale, vol. xv, Leiden,
      1914, pp. 623–644.

      Summary of recent researches. Includes data on the origins of the
      legend of Prester John.

  Peschel, Oscar. _Geschichte der Erdkunde bis auf Alexander von
      Humboldt und Karl Ritter_, 2nd edit., edited by Sophus Ruge,
      Munich, 1877.

  Peschel, Oscar. _Abhandlungen zur Erd- und Völkerkunde_, 3 vols.,
      Leipzig, 1877–1879.

  PETACHIA OF RATISBON. _The Travels of Rabbi Petachia of Ratisbon._
      English translation by A. Benisch and W. F. Ainsworth, London,
      1856.

  PETER ABELARD. See ABELARD, PETER.

  PETER ALPHONSI. See ALPHONSI, PETER.

  PETER COMESTOR. See COMESTOR, PETER.

  PETER LOMBARD. See LOMBARD, PETER.

  _PEUTINGER TABLE._ See Miller, _Weltkarte des Castorius_, 1888; the
      same, _Itin. Romana_, 1916.

  Philipp, Hans. _Die historisch-geographischen Quellen in den
      Etymologiae des Isidorus von Sivillia_ (Quellen und Forschungen
      zur alten Geschichte und Geographie herausgegeben von W. Sieglin,
      nos. 25–26), 2 pts., Berlin, 1912–1913.

  Philipps, W. R. _The Connection of St. Thomas the Apostle with India_,
      in: The Indian Antiquary, vol. xxxii, Bombay, 1903, pp. 1–15,
      145–160.

  PLATO. _Dialogues_, English translation by Benjamin Jowett, _The
      Dialogues of Plato_, 5 vols., London, 1892.

  PLATO OF TIVOLI. Translation of the _Astronomy_ of Al-Battānī.
      Manuscript in: Bibliothèque Nationale MSS., fonds latin, no. 7266,
      fols. 47–112vo. Also published under the title _Mahometis
      Albatenii de scientia stellarum liber, cum aliquot additionibus
      Joannis Regiomontani, ex Bibliotheca Vaticana transcriptus_,
      Bologna, 1645.

      See BATTĀNĪ, Al-; Boncompagni, _Delle versione_, 1851.

  PLINY. _Historia naturalis._ Edited by C. Mayhoff, _C. Plinii Secundi
      Naturalis historiae libri XXXVII_, 6 vols., Leipzig, 1892–1909.
      The references in the present work are to chapters of this
      edition. English translation by John Bostock and H. T. Riley, 6
      vols. (Bohn’s Classical Library), London, 1855–1857. For the
      geographical books see D. Detlefsen, _Die geographischen Bücher
      (II, 242-VI Schluss) der Naturalis Historia des C. Plinius
      Secundus, mit vollständigem kritischen Apparat_ (Quellen und
      Forschungen zur alten Geschichte und Geographie herausgegeben von
      W. Sieglin, no. 9), Berlin, 1904.

      See Detlefsen, _Geographie Afrikas_, 1909; Klotz, A.; Rück, K.

  POLO, MARCO. _The Book of Ser Marco Polo the Venetian Concerning the
      Kingdoms and Marvels of the East_, translated and edited with
      notes by Sir Henry Yule, 3rd edit. revised by Henri Cordier, 2
      vols., London, 1903. Supplemented by: Henri Cordier, _Ser Marco
      Polo: Notes and Addenda to Sir Henry Yule’s Edition, Containing
      the Results of Recent Research and Discovery_, London and New
      York, 1920.

  POMPONIUS MELA. _De situ orbis_, edited by [J. M. N. D.] Nisard, in:
      _Macrobe (Oeuvres complètes), Varron (De la langue latine),
      Pomponius Mela (Oeuvres complètes), avec la traduction en
      français_ (Collection des auteurs latins avec la traduction en
      français, publiée sous la direction de M. Nisard), Paris, 1883.
      Also edited by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1867.

  Poole, R. L. _Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought and
      Learning_, 2nd edit., revised, London, 1920.

  Poole, R. L. _The Masters of the Schools at Paris and Chartres in John
      of Salisbury’s Time_, in: English Historical Review, vol. xxxv,
      London, 1920, pp. 321–342.

  Potthast, August. _Bibliotheca historica medii aevi: Wegweiser durch
      die Geschichtswerke des europäischen Mittelalters bis 1500_, 2nd
      edit., 2 vols., Berlin, 1896.

      See above, pp. 491–492.

  Powell, F. York. See SAXO GRAMMATICUS; Vigfusson, G., and F. York
      Powell.

  _PRECEPTUM CANONIS PTOLEMEI._ Manuscript in Chartres, Bibliothèque
      Publique, MS. no. 214.

  PRESBYTER JOHANNES. See PRESTER JOHN.

  PRESTER JOHN. Letters and documents relating to Prester John or
      supposedly written by him: I. _Letter of Prester John_, in:
      Friedrich Zarncke, _Der Priester Johannes_, Erste Abhandlung, in:
      Koeniglich-saechsische Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,
      Abhandlungen, Philologisch-historische Classe, vol. vii, Leipzig,
      1879, pp. 909–924 (also numbered 83–98). For medieval German
      translations, see Zarncke, _ibid._, pp. 947–1028 (also numbered
      121–202); for other medieval Latin and English versions, see
      Zarncke, in: Koeniglich-saechisische Gesellschaft der
      Wissenschaften, Berichte, vol. xxix, Leipzig, 1877, pp. 111–156;
      vol. XXX, pt. I, 1878, pp. 41–46. II. _Elysaeus Account_, in:
      Zarncke, _Der Priester Johannes_, Zweite Abhandlung, in:
      Königlich-sächische Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Abhandlungen,
      Philologisch-historische Classe, vol. viii, Leipzig, 1876 (_sic_),
      pp. 122–128. III. _Letter from Pope Alexander III to Prester
      John_, in: Zarncke. _op. cit._, Erste Abhandlung, in:
      Abhandlungen, vol. vii, 1879, pp. 941–944 (also numbered 115–118).

      See Bruun, P.; Oppert, G.

  Prior, O. H. See _IMAGE DU MONDE, L’_.

  PRISCIAN. _Periegesis_, edited by C. Müller, _Geogr. graeci min._,
      vol. ii, Paris, 1882, pp. 190–199.

  PSELLOS, MICHAEL. See Zervos, C.

  PSEUDO-ABDIAS. See ABDIAS, PSEUDO-.

  _PSEUDO-CALLISTHENES._ See _ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF_, I.

  _PSEUDO-METHODIUS._ See Sackur, E.

  PTOLEMY, CLAUDIUS. I. Μαθεματικῆς συντάξεως βιβλία ̅ι̅γ (_Mathematical
      Composition_ or _Almagest_), edited by J. L. Heiberg, _Claudii
      Ptolemaei opera quae exstant omnia_, vol. i, pts. 1 and 2,
      _Syntaxis mathematica_, Leipzig (Teubner), 1898–1903. French
      translation: _Composition mathématique de Claude Ptolemée traduite
      pour la première fois du grec en français sur les manuscrits
      originaux de la Bibliothèque imperiale par M. Halma (avec le texte
      grec) et suivie des notes de M. Delambre_, 2 vols., Paris,
      1813–1816. German translation: Karl Manitius, _Des Claudius
      Ptolemäus Handbuch der Astronomie_, Leipzig (Teubner), 1912. The
      introduction of the last named gives a brief account of the
      influence of the _Almagest_ in later times. See also above, p.
      398, note 32. II. Γεωγραφικὴ ὑφήγησις (_Geography_). Books i-v
      edited, with Latin translation, by Carolus Müllerus, _Claudii
      Ptolemaei Geographia_, vol. i, pts. 1 and 2, and atlas, Paris,
      1883–1901. Complete Greek text edited by C. F. A. Nobbe, _Cl.
      Ptolemaei Geographia_, 3 vols., Leipzig, 1888–1913. Also numerous
      fifteenth- and sixteenth-century editions.

      See Dinse, _Ptolemäus-Karten_, 1913; Fischer, J.; Haskins, C. H.,
      and D. P. Lockwood; Rose, V.; Schütte, G.; Tudeer, L. O. T.

  Pullé, F. L. _La cartografia antica dell’ India_, pt. 2: _Il medio-evo
      europeo e il primo rinascimento_, in: Studi italiani di filologia
      indo-iranica, vol. v, Florence and Pisa, 1905. (Pt. 1, in vol. iv
      of the Studi italiani, etc., is entitled _Disegno della
      cartografia antica dell’ India_, Florence, 1901, and deals with
      the period “dai principi fino ai Bizantini e agli Arabi”).

  RABAN MAUR. _De universo_, in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cxi, cols.
      9–614. See Bertolini, _I quattro angoli_, 1910.

  Rafn, C. C., edit. _ANTIQUITATES AMERICANAE, SIVE SCRIPTORES
      SEPTENTRIONALES RERUM ANTE-COLUMBIANARUM IN AMERICA_, Societas
      Regia Antiquariorum Septentrionalium, Copenhagen, 1837;
      Supplement, 1841.

      Collection of sources of Norse voyages to America with commentary.

  RAGEWIN. See OTTO OF FREISING, II.

  Rahn, J. R. _Die Glasgemälde in der Rosette der Kathedrale von
      Lausanne: Ein Bild der Welt aus dem XIII. Jahrhundert_, in:
      Mittheilungen der Antiquarischen Gesellschaft in Zürich, vol. xx,
      1878–1879, pp. 31(3)-58(30).

      Deals with medieval geography as displayed on a stained glass
      window. A facsimile of the window is given.

  Rainaud, Armand. _Le continent austral: Hypothèses et découvertes_,
      Paris, 1893.

      History of the evolution of theories regarding the antipodes and
      austral continent and of explorations to the south from early
      times to the voyages of Cook.

  Rand, E. K. _Johannes Scottus_ (Quellen und Forschungen zur
      lateinischen Philologie des Mittelalters herausgegeben von Ludwig
      Traube, vol. i, pt. 2), Munich, 1906.

  RAVENNA GEOGRAPHER, Anonymous. _Cosmographia_, edited by M. Pinder and
      G. Parthey, _Ravennatis anonymi Cosmographia et Guidonis
      Geographica_, Berlin, 1860, pp. 1–445.

  RAYMOND OF MARSEILLES. _Marseilles Tables._ Unpublished. On
      manuscripts see Haskins, _Studies_, 1924, pp. 96–98, and also
      above, p. 399, note 41. On a geographical table accompanying the
      Paris manuscript see J. K. Wright, _Knowledge of Latitudes and
      Longitudes_, 1923, pp. 87–88.

  Reeves, A. M. _THE FINDING OF WINELAND THE GOOD: THE HISTORY OF THE
      ICELANDIC DISCOVERY OF AMERICA_, London, 1890.

      Translations of the sources with critical commentary.

  Reinhard, R. _Pässe und Strassen in den schweizer Alpen:
      Topographisch-historische Studien_, Lucerne, 1903.

  Reinaud, J. T. _Mémoire géographique, historique, et scientifique sur
      l’Inde antérieurement au milieu du xi^e siècle_, etc., Paris,
      1849.

  Reinaud, J. T., on Moslem geography. See ABŪ-L-FIDĀ.

  Renan, Ernest. _Averroès et l’Averroïsme_, 1st edit., Paris, 1852; 3rd
      edit., Paris, 1866; 4th edit., Paris, 1882.

  _RERUM BRITANNICARUM MEDII AEVI SCRIPTORES._ See “_ROLLS SERIES_.”

  Revelli, P. _Una “rosa dei venti” del secolo ix_, in: Bollettino della
      Società Geografica Italiana, vol. xlvii, Rome, 1910, pp. 269–279.

  Rey, E. _Les colonies franques de Syrie aux xii^e et xiii^e siècles_,
      Paris, 1883.

      On society, economic conditions, and life.

  Rey, E. _Géographie historique de la Syrie au temps des croisades:
      Formation des noms de lieux avec index des localités occupées en
      Syrie par les Francs au xii^e et xiii^e siècles_, Geneva, n. d.

  Reynaud, G. See Michelant, H., and G. Reynaud.

  Riese, Alexander, edit. _GEOGRAPHI LATINI MINORES_, Heilbronn, 1878.

      Important collection of texts of the writings of the lesser Latin
      geographers.

  Robbins, F. E. _The Hexaemeral Literature: A Study of the Greek and
      Latin Commentaries on Genesis_ (Doctoral Dissertation, University
      of Chicago, 1912).

      Includes useful material on classical and medieval theories of
      cosmogony.

  ROBERT DE CLARI. _La prise de Constantinople_, edited by Charles Hopf,
      in his _Chroniques gréco-romanes inédites ou peu connues_, Berlin,
      1873, pp. 1–85.

  ROBERT GROSSETESTE. See GROSSETESTE, ROBERT.

  ROBERT OF RETINES (ROBERT OF KETENE, ROBERT OF CHESTER). I.
      Translation of the _Astronomy_ of Al-Battānī. No text of this is
      known. See above p. 398, note 36. II. Adaptation to the meridian
      of London of tables of Az-Zarqalī and Al-Battānī. Unpublished. See
      Haskins, _Reception_, 1915, p. 64; the same, _Studies_, 1924, p.
      122. III. Adaptation of Adelard of Bath’s translation of the
      _Khorazmian Tables_ to the meridian of London. Unpublished. See
      Haskins, _Reception_, 1915, pp. 64–65; the same, _Studies_, 1924,
      p. 123.

  ROGER OF HEREFORD. I. _Theorica planetarum._ Unpublished. II. Tables
      for the meridian of Hereford based on tables for Toledo and
      Marseilles. Unpublished.

      On manuscripts see Haskins, _Reception_, 1915, p. 66; the same,
      Studies, 1924, p. 125.

  ROGER OF HOVEDEN (HOWDEN). _Chronica_, edited by William Stubbs (Rolls
      Series, no. 51), 4 vols., London, 1868–1871.

  Röhricht, Reinhold. _Bibliotheca geographica Palaestinae_, Berlin,
      1890.

  “_ROLLS SERIES._” Customary designation of _RERUM BRITANNICARUM MEDII
      AEVI SCRIPTORES, OR CHRONICLES AND MEMORIALS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND
      IRELAND DURING THE MIDDLE AGES_, published by authority of Her
      Majesty’s Treasury, under direction of the Master of the Rolls,
      London, 1858–1891.

  Roscher, W. H. _Omphalos_, in: Koeniglich-saechsische Gesellschaft der
      Wissenschaften, Abhandlungen, Philologisch-historische Klasse,
      vol. xxix, Leipzig, 1913, pp. 1–140.

  Roscher, W. H. _Neue Omphalosstudien_, in: Koeniglich-saechsische
      Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Abhandlungen,
      Philologisch-historische Klasse, vol. xxi, Leipzig, 1915, pp.
      1–90.

  Rose, Valentin. _Ptolemäus und die Schule von Toledo_, in: Hermes:
      Zeitschrift für classische Philologie, vol. viii, Berlin, 1874,
      pp. 327–349.

  Rose, Valentin, on Arnold the Saxon. See ARNOLD THE SAXON.

  Rück, Karl. _Auszüge aus der Naturgeschichte des C. Plinius Secundus
      in einem astronomisch-komputistischen Sammelwerke des achten
      Jahrhunderts_, Programm des Ludwigsgymnasiums in München, Munich,
      1888.

  Rück, Karl. _Die Naturalis Historia des Plinius im Mittelalter:
      Exzerpte aus der Naturalis Historia auf den Bibliotheken zu
      Lucca, Paris und Leiden_, in: Koeniglich-bayerische
      Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München, Sitzungsberichte,
      Philosophisch-philologische und historische Classe, vol. ii,
      Munich, 1898, pp. 203–318.

  Rück, Karl. _Das Exzerpt der Naturalis Historia des Plinius
      von Robert von Cricklade_, in: Koeniglich-bayerische
      Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München, Sitzungsberichte,
      Philosophisch-philologische und historische Classe, Munich, 1902,
      pp. 195–285.

  RUDOLF OF HOHEN-EMS. See Doberentz, O.

  Ruge, Sophus, and Walther Ruge. _Die Litteratur zur Geschichte der
      Erdkunde vom Mittelalter an_, in: Geographisches Jahrbuch, Gotha,
      vols. xviii, 1895, pp. 1–60; xx, 1897, pp. 217–248; xxiii, 1900,
      pp. 173–212; xxvi, 1903, pp. 175–218; xxx, 1907, pp. 329–380.

      See above, p. 492.

  RUPERT OF DEUTZ. _De sancta trinitate et operibus eius_, in: Migne,
      _Pat. lat._, vol. clxvii, cols. 199–1828.

  Sackur, Ernst. _Sibyllinische Texte und Forschungen_, Halle, 1898.

      Data on early medieval prophecies of the end of the world,
      including the _Pseudo-Methodius_.

  SACROBOSCO. See JOHN OF HOLYWOOD.

  SAEWULF. _De situ Hierusalem_, edited by A. d’Avezac (Recueil de
      voyages et de mémoires publiées par la Société de Géographie, vol.
      iv, pp. 817–854), Paris, 1839. English translation in Thomas
      Wright, _Early Travels_, 1848, pp. 31–50. Also translation by
      Canon Brownlow in Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, _Library_,
      vol. iv, London, 1897.

  _SAGAS, THE._ For editions, see Hermannsson, _Bibl. Icelandic Sagas_,
      1908; the same, _Bibl. Sagas Kings_, 1910.

  Sandys, Sir J. E. _A History of Classical Scholarship_, 3rd edit.,
      vol. i, _From the Sixth Century B. C. to the End of the Middle
      Ages_, Cambridge, 1921.

  Santarem, [M. F.] Le Vicomte de. _Essai sur l’histoire de la
      cosmographie et de la cartographie pendant le moyen âge_, etc., 3
      vols. and atlas, Paris, 1849–1852.

      An elaborate study. Vol. i contains a general summary of the
      development of cartography and geographic theories during the
      early Middle Ages. Though largely out of date in details, this
      great work is still one of the primary approaches to medieval
      geography.

  SAXO GRAMMATICUS. _Gesta Danorum_, edited by Alfred Holder, Strasburg,
      1886. English translation: _The First Nine Books of the Danish
      History of Saxo Grammaticus_, translated by Oliver Elton, with
      some considerations on Saxo’s sources, historical methods, and
      folk lore, by Frederick York Powell, London, 1894.

  Scala, R. von. _Das Fortleben der eratosthenischen Masse_, in:
      Verhandlungen des achtzehnten deutschen Geographentages zu
      Innsbruck, Berlin, 1912, pp. 206–217.

  Schaube, Adolf. _Handelsgeschichte der romanischen Völker des
      Mittelmeergebiets bis zum Ende der Kreuzzüge_, Munich and Berlin,
      1906.

      Valuable from the geographic point of view for the light it throws
      on the extent of travel of Mediterranean peoples during the Middle
      Ages.

  Scheffel, P. H. _Verkehrsgeschichte der Alpen_: vol. i, _Bis zum Ende
      des Ostgotenreiches Theodorichs des Grossen_; vol. ii, _Das
      Mittelalter_; Berlin, 1908, 1914.

  Schmidt, W. _Über Dante’s Stellung in der Geschichte der
      Kosmographie_, Graz, 1876 (not seen).

  Schneid, M. _Die Lehre von der Erdrundung und Erdbewegung im
      Mittelalter_, in: Historisch-politische Blätter für das
      katholische Deutschland, vol. lxxx, no. 6, Munich, 1877, pp.
      433–451.

      Reply from Catholic point of view to a paper of same title in S.
      Günther’s _Studien_, 1877–1879.

  Schneider, Artur. _Die abendländische Spekulation des zwölften
      Jahrhunderts in ihrem Verhältnis zur aristotelischen und
      jüdisch-arabischen Philosophie_, in: Beiträge zur Geschichte der
      Philosophie des Mittelalters herausgegeben von C. Baeumker, vol.
      xvii, pt. 4, Münster, 1915.

  Schoy, Carl. _Die geschichtliche Entwicklung der Polhöhenbestimmung
      bei den älteren Völkern_ (Dissertation, University of Munich,
      1911).

  Schoy, Carl. _Längenbestimmung und Zentralmeridian bei den älteren
      Völkern_, Mitteilungen der Kaiserlich-koeniglichen Geographischen
      Gesellschaft in Wien, vol. lviii, Vienna, 1915, pp. 27–62.

  Schoy, Carl. _Erdmessungen bei den Arabern_, in: Zeitschrift der
      Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin, 1917, pp. 431–445.

  Schoy, Carl. _Aus der astronomischen Geographie der Araber:
      Originalstudien aus “Al-Qânûn al-Masʿûdî” des arabischen
      Astronomen Muḥ. b. Ahmed Abû’l-Rîḥân al-Bîrûnî (973–1048)_, in:
      Isis: International Review Devoted to the History of Science and
      Civilization, vol. v, pt. 1, Brussels, 1923, pp. 51–74.

  Schoy, Carl. _The Geography of the Moslems of the Middle Ages_, in:
      Geographical Review, vol. xiv, New York, 1924, pp. 257–269.

  Schröder, Carl. See BRANDAN, Saint.

  Schulte, A. _Geschichte des mittelalterlichen Handels und Verkehrs
      zwischen Westdeutschland und Italien mit Ausschluss von Venedig_,
      2 vols., Leipzig, 1900.

      Includes data on the Alpine passes in the Middle Ages.

  Schütte, Gudmund. _Ptolemy’s Maps of Northern Europe_, Copenhagen,
      1917.

  SCOT, MICHAEL. See MICHAEL SCOT.

  SCOTUS ERIGENA. See JOHN SCOT ERIGENA.

  _SCRIPTORES RERUM GERMANICARUM IN USUM SCHOLARUM EX MONUMENTIS
      GERMANIAE HISTORICIS RECUSI_, Hanover, 1840 ff. The volumes of
      this series are not numbered, only dated.

      Important collection of sources based on _Mon. Germ. hist._ In
      some cases the texts are revisions and improvements over those of
      the _Monumenta_.

  _SCRIPTURE._ See _BIBLE_.

  SENECA. _Quaestiones naturales_, edited by Alfred Gercke, _Naturalium
      quaestionum libri VIII_, Leipzig (Teubner), 1907. English
      translation: John Clarke, _Physical Science in the Time of Nero,
      Being a Translation of the Quaestiones Naturales of Seneca_, with
      notes by Sir Archibald Geikie, London, 1910.

  Shadwell, C. L. See DANTE, V.

  SIGURD THE CRUSADER. _The Saga of Sigurd the Crusader_, in Snorri
      Sturluson’s _Heimskringla_. See Hermannsson, _Bibl. Sagas Kings_,
      1910, pp. 19–30. English translation in Thomas Wright, _Early
      Travels_, 1848, pp. 50–62.

  Simar, T. _La géographie de l’Afrique centrale dans l’antiquité et au
      moyen âge_, Brussels, 1912. Also published in: Revue Congolaise,
      vol. iii, Brussels, 1912, pp. 1–23, 81–102, 145–169, 225–252,
      289–310, 440–441.

      A thorough and well-documented study of the evolution of ancient
      and medieval knowledge of Central Africa.

  Singer, Charles. _The Scientific Views and Visions of Saint
      Hildegard_, in: Charles Singer, edit., _Studies in the History and
      Method of Science_, vol. i, Oxford, 1917, pp. 1–55.

  Singer, Charles. _Daniel of Morley, An English Philosopher of the
      XIIth Century_, in: Isis: International Review Devoted to the
      History of Science and Civilization, vol. iii, Brussels, 1920, pp.
      263–269.

  _SITU ORBIS, DE._ M. Manitius, edit., _Anonymi de situ orbis_,
      Stuttgart, 1884.

      A compilation dating from the end of the ninth century.

  _SITU TERRARUM, DE._ See HUGH OF ST. VICTOR, VI.

  SNORRI STURLUSON. I. _Heimskringla._ On editions see Hermannsson,
      _Bibl. Sagas Kings_, 1910, pp. 19–30. English translation by
      William Morris and Eirikr Magnûsson in: _The Saga Library_, vols.
      iii-vi, London, 1893–1905. II. _Snorra Edda (Snorri’s Edda)._ On
      editions see Hermannsson, _Bibl. Eddas_, 1920, pp. 74–79. English
      translations: R. B. Anderson, _The Younger Edda, Also Called
      Snorre’s Edda, or the Prose Edda: An English Version of the
      Foreword; the Fooling of Gylfe; the Afterword; Brage’s Talk; the
      Afterword to Brage’s Talk; and Important Passages of the Poetical
      Diction (Skaldskaparmal)_, Chicago, 1880; A. G. Brodeur, _The
      Prose Edda by Snorri Sturluson_, New York, 1916 (not seen).

  SOLINUS. _C. Iulii Solini collectanea rerum memorabilium_, edited by
      Theodor Mommsen, Berlin, 1895.

      See Columba, G. M.

  _SPECULUM REGALE._ See _KONUNGS-SKUGGSJÁ_.

  Spitta, Wilhelm. _Die Geographie des Ptolemaeus bei den
      Arabern_, in: Verhandlungen des fünften internationalen
      Orientalisten-Congresses, pt. 2, Abhandlungen und Vorträge,
      vol. i, Berlin, 1882, pp. 19–28.

  Stange, Emil. _Arnoldus Saxo, der älteste Enzyklopädist des XIII.
      Jahrhunderts_ (Dissertation, University of Halle, 1885).

  Stange, Emil. On _Arnold the Saxon_, in: Programm des königlichen
      Gymnasiums zu Erfurt, 1905–1907 (not seen).

  Steele, Robert. _Roger Bacon and the State of Science in the
      Thirteenth Century_, in: Charles Singer, edit., _Studies in the
      History and Method of Science_, vol. ii, Oxford, 1921, pp.
      121–150.

  Steele, Robert. See BARTHOLOMEW ANGLICUS.

  Stegmann, Otto. _Die Anschauungen des Mittelalters über die endogenen
      Erscheinungen der Erde_ (Dissertation, University of Tübingen,
      1913). Also in: Archiv für die Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften
      und der Technik, vol. iv, Leipzig, 1913, pp. 243–269.

  Steinschneider, Moritz. _Études sur Zarkali, astronome arabe du xi^e
      siècle, et ses ouvrages_, in: Bollettino di bibliografia e di
      storia della scienze matematiche e fisiche pubblicato da B.
      Boncompagni, Rome, vols. xiv, 1881, pp. 171–182; xvi, 1883, pp.
      493–527; xvii, 1884, pp. 765–794; xviii, 1885, pp. 343–360; xx,
      1887, pp. 1–36, 575–604.

  Steinschneider, Moritz. _Die hebräischen Übersetzungen des
      Mittelalters und die Juden als Dolmetscher: Ein Beitrag zur
      Literaturgeschichte des Mittelalters_, 2 vols., Berlin, 1893.

  Steinschneider, Moritz. _Die europäischen Übersetzungen aus
      dem Arabischen bis Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts_, in:
      Kaiserlich-koenigliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien,
      Sitzungsberichte, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Vienna, vol.
      cxlix, 1905, pp. 1–84; vol. cli, 1906, pp. 1–108.

      This and the preceding are arranged alphabetically by authors’ or
      translators’ names and by titles.

  Storm, Gustav, edit. _MONUMENTA HISTORICA NORVEGIAE: LATINSKE
      KILDESKRIFTER TIL NORGES HISTORIE I MIDDELALDEREN_, Christiania,
      1880.

      Collection of texts of several medieval histories of Norway,
      including _Historia Norwegiae_ and Theodricus Monachus, _Historia
      de antiquitate regum norwagensium_.

  Stubbs, William. See BENEDICT OF PETERBOROUGH; GERVASE OF CANTERBURY;
      ROGER OF HOVEDEN.

  STURLUSON, SNORRI. See SNORRI STURLUSON.

  Suchier, H. See BRANDAN, Saint.

  SULPICIUS SEVERUS. _Dialogus_, in: Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. xx, cols.
      183–222.

  Suter, Heinrich. _Die Mathematiker und Astronomen der Araber und ihre
      Werke_, in: Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der mathematischen
      Wissenschaften, etc., vol. x and vol. xiv, pp. 155–185, Leipzig,
      1900, 1902.

  Suter, Heinrich, on the Kharazmian Tables. See KHWĀRIZMĪ, Al-, II.

  SYLVESTER, BERNARD. See BERNARD SYLVESTER.

  SYLVESTER II (Pope). See GERBERT.

  _TABULA PEUTINGERIANA._ See Miller, _Weltkarte des Castorius_, 1888;
      the same, _Itin. Romana_, 1916.

  Thalamas, A. _Étude bibliographique de la géographie d’Ératosthène_,
      Versailles, 1921.

  Thalamas, A. _La géographie d’Ératosthène_, Versailles, 1921.

  THEODERIC (Pilgrim). _Libellus de locis sanctis_, edited by T. Tobler,
      St. Gall and Paris, 1865. English translation by Aubrey Stewart,
      _Theoderich’s Description of the Holy Places (circa 1172 A. D.)_,
      London, 1891 (in: Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, _Library_,
      vol. v, London, 1897).

  THEODORIC OF CHARTRES. _De sex dierum operibus_, edited by B. Hauréau,
      in his _Notices et extraits de quelques manuscrits latins de la
      Bibliothèque Nationale_, vol. i, Paris, 1890, pp. 52–68.

  THEODRICUS MONACHUS. _Historia de antiquitate regum norwagiensium_,
      edited by G. Storm, in his _Mon. hist. Norveg._, 1880, pp. 1–68.

  THIERRY DE CHARTRES. See THEODORIC OF CHARTRES.

  THOMAS, Saint (The Apostle). See ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, APOCRYPHAL;
      Dahlmann, J.; Philipps, W. R.

  Thorndike, Lynn. _A History of Magic and Experimental Science During
      the First Thirteen Centuries of Our Era_, 2 vols., New York, 1923.

      Fundamental work on the subject. Contains many valuable
      bibliographical indications. The researches whose results are
      embodied in these volumes were largely made in manuscript sources.

  Thoroddsen, Thorvaldur. _Geschichte der isländischen Geographie._
      Translated into German by A. Gebhart. Vol. i, _Die isländische
      Geographie bis zum Schlusse des 16. Jahrhunderts_, Leipzig, 1897.

      The outstanding work on the historical geography of Iceland.
      Contains section (pp. 53–92) on the oldest descriptions of Iceland
      and on Iceland on medieval maps.

  Tiander, K. _Poyezdki Skandinavov v Byeloe More (The Voyages
      of the Scandinavians to the White Sea)_, in: Zapiski
      Istoriko-Filologicheskago Fakulteta Imperatorskago
      S. Peterburgskago Universiteta (Journal of the
      Historical-Philological Faculty of the Imperial University of St.
      Petersburg), vol. lxxix, 1906.

  Tillinghast, W. H. _The Geographical Knowledge of the Ancients
      Considered in Relation to the Discovery of America_, in: Justin
      Winsor, edit., _Narrative and Critical History of America_, vol.
      i, Boston and New York, 1889, ch. i.

      Particularly valuable for its bibliographical references.

  Tobler, Titus, edit. _DESCRIPTIONES TERRAE SANCTAE EX SAECULO VIII,
      IX, XII, ET XV_, Leipzig, 1874.

      See also THEODERIC (Pilgrim).

  Tobler, Titus, edit. _ITINERA ET DESCRIPTIONES TERRAE SANCTAE, LINGUA
      LATINA SAEC. IV-XI EXARATA_, vol. i (constituting Publications de
      la Société de l’Orient Latin: Série géographique, no. 1), Geneva,
      1877.

  Tobler, Titus, and A. Molinier, edits. _ITINERA HIEROSOLYMITANA ET
      DESCRIPTIONES TERRAE SANCTAE BELLIS SACRIS ANTERIORA ET LATINA
      LINGUA EXARATA_, vol. i, pt. 2 (constituting Publications de la
      Société de l’Orient latin: Série géographique, no. 2) Geneva,
      1880; vol. ii, edited by A. Molinier and C. Kohler, (constituting
      _op. cit._, no. 4), Geneva, 1885.

  _TOLEDO TABLES._ Unpublished. On manuscripts of Latin translations,
      see Steinschneider, _Études sur Zarkali_, in: Bollettino, vol. xx,
      1887, pp. 1–36, 575–604.

  Tozer, H. F. _A History of Ancient Geography_, Cambridge, 1897.

      Brief, attractively written introduction.

  Tudeer, L. O. T. _On the Origin of the Maps Attached to Ptolemy’s
      Geography_, in: Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol. xxxvii, pt. 1,
      London, 1917, pp. 62–76.

  VALERIUS, JULIUS. See _ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ROMANCE OF_, II, III.

  Van der Linden, Herman. _Virgile de Salzbourg et les théories
      cosmographiques au VIII^e siècle_, in: Académie royale de
      Belgique, Bulletin de la Classe des lettres, Brussels, 1914, pp.
      163–187.

  Vaux, Carra de. See Carra de Vaux, B.

  Vidier, A. _La mappemonde de Théodulfe et la mappemonde de Ripoll
      (ix^e-xi^e siècle)_, in: Bulletin de géographie historique et
      descriptive, Paris, 1911, pp. 285–313.

  Vigfusson, Gudbrand, and F. York Powell, edits, and transls. _ORIGINES
      ISLANDICAE: A COLLECTION OF THE MORE IMPORTANT SAGAS AND OTHER
      NATIVE WRITINGS RELATING TO THE SETTLEMENT AND EARLY HISTORY OF
      ICELAND_, 2 vols., Oxford, 1905.

  VINCENT OF BEAUVAIS. I. _Speculum naturale_ and (II) _Speculum
      historiale_, in: _Bibliotheca mundi Vincentii Burgundii ...
      episcopi Bellovacensis speculum quadruplex, opere et studio
      theologorum Benedictinorum collegii Vedastini_, 4 vols., Douai,
      1624. This is the latest complete edition. For bibliographical
      notes, see J. C. Brunet, _Manuel du libraire_, vol. v, Paris,
      1864, cols. 1253–1257. On _Speculum historiale_, see Potthast,
      _Bibliotheca_, vol. ii, 1896, p. 1095.

  VITALIS, ORDERICUS. See ORDERICUS VITALIS.

  von Mžik; von Scala; etc. See Mžik, von; Scala, von; etc.

  Vulpinus, T. See GUNTHER OF PAIRIS.

  WALTER OF CHÂTILLON (WALTER OF LILLE). _Alexandreis_, edited by F. A.
      W. Müldener, Leipzig (Teubner), 1863. For commentary and
      bibliography, see Giordano, _Alexandreis_, 1917.

  Wattenbach, W. See GUY OF BAZOCHES.

  Weinhold, Karl. _Die Polargegenden Europas nach den
      Vorstellungen des deutschen Mittelalters_, in: Kaiserliche
      Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Sitzungsberichte,
      Philosophisch-historische Klasse, vol. lxviii, Vienna, 1871,
      pp. 783–808.

      Data on the voyages northward described by Adam of Bremen, Saxo
      Grammaticus, and other Germanic writers.

  Werlauff, E. C. _Symbolae ad geographiam medii aevi ex monumentis
      islandicis_, Copenhagen, 1821.

      A brief summary of the status of Icelandic geographical knowledge
      in the Middle Ages together with texts dating from the twelfth
      century and later.

  Werner, Karl. _Die Kosmologie und Naturlehre des scholastischen
      Mittelalters mit specieller Beziehung auf Wilhelm von Conches_,
      in: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien,
      Sitzungsberichte, Philosophisch-historische Classe, vol. lxxv,
      Vienna, 1873, pp. 309–403.

  Werner, Karl. _Die Kosmologie und allgemeine Naturlehre des Roger
      Baco_, in: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien,
      Sitzungsberichte, Philosophisch-historische Classe, vol. xciv,
      Vienna, 1879, pp. 489–612.

  Westropp, T. J. _Brasil and the Legendary Islands of the Atlantic_,
      in: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. xxx, sect. C, no.
      8, Dublin, 1912, pp. 223–260.

  White, A. D. _A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in
      Christendom_, 2 vols., New York, 1895 (reprinted 1920).

      A wealth of material is here brought together in an attempt to
      demonstrate the almost universally adverse influence that theology
      (as distinguished from religion) has exerted on the development of
      scientific thought.

  WILLIAM OF AUVERGNE. _De universo_, in: _Guillelmi Alverni, episcopi
      parisiensis, opera_, etc. ... _curante Blasio Ferronio_, 2 vols.,
      Orléans, 1674 (not seen).

  WILLIAM THE BRETON. _Philippidos libri XII_, or _Gesta Philippi regis
      Franciae_, edited by H. F. Delaborde, in: _Oeuvres de Rigord et de
      Guillaume le Breton_, vol. ii, Paris, 1885, pp. 1–385. Also in
      part in: _Mon. Germ. hist._, Scriptores, vol. xxvi, pp. 319–389.

  WILLIAM OF CONCHES. I. _De philosophia mundi_ (or _Philosophicarum et
      astronomicarum institutionum libri, tres_ or Περὶ διδαξέων _sive
      elementorum philosophiae libri quattuor_), edited in: Migne, _Pat.
      lat._, vol. clxxii, cols. 39–102, among the works of Honorius of
      Autun (the references in the present work are to books and
      chapters of this edition); also in: Migne, _op. cit._, vol. xc,
      cols. 1127–1182, among the works of Bede. See above, p. 398, note
      28. Book III, chs. 1–11 and 15, dealing with meteorology, are
      printed in Hellmann, _Denkmäler_ 1904, pp. 62–74. II. _Dragmaticon
      philosophiae._ This is the title given in the manuscripts. This
      work, which corresponds closely in content to the _De philosophia
      mundi_, was published at Strasburg, 1567, under the title
      _Dialogus de substantis physicis, ante annos ducentos confectus a
      Vuilhelmo Aneponymo philosopho. Item libri tres incerti authoris
      eiusdem aetatis. I. De calore vitalis. II. De mari aquis. III. De
      fluminum origine. Industria Guilelmi Grataroli medici_ ... etc.
      The portion of _Dragmaticon philosophiae_ dealing with meteorology
      is published in Hellmann, _Denkmäler_, 1904, pp. 42–45.

      See Werner, _Kosm. Wilhelm von Conches_, 1873.

  WILLIAM FITZSTEPHEN. See FITZSTEPHEN, WILLIAM.

  WILLIAM OF TYRE. _Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum_,
      or _Belli sacri historia_, in: _Recueil des historiens des
      croisades_, Historiens Occidentaux, vol. i, Paris, 1844. Also in:
      Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. cci, cols. 209–892. Medieval French
      translation edited by Paulin Paris, _Guillaume de Tyr et ses
      continuateurs_, 2 vols., Paris, 1879–1880.

  Wisotzki, Emil. _Zeitströmungen in der Geographie_, Leipzig, 1897.

      Important study of tendencies of geographical thought in the
      sixteenth to nineteenth centuries, with occasional references to
      the earlier periods.

  Woepcke, Franz. _Notice sur quelques manuscrits arabes ... relatifs
      aux mathématiques et récemment acquis par la Bibliothèque
      Impériale_, in: Journal asiatique, series 5, vol. xix, Paris,
      1862, pp. 101–127.

  Wolkenhauer, W. _Aus der Geschichte der Kartographie_, in: Deutsche
      geographische Blätter, vol. xxxiv, Bremen, 1911, pp. 120–129 (on
      the cartography of the Greeks and Romans), vol. xxxv, 1912, pp.
      29–47 (on medieval and Moslem cartography).

      A useful summary. Maps are listed and bibliographical data
      appended.

  Wright, J. K. _Notes on the Knowledge of Latitudes and Longitudes in
      the Middle Ages_, in: Isis: International Review Devoted to the
      History of Science and Civilization, vol. v, pt. 1, Brussels,
      1923, pp. 75–98.

  Wright, Thomas, edit. _Popular Treatises on Science Written During the
      Middle Ages in Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Norman, and English_, London,
      1841.

  Wright, Thomas. _EARLY TRAVELS IN PALESTINE_ (Bohn’s Antiquarian
      Library), London, 1848.

      Translations of medieval books of travel.

  Wulf, Maurice de. _Histoire de la philosophie médiévale, précédée d’un
      aperçu sur la philosophie ancienne_, Louvain, 1900 (4th edit.,
      Louvain, 1912). English translation by P. Coffey entitled _History
      of Medieval Philosophy_, London and New York, 1909.

  Wüstenfeld, F. _Die Übersetzungen arabischer Werke in das
      Lateinische seit dem XI. Jahrhundert_, in: Abhandlungen der
      königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen,
      Philologisch-historische Klasse, vol. xxii, no. 2, 1877.

      Now superseded by Steinschneider, _Europ. Übersetz._, 1905–1906.

  Xivrey, Berger de. See Berger de Xivrey, J.

  York Powell, F. See SAXO GRAMMATICUS; Vigfusson, G., and F. York
      Powell.

  Yule, Sir Henry. _Cathay and the Way Thither_, 2nd edit., edited by
      Henri Cordier, 4 vols., Hakluyt Society [publs.], series 2, vols.
      xxxiii, xxxvii, xxxviii, xli, London, 1913–1916.

      The best general account of the development of Western knowledge
      of the Far East in ancient and medieval times. Translations of the
      sources are given with commentaries. The introduction is an
      excellent outline of the entire subject.

      See also POLO, MARCO.

  Zarncke, Friedrich. See PRESTER JOHN.

  ZARQALĪ, Az-. _Canons on the Toledo Tables._ Unpublished. On
      manuscripts, see Steinschneider, _Études sur Zarkali_, in:
      Bollettino, vol. xx, 1887, pp. 1–36, 575–604.

      See GERARD OF CREMONA, II.

  Zervos, Charles. _Un philosophe néoplatonicien du XI^e siècle, Michel
      Psellos: Sa vie, son oeuvre, ses luttes philosophiques, son
      influence_, Paris, 1919.

  Zeuss, Kaspar. _Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme_, Munich, 1837.
      Many quotations from chronicles and medieval historians. Useful in
      determining changes in the names of tribes.

  Zimmer, Heinrich. _Über die frühesten Berührungen der Iren mit den
      Nordgermanen_, in: Koeniglich Preussiche Akademie der
      Wissenschaften, Sitzungsberichte, Berlin, 1891, pp. 279–317.

  Zöckler, _O. Geschichte der Beziehungen zwischen Theologie
      und Naturwissenschaft mit besondrer Rücksicht auf
      Schöpfungsgeschichte_, 2 vols., Gütersloh, 1877–1879: vol. i, _Von
      den Anfängen der christlichen Kirche bis auf Newton und Leibniz_;
      vol. ii, _Von Newton und Leibniz bis zur Gegenwart_.

      A thorough study of the development of natural science in its
      relation to theology. The author attempts to show that medieval
      theology was not adverse to the growth of natural science.
      Analyses given of theories of the Creation.

  Zunz, ——. _Essay on the Geographical Literature of the Jews from the
      Remotest Times to the Year 1841_, in: _The Itinerary of Rabbi
      Benjamin of Tudela_, edited by A. Asher, vol. ii, London and
      Berlin, 1841, pp. 230–317.




                                 INDEX

  _Matter in the Notes (pp. 365–487) that can readily be found from
  references in the text is omitted in the index._

  _Titles in the Bibliography (pp. 503–543), as such, are also omitted
  in the index._


  Abbreviations, medieval, 493

  Abelard, Peter, 31, 89, 151;
    on the congregation of the waters, 184, 186;
    on Nile flood, 206;
    on the rivers of Paradise, 264;
    on the water above the firmament, 182, 184

  Abu-l-Ḥasan, 485

  Abū Maʿshar, 82, 83, 86, 193;
    on the tides, 84

  Abyss, 59

  Abyssinia, 283, 286, 292

  Accuracy, gradations of, in knowledge, 256;
    in relation to medieval maps, 247, 248

  Acheron, 282

  Acre, 294, 308

  Adam and Eve, 254, 261

  Adam of Bremen, 48, 51, 111, 223;
    geography, 481;
    on northern Europe, 327, 329;
    on northern ocean, 348, 350

  Ad-Dir, 87

  Adelard of Bath, 92, 135, 158, 170, 171, 188, 189, 200, 260;
    Aristotelian influence upon, 401;
    on authority, 135;
    on boundaries, 128;
    on earthquakes, 227;
    on the saltness of the sea, 189;
    on subdivision of land areas, 210;
    on the support of the earth, 154;
    on the tides, 192, 439–440;
    translations, 95;
    on winds, 172.
    _See also_ Khorazmian Tables

  Aden, 292, 299

  Aden, Gulf of, 281

  Adrastias, 368

  Aegean Sea, 25, 26, 37

  Aethicus of Istria, 44, 49

  Africa, 19, 39, 41, 55, 71, 258, 298;
    limits, 74;
    west of Egypt, 300

  Africa, Central, traditional view, 306

  Africa, North, 257

  Agareni, 287

  Agathodaemon’s map, 242, 453, 456

  Agisymba, 41

  Agobard, 57

  Agriculture and soils, 232

  Agrippa, 36

  Akaba, 294, 295

  Alan of Lille, 128, 136

  Alani, 290

  Albania (Scotia), 336

  Alberic of Besançon, 113

  Albertus Magnus, 22, 101, 106;
    writings, 406

  Alemannia, name, 325

  Alexander Neckam. _See_ Neckam, Alexander

  Alexander of Bernai, 113

  Alexander the Great, 26, 38;
    Gog and Magog and, 287;
    Paradise and, 262;
    Romance of, 49, 50, 73, 113, 205, 214, 275;
    his view from a mountain summit, 216;
    visit to India, 275;
    visit to the sea floor, 199

  Alexander III, Pope, 286

  Alexandreis, 113

  Alexandria, 38, 299

  Alfraganus. _See_ Farghānī, Al-

  Alfred of Sareshel, 402;
    on origin of mountains, 213

  Alfred the Great, 49, 75

  Algeria, 302

  Allegory, 89, 90, 135, 136, 153, 236

  Almagest, 78, 98

  Almohads, 301, 302

  Alpetragius, 77.
    _See also_ Biṭrūjī, Al-

  Alphonsi, Peter (Petrus Anfusi), 95, 96, 121, 162, 168, 169, 185, 380

  Alps, 217, 219;
    knowledge of, 323;
    “Pyrenean,” 319, 323;
    routes across, 324

  Alsace, 332

  Altitudes, 32, 214

  Altmann of Passau, 216

  Amazons, 285, 329

  Ambroise, 296;
    on the Assassins, 298;
    on Sicily, 311;
    on summer heat of Palestine, 176

  Ambrose, 59, 61

  America, Icelandic discovery, 391;
    Norsemen in, 76

  Amor reorum, Mount, 260

  Amphitrite, 159, 428

  Anaxagoras, 31

  Ancient geography, 9–42;
    works on, 497

  Andamans, 280

  Anglesey, 344, 345

  Anglia, 336

  Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 74

  Animals, 143

  Anselm of Canterbury, 217

  Antichthones, 160

  Antioch, 239, 295

  Antipodal regions, 157;
    belief that they were inhabited, 159

  Antipodeans, 158, 257

  Antipodes, 19, 28, 55, 160, 385, 386, 429

  Antiquarian interests, 321

  Antiquity, geographical lore of, 9–42;
    works on, 496

  Antoikoi, 160

  Apennines, 315, 319, 323

  Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, 379

  Apokatastasis, 367

  Apostles, Apocryphal Acts of, 379;
    the twelve, 123 (ill.), 278

  Apulia, 319, 320

  Aquinas, Thomas, 91

  Arabia, Benjamin of Tudela on, 291

  Arabic, translations from, 95

  Arabic geography, 77–87

  Arabic literature, 87

  Arabs, 109

  Arachosia, 288

  Ararat, Mount, 270

  Araxes, 282

  Arbela, battle of, 35

  Archeology, 321

  Arculf, 259

  Arethusa, 311

  Argare, 280

  Argentina (Strasburg), 333

  Argyre, 280

  Ari Frodhi, 111, 346, 349

  Arin (Arim), 82, 86, 95, 96, 162

  Aristippus, Henricus, 398, 402

  Aristotelianism, 100;
    effects, 138;
    introduced through Arabic works, 98;
    opponents, 101

  Aristotle, 9, 24, 30;
    on circumference of the earth, 16;
    on cosmic cycles, 13;
    on depth of the seas, 25;
    on earthquakes and volcanoes, 32;
    on the elements, 12, 20;
    on exhalations and vapors, 22;
    on extent of the oikoumene, 19;
    on height of mountains, 32;
    on immobility of the earth, 370;
    influence, 98;
    influence among the Moslems, 77;
    on interior of the earth, 29;
    on shape of the earth, 368;
    Western knowledge of, 99, 400, 401

  Ark, 234

  Arklow, 195, 196, 206

  Arles, 334

  Armenia, 270, 288, 289

  Armenia, Little, 296

  Armorica, 336

  Arnold of Chartres, 145

  Arnold of Lübeck, 117, 317

  Arnold the Saxon, 100, 408

  Arthur, King, 311

  Arts, medieval, 127

  Asceticism, 64

  Asia, 19, 39, 70, 71, 258;
    early relations of eastern and western, 266;
    European knowledge of, 265;
    great mountain system, 270;
    opening of, in the thirteenth century, 266

  Asia, Central, 282

  Asia, Western, 257, 288;
    as described by the Crusaders, 296

  Asia Minor, 270, 295

  Assassins, 298

  Assyria, 288

  Astrology, 13, 51, 52, 85, 244, 246;
    geography and, 128

  Astronomical geography, of the known world, 241–246;
    Moslem contribution, 82;
    works on, 501

  Astronomical observations, 243

  Astronomy, in map making, 242, 244, 246, 457 (with map)

  Atlantic Ocean, 19, 25;
    fabulous islands, 350;
    legends of islands, 75.
    _See also_ Western Ocean

  Atlantis, 351

  Atlas, Mount, 301;
    Nile and, 304, 305

  Atmosphere, 21, 166;
    circulation, 24, 172;
    composition, 166;
    upper levels, 167

  Augustine (Saint), 47, 52, 54, 56, 59, 60, 61, 66, 144–145;
    on Paradise, 262

  Augustine (seventh century), 61

  Aurea Chersonesus, 280

  Aurea gemma, 104

  Auster, 173, 174

  Austral continent, 157, 257

  Australia, 281

  Authority, 135, 358

  Avalanches, 218

  Avars, 315

  Averroës (Ibn Rushd), 77, 85, 100, 420, 437

  Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā), 77, 213, 446

  Azores, 334

  Azov, Sea of, 314


  Babylon, 289, 298

  Babylonian astrology and geography, 391

  Bacchus, 275

  Bacon, Roger, 102, 106, 163, 164, 188, 258, 372, 420;
    on the height of mountains, 447;
    Opus majus, 269, 409;
    works, 408

  Bactria, 270

  Baghdad, 86, 117, 118, 176, 282, 297;
    Benjamin of Tudela on, 289

  Baldach, 289

  Baleares, 310

  Balkan Peninsula, 316

  Baltic, term, 482

  Baltic Sea, 40, 75, 112, 327;
    regions, 327

  Bang, W., 478

  Barbaric Sea, 281

  Barbaro, Monte, 221

  Bardo, Mount, 319, 323

  Bartholomew Anglicus, 106, 177, 227;
    on origin of mountains, 213

  Basil, 61

  Batiffol, Pierre, 379

  Battānī, Al-, 78, 87, 96, 97, 162, 245;
    on the Indian Ocean, 280;
    on the Mediterranean, 307

  Bavaria, 325

  Beatus maps, 68, 69 (ill.), 122, 123 (ill.), 157, 249, 251, 252

  Beauty, 63, 64;
    of mountains, 215

  Beazley, C. R., xix, 269, 498

  Bede, the Venerable, 48, 53, 54, 56, 59, 61, 62, 143;
    on Nile flood, 206

  Bedouins, 297

  Beginning of the world, 140

  Benedict, Saint, 236

  Benedict of Peterborough, 109, 308, 433

  Bengal, Bay of, 281

  Benjamin of Tudela, 117;
    on Alexandria, 299;
    on Arabia, 291;
    on Baghdad, 289;
    on Central Asia, 282;
    on China, 272;
    on climates, 176;
    on Constantinople, 318;
    on India, 274;
    on Islam, 297;
    on Italy, 478;
    on the Nile flood, 300;
    on the Sahara, 474;
    on Slavic Europe, 314

  Bergsson, Nikulás. _See_ Nikulás Bergsson

  Bernard of Chartres, 91, 93

  Bernard of Clairvaux, on nature, 235, 238;
    on the sea as the source of waters, 200

  Bernard Sylvester of Tours, 92, 93, 134, 135, 148, 158, 199, 265;
    on tripartite division of the oikoumene, 258;
    on interrelations of the parts of the universe, 231;
    on orographic systems, 215;
    theory of Creation, 139, 145;
    on the tides, 190;
    on zones, 156

  Betten, F. S., 384

  Biarma, 75, 313, 348

  Bible, 3, 43, 134;
    interpretation, 46, 380;
    position, 45

  Bibliographical Note, 491

  Bibliographie géographique, 492

  Bibliographies, description, 491

  Bibliography, 503

  Bibliotheca Geographica, 492

  Bingen, 327

  Birds, 204, 217, 230, 281, 326

  Birka, 329

  Biṭrūjī, Al-, 77, 83, 85

  Black Sea, 312, 313.
    _See also_ Euxine

  Blake, R. P., xx, 389

  Blood vessels, 148, 185

  Blue sky, 436

  Boëthius, 57

  Bohemia, 87

  Boniface, Saint, 57

  Borchardt, Paul, 414, 474

  Boreas, 173, 174

  Borneo, 42

  Borysthenes, 242

  Bothnia, Gulf of, 328

  Boundaries, 128

  Brahmins, 74, 273, 285

  Brandan, Saint, 50, 75, 178, 220, 263;
    on antipodes, 159;
    islands of, 230, 351;
    legend, 115;
    visits to volcanic isles, 224, 225;
    wanderings, 197

  Brecknock, Lake, 208, 340

  Bremen, 111, 112

  Brenner Pass, 324

  Bretschneider, E., 464

  Bristol, 195

  Britain, 24, 39;
    dimensions, 336;
    maps, 126;
    maps of Matthew Paris, 342, 343 (ill.)

  Britannic Sea, 335, 336

  British Isles, 335, 337;
    cities, 335, 336;
    coast tides, 194;
    rivers, 336, 344

  Brittany, 336, 341

  Brooks, A. A., xxi

  Brothers of Piety and Sincerity, 83, 394

  Brunetto Latino. _See_ Latino, Brunetto

  Burkhard, 476

  Byzantine literature, 44, 378

  Byzantium, 278


  Cadiz, 301

  Cahun, Léon, 464

  Cairo, 289, 297, 298, 300

  Calabria, 319, 322

  Caliphs, 289, 290, 297

  Callisthenes, 49

  Camargue, 333

  Cambria, 336

  Camels, 296

  Canary Islands, 37, 39, 86, 334

  Canigou, Mount, 209, 214, 449

  Cannibalism, 330

  Cape Verde Islands, 334

  Capella, Martianus, 9, 11, 16, 18, 44, 48, 71;
    on antipodeans, 160;
    De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii, 54, 127, 366;
    on sphericity of the earth, 15, 54

  Capelle, Wilhelm, 365

  Cappadocia, 270

  Cappelli, A., 493

  Captivity, Head of the, 290, 291

  Carolingian Renaissance, 44, 54, 65

  Carthage, 300

  Cartography, 35, 247;
    ancient, 376, 377;
    development, 254;
    works on, 501.
    _See also_ Maps

  Casentino, 217

  Caspian Sea, 37, 38, 282, 288

  Castile, 322

  Castorius, 381

  Casule, Mons (Hekla), 223

  Cathay, 266, 271

  Caucasus Mountains, 270, 281, 282

  Cavagum (Canigou), Mount, 209, 214, 449

  Caverns, 27, 28, 59, 172

  Cecco d’ Ascoli, 57

  Celestial influences, 12, 51

  Cenis, Mont, 324

  Center of the world, 259;
    position, 260.
    _See also_ Arin

  Cephalonia, 309

  Ceraunes, Montes, 462

  Ceylon, 38, 39, 280, 281

  Chalcidius, 9, 47

  Chaldea, 289

  Changes, geographical, 83

  Channing, Edward, 372, 460

  Chaos, 140, 141, 147

  Charcot, J. B., 487

  Charinus, Lucius, 379

  Charlemagne, 44, 65

  Chartres, school of, 91, 94, 134

  Chevalier, Ulysse, 491

  China, 39, 40, 41, 87, 266;
    word first used, 271

  China Sea, 281

  Chrisa, 280

  Christian kingdom in Asia, 269, 275, 278, 283

  Christian names in Asia, 284

  Christianity, 43

  Chronicon novaliciense, 448

  Chryse, 40, 41, 280

  Church Fathers, 44, 46;
    interpretation of the Bible, 46

  Circumference of the earth, 16

  Cisalpine, term, 324

  Cities, descriptions of, 289, 299, 318, 321, 331, 341;
    exaggeration of plans on maps, 249

  Civilization, westward flow, 233, 235

  Classical influences, 47

  Clement of Alexandria, 51

  Cleomedes, 15, 16

  Climata, 242;
    parallels of latitude and (with diagr.), 453–456

  Climates, 23;
    distribution, 177;
    divisions of the ancient geographers, 242;
    East and West, differences, 177;
    hot and cold, 176;
    influence on man, 180;
    topographic influences on, 177

  Climatology, 23, 166, 175

  Climax, Mount, 303

  Clotted sea, 442

  Cloud breezes, 172

  Clouds, 168

  Cold, 23, 57, 176

  Comestor, Peter, 91, 138, 151, 170, 184, 185, 213, 214;
    on the atmosphere, 168;
    on the Creation, 140, 143, 144;
    on river Pison, 273

  Cones of celestial light, 163, 191

  Congregation of the waters, 184, 188

  Conrad of Querfurt, 116, 221, 311, 321

  Constantinople, 43, 110, 295, 317;
    city and people, 318;
    Italian colonies in, 318

  Continental hypothesis, 19

  Continents, 71;
    fourth continent, 157

  Conway, River, 206

  Coördinates, geographical, 243;
    map constructed from points of Paris MS. of Marseilles Tables, 245

  Corbianus, 239

  Corfu, 309, 310

  Cornwall, 335, 336, 341, 344

  Corsica, 310

  Corus, 434

  Cosmas Indicopleustes, 152, 378, 380

  Cosmic cycles, 13, 83

  Cosmogony, 12, 133;
    works on, 499

  Cosmography, 127, 133

  Cosmology, 51, 133;
    character, 134;
    works on, 499

  Countrysides, 235, 237;
    practical interest in, 238

  Crates of Mallos, 18;
    theory of the arrangement of the world, 158

  Cratesian theory, 19, 158

  Creation, 2, 45, 52, 133, 135;
    Bernard Sylvester’s account, 145;
    commencement versus, 382;
    function of light, 143;
    Icelandic account, 146;
    problems, 139;
    processes, 141;
    Theodoric of Chartres’ theory, 141;
    Theodoric’s work on, 92;
    William of Conches’ theory, 142.
    _See also_ Works of the Six Days

  Crebonensus, 196

  Crete, 310

  Crimea, 313

  Crusaders’ routes, 307, 317

  Crusades, historians and histories, 109;
    geographical knowledge enlarged by, 292;
    regional knowledge and, 293;
    time of, 1

  Ctesias, 37, 467

  Cumont, Franz, 29

  Cyclades, 310

  Cycles, cosmic, 13, 83

  Cyclopes, 224, 329, 348

  Cynocephali, 274, 276 (ill.), 304, 468

  Cyprus, 310

  Cyrenaica, 300

  Cyrus, 38


  Damascus, 239

  Damietta, 299

  Daniel of Morley, 97, 151, 418

  Dante, 106;
    on excentric spheres of land and water, 437;
    linguistic geography in, 484

  Danube, 24, 325, 327

  Dara, 305, 306

  Dead, world of the, 27, 28

  Dead Sea, 208, 288, 292;
    legends, 472

  Dee, 206, 336, 346

  Degree, measurement, 55, 85

  Deluge, 170, 184, 261

  Denmark, 112, 327, 329

  Deserts, 228

  Devils, 224

  Devision, La, de la terre de oultremer et des choses qui i sont, 110

  Dew, 184

  Dicaearchus, 33

  Dictionaries, 493

  Dicuil, 48, 61, 62, 75

  Dieterici, Friedrich, 394

  Dionysius Periegetes, 49

  Dir, Ad-, 87

  Doegr, 486

  Dominicus Gondisalvi (Gondissalinus), 99, 128

  Dreesbach, E., 296

  Dublin, 195

  Du Cange, C. D., 493

  Duhem, Pierre, 99, 401, 418, 499

  Dwarfs, 329


  Eadmer, 448

  Earth, 2, 21;
    center, 16;
    as center of the universe (with diagr.), 422, 426;
    circumference, 16;
    established above the waters, 186;
    flatness, 53;
    immobility, 15, 153, 370;
    interior, 27, 28, 29, 443;
    mountain in the north, 152;
    navel, 260, 461;
    oval shape, 153;
    shape, 152, 368;
    shape and size, 53;
    shape, movements, and size, 150;
    situation, 150;
    size, 54, 155;
    sphericity, 15, 54, 383, 384, 425;
    upon the waters, 60

  Earthquakes, 21, 23, 137, 227;
    causes, 31

  East, place on maps, 251.
    _See also_ Orient

  Ecbatana, 284

  Eclipses, 34, 246

  Eddas, 110;
    account of Creation, 146

  Eden, Garden of, 71, 170, 251;
    Augustine on its location, 262;
    meaning, 261

  Edessa, 278, 283, 294

  Edrisi, 80

  Egypt, 30, 206, 239, 270;
    as part of Asia, 298;
    descriptions, 298, 299

  Ehstland, 328

  Einhard, 328

  Elbe, 327

  Elements, the four, 20, 28, 29;
    magical control, 203;
    transformation, 29

  Elysian Fields, 28

  Encyclopedias, 47, 102;
    thirteenth-century productions, 106, 408

  End of the ages, 234

  Endres, J. A., 403, 481

  England, 119, 336, 344;
    earthquakes, 228

  Englishmen at Prester John’s court, 286

  Environment, influences on man, 232;
    influences on plant and animal life, 231

  Eolian (Lipari) Islands, 32, 222

  Eolus, 221

  Equatorial region, Grosseteste on, 163;
    habitability, 162

  Equatorial zone, 157

  Equilibrium of forces, 155

  Eratosthenes, 10, 38, 155;
    on the circumference of the earth, 16, 17;
    on currents, 26;
    on extent of the oikoumene, 39, 377;
    measurements of the earth, 55;
    on mountain heights, 33;
    on zones, 18

  Eric the Red, 349

  Eridanus, 319

  Erigena. _See_ John Scot Erigena

  Erosion, 446

  Esdras, Second Book of, 188

  Esthetic feeling for nature, 237

  Esthonia, 328

  Eternity of the universe, 145

  Etesian winds, 24, 30, 31, 373

  Ethiopia, 24, 31, 283;
    application of the name, 303;
    India and, 303

  Ethiopians, 24, 41

  Etna, Mount, 32, 220, 221, 311;
    Michael Scot on, 222

  Etymology, example of free, 445

  Euphrates, 72, 265, 288

  Euripus, 26

  Europe, 71, 74, 258;
    northeastern regions, 312;
    regional knowledge of, 257;
    relative position of certain points as shown in medieval
       astronomical tables, 457 (with map);
    Slavic, 314

  Eurus, 173, 174

  Eustace of Kent, 114

  Euxine, 25, 26, 37, 312

  Evaporation, 27

  Ewyas, valley of, 340

  Exeter, 336

  Exploration, Moslem, 87;
    northern Europe, 75


  Fabianus, 25

  Fabulous tales, 37, 38

  Fallon, G. R., xxi

  Falones, 315

  Fārābī, Al-, 416

  Farghānī, Al-, 78, 85, 151, 152, 243, 287

  Faroe Islands, 346, 352

  Felix, Marcus Minutius, 24

  Fetellus (Fretellus), 116

  Fimbultyr, 147

  Finns, 329

  Fires, 32;
    at the center of the universe, 369

  Firmament, 58;
    waters above and below, 58, 182

  Fitzstephen, William, on London, 341

  Flatey Book, 349

  Flatness of the earth, 53, 152

  Flood, Great, 59.
    _See also_ Deluge

  Floods, 170

  Fog, 432

  Fons humoris, 185

  Forests, Ireland, 338;
    representation on maps, 253

  Fortunate Islands, 86

  Fossils on mountains, 432

  Fountain of Youth, 204, 285

  Four elements, 20, 28, 29.
    _See also_ Elements

  Four land masses, 18

  France, 331;
    Hungary and, 316;
    southern, 333

  Francis, Saint, of Assisi, 217

  Frazer, J. G., 203, 387

  Frederick II, Emperor, 99, 100, 138, 200, 222, 345

  Frisia Minor, 327

  Frodhi, Ari. _See_ Ari Frodhi


  Gades (Cadiz), 301

  Gallandia, 346

  Ganges, 273, 280

  Ganzenmüller, W., 65

  Garamantes, 41, 42

  Garden. _See_ Eden

  Gasquet, A., 379

  Gaul, 331

  Genesis, Book of, 45, 53

  Genoa, 479;
    trade with Africa, 301

  Geoffrey of Monmouth, 50

  Geoffrey of St. Victor, 127, 159

  Geographical bibliographies, 492

  Geographical changes, 83

  Geographical lore, character of, summary, 358–361;
    origins, 3;
    outstanding elements of, summary, 353–358;
    works on, 496

  Geographical lore of the time of the Crusades, term, 1

  Geographisches Jahrbuch, 492

  Geography, 127;
    astrology and, 128;
    history of, works on, 497;
    history of, in particular periods, works on, 497;
    history of particular aspects, works on, 499;
    place in medieval knowledge, 127.
    _See also_ Ancient Geography; Astronomical geography; Babylonian
       astrology and geography; Mathematical geography; Medieval
       geography; Physical geography; Regional geography

  Geometry, 127

  Geomorphology, 62, 210, 213

  Gerald of Barry. _See_ Giraldus Cambrensis

  Gerard of Cremona, 79, 96, 97, 99, 246

  Gerard of Sabbionetta, 400

  Gerbert, 47, 48, 55, 65

  Gerizim, Mount, 460, 461

  Germany, description, 325

  Gervase of Canterbury, 119

  Gervase of Tilbury, 50, 104, 138, 151, 157, 170, 176, 189, 196, 213,
     214, 215, 241, 270, 280, 298, 322;
    on bottom of the sea, 198;
    on Britain, 336;
    on center of the earth, 259, 260;
    on climatic influence on man, 180;
    on the Dead Sea, 208;
    on Ethiopia, 303;
    on Etna, 311;
    on France (southern), 333;
    on India, 272;
    on the Mediterranean, 307;
    on mouths of Hell, 209, 225;
    on mysterious cave, 161;
    on the Nile, 305;
    his Otia imperialia on regional geography, 256;
    on qualities of land areas, 211, 230;
    on rivers of Paradise, 211;
    on sea above the atmosphere, 183;
    on the Seres, 271;
    on shape of the earth, 152;
    on Sinai, 214;
    on springs and wells, 185, 203;
    on the terrestrial Paradise, 261, 262;
    on volcanic features of Naples, 221;
    on volcanoes, 226;
    on winds, 171, 172, 175

  Gesta Hammenburgensis, 112

  Gesta regis Henrici Secundi, 228

  Gesta regis Ricardi, 109, 433;
    instructions for navigation in Mediterranean 308.
    _See also_ Benedict of Peterborough

  Geysers, 203, 204

  Gihon, 72, 290, 304

  Gilson, J. P., 461

  Ginungagap, 147, 486

  Giraldus Cambrensis (Gerald of Barry), 50, 119, 137, 159, 214, 241;
    on climate of Ireland, 178, 180;
    comparison of East and West, 174, 177, 211;
    on course of rivers, 205, 206;
    eye for local topography, 240;
    on Iceland, Thule, Orkneys, Shetlands, 345;
    on Ireland and Wales, 215, 216, 232, 233, 337;
    on islands, 211, 229, 230;
    on lakes, 207;
    on marine phenomena, 196;
    on precipitation, 170;
    tidal studies, 194;
    on volcanoes of Iceland, 222;
    on wells and springs, 203

  Glaciers, 219

  Globe, 15

  God, 53, 134, 135, 136

  Godard, Léon, 474

  Godefroy, F. E., 493

  Godfrey of Viterbo, 119;
    on Alsace, 332;
    on Gog and Magog, 288, 471;
    on the golden ball of empire, 159;
    on Lombardy, 320;
    on Paradise, 263;
    on Sicily, 311.

  Gog and Magog, 46, 50, 282;
    Bible accounts, 72;
    stories about, 287

  Gold, 265, 275, 280, 281, 285, 316

  Golden ball of empire, 159

  Gollanda, 485, 487

  Gondisalvi, Dominicus. _See_ Dominicus Gondisalvi

  Gossouin of Metz, 105, 405

  Grabmann, M., 401

  Great Summer, 14

  Great Winter, 14, 27

  Great Years, 13, 52, 82;
    duration, 14, 367;
    theory, 14

  Greece, 317, 318

  Greek Fathers, 54

  Greek geographers, 3, 4

  Greek language, 44, 95;
    translations from, 95, 398

  Greek regional knowledge, 37

  Green Sea, 281

  Greenland, 76, 111, 257;
    description, 347;
    Norse settlements and voyages on the coast of, 486

  Greenland Annals, 111

  Gregory, Master, 321

  Gregory of Nyssa, 30, 58, 60

  Griffons, 272, 274, 280, 281

  Grosseteste, Robert, 101, 147, 159, 262;
    on the congregation of the waters, 187;
    on the habitable parts of the earth, 163–165;
    on mountains in polar regions, 179;
    on oceans, 159;
    on temperature of the air, 167;
    theory of Creation, 144;
    on the tides, 190

  Ground water, 199

  Grousset, René, 464

  Guido’s encyclopedia, 49, 103, 104, 124, 125

  Gundophorus, 275, 278, 286

  Günther, Siegmund, 497

  Gunther of Pairis, 108, 233;
    on climatic influence of mountains, 178;
    on Germany, 326;
    on Italy, 180, 320;
    on mountains, 217;
    on northern Europe, 330

  Gurganim, 290

  Guy of Bazoches, 116, 311;
    on Etna, 221;
    on the Mediterranean, 310;
    on nature, 237;
    on Paris, 331

  Gymnosophists, 274


  Habitable regions, 17

  Hades, 28

  Ḥamd-Allāh Mustaufī, 446

  Hardy, T. D., 382

  Haskins, C. H., xx, 495

  Hearth of the universe, 369

  Heat, 23, 57

  Heavens, blueness, 436

  Hebrides, 344, 351

  Hecataeus, 37

  Hedin, Sven, 464

  Heimskringla, 111, 448, 486

  Hekla, 223, 225

  Hell, 29, 62, 153, 209, 227;
    cold hell, 225;
    volcanoes as gates of, 225

  Helluland, 76

  Helmold, 328

  Henry of Mayence, 124;
    outline map, 245 (ill.), 251, 252

  Heraclius, 287

  Hercules, 275

  Hercules, Pillars of, 26, 301

  Hercynian Forest, 326

  Hereford map, sections showing marvels of India, 276 (ill.), 277
     (ill.)

  Hermann of Reichenau, 55

  Hermann the Dalmatian, 82, 83, 92, 95, 97, 168, 262

  Hermits, 64

  Herodotus, 30, 37

  Herrad of Landsperg, 104

  Herrmann, Albert, 464

  Hesiod, 18

  Hesperides, 350

  Hibernia, 335

  Hildegard of Bingen, 90, 148, 171, 396;
    macrocosm, microcosm, and winds, 148, 149 (ill.);
    microcosm, 436;
    position of the earth, 151;
    on the rivers of her country, 326;
    on the shape of the earth, 152;
    on soil and agriculture, 232;
    theories on the structure of the earth, 423;
    on the tides, 439;
    on the waters above the firmament, 183;
    on the waters of the lands, 201, 202;
    on winds, 171

  Himalayas, 273

  Hindu religion, 82

  Hindustan, 272

  Hipparchus, 10, 15, 35, 38

  Hippo, 300

  Hirth, Friedrich, 464

  Historia Norwegiae, 112, 223;
    on Iceland, 346;
    on polar seas, 348;
    on use of skis, 329;
    on volcanic upheaval off Iceland, 137

  Historians of the Crusades, 109

  Historical bibliographies, 491

  Historical narratives, 107

  History of geography, xix;
    works on, 497

  Hoffman, Rudolf, 379

  Holy Ghost, 141

  Holy Land, 51, 70, 176, 257;
    guidebooks, 115;
    histories, 109;
    travel to, 293, 294

  Homer, 18, 37

  Honorius Inclusus, 103, 403

  Honorius of Autun, 103, 403

  Hornelen, 448

  Horses, Arabian, 296

  Hospitallers, 316

  Hugh of Amiens, 418

  Hugh of St. Victor, 90, 143, 144, 153, 184, 234

  Hulna, 279

  Human sacrifice, 329, 482

  Humboldt, Alexander von, 497

  Hungarians, 315

  Hungary, 267, 268, 313;
    description, 314;
    France and, 316

  Huns, 315

  Hyde, W. W., 501

  Hydrography on maps, 253

  Hyères, Îles de, 333

  Hyle, 140

  Hyperboreans, 71, 179, 312

  Hyrcania, 270, 281, 188


  Ibn Ḥauqal, 77

  Ibn Rushd (Averroës), 77, 85, 100, 420, 437

  Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna), 77, 213, 446

  Ibn Yūnūs, 395

  Icebergs, 198

  Iceland, 76, 111, 176, 345;
    glaciers, 219;
    in Icelandic literature, 346;
    springs and wells, 203, 204;
    volcanoes, 222

  Icelandic Annals, 111, 349

  Icelandic discovery of America, 391

  Iconium, 296

  Idrīsī, Al-. _See_ Edrisi

  Image du monde, L’, 105, 151, 159, 189, 227, 241, 256;
    on Mongibel, 220

  Imagine mundi, De, 103, 151, 155, 157, 159, 171, 185, 188, 189, 227,
     241, 307;
    on Africa, 300;
    on Asiatic mountains, 270;
    on British Isles, 325;
    on division of the earth, 259;
    on Egypt, 298;
    on fabulous isles of the Atlantic, 350;
    on Germany, 325;
    on Gog and Magog, 287;
    on regional geography, 256;
    on rivers of Paradise, 264;
    on Saba in Ethiopia, 303;
    on size of the earth, 155;
    on size of mountains, 214;
    on springs, 202;
    on subdivisions of land areas, 211;
    on tides, 441

  Immobility of the earth, 15, 153

  India, 24, 37, 42, 176, 263, 270;
    broad meaning, 272;
    Christians in, 114;
    facts known about, 273;
    legends of saints in, 74;
    marvels, 274, 276 (ill.), 277 (ill.);
    subdivisions, 272

  Indian Ocean, 19, 37, 40, 279;
    Al-Battānī on, 280;
    islands, 280

  Intellectual life, medieval, works on, 495

  Interpretation of the Bible, 46;
    symbolic, 206

  Iran, 281

  Ireland, 50, 119, 176, 178, 180, 335;
    coast tides, 194;
    Giraldus Cambrensis on, 337;
    healthfulness, 212;
    lakes, 207, 208;
    properties of the soil, 212, 445;
    rivers, 205, 336, 339;
    topography, 240

  Ireland the Great, 76

  Irish, 338, 339

  Isidore of Seville, 11, 48, 54, 56, 59, 60, 62, 241, 259, 305

  Islandia, 346

  Islands, fabulous, 350;
    Indian Ocean, 280;
    Mediterranean, 309;
    miraculous, 230, 231;
    origins, 229;
    representation on maps, 335;
    St. Brandan’s visits to, 230;
    volcanic, 224;
    of Western Ocean, 334

  Islands of the Blessed, 28

  Íslendingabók, 111, 346

  Istakhrī, Al-, 77

  Ister, 24

  Italian traders, 293, 294, 295, 296, 299

  Italians in Constantinople, 318

  Italy, 180;
    city states, 320;
    description, 319, 478;
    dialectic regions, 484;
    northern, 319;
    regional divisions, 479

  Iter ad Paradisum, 113, 262

  Ithaca, 309

  Itineraries, 33


  Jacques de Vitry, 105

  Java, 42

  Jenghiz Khan, 266, 284

  Jerome, 58, 64, 73, 125

  Jerusalem, 68, 110, 249;
    as center of the oikoumene, 259;
    Kingdom of, 294;
    pilgrimages to, 117;
    plans, 126, 250 (ill.)

  Jews, 282;
    in Arabia, 291;
    in Baghdad, 290;
    in Constantinople, 319;
    travelers, 117

  Joerg, W. L. G., xvi

  John of Bremble, on mountains, 218

  John of Holywood (Sacrobosco), 96, 97, 98, 241;
    on the earth as the center of the universe, 151, 422 (diagr.);
    on immobility of the earth, 154;
    on shape of the earth, 152;
    on size of the earth, 155, 426

  John of India, Patriarch, 114, 272, 278

  John of Pian de Carpine, 269

  John of Salisbury, 136

  John of Seville (Johannes Hispanensis, John of Luna), 96;
    on climates, 243

  John of Würzburg, 115

  John Scot Erigena, 47, 48, 55

  Jordanus of Severac, 373

  Jornandes, 49

  Josephus, 58

  Jourdain, C. B., 496, 497

  Judas, 225

  Julius Valerius, 50

  Jumna, 328

  Jupiter Ammon, Temple of, 302


  Kålund, K., 405

  Karentet, 309

  Karst, 27

  Kelly, Matthew, 484

  Keraits, 284

  Kheibar, 291

  Khorazmian Tables, 82, 95.
    _See also_ Adelard of Bath

  Khulam, 274

  Khwārizmī, Al-, 78, 82, 86, 96, 244, 392, 394, 456

  Kiev, 314, 477

  King’s Mirror, 105, 347;
    on volcanoes in Iceland, 223, 225

  Kitāb ṣūrat-al-arḍ, 78

  Knowledge, classification, 127, 129;
    modern compared with medieval, 256

  Known world. _See_ Oikoumene

  Komans, 313, 314, 315

  Konungs-Skuggsjá. _See_ King’s Mirror

  Koran, 53, 73

  Krachkovskii, ——, 389

  Kretschmer, Konrad, xix, 500

  Kufar-al-Turak, 282, 284

  Kurland, 328


  Lactantius Firmianus, 47, 54, 56

  Lakes, 207;
    in Ireland, 338

  Lambert li Tors, 113

  Lambert of St. Omer, 103, 155;
    map, 124, 125, 158;
    on sphericity of universe, 150;
    on winds, 174;
    on tides, 192

  Lamprecht, 113

  Land surface, representation on maps, 253

  Landnámabók, 76, 111, 346, 486

  Landogna, F., 479

  Lands, 31, 62, 210;
    classification of areas, 210;
    deathless, 211;
    distribution of waters and, 187;
    effect on waters which spring from the land, 202;
    qualitative and quantitative subdivisions, 210, 211;
    theory of four masses, 18;
    veins, cavities, and tunnels in, 27

  Landscape, 63, 210

  Langka, 86

  Languages, 348;
    kinship, 484

  Laodicea, 295

  Lapps, 329

  La Roncière, C., xx, 81

  Latin, medieval, 493

  Latin writers, 11

  Latino, Brunetto, 106, 186, 187

  Latitude, 34, 85, 242, 244;
    methods of finding, 244;
    parallels of latitude and climata (with diagr.), 453–456;
    phenomena resulting from differences in, 241

  La Verna, 217

  Legends, 49, 113

  Leif Ericsson, 349

  Lemannus, 325

  Lentulus, 312

  Leo Archipresbyter, 381, 412

  Le Strange, Guy, 446

  Letters of travel, 116

  Levant, 177;
    Occidental population in, 294;
    trade, 293;
    traders, 378

  Level of the sea, 188

  Liber de proprietatibus elementorum, 82, 83

  Liber floridus, 103

  Libya, 258, 292, 300

  Light, function in the Creation, 143

  Ligurinus, 108

  Linguistic geography, 340, 484

  Lipari Islands. _See_ Eolian Islands

  Literal interpretation of the Bible, 46, 380

  Liver Sea, 442

  Llanthoni Abbey, 216

  Location, 34, 85

  Loegria, 336

  Lombard, Peter, 91, 137, 140, 142, 143;
    on Paradise, 261, 462

  Lombards, 180, 232, 312, 320

  Lombardy, 320, 332

  London, 335, 336;
    Fitzstephen’s account, 341

  Longitude, 34, 85, 244;
    methods of finding, 246;
    prime meridian, 86

  Lost Island, 351

  Lost tribes, 282, 285, 288

  Lot’s wife, 472

  Lucidaire, 404

  Lucidarius, 104

  Lucius, Gratianus, 483

  Lucydary, 404

  Lynch, John, 483


  Macarius, Saint, 263

  McCartney, E. S., 367, 432

  McGiffert, A. C., 383, 499

  Macrobius, 9, 11, 16, 18, 44, 47, 66, 258;
    on antipodeans, 160;
    popularity, 366;
    on southern limit of the oikoumene, 378;
    on tides, 27

  Macrocosm, 147;
    microcosm and, 148, 149 (ill.)
    _See also_ Microcosm

  Madeira, 334

  Maelstrom, 61

  Maghreb, 301

  Magi, 284

  Magna Graecia, 319

  Magonia, 58

  Magyars, 316

  Main (river), 326, 327

  Malay Peninsula, 41, 280

  Malaya, 280, 281

  Man, Isle of, 335, 345

  Manegold, 47

  Manegold’s Contra Wolfelmum opusculum, 161

  Mantichora, 277 (ill.), 468

  Mantua, 311

  Manuscripts, 493

  Maps, 121;
    Beatus, 68, 69 (ill.), 122, 123 (ill.);
    character and value, 247;
    conventions, 251;
    details, 247–254;
    distortion, 249;
    early, 65;
    early, classification, 389;
    European points in medieval astronomical tables as compared with
       actual position, 457 (with map);
    exaggeration, 249;
    inaccuracy, 247;
    of Lambert, Guido, Henry of Mayence, etc., 124;
    Macrobian, 66;
    regional, 125;
    Roman, 34, 36;
    Sallust, 67 (ill.), 68, 121;
    Scriptural effect on, 45;
    symbols and legends, 252;
    T-O maps, 66, 121;
    technique, 251;
    zone maps, 121, 122 (ill.).
    _See also_ Cartography

  Marbod of Rennes, on love of nature, 238

  Marco Polo. _See_ Polo, Marco

  Marine life, 309

  Marinelli, G., 471

  Marinus of Tyre, 10

  Markland, 76, 350

  Marquart, J., 478

  Marr, N. I., 389

  Marseilles, 308, 309, 333

  Marseilles Tables, 96, 162, 244;
    authorship, 456;
    on determination of longitude, 246;
    on habitability of equatorial region, 162;
    map constructed from positions given in Paris MS. of, 245

  Marvels, of Ethiopia, 303;
    of India, 274, 276 (ill.), 277 (ill.)

  Maslama-al-Majrīṭi, 95

  Masson, Paul, 442

  Masʿūdī, Al-, 50, 77

  Materia, 141, 142, 144

  Mathematical geography, 33, 65

  Matter, preëxistence, 139;
    orthodox view, 139;
    rational view, 141

  Matthew, Saint, 272

  Matthew Paris, 125;
    maps of Britain, 126, 342, 343 (ill.);
    on the Tatars, 267

  Maur, Raban, 48, 385

  Mauretania, 300, 306

  Mayence, 326

  Mazdeus, 278

  Mcerloba, M. J. K., 389

  Mecca, 85, 297

  Media, 288

  Medieval geography, works on, 497

  Medieval intellectual life, works on, 495

  Medina, 295

  Mediterranean Sea, 25, 37, 257;
    commerce between northern and southern shores, 301;
    during the Crusades, 307;
    islands, 309;
    length, 86, 307;
    map of region constructed from position given in Paris MS. of
       Marseilles Tables, also outline map of Henry of Mayence, 245;
    name, 307;
    names of parts, 475;
    navigation, instructions, 308;
    speed of journeys in, 476

  Megasthenes, 24, 38

  Meiryonidd (Merioneth), 215

  Mela, Pomponius, 40

  Meridian, prime, 86

  Merioneth, 340

  Meroë, 298, 305, 377

  Merriman, R. B., 474

  Meru, Mount, 86

  Mesopotamia, 270, 288, 289, 294

  Messina, 312

  Meteorology, 21, 57, 166

  Michael Scot, 99, 100, 138, 151, 183, 225;
    on the Eolian Isles and Etna, 222;
    on hot springs, 202

  Michel, F., 487

  Microcosm, 147, 148, 185;
    macrocosm and, 148, 149 (ill.)

  Middle Ages, 2;
    geographical lore, works on, 496;
    science, 43, 44;
    writings, 88

  Midgard, 147

  Migne, J. P., 494

  Milan, 320

  Milford Haven, 195

  Miller, Konrad, 121

  Minutius Felix, Marcus, 24

  Mirabilia urbis Romae, 321

  Mirage, 311

  Missions to the Mongols, 268, 269

  Mistral, 173, 175, 180, 333

  Mohammedans, 297

  Mona, 214

  Mongibel (Etna), 220, 311

  Mongol conquests, 266

  Mongol princes, 284

  Mongols in Russia, 313

  Monsoons, 24, 40

  Monsters, 263, 274, 276 (ill.), 277 (ill.), 309, 329, 348;
    in Ethiopia, 303;
    lands of, 257

  Mont St. Michel, 441

  Moon and tides, 61, 84, 190

  Morava-Maritsa valley, 317

  Morgain, 311

  Moritz, Bernhard, 472

  Morocco, 302

  Moselle, 326, 327

  Moslems, 43;
    contribution of, 77;
    exploration and travel, 87

  Mosquitoes, 296

  Moule, A. C., 439, 442

  Mountaineering, 220, 448, 501

  Mountains, 30, 212;
    Asia, great system, 270;
    atmosphere of, 168, 178;
    beauty, appreciation of, 215;
    height, 32, 447;
    influence on climate, 178;
    medieval feeling about, 217;
    miraculous qualities, 214;
    mountain in the north of the earth, 152;
    observation of phenomena, 215;
    origin, 213;
    in polar regions, 179;
    religious attitude toward, 216;
    representation on maps, 253;
    saline, in the sea, 189;
    size and height, 214

  Mozambique Channel, 281

  Munster, Ireland, miraculous spring, 203

  Mysticism, 90, 237


  Naples, 221, 322

  Narbonnese, 333

  Natural defenses, 233

  Natural laws, 136

  Nature, early Christian attitude toward, 64;
    esthetic appreciation of, 63, 237;
    feeling for, works on, 500;
    medieval attitude toward, 64, 389;
    practical interest in, 238;
    spiritual feeling for, 235

  Naval expedition in the Red Sea in twelfth century, 295

  Navel of the earth, 260, 461

  Navigation, 81, 246, 248;
    speed of travel, 308, 476

  Neagh, Lough, 208

  Nearchus, 26, 38

  Neckam, Alexander, 93, 138, 228, 232, 264;
    on Britain, 336;
    on springs, 204;
    on the tides, 193;
    on volcanoes, 226;
    on the waters, 186, 188, 189

  Neoplatonism, 47

  Nestorian Christianity in Asia, 269, 275, 284

  New Compendium, 116

  Nicaea, 296

  Nicholas, Abbot, 405

  Niger, 41, 304, 305

  Nikulás Bergsson of Thverá, 115, 405

  Nile, 24, 41, 71, 298, 300;
    flood, 30, 60, 206, 300;
    sources, 304

  Nilometer, 300

  Nineveh, 289

  Noah, 170

  Normans in Sicily, 79, 81

  Norsemen and America, 76

  Northmen, 51, 70, 75

  Norway, 112, 328, 329

  Notes, 365

  Nous, 146, 156

  Nuchul, 305, 306


  Oblong circle, 153

  Observation, 84;
    geography of, 255;
    of mountains, 215

  Occident, climate, 177;
    Orient compared with, by Giraldus Cambrensis, 211

  Ocean, 24;
    bottom, 198;
    circulation, 25;
    encircling the earth, 18;
    relative areas of land and sea, 187;
    saltness, 189;
    as source of the waters of the land, 200;
    uniform level, explanation, 188.
    _See also_ Sea

  Ocean currents, 173, 192

  Oceanus Britannicus, 335

  Oder, 327

  Odin, 147

  Odjein, 86

  Odo, 279

  Oikoumene, 18, 187;
    astronomical geography of, 241;
    center, 259;
    extent, 19;
    limit, 39, 41, 377;
    three parts—Asia, Libya, and Europe, 258;
    as a whole, 257

  Old Compendium, 116

  Old Man of the Mountain, 298

  Olympus, Mount, 168, 204, 214

  Ophir, 275

  Ordericus Vitalis, 272, 278, 350

  Orient, 238;
    climate, 177;
    ideas transmitted to the West, 82;
    Occident compared with, by Giraldus Cambrensis, 211

  Origen, 52

  Original sources, collections, 493

  Orkneys, 335, 344, 345

  Orosius, 44, 48, 66, 103, 258, 259, 483;
    on the Nile, 304, 305

  Orthodox works, 137

  Oscorus, 282

  Osma Beatus map, 123 (with ill.)

  Ostrogard, 477

  Otia imperialia, 104, 256

  Otto of Freising, 107, 262, 325;
    on the Alps and Apennines, 323;
    on Babylon and Cairo, 289;
    on France, 331;
    on Germany, 326;
    on Gog and Magog, 287–288;
    on Hungary, 315;
    on the influence of climate on man, 180;
    on the influence of environment on man, 232;
    on Italy, 180, 319;
    on a certain John of the Far East, 283;
    on mountains, 217;
    on the mutability of things, 234;
    practical interest in nature, 239

  Oxus, 282, 290


  Paetow, L. J., 492

  Paleography, 493

  Palestine, 270;
    exaggeration on maps, 249.
    _See also_ Holy Land

  Palingenesis, 13, 51

  Pannonia, 314, 323

  Pappas, Nicholas, 198

  Paradise, 42, 45, 63, 71, 261, 352;
    journeys to, 263;
    location, 261;
    rivers of, 28, 72, 185, 205, 264;
    types of legends of, 463

  Paraskévopoulos, J. S., 373

  Paris, description, 331

  Paris, Matthew. _See_ Matthew Paris

  Parmenides, 17

  Parthia, 270, 288

  Partholan, 338

  Pasquali, Giorgio, 374

  Patrick, Saint, 212

  Patristic literature, 44, 46.
    _See also_ Church Fathers

  Patroclus, 38

  Paul the Deacon, 61

  Pausanius, 271

  Peeters, Paul, 389

  Pelion, 33

  Pelliot, Paul, 465

  Pentapolis, 300

  Perdita, 351

  Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, 40, 271

  Persia, 37, 267, 272, 288

  Persian Gulf, 279, 281

  Peschel, Oscar, 497

  Petachia of Ratisbon, 117, 118, 289;
    on Slavic Europe, 314

  Petchenegs, 313, 314, 315

  Peter Abelard. _See_ Abelard, Peter

  Peter Alphonsi. _See_ Alphonsi, Peter

  Peter Comestor. _See_ Comestor, Peter

  Peter Lombard. _See_ Lombard, Peter

  Peter of St. Cloud, 113

  Petrarch’s ascent of Mont Ventoux, 212

  Peutinger Table, 35

  Philip, Master, 286

  Phillips, W. R., 379

  Philolaus, 369

  Philosophy, 89, 91, 127

  Physical geography, 19, 57, 89;
    works on, 500

  Pian de Carpine. _See_ John of Pian de Carpine

  Pilgrim narratives, 71, 115

  Pilgrims, 51, 212

  Pillar of salt, 472

  Pillars of Hercules, 26, 301

  Piracy, 310, 330

  Pisa, 479

  Pison, 72, 273, 279

  Planisphere, 377

  Plano Carpini. _See_ John of Pian de Carpine

  Plato, 9;
    on cosmic cycles, 13;
    on earthquakes and volcanoes, 32;
    on interior of the earth, 29, 32;
    on sphericity of the earth, 15

  Plato of Tivoli, 96, 162.
    _See also_ Battānī, Al-

  Platonism, 51, 135

  Pliny the Elder, 11, 15, 16, 20, 23, 24, 25–27, 31, 35, 40, 41, 220,
     377;
    popularity, 365

  Po, 319

  Poisons, 212, 310, 338

  Poland, 233, 267, 313, 314, 315

  Polar caps, 156, 157

  Polar regions, Grosseteste on, 165;
    influence of mountains on climate, 179

  Polar seas, 348

  Polo, Marco, 269, 270, 272, 284

  Polo, Nicolo and Maffeo, 269

  Polybius, 10

  Pomeranians, 328

  Pontianum (pontias), 175

  Popularization of knowledge, 105

  Porus, 287

  Posidonius, 10, 16, 26, 33, 373

  Pozzuoli, 209, 211, 221, 225

  Precession of the equinoxes, 83, 164

  Precipitation, 169

  Prester John, 74, 265, 269;
    alliance desired by Western powers, 286;
    court, 286;
    on the desert, 229;
    on the Fountain of Youth, 204;
    kingdom, 283;
    kingdom as described in his Letter, 285;
    legend, origins, 283;
    Letter, 114, 271, 272;
    palace, 278, 286

  Priscian, 49

  Procopius, 73

  Prodigies, 228

  Proprietatibus elementorum, Liber de, 83

  Proserpina, 311

  Provençaux, 334

  Provence, 333

  Prussians, 328

  Psellos, Michael, 378

  Pseudo-Abdias, 379

  Pseudo-Callisthenes, 49, 73, 113

  Pseudo-Methodius, 50, 73

  Ptolemy, Claudius, 10, 15, 16, 35, 36, 77;
    Africa on his map, 41;
    “Almagest,” influence of, 78;
    “Geography,” 10, 19, 34;
    “Geography,” influence of, 48, 78;
    parallels and climates, 242, 453–456 (with diagr.)

  Pumice, 222

  Purgatory, Mount of, 463

  Putrid Sea, 314

  Pygmies, 274, 317

  Pyramids of light rays, 163, 164, 191

  Pyrenean Alps, 319, 323

  Pythagoreans, 9, 15

  Pytheas of Marseilles, 26, 39


  Quadrivium, 127

  Quilon, 274


  Raban Maur, 48, 385

  Raeburn, H., 448

  Ragewin (Rahewin), 108, 233, 325;
    on northern Europe, 330;
    on Poland, 313

  Rainfall, 169

  Rainmaking, 203

  Ratisbon, 325

  Ravenelle, 317

  Ravenna, 251

  Ravenna geographer, 49, 124

  Raymond of Marseilles. _See_ Marseilles Tables

  Rays of light, 163, 164, 191

  Red Sea, 279, 281, 289;
    naval expedition in twelfth century, 295

  Redemptorists, 302

  Regional geography, 36, 255;
    ancient limits on the south and east, 41;
    expansion of Greek, 37;
    Hellenistic, 39;
    medieval, 70, 255–352;
    regions grouped as known, little-known, or unknown, 257;
    works on, 501

  Regional maps, 125

  Reinhardt, Karl, 365

  Remy of Auxerre, 48

  Renaissance, 293

  Renan, E., 487

  Reykyanes, Cape, 223

  Rhaetia, 325

  Rhine, 326, 327, 331, 332

  Rhipaean Mountains, 242, 312, 329

  Rhodes, 310

  Rhone, 333

  Richard Coeur-de-Lion, 109, 110, 308, 322

  Richard of St. Victor, 190

  Rivers, 27;
    connection between seas and, 185;
    Hildegard on, 326;
    origin, 29;
    peculiarities, 206;
    representation on maps, 253;
    source, 205;
    underworld, 28

  Rivers of Paradise, 28, 72, 185, 205, 264

  Robert de Clari, 110, 313

  Robert Grosseteste. _See_ Grosseteste, Robert

  Robert of Retines, 92, 97

  Robinson, G. W., xxi

  Rochemelon, 448

  Rockall, 487

  Rockhill, W. W., 464

  Roger of Hereford, 97

  Roger of Hoveden, 109;
    on coasts of Iberian Peninsula, 322;
    on the Mediterranean, 308

  Roger II, 79, 80, 198

  Roland and Oliver, 311

  Rolls Series, 494

  Roman de toute chevalerie, 412

  Romance of Alexander. _See_ Alexander the Great

  Rome, 479;
    anonymous guide, 121;
    climate, 180;
    decay, 321;
    Mirabilia urbis Romae, 321;
    wonders in, 321

  Roncaglia, 324

  Rubruck. _See_ William of Rubruck

  Rudolf of Hohen-Ems, 274

  Rupert of Deutz, on origin of mountains, 213

  Russia, 87, 118, 176, 257, 267;
    northern, 312;
    southern, 313


  Saba, 291, 303

  Sacrobosco. _See_ John of Holywood

  Saewulf, 115, 260

  Sagas, 51, 110, 346

  St. Bernard Pass, 218, 324

  St. Rhémy, 218

  St. Sever Beatus map, 68, 69 (ill.)

  Saints’ Land of Promise, 231, 262, 351, 352

  Salamander, 285

  Salimbene, Fra, 448

  Saline mountains in the sea, 25, 189

  Sallust maps, 67 (ill.), 68, 121

  Salt, 25;
    African, 302

  Saltness of the ocean, 189

  Samarkand, 282, 290

  Samland, 328

  Sanaa, 291

  Sandaruk, 275

  Sandy Sea, 229, 285

  Sanjar, 282

  Santa Quaranta, 309

  Saracens, 287, 294, 297, 312

  Sarandib, 281

  Sardinia, 308, 310, 319

  Sargasso Sea, 442

  Saxo Grammaticus, 112, 203;
    on farther Biarmaland, 348;
    on northern Europe, 327, 328, 329;
    on the geysers of Iceland, 204;
    on the glaciers of Iceland, 219;
    on the volcanoes of Iceland, 223

  Saxony, 327

  Scandia, 328

  Scandinavia, 39, 106, 257, 327, 328;
    historical works, 110;
    Latin histories, 111

  Scenery, 63;
    appreciation, 215, 235;
    Guy of Bazoches and, 237

  Schechter, S., 471

  Schmidlin, I., 452

  Schneid, M., 383

  Schneider, A., 401, 418

  Science, 43;
    bibliographies of the history of, 492;
    character, 134;
    medieval, 128;
    stagnation in early Middle Ages, 44

  Scilly Isles, 335

  Scot. _See_ John Scot Erigena

  Scot, Michael. _See_ Michael Scot

  Scotia, 335, 336

  Scotland, 335, 336, 344

  Scriptures, 43.
    _See also_ Bible

  Scylla and Charybdis, 311

  Scythia, 37, 49, 270, 281

  Scythian Sea, 330

  Sea, 25;
    above the atmosphere, 183;
    connection between seas and rivers, 185;
    depth, 25;
    influence on climate, 178;
    physical geography of, 61;
    recessions, 196;
    saltness, 25;
    speed of medieval travel by sea, 308, 476;
    sphericity, 369.
    _See also_ Ocean

  Secondary works, 495

  Seh, 327

  Seine, 186, 193, 331

  Seneca, 11, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 30, 174;
    popularity, 366

  Sententiae of Peter Lombard, 91

  Septimer Pass, 324

  Seres, 39;
    land of the, 270, 271

  Serica, 40

  Serpents, 310, 335, 345

  Servi, 317

  Seth, son of Adam, 263

  Seven liberal arts, 127

  Seven wonders of the world, 321

  Severian of Gabala, 54, 234

  Shannon, 205, 339

  Sheba, 290, 291

  Sheba, Queen of, 291, 303

  Shetlands, 345

  Siberia, 290

  Sic et non, 91

  Sicades, 333

  Sicilo-Moslem geography, 81

  Sicily, 226, 303, 310, 319, 322;
    description, 311;
    geography in, 79;
    volcanic regions, 221

  Sigurd the Crusader, 111

  Silk, 271

  Silkworms, 271, 285

  Simar, T., 306

  Simoom, 175

  Sinae, 271

  Sinai, Mount, 214, 291

  Singer, Charles, xxi, 423

  Sinus Codanus, 40

  Situ terrarum, De, 259, 262, 405

  Six Days, nature of, 144.
    _See also_ Works of the Six Days

  Ski-runner, 482

  Skiapodes, 157, 254, 274, 275, 276 (ill.)

  Skis, 329, 482

  Skraelings, 349

  Skridfinns, 329

  Sky, blueness, 436

  Slavonia, 328

  Smalserhorn, 448

  Smith, J. R., 375

  Snorri Sturluson, 111, 448.
    _See also_ Heimskringla

  Snow, 167, 214

  Snowdon, Mount, 208, 215, 340, 344;
    floating island in a lake on, 230

  Soil and agriculture, 232

  Solinus, 11, 44, 241, 337;
    interpolation in, 176

  Sources, collections of original, 493;
    secondary, 495

  Southern hemisphere, 164

  Spain, 322;
    Christian and Saracenic, 322

  Speculum mundi, 405

  Sphericity of the earth, 15, 54, 152, 158, 383, 384, 425

  Sphericity of the universe, 150

  Spirit of God, 141

  Spitsbergen, 349

  Springs, 199, 374–375;
    hot, 202, 221;
    miraculous, 203;
    in Munster, Ireland, 203

  Stade, 16, 33

  Staffordshire, 205

  Stagnation, scientific, 44

  Stars, 51, 52

  Stoechades, 333

  Storms. _See_ Winds

  Strabo, 10, 40

  Strasburg, 333

  Striguus, 316

  Stromboli, 222

  Stubbs, William, 469

  Sturluson, Snorri. _See_ Snorri Sturluson

  Submarine eruption, 223

  Subterranean channels, 27, 264

  Sucades, 333

  Sugar, 296

  Sullivan, R. J., 446

  Sulphur, 202, 222, 226

  Sulpicius Severus, 214

  Sumatra, 280

  Summa philosophiae, 408

  Sur (Tyre), 296

  Svalbard, 349, 486

  Svantevith, 328

  Swabia, 325

  Sweat of the earth, 199

  Sweden, 328, 329

  Syene, 298

  Sylvester, Bernard. _See_ Bernard Sylvester

  Sylvester II, 47

  Symbolic interpretation, 206

  Symbols on maps, 252

  Syria, 292, 294, 296;
    European occupation, 294

  Syrtes, 301

  Systems, 129


  Tabula Peutingeriana, 35

  Tanai, 291

  Tanaïs (Don), 71, 312

  Tangier (Tingi), 301

  Taormina, 311

  Taprobane, 38, 280, 310

  Tartarus, 28

  Tatars, 267

  Taylor, H. O., 416, 495

  Teima, 291

  Temperature, 23, 57

  Templars, 316

  Temujin, 266

  Tenedos, 310

  Terrestrial degree, measurement, 85

  Terrestrial geography, works on, 499

  Terrestrial Paradise, 63, 261.
    _See also_ Eden; Paradise

  Tertullian, 46

  Thames, 344

  Thanet, 335, 342

  Thebes, Egypt, 298

  Theoderic (pilgrim), 115

  Theodoric (Thierry) of Chartres, 91, 92, 93, 134, 135, 182;
    on immobility of the earth, 154;
    on precipitation, 169;
    theory of Creation, 139, 141, 144

  Theodosia, 312

  Theodricus monachus, 346, 412

  Theology, 89

  Thessalonica, 317

  Thina, 40

  Thinae, 271

  Thomas, Saint, 272;
    Church of, in India, 279;
    in India, 74;
    preaching in India, 275

  Thomas Aquinas, 91

  Thomas of Cantimpré, 408

  Thompson, E. M., 493

  Thule, 39, 75, 176, 211, 241, 335, 345

  Tibet, 282, 290

  Tibiariae, 281

  Tides, 21, 25, 26, 61, 173;
    Adelard of Bath on, 192, 439–440;
    astrological and physical theories, 190;
    British and Irish coasts, 194;
    Chinese knowledge, 439;
    Giraldus Cambrensis’ studies, 194;
    moon and, 190;
    Moslem theories, 84;
    terrestrial causation, 192

  Tigris, 72, 265, 284, 288, 289, 290, 294

  Tilmas, 291

  T-O maps, 66, 121, 259;
    types, 67 (ills.)

  Togarmim, 290

  Toledo, 322

  Toledo Tables, 79, 96, 242, 244, 392, 394, 400

  Topography, influence on climate, 177;
    local, 240;
    as a natural defense, 233;
    works on, 118

  Tortona, 323

  Tractatus excerptionum, 405.
    _See also_ Situ terrarum, De

  Tradition, 270;
    geography of, 255

  Transalpine, term, 324

  Translations from the Arabic, 95

  Translations from the Greek, 95, 398

  Transmutation, 29, 30, 60

  Transposition of land and sea, 83

  Travelers, 116, 292;
    Jewish, 117, 289

  Travels, 269;
    books of, 50;
    letters of, 116

  Trees of the sun and moon, 275

  Triangulation, 33

  Triffar, 309

  Tripartite division, 258

  Tripolis, 300

  Trivium, 127

  Troglodytes, 304

  Tudela, 117

  Tunis, 301, 302

  Turegum (Zurich), 325

  Turkestan, 267, 282

  Twelfth-century renaissance, 1

  Typhoons, 272


  Ukraine, 313, 314

  Ultima Tile, 346

  Underground waters, 27, 28

  Underworld rivers, 28

  Universe, 12;
    Bible opposed to theory of an eternal, 51;
    eternity, 145;
    history, 51;
    sphericity, 150

  Upsala, 329

  Urals, 312


  Vapor, 166, 168, 169, 172, 185, 191, 202

  Venetian traders, 295

  Ventoux, Mont, 212

  Vesuvius, Mount, 220, 221, 322

  Viedebantt, Oscar, 371

  Vignaud, Henry, 459

  Vikings, 110

  Vincent of Beauvais, 106, 405–406

  Virgil, 221

  Virgil, bishop of Salzburg, 57, 386

  Virginum, Mons, 221

  Vitruvius, 16

  Vivaldi, Fulberto, 448

  Vivien de St. Martin, Louis, 497

  Volcanic islands, 224

  Volcanoes, 21, 62, 137;
    causes, 31;
    as gates of Hell, 225;
    Iceland, 222;
    regions of, in Italy and Sicily, 220;
    visits to, 220

  Voyages, 70

  Vulcanism, causes, 225

  Vulcano, 222


  Wales, 120, 179, 195, 344;
    description, 340;
    Giraldus Cambrensis on, 337, 340;
    lakes, 207;
    landscape, 216;
    local topography, 240;
    marine encroachments, 196–197;
    mountains, 215;
    natural defensibility, 233;
    rivers, 206, 340

  Walter of Châtillon (of Lille), 108, 113;
    on a mountain view, 216

  Walter of Metz, 105, 405

  Warner, G. F., 461

  Waters, 20, 21, 24;
    above the firmament, 58, 182;
    congregation of, 59, 184, 188;
    distribution of land and, 187;
    distribution on the earth, 437;
    earth upon the waters, 60, 186;
    effect of land on waters which spring from it, 202;
    of the lands, 199;
    purpose of waters above the firmament, 184;
    qualities of waters of the lands, 201, 202

  Wells, 199;
    miraculous, 203

  Welsh, 340

  Welsh language, 340

  Wensinck, A. I., 460

  Werner, Karl, 499

  West. _See_ Occident

  Western Ocean, 25, 257;
    islands, 334.
    _See also_ Atlantic Ocean

  Westward flow of civilization, 233, 235

  Whirlpools, 194, 348, 349, 388

  White-men’s-land, 76

  Wicklow, 195, 206

  William of Auvergne, 101, 138, 145, 183

  William of Conches, 93, 135, 136, 151, 157, 158, 160, 185, 189, 214,
     227;
    on the atmosphere, 166;
    on atmospheric circulation, 172;
    on climates, 177;
    on climatic influence of mountains, 178;
    on clouds, 168;
    on elements, 418;
    on eternity of universe, 145;
    on floods, 170;
    on ground water, 199;
    on precipitation, 169;
    rationalism, 136;
    on shape of the earth, 152;
    on springs and wells, 202;
    theory of Creation, 141, 142;
    on tides, 192;
    on the waters, 182;
    on winds, 171, 172, 173, 174

  William of Malmsbury, 469

  William of Rubruck, 269

  William of Tyre, 109;
    on Alexandria, 299;
    on the Assassins, 298;
    on the desert, 228;
    on Egypt, 299, 300;
    on the simoom, 175;
    on Western Asia, 296, 297

  William the Breton, 108, 417;
    on French landscapes, 483;
    on the tides, 193, 441

  Winchester, 336

  Wind blowers, 252

  Wind-blown horns, 221

  Winds, 22, 32, 171;
    cause, 172;
    local, 175;
    names, 173;
    qualities, 174;
    supernatural production, 171, 433

  Wineland, 76;
    position, 349

  Wolfelm of Cologne, 161

  Woman, 143

  Wonders of the world, 321

  Wood, G. A., 469

  Works of the Six Days, 53, 134, 135, 137;
    medieval discussions of, 138

  World, medieval conception, 71

  World center, 259.
    _See also_ Arin; Jerusalem

  World Soul, 16, 141, 231, 419

  Worms region, 326

  Writings, Middle Age, 88


  Xenophon, 38


  Ydonus, 273

  Yemen, 290, 291

  Ymer, 147

  Youth, Fountain of, 204, 285


  Zachary, Pope, 57

  Zanzibar, 87

  Zarqalī, Az-, 79, 86, 96, 245

  Zemarchus, 50

  Zephyr, 173, 174

  Zin, 272

  Zion, Mount, 260, 463

  Zone maps, 121, 122 (ill.)

  Zones, 17, 23, 55, 156, 157

  Zurich, 325




                                 ERRATA


   p.  71, line 13: _for_ Tanais _read_ Tanaïs.

   p. 112, line 8: for _Hamm-burgensis_ read _Hammenburgensis_.

   p. 242, line 7: _for_ Borysthenes Dnieper _read_ Borysthenes
             (Dnieper).

   p. 273, line 16 from bottom: _for_ “Pison” _read_ “Phison.”

   p. 509, line 16: for _Michael Scot, 1921–1922_, read _Michael Scot_,
             1921–1922.

   p. 516, line 21: _for_ Giordano _read_ Giordano Carlo.

  The titles of Hugh of St. Victor’s _De arca Noë mystica_ and _De arca
  Noe morali_ are thus spelled in Migne, _Pat. lat._, vol. clxxvi (not
  _De archa_, etc., as throughout the present volume).

------------------------------------------------------------------------




                           TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES


  ● Fixed typos; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.
  ● Corrected Errata.
  ● Renumbered footnotes.
  ● Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78333 ***