Γεωγραφικα 2.1.22

2.1.22

̔εξῆς δὲ συνηγορῶν ἔτι τοῖς ἀρχαίοις πίναξιν οὐ τὰ λεγόμενα ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἐρατοσθένους προφέρεται περὶ τῆς τρίτης σφραγῖδος, ἀλλʼ ἑαυτῷ κεχαρισμένως πλάττει τὴν ἀπόφασιν πρὸς ἀνατροπὴν εὐφυῆ. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀκολουθῶν τῇ θέσει τῇ προειρημένῃ τοῦ τε Ταύρου καὶ τῆς ἀπὸ στηλῶν θαλάττης, διελὼν τῇ γραμμῇ ταύτῃ τὴν οἰκουμένην δίχα καὶ καλέσας τὸ μὲν βόρειον μέρος τὸ δὲ νότιον, πειρᾶται τούτων ἑκάτερον τέμνειν πάλιν εἰς τὰ δυνατὰ μέρη· καλεῖ δὲ ταῦτα σφραγῖδας. καὶ δὴ τοῦ νοτίου μέρους πρώτην εἰπὼν σφραγῖδα τὴν Ἰνδικήν, δευτέραν δὲ τὴν Ἀριανήν, ἐχούσας τι εὐπερίγραφον, ἴσχυσεν ἀμφοτέρων ἀποδοῦναι καὶ μῆκος καὶ πλάτος, τρόπον δέ τινα καὶ σχῆμα, ὡς ἂν γεωμετρικός. τὴν μὲν γὰρ Ἰνδικὴν ῥομβοειδῆ φησι διὰ τὸ τῶν πλευρῶν τὰς μὲν θαλάττῃ κλύζεσθαι τῇ τε νοτίῳ καὶ τῇ ἑῴᾳ, μὴ πάνυ κολπώδεις ᾐόνας ποιούσαις, τὰς δὲ λοιπὰς τὴν μὲν τῷ ὄρει τὴν δὲ τῷ ποταμῷ, κἀνταῦθα τοῦ εὐθυγράμμου σχήματος ὑπό τι σωζομένου· τὴν δʼ Ἀριανὴν ὁρῶν τάς γε τρεῖς πλευρὰς ἔχουσαν εὐφυεῖς πρὸς τὸ ἀποτελέσαι παραλληλόγραμμον σχῆμα, τὴν δʼ ἑσπέριον οὐκ ἔχων σημείοις ἀφορίσαι διὰ τὸ ἐπαλλάττειν ἀλλήλοις τὰ ἔθνη, γραμμῇ τινι ὅμως δηλοῖ τῇ ἀπὸ Κασπίων πυλῶν ἐπὶ τὰ ἄκρα τῆς Καρμανίας τελευτώσῃ τὰ συνάπτοντα πρὸς τὸν Περσικὸν κόλπον. ἑσπέριον μὲν οὖν καλεῖ τοῦτο τὸ πλευρόν, ἑῷον δὲ τὸ παρὰ τὸν Ἰνδόν, παράλληλα δʼ οὐ λέγει· οὐδὲ τὰ λοιπά, τό τε τῷ ὄρει γραφόμενον καὶ τὸ τῇ θαλάττῃ, ἀλλὰ μόνον τὸ μὲν βόρειον τὸ δὲ νότιον.

Again, Hipparchus, ever anxious to defend the [accuracy of the] ancient charts, instead of fairly stating the words of Eratosthenes concerning his third section of the habitable earth, wilfully makes him the author of an assertion easy of disproof. For Eratosthenes, following the opinion we before mentioned, that a line drawn from the Pillars of Hercules across the Mediterranean, and the length of the Taurus, would run due west and east, divides, by means of this line, the habitable earth into two portions, which he calls the northern and southern divisions; each of these he again essays to subdivide into as many smaller partitions as practicable, which he denominates sections. He makes India the first section of the southern part, and Ariana the second; these two countries possessing a good outline, he has been able not only to give us an accurate statement of their length and breadth, but an almost geometrically exact description of their figure. He tells us that the form of India is rhomboidal, being washed on two of its sides by the southern and eastern oceans [respectively], which do not deeply indent its shores, The two remaining sides are contained by its mountains and the river [Indus], so that it presents a kind of rectilinear figure. As to Ariana, he considered three of its sides well fitted to form a parallelogram; but of the western side he could give no regular definition, as it was inhabited by various nations; nevertheless he attempts an idea of it by a line drawn from the Caspian Gates to the limits of Carmania, which border on the Persian Gulf. This side he calls western, and that next the Indus eastern, but he does not tell us they are parallel to each other; neither does he say this of the other sides, one bounded by the mountains, and the other by the sea; he simply calls them north and south.