Subject Matter and Relationship to Adjacent Disciplines
Apparently most ancient geographers were satisfied with an astonishingly low level of reflection on the methodological problems pertaining to their discipline and on the conceptualization of their authorial task. The broad subject matter and methodological pluralism of ancient geographical writings may be regarded as typical of the epoch. In the third century BCE, Eratosthenes of Cyrene, as the first geographer of ancient times, attempted to formulate in detail the subject matter and methodology of geographical description (geographia) in his Geographica. He had as his ultimate goal the creation of a map of the world. Strabo and Ptolemy are other laudable exceptions. The meaning of geographia and the verb geOgraphein remained ambivalent throughout all of antiquity: these terms denoted both the representation or drawing of the world on a map and the description of the world in words (Jacob 1996a: 901-953; 1998: 19-37). This dual meaning indicates the two main trends in ancient geography. Strabo in his Geographica discusses his conception of that geography that dealt with the oikoumenO (inhabited world), where he examines critically the positions of his predecessors Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, and Posidonius, all of whom he reproaches for having an exaggerated mathematical-physical orientation. He understood his own specific variety of geography as chOrographia, i. e., descriptive or cultural geography (Str. Geog. 1.1.1-23, C1-14; 2.5.17, C 120-121; 8.1.1, C332; Books 1-2). Ptolemy’s famous investigations refer to this discussion in the proem of his Geographical Guide (GeOgraphike HuphOgOsis). Here this mathematically oriented geographer under the empire informs us about his methodology and conception of his own undertaking through the comparison of geography with chorography (Ptol. Geog. 1.1.1-2).
Greco-Roman geography encompasses other areas not included in today’s discipline (Bunbury 1879; Pedech 1976; Olshausen 1991; Cordano 1992; Hubner 2000c). This is because numerous disciplines in the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries became independent and developed their own individual profile, while in the ancient world these same disciplines, above all ethnography and parts of anthropology, were considered to belong to geography. Ancient geography also approached very closely philosophy and cosmology. Above-average knowledge of mathematics, geometry, and astronomy was regarded as an indispensable foundation for the mathematical-physical branch of geography. By contrast, only a basic knowledge of these fields was required for cultural geography. At the same time, only a few works of cultural geography betray some appreciable influence of rhetoric, an influence felt in all ancient disciplines and literary genres, and elaborate rhetorical ornamentation in geographical accounts remained the exception.
Ancient geographical works deal with the real world as well as with purely imaginary, literary, fictional, and mythical places, countries, people, and nations. The borders of the oikoumene fluidly merged with the realm of mythical geography (Romm 1992; Perez Jimenez and Cruz Andreotti 1998; Hubner 2000a), a feature found also in the works of many Greco-Roman historians. Ancient cartographers also liked to embellish their works with mythical creatures. If one defines Greeks and Romans as central actors in ancient history, as nearly all Greco-Roman authors did, then the Mediterranean area necessarily becomes the central region of their activity. Other nations and regions are simply reduced to minor ‘‘barbarian’’ nations and cultures. Most Greek and Latin works of geography and historiography, therefore, focus on the Mediterranean oikoumene and its fringe areas.
The predilection, discernable in ancient historical and geographical writings, for incredible, wondrous, and amazing accounts (thaumasia, paradoxa, and mirabilia stories) is closely related to accounts of mythical geography. One also finds them included for the readers’ entertainment even in very serious scientific works, e. g., in Strabo, Pausanias, or Pliny. Freely invented descriptions of countries and peoples on the fringes of the world (India, Central Asiatic Scythia, Arabia, and Africa) or on hypothetical opposing continents ( antipodes) are widely prevalent well into the imperial period. Thus the generic boundaries between ancient geography and para-doxography were fluid (Schepens and Delcroix 1996: 375-460; Stramaglia 1999).
Ancient cultural geographical and ethnographic works, like some historical works, are inclined to playfully cross generic boundaries between prose and poetry as a stylistic device. One thus encounters, for example in Strabo’s Geographica, long passages mostly from Homer, but also from tragedians and other poets. (On the other hand, however, one finds almost no direct speeches, one of the most popular stylistic devices of ancient historiography.) Quotations of poets served as evidence of the authors’ education, as a societal game between author and readers, to heighten the pathos ofa passage, or as authoritative proof of an expert opinion (Radt 1994: 61-92; Dueck 2005: 86-107). Didactic poems with geographic subject matter have likewise been transmitted to us from antiquity, e. g., the Guide (Periegesis) of Pseudo-Skymnos in iambic trimeters or that of Dionysius of Alexandria in hexameters (Jacob 1990; Schindler 2000: 163-183). It would therefore be a serious mistake to conceive of ancient geography as a prose genre only. Versification of geographic or astronomical subject matter rendered it easier to remember and even secured a certain readership for dry subjects. Apart from geographers, ancient writers of biological and agricultural treatises (e. g., Theophrastus, Varro, and Columella) preferentially described the flora and fauna of a region, or treated them as part of an encyclopedic compendium (e. g., Pliny in his Natural History). Thus ancient geographers also dealt with subject matter similar to that treated by writers in other adjacent fields.
Ancient geography was unsuccessful, however, at gaining entry as an independent subject into the canon of higher education subjects, the artes liberales. Literary, philosophical, and rhetorical education had priority. The subject matter of geography was regarded as difficult, and the utility of physical-geographical knowledge was not held in high esteem except by a narrow circle of experts. If geographical knowledge enjoyed any popularity at all among the Greco-Roman elite, it was knowledge of descriptive cultural geography that was highly regarded. Prospective politicians and military personnel were advised to study geographical descriptions; cultural geographic descriptions of places, countries, or the oikoumene aimed at immediate and practical utility for a readership in civil life, politics, and warfare, while their subject matter certainly enabled them to be integrated in an unproblematic way into digressions in historical works.
The teachings and treatises of mathematical-physical geography in antiquity (French 1994: 114-148; Rihll 1999: 82-105) served primarily for internal discussion within philosophical and learned circles. This branch of geography particularly focused on the determination of the circumference of the earth, of the locations of particular places, and of the distances between them. Important topics included the subjects of ancient meteorology and climatology. The relevancy of these subjects to the predominantly agrarian societies of the ancient world is immediately clear. From our point of view, however, the important sub-disciplines and methodologies of ancient meteorology and climatology exhibited an ‘‘unscientific’’ character: they still remained closely associated with philosophy and cosmology, and the proverbial rules of farmers and popular belief maintained their influence (Marcotte 1998: 263-277; Cusset 2003; Taub 2003). The connections between ancient mathematical-physical geography and history were quite tenuous, with the exception of precise information pertaining to distances and the location of important places. By contrast, the close affinity of ancient cultural geography with national and universal history was of central importance. The culmination of the development of comprehensive cultural-geographical treatises was achieved in the Hellenistic and Augustan eras with the oikoumene geographies of Posidonius (On Ocean), Strabo (Geographica), and with the mathematical geography which included the Geographike Huphegesis and maps of Ptolemy.
The development of biography as an independent genre was delayed, as is well known, because much biographical information could be incorporated in other genres. It is not necessary here to delve into the great significance of biographical passages in historical works (cf. Ch. 54), but it is worth pointing out that one does find pronounced biographical features in cultural-geographical works also, for example in monographs on individual poleis and their famous sons and daughters, or in Strabo’s oikoumene geography with its catalogue of urban honoratiores (‘‘men of high reputation and social standing’’) and numerous references to members of the Greco-Roman elite (Engels 1999: 314-377; 2005: 129-143).
All ancient genres of prose literature developed later in time and less clearly than poetic genres with their typical metres and dialects. Unfortunately, systematic discussions of generic problems in prose literature have not been transmitted to us, either by ancient historians or geographers, or by philosophers, or by rhetorical or literary critics. Aristotle composed the most sophisticated general discussion in his Poetics, where he employed a combination of criteria: external form, subject matter, considerations regarding the author and his target audience or readership, metrical questions, the historical development of poetry, and other aspects. The application of this framework and analysis, however, to the relationship between historiography and geography is no simple matter.
A determination of the relationship between these two disciplines, therefore, must proceed from scattered references found in historical and geographical works. The relationship between geography and history does not, however, assume a central position in the rare examples of the more detailed methodological chapters of ancient historians, e. g., those of Thucydides or Polybius. Special treatises on ancient historiography have either come down to us in the form of fragments (Theophrastus, On History) or offer little of value in distinguishing historiography from geographic writings (Lucian, How to Write History). Important methodological statements are found, however, in the proems ofancient geographical and historical works, others in the often polemical criticisms of predecessors and contemporaries (Podossinov 2003: 88-104). Ancient authors liked to associate themselves with a tradition or a school. Recourse to older, renowned writers strongly bolstered claims to authority in a world in which literature was the medium of education. It is always worthwhile to enquire about an author’s references to other writers in particular (and about those whom he intentionally ignores). The principles of imitation and emulation, citation, and the progress an ancient discipline makes through criticism of predecessors provide important indications of ancient geographers’ and historians’ conceptualization of their task (Jacob 1986: 27-64; Marincola 1997; Engels 1998: 79). The precepts of rhetorical treatises on artistic prose (Kunstprosa) can only be applied to cultural-geographical writings in a limited way, however, since hardly any of these works display stylistic ambition. Brilliant passages in the works of Posidonius and Agatharchides represent the exceptions. Brevity, simplicity, clarity, and systematization in the presentation of subject matter are, by contrast, the qualities of ancient geographic authors. An intentional avoidance of the stylistic devices known to all authors was supposed to guarantee the reliability of geographical information (e. g., in Strabo’s work). Thus the technical terminology of geography is to blame for some of the losses sustained by the genre in the course of textual transmission.
Outstanding ancient geographers, e. g., Strabo, Artemidorus, or Posidonius, wrote in both genres of geography and of historiography. As authors they must have recognized sufficiently the specific and distinctive aspects their geographic works possessed vis-a-vis their historical works. Their readers must have too. Since, however, geographic writings did not find their way into the canon of texts read in ancient schools, their readership cannot have been that numerous. Some cultural geographers, therefore, turned to a broader circle of readers in possession of a general education. Strabo’s ideal reader was not the philosopher or his colleague the geographer, but rather the educated citizen.
The Treatment of Space and Time
Behind every historical event, powerful geographic factors are at work. History always takes place in particular spaces, and every space has its own history (Semple 1931; Hassinger 1953; Myres 1953; East 1966; Kirsten 1984; Sordi 1988). Space and time form complementary basic axes and supply the fundamental parameters for a closer determination of the relationship of ancient history and geography. The role that space plays in an ancient work helps to characterize it as primarily historical or geographical. Of course climate, mountains, deserts, rivers, coastlines, or deposits of mineral resources and other basic factors establish the underlying conditions for long-term historical developments in ancient places, regions, and empires. Geographic factors, as contingent phenomena, have often decided the course of particular political and military events, and the destinies of human lives. Ancient geographers and historians took note of the knowledge (or, conversely, ignorance) of topography and climate in a war zone, unusual occurrences such as earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruptions, lunar and solar eclipses, droughts, and periodic occurrences of extreme cold. A chronologic narrative structure with emphasis on political and military events (praxeis, res gestae) dominates almost all historical works, while long descriptions of conditions with detailed ekphrasis of flora and fauna, customs, and habits do indeed appear as digressions but rather tend to be typical for geographic works.
The treatment of space and time can be examined with the aid of some central questions: Does an author attribute more weight to the category of space than to the time axis of the events mentioned? Does he focus on individual places, regions, or the entire oikoumene? Are real places and spaces described or purely literary ones? Which methods does the author prefer for his descriptions? Is the interest displayed in a place, country, or people more pronounced for its (their) current importance or for its past renown and earlier treatment in literary works? In descriptions, are many citations employed from canonical works? How comprehensive and precise are the chronological references, i. e., is there in any way a systematic and precise chronology (which certainly would in no way belong to the indispensable characteristics of cultural-geographic works), or only crude chronological references? Is only contemporary history (Zeitgeschichte) covered? Does the amount of detail increase as soon as an author approaches approximately his own lifetime, or does an important past epoch dominate?
World History
