Geography

​Indeed, I think that this argument is open to many criticisms. In the first place, because, although Eratosthenes used many testimonies, Hipparchus says that he used only one, that of Patrocles. Who, then, were those who asserted that the southern extremities of India lie opposite the regions around Meroe? And who were those who stated the distance from Meroe to the parallel through Athens? And again, who were those who said the width of the mountains was so much, or those who said that the distance from Cilicia to Amisus was the same as this? And who were those saying that the route from Amisus through Colchis and Hyrcania as far as Bactria and the regions beyond reaching to the eastern sea is both in a straight line and towards the equinoctial sunrise, and along the mountains keeping them on the right? Or again, who said that the extension to the west in a straight line with this is so, because it leads to the Propontis and the Hellespont? For Eratosthenes takes all these things as testified to by those who have been to the places, having met with many memoirs, with which he was well supplied, possessing a library as large as Hipparchus himself says.

​And Patrocles’ own credibility is established by many testimonies—those of the kings who entrusted him with so great a command, of those who accompanied him, and of those who held different opinions, whom Hipparchus himself names; for the refutations of those men are proofs of the things said by Patrocles. Nor is this incredible concerning Patrocles, when he says that those who campaigned with Alexander recorded each detail only in a cursory manner, but Alexander himself made it accurate, since those most experienced under him described the whole country; and he says that this description was afterwards given to him by Xenocles, the treasurer.

​Furthermore, Hipparchus says in his second treatise that Eratosthenes himself discredits the reliability of Patrocles on the basis of his disagreement with Megasthenes concerning the length of the northern side of India, where Megasthenes says it is sixteen thousand stadia, while Patrocles says it falls short by a thousand; for, starting from a certain record of stages, Eratosthenes disbelieved them because of the disagreement, but paid attention to that record. If, then, Patrocles is untrustworthy here on account of the disagreement, even though the difference is only a thousand stadia, how much more must we disbelieve him in cases where the difference is eight thousand, and that too against two men who agree with each other, when they say the width of India is twenty thousand stadia, while he says it is twelve thousand?

​But we shall say that he did not censure the mere disagreement, but compared it with the agreement and the reliability of the record of the stages. And it is not surprising if something becomes more reliable than what is reliable, and if we trust the same person in some matters but distrust him in others, whenever something more certain is put forward by someone. And it is ridiculous to think that a great disagreement makes those who disagree more untrustworthy; for, on the contrary, this seems rather to happen in the case of a small difference. For a small error is more likely to happen not only to ordinary people, but also to those who are wiser than others; but in the case of a great difference, while an ordinary person might err, a more scientific man would be less likely to suffer this; which is why he is also more readily believed.

​Now all those who have written about India have been for the most part liars, and Deimachus beyond measure, while Megasthenes is second to him, and Onesicritus and Nearchus and other such writers already merely babble. And it was possible for us to observe these things more fully when we were writing our memoirs of the deeds of Alexander; and it is especially right to disbelieve both Deimachus and Megasthenes. For these are the men who report the story of the people who sleep in their ears, and those without mouths, and the noseless, and the one-eyed, the long-legged, and those with fingers turned backward; and they revived the Homeric battle of the Pygmies with the cranes, saying they are three spans tall. And these men also tell of the gold-digging ants, and wedge-headed Pans, and serpents swallowing both oxen and stags, horns and all; concerning which things they refute one another, as Eratosthenes also says. For they were sent on embassies to Palibothra—Megasthenes to Sandrocottus, and Deimachus to Allitrochades, his son; and they left behind such memoirs of their travels, led on by whatever cause it may have been. But Patrocles is least of all like this; and the other witnesses whom Eratosthenes has used are not untrustworthy.