He wrote a History, which he describes (vol. i. p. 21) as composed in a lucid style; it is cited by Plutarch, and also by Josephus in his Jewish Antiquities, xiv. 7. It consisted of forty-three books, which began where the history of Polybius ended, and was probably continued to the battle of Actium. This valuable History is lost.
Strabo was a great traveller, and apparently had no professional or other occupation. We may therefore conclude that his father left him a good property. Much of his geographical information is the result of personal observation. In a passage of his 2nd book[8] he thus speaks: “Our descriptions shall consist of what we ourselves have observed in our travels by land and sea, and of what we conceive to be credible in the statements and writings of others; for in a westerly direction we have travelled from Armenia to that part of Tyrrhenia which is over against Sardinia; and southward, from the Euxine to the frontiers of Ethiopia. Of all the writers on geography, not one can be mentioned who has travelled over a wider extent of the countries described than we have. Some may have gone farther to the west, but then they have never been so far east as we have; again, others may have been farther east, but not so far west; and the same with respect to north and south. However, in the main, both we and they have availed ourselves of the reports of others, from which to describe the form, size, and other peculiarities of the country.” He mentions having been in Egypt, the island Gyarus, Populonium near Elba, Comana in Cappadocia, Ephesus, Mylasa, Nysa, and Hierapolis in Phrygia. He visited Corinth, Argos, Athens, and Megara; but, on the whole, he does not appear to have seen more of Greece than in passing through it on his way to Brundusium, while proceeding to Rome. Populonium and Luna in Italy were the limit of his travels northwards. It is probable he obtained his information as to Spain, France, Britain, and Germany, while staying at Rome.
The first systematic writer on geography was Eratosthenes, who died at the age of 80, about B. C. 196. His work consisted of three books.
There is no ground for considering the Geography of Strabo an improved edition of that of Eratosthenes. Strabo’s work was intended for the information of persons in the higher departments of administration, and contains such geographical and historical information as those engaged in political employments cannot dispense with. Consistently with this object he avoids giving minute descriptions, except where the place is of real interest, but supplies some account of the important political events that had occurred in various countries, and sketches of the great men who had flourished or laboured in them. It is a lively, well-written book, intended to be read, and forms a striking contrast to the Geography of Ptolemy. His language is simple, appropriate to the matter, without affectation, and mostly clear and intelligible, except in those passages where the text has been corrupted. Like many other Greeks, Strabo looked upon Homer as the depository of all knowledge, but he frequently labours to interpret the poet’s meaning in a manner highly uncritical. What Homer only partially knew or conjectured, Strabo has made the basis of his description, when he might have given an independent description, founded on the actual knowledge of his time: these observations apply especially to his books on Greece. He does not duly appreciate Herodotus; nor does he discriminate between the stories which Herodotus tells simply as stories he had heard, and the accounts he relates as derived from personal observation. He likewise rejects the evidence of Pytheas of Marseilles as to the northern regions of Europe, and on more than one occasion calls him a liar, although it is very certain that Pytheas coasted along the whole distance from Gadeira, now Cadiz, in Spain, to the river he calls Tanaïs, but which was probably the Elbe; however, from the extracts which have been preserved it seems that he did not give simply the results of his own observations, but added reports which he collected respecting distant countries, without always drawing a distinction between what he saw himself and what was derived from the report of others.
Strabo’s authorities are for the most part Greek, and he seems to have neglected the Latin memoirs and historical narratives of the campaigns of the Romans, which might have furnished him with many valuable geographical facts for the countries as well of Asia as of Europe. He made some use of Cæsar’s description of France, the Alps, and Britain; he alludes to the voyage of Publius Crassus in speaking of the Cassiterides, and also the writings of Asinius Pollio, Fabius Pictor, and an anonymous writer whom he calls the Chorographer; but he might have obtained much additional information if he had taken pains to avail himself of the materials he could have procured during his stay at Rome.
Strabo considered that mathematical and astronomical knowledge was indispensable to the science of geography; he says in book i.,[9] that without some such assistance it would be impossible to be accurately acquainted with the configuration of the earth; and that every one who undertakes to give an accurate description of a place, should describe its astronomical and geometrical relations, and explain its extent, distance, latitude, and climate.[10] As the size of the earth, he says, has been demonstrated by other writers, we shall take for granted what they have advanced. We shall also assume that the earth is spheroidal, and that bodies have a tendency towards its centre. He likewise says, the convexity of the sea is a further proof that the earth is spheroidal to those who have sailed; for they cannot perceive lights at a distance when placed at the same level as their eyes, but if raised on high, they at once become perceptible.[11] He also observes, “our gnomons are, among other things, evidence of the revolution of the heavenly bodies, and common sense at once shows us that if the depth of the earth were infinite, such a revolution could not take place.”[12] But Strabo did not consider the exact division of the earth into climates or zones, in the sense in which Hipparchus used the term, and the statement of the latitudes and longitudes of places, which in many instances were pretty well determined in his time, as essential to his geographical description.
With regard to the lost continent of Atlantis, Strabo is very cautious in criticising[13] Poseidonius; he observes, “he did well, too, in citing the opinion of Plato, that the tradition concerning the island of Atlantis might be received as something more than a mere fiction, it having been related by Solon, on the authority of the Egyptian priests, that this island, almost as large as a continent, was formerly in existence, although now it had disappeared,” and remarks that Poseidonius thought it better to quote this than to say, He who brought it into existence can also cause it to disappear, as the poet did the wall of the Achivi.
The measure adopted by Strabo was the stadium. In book vii. chap. vii. § 4, he says, “From Apollonia to Macedonia is the Egnatian Way; its direction is towards the east, and the distance is measured by pillars at every mile, as far as Cypsela and the river Hebrus. The whole distance is 535 miles. But reckoning, as the generality of persons do, a mile at eight stadia, there may be 4280 stadia. And, according to Polybius, who adds two plethra, which are a third of a stadium, to every eight stadia we must add 178 stadia more,—a third part of the number of miles.” In book xi. chap. xi. § 5, he compares the parasang with the stadium, and states that some writers reckoned it at 60, others at 40, and others at 30 stadia.
Dr. Smith, in his Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, says, “We think that Ukert has satisfactorily shown an accurate description of a place should be particular to add its astronomical and geometrical relations, explaining carefully its extent, distance, degrees of latitude, and temperature of atmosphere. He says likewise, as the size of the earth has been demonstrated by other writers, we shall take for granted that the Greeks had not different standards of length, but always used the Olympic stadium and the foot corresponding to it. He states that the stadium was equal to 600 Greek, or 625 Roman feet, or to 125 Roman paces, and the Roman mile contained 8 stadia. Hence the stadium contained 606 feet 9 inches, English. This standard prevailed throughout Greece under the name of the Olympic stadium, because it was the exact length of the stadium or foot-race course at Olympia, measured between the pillars at the two extremities of the course.” Still Dr. Smith further observes, “But although the stadium and the foot connected with it were single definite measures throughout Greece, yet we find in the eastern countries, Babylon, Syria, and Egypt, and in some neighbouring Greek states, feet longer than the Olympic, the origin of which is to be explained by the coëxistence, in the Babylonian system, of a royal or sacred and a common foot and cubit, which were so related to one another, that the royal cubit was three finger-breadths longer than the common.”
We may conclude that Strabo’s stadium varied considerably, as he sometimes received his distance from personal observation or credible report, and often quoted other writers, and reduced other standards, as the mile, the parasang, and the schœnus, to the stadium. In addition to this, the most ancient mode of reckoning distances was by the number of days required to perform the journey, and this was transferred into stadia by reckoning a certain number of stadia to a day’s journey.[14]