Mace nothing more than the weftern fhore of the greater of these gulfs. Ptolemy limits them to the neighbourhood of the river Cinyps alone, whilst Herodotus appears to confine them to the weft of that river; or perhaps of the district which is denominated from it. Again, Strabo, p. 834, places them in the island of Meninx, alone; although he calls the adjoining Syrtis, that of the Latophagi, implying that they poffelled at leaft a part of its fhores; as was really the cafe: and Pliny, lib. vi. 7, affigns them, in addition to the island, the environs of the Syrtis, alfo. In effect then, it appears, that although the Lotophagi of the Greeks, extended generally along the coaft between the two Syrtes, yet that the different tribes of them might ufe it, only in different degrees; and it is certain that Herodotus confines the proper Lotophagi to the promontory or projection of the coatt, oppo fite to the Gindanes (the fuppofed people of Gadamis); in which may be included the aforefaid ifland of Meninx, or Jerba, which is feparated from the coaft by a narrow and fhallow channel, and may poffibly have been regarded by Herodotus as a continuation of the main land. If we take the whole extent of the tract thus afligned to the Lotophagi and Machlyes, it may comprehend 200 miles of coat.. "But the allotment of this confined space, alone, to the eaters of lotus, was owing to the want of a more extended knowledge of the countries that bordered on the Defert: for it will be found, that the tribes who inhabit them, and whofe habits are in any degree known to us, eat univerfally of this fruit, in a greater or lefs degree, according to circumftances: and most of them, apparently, as much as they can ob tain of it. The tree or fhrub that bears the lotus fruit, is diffeminated over the edge of the great Defert, from the coaft of Cyrene, round by Tripoly and Africa proper, to the borders of the Atlantic, the Senegal, and the Niger.

"It is well known, that a great difference of opinion has prevailed. amongst the moderns, concerning what the ancients intended by the LOTOS: for the hiftory of it, as it has come down to us, is evidently mixed with fable, from having previously paffed through the hands of the poets; Homer being the first who mentions it (in the Odyssey, lib. ix. 94) but he no more expected us to believe that the lotus poffeffed the quality of inducing forgetfulness, than that a race of Cyclops exifted, or that men would be transformed into fwine. But of the exiftence of a fruit, which, although growing fpontaneously, furnished the popular food of tribes or nations, there is no kind of doubt; as it is mentioned by various authors of credit; and amongst the reft by Polybius, who appears to have feen it, in the proper country of the Lotophagi

There appear, however, to have been two diftinct species of lotus defigned by the term; because Herodotus and Pliny, in particular, defcribe a marked difference between them: the one being an aquatic plant, whofe root and feeds were eaten, in Egypt; the other, the fruit of a fhrub or fmall tree, on the fandy coaft of Lybia. The Egyptians, it feems, did not obtain a nickname from the Greeks, for eating their lotus, as certain people of Lydia did; the reafon of which feems elearly to be, that it conftituted a part only of the food of the one, but the entire food of the other. And here it may be remarked, by the

bye,

bye, that the Greeks appear to have applied the name LOTUS to fuch vegetable productions as either grew fpontaneoufly, or were raised with evry little art or labour; and which contituted the food of men. We shall first speak of the lotus of Lybia: the one generally intended by

the ancients.

"Herodotus certainly had not feen it. In Melpom. 177, he calls it" the fruit of the lotus, which is of the fize of the maftick, and fweet like the date; and of which a kind of wine is made." This circumstance of the wine is mentioned by all those who have spoken of the lotus of Lybia, and marks the diftinction between that and the aquatic lotus. Herodotus, moreover, fpeaks of "a fpecies of thorn, which resembles the lotus of Cyrene; and which diftils a gum." Euterpe, 96. This, therefore, fhould be the Rhamnus lotus.

Pliny, lib. xiii. c. 17, defcribes two different kinds of lotus; the one found at the Syrtis, and amongst the Nafamones, &c. the other in Egypt. The former he defcribes from Cornelius Nepos, to be the fruit of a tree: in fize ordinarily as big as a bean, and of a yellow colour; fweet and pleasant to the tafte. The fruit was bruifed, and made into a kind of paste or dough, and then stored up for food. Moreover, a kind of wine was made from it, refembling mead; but which would not keep many days. Pliny adds, that "armies in marching through that part of Africa, have fubfifted on the lotus." Perhaps this may refer to the army of Balbus, which, Pliny informs us, lib. v. c. 5, had penetrated to Gadamis and Fezzan.

"Polybius, who had himself feen the lotus on the coaft of Lybia, Tays that it is the fruit of a thrub, which is rough and armed with prickles, and in foliage refembles the rhamnus. That when ripe it is of the fize of a round olive; has a purple tinge, and contains a hard ftone that it is bruifed or pounded, and laid by for ufe; and that its flavour approaches to that of figs or dates. And, finally, that a kind of wine is made from it, by expreffion, and diluted with water; that it affords a good beverage, but will not keep more than ten days. (Polyb. apud Athenæum, lib. xiv. c. 12.)

"The lotus has been defcribed by two modern travellers, Dr. Shaw and M. Desfountaines, on the fide of the Mediterranean; and by a third, Mr. Park, towards the Niger and Senegal rivers. Dr. Shaw, it is well known, vifited the country about the Leffer Syrtis, on the borders of the proper country of the Lotophagi; and M. Desfountaines, who refided in the fame neighbourhood, did the fame, at a much later period. The defcriptions given by thefe gentlemen agree perfectly amongst themselves, and alfo with thofe of the ancients; as may be seen in Dr. Shaw, p. 226; in the Mem. Acad. Royale, 1788, P. 443, et feq. and in Mr. Park's highly interefting Book of Travels, P.99, 100. It feems to be agreed, that it is the fruit of the rhamnus Lotus of Linnæus." P. 625.

The Twenty-third Section treats of the Two Syrtes, the Lake Tritonis, the Temple and Egis of Minerva, with the antiquities of dyed fkins in Africa. The Lake Tritonis was not known to Herodotus by the name of Syrtes. Some cu

R

BRIT. CRIT. VOL. XVIII, SEPT. 1801.

rious

rious obfervations are here made on the Ægis of Minerva, which thus conclude:

"It appears from the Scriptures, that rams'-fkins dyed red, formed a covering for the tabernacle in the wilderness, in the days of Mofes; near 1500 years before Chrift; and we may be pretty confident that thefe were brought out of Egypt, by the Ifraelites; for it happened early in the very firft year of their wanderings; and it is not very probable that the fkins could be collected in the wilderness. We are told that the Ifraelites borrowed of the Egyptians, not only gold, filver, and raiment, but alfo "fuch things as they required: fo that they Spoiled the Egyptians." Now amongst the offerings, we find blue, and purple, and fearlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, (befides the red skins before-mentioned) all of which they muft furely have taken from the Egyptians; and by the ufe to which these skins were applied, in the wilderness, we mult fuppofe them to have been confidered as an elegant luxury in Egypt; from whence, doubtless they were brought.

"Whether they were manufactured in Egypt, or otherwife, cannot be known; but the contrary is the more probable, not only because the animal which produces the fkin feems to be a native of the Lybian provinces, but because the manufacture is at this day in the greatest repute there. And as the Fezzaners at prefent fetch them from the centre of Africa, fo might the Egyptians of old: and Mr. Maillet informs us (p. 199) that moroquins, meaning the dyed skins of Weftern Africa, are amongst the articles imported into Egypt, in modern times. "Dr. Shaw mentions both fheep and goats, in the countries of Barbary, p. 241 although he is filent refpecting any manufacture of their fkins. He fpeaks moreover of a particular breed of fheep, in the neighbourhood of Gadamis, Wurglah, and other places of the Sahara, which are nearly as tall as our fallow deer, and with fleeces as coarfe and hairy as thofe of goats. only. Pliny, lib. viii. c. 50, fays that the goats about the Syrtes are He fpeaks, however, from information Thorn like sheep. Goats' hair is mentioned as one of the offerings in the wilderness this too was probably brought from Africa; and here we are even told where it was produced.

"Abulfeda informs us of a celebrated manufacture of dyed skins in Gadamis; probably of the very kind defcribed above, by Dr. Shaw: for fpeaking of Gadamis (concerning which, fee above, p. 623) in his account of Africa, Tab. III. he fays, that "the people of Gadamis are celebrated for preparing of fkins." But he gives no particulars: a defect we have often occafion to remark. It is proper to remind the reader, that Gadamis is fituated in the fame quarter with the lake of Tritonis, or Lowdeah; where the dyed skins were in ufe at the temple of Minerva.

"It is doubtlefs a curious fact, that the tabernacle of the Deity in the wilderness, and the shrine of Minerva at the lake Tritonis, should have been decorated, not only with the fame kind of manufacture, but that alfo of the fame colour. We know not the date of the cuftom in Africa, but it was clearly anterior to the invention of the Grecian Agis: fo that it carries us back to a very high period of antiquity, perhaps not far fhort of that of the inftitutions of Moses.

"The

The modern ftate of this manufacture in Africa, and more particularly in the quarter affigned to the temple of Minerva, furnithes a ftrong prefumptive proof of a curious fact adduced by our author: and if, as appears probable, the skins mentioned in Exodus were brought from Africa, we are furnished with another curious fact in the hiftory' of manufactures; for, in that cafe, the manufacture must have ex fted in the fame quarter about 3300 years: and even if the Greeks borrowed the Ægis from the Minerva Tritonia, or any other of the African Minervas, it gives a duration of about 3000 years, to the manufactory." P. 669.

The Twenty-fourth and Twenty-fifth Sections are on a fubject peculiarly interefting; namely, the circumnavigation of Africa by the fhips of Pharaoh Necho, King of Egypt. This circumstance has ever excited the curiofity of the world; that Africa was circumnavigated was believed by Herodotus and Pliny, but queftioned by Strabo, Polybius, and Ptolemy. Major Rennel concludes, that fuch a fact was very probable; and this opinion is confirmed by Larcher, who obferves that it is corroborated by this fact, that of the fun being on the right hand in failing round Africa, and which never could have been imagined in an age when aftronomy was yet in its infancy.

The last Section is extraneous, as far as relates to Herodotus, and exhibits an examination of the account of the Voyage of Hanno along the western coaft of Africa. In this part, the author pursues his ufual method; he explains the thing itself, from his own conception of the data, and he illuftrates what is faid from ancient and modern authors, and finally concludes with fome general remarks. We have before obferved, that this is merely a beginning and introduction to a far greater work, it is therefore an act of juftice to reprefent to our readers the author's feelings at the conclufion of this portion of his labour.

"Thus having drawn from the great and celebrated work of the FATHER of prolane HISTORY, the various geographical notices with which it abounds, the author has endeavoured to form the whole into a general fy item, fuch, as it may be conceived, exitled amongst the Grecks of that day; and having completed the plan, with great deference has fubmitted it to the infpection of the public, from whofe tribunal he hopes for a favourable judgment, fince its decrees admit of no appeal.

It is poffible that fome readers may have condemned the work, for its containing matter, in their opinion, foreign to the main fubject; and others for its being, altogether, too diffufe. With refpect to the first clafs, it may be remarked that any fyftem, in order to be underflood, must be regularly gone through, and it happens that the drynefs of geographical detail is fuch, that a continued feries of them would rather be referred in, than read: fo that the intention of explaining a fyftem, would of courfe have been fruftrated. It has there

R 2

fore

:

fore been the ftudy of the author, to intermix with the geographical matter fuch ingredients as, whilft they served to confolidate the whole mafs into a regular form, would alfo give it the moft agreeable colouring in other words, that by the addition of hiftory, which it is the proper office of geography to explain; by mifcellaneous remarks and obfervations; and occafionally by remarks on the phyfical geography; he might fupply in part that intereft, which the generality of readers muft ever find wanting, in books of science.

"In refpect to objections to the bulk of the work, taken abfolutely, the author can only anfwer in the words of an eminent historian, that "he, who in the defcription of unknown things, affects too much brevity, feeks not fo much that which should be plainly told, as that which fhould be paffed over." In effect, a great many of the notices afforded by Herodotus, could not be fo well explained, or illuftrated, as by a reference to the works of other authors; or by the introduction of foreign matter.

"It is a remark of Polybius on this very fubject of geography, that the ancient authors who had written concerning it, had fallen into fo many errors, that it was neceffary to enter into a full and deliberate examination of them; but, at the fame time, he with great candour allows," that their labours deferve, on the whole, rather praise than cenfure; and that their errors are ever to be corrected in the gen left manner; fince it is certain, that they would themselves retract or alter many paffages in their works, if they were now alive."

"The author will receive that reward for which he has toiled, if the public, during the perufal of his work, have regarded it with the fame fentiments, as those which poffeffed the mind of Polybius: and which may be productive of more advantage in the prefent than in the former cafe: fince the author hopes that he may be enabled, in perfon, to retract or alter, what the difcernment of his judges may condemn." P. • 745.

We have thus, we flatter ourselves, given a fair and just analyfis of this elaborate, excellent, and ufeful work, as far as it goes. We have entered into no partial criticifms, for various reafons; among which, thefe may be thought fatisfactory, both to the author and our readers. We would not wish to check, in principio, the ardour and zeal of fcientific purfuit, particularly as any objections we could poffibly make are really trifling, both in themfelves and in their confequences. In fo va a work, verbal inaccuracies, incidental obfervations on the local defignation of lefs eminent towns or ftructures, ought not to weigh against that fagacity which difcovers, and that precision which defines, the more memorable scenes which bear the most important characters of antiquity, which elucidate real science, and which are truly dear to every scholar and every friend of learning.

Moft anxiously do we with health and leifure to the ingenious and accomplished author, that he may profecute to their