A General History and Collection of Voyages and Travels — Volume 03 - Arranged in Systematic Order: Forming a Complete History of the Origin and Progress of Navigation, Discovery, and Commerce, by Sea and Land, from the Earliest Ages to the Present Time by Robert Kerr
page 33 of 639 (05%)
page 33 of 639 (05%)
|
farther it extended eastwards, so much the nearer it must approach to the
Cape Verd islands, or the then known western limits of the globe: And, if this space were sea, it might be easily sailed over in a short time; and if land, that it would be much sooner discovered by sailing to the west, since it must be much nearer to these islands in that direction. To this may be added what is related by Strabo in his Fifteenth Book, that no army ever penetrated to the eastern bounds of India, which according to Ctesias is as extensive as all the rest of Asia. Onesicritus affirms that India is a full third part of the world; and Nearchus says that it is four months journey in a straight line from west to east. Pliny, in the 17th Chap, of his 6th Book, says that India is a third part of the earth, and that consequently it must be nearer Spain in the western than in the eastern direction. The fifth argument which induced the admiral to believe that the distance in a western direction to India was small, was taken from the opinion of Alfragranus and his followers, who computed the circumference of the globe as much less than all other cosmographical writers, as they only allowed 56-2/3 miles to a degree of longitude. Whence my father inferred, that the whole globe being small, the extent of that third part which remained to be discovered must necessarily be proportionally small likewise; and might therefore be sailed over in a short time. And, as the eastern bounds of India were not yet discovered, and must lie considerably nearer us towards the west, he therefore considered that the lands which he might discover in his proposed expedition westwards might properly be denominated the Indies. Hence it appears how much Roderick the archdeacon of Seville was wrong in blaming the admiral for calling those parts the Indies which were not so. But the admiral did not call them the Indies as having been seen or discovered by any other person; but as being in his opinion the eastern part of India beyond the Ganges, to which no |
|