extensive, or its trees large, but only that it was much wooded. Nor do we
find that the rivers were wonderful, or the soil fat, or that the island
was more remote from Africa than from Europe; but merely that it was
remote from the continent. It is not said in the original that any towns
were built here, and indeed it is not likely that these traders should
build much; neither is the place said to have become famous, as we see on
the contrary that the Carthaginians were careful to prevent its fame from
spreading among the nations. Thus the translator being ignorant, led
Oviedo to believe quite a different story from the reality[10].

It is quite ridiculous to suppose that Carthaginian merchants could
possibly be carried so far out of their way as Hispaniola or Cuba; neither
could they have arrived at either of those islands without meeting with
the many other islands which surround them. It is more probable that the
island discovered by the Carthaginians was one of the Azores; for though
Ferrarius speaks of navigable rivers, he might possibly have written _ad
navigandum_ instead of _potandum_, and have thereby corrupted the meaning
of his author, that the island had plenty of streams fit for drinking,
into abundance of rivers adapted for navigation[11]. Oviedo falls into a
similar error in supposing this island of the Carthaginians to have been
the same with that mentioned by Seneca in his fourth book; where he tells
us that Seneca speaks of an island named Atlantica, which was entirely or
mostly drowned in the time of the Peloponnesian war; and of which island
Plato likewise makes mention in his Timaeus: But we have already dwelt too
long on these fables.

Oviedo insists that the Spaniards had the entire dominion of these islands,
which he was pleased to consider as the same with our West Indies. He
grounds this opinion on what is said by Statius and Sebosus, that certain
islands called _Hesperides_ lay forty days sail west from the Gorgonian