Copyright
Gudmund Schütte.

Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe, a reconstruction of the prototypes online

. (page 14 of 17)
Online LibraryGudmund SchüttePtolemy's maps of northern Europe, a reconstruction of the prototypes → online text (page 14 of 17)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Ptolemaic tribes between the Rhine and the Elbe, except the Swabians.
Our principal reason is the fact that the correspondence with the Tabula
Peutingeriana will only become complete, if we may attribute to C the
Kamauoi-Chairusikoi = the Chamavi-Chrepstini Tab. Peuting.



d. Topographic Correctness.

As we shall see under the heading "Literary milieu", Prot. C was a
so-called itinerary, i. e. a road-map showing the distances between a
series of towns. Such maps, like our modern schematic representations
of railway systems, do not pretend to offer a correct topography. The
Tab. Peuting. is a classical exemple of the prevailing distortions. Corre-
spondingly, there are several traces of bad topography in Prot. C.

The tribes are distributed in a confused manner, as in the Tab. Peuting.
(i) Abrinkatuoi, (3) Namnetai, (2) Redones, instead of i, 2, 3; Karitnoi
south of Vangiones, *Chattvaroi south of Kasvaroi, Kamauoi beside
Chairusikoi and Chattai, cf. the Chamavi beside the Chrepstini on the
Tab. Peuting. The distance between Nouaision and Bogadion (Bagacum)
is shortened. On the other hand, the distance between Mediolanion and



122 PTOLEMY S MAPS OF NORTHERN EUROPE

Leufana is largely exaggerated. *Bagacum ought to lie south-west of
Nouaision, not north-west.

It must, however, be remembered that the Ptol. constructor may
have deteriorated the map, as he seems to have done by introducing
the broad chasm between the sections north western Gaul and Germania
Belgica.

In spite of the confusion, parts of the map seem to have been not
so bad after all. The line *Vangiones, *Arlaunon, *Tungri (Tenkeroi),
Nouaision, Teuderion corresponds fairly well to the actual positions oi
Worms (capital of the Vangiones), Arlon, Tongern, Neuss, Tiiddern. It

seems that Prot. C had not yet assumed the
extremely oblong shape which deforms the
Tab. Feuting. The Rhine was probably
represented on the basis of observation of



Leufana o



*Vangiones



o Nouaision ... ^ i. ^i, i-

its various curves, and not as a smooth line,
as was the case on the Tab. Peuting. and

*Usipoi in Prot. A. A zigzag line is implied by the

localisations of the fixed points indicated in

the accompanying diagram. It corresponds to two actual curves of the

river, the one between Strassburg and Bingen, the other between Neuss

and Nimwegen.

e. Statistical Features. ^

Prot. C, like the Tab. Peuting., contains mainly towns, but also several
tribes. In the invaded north-western German section of Prot. Aa, Prot. C
thus ''supplies a want", as these regions were in reality almost completely
bare of towns.

On the other hand, Prot. C enriches south-western Germany with a
series of tribal names, whereas the due local prototype Ab contains no
samples of this category. The present selection of names in Prot. C
seems somewhat accidental or arbitrary, but this fact may to a great
extent be due to the Ptol. constructor. It is worth noticing that all
traceable towns of Prot. C in the western section possess a certain im-
portance, three being tribal capitals, and the fourth a flourishing mercan-
tile centre, the present Rouen. On the Tab. Peuting. two of these are
distinguished by towers, viz. Rouen and Rennes.

As to the names of tribes, the selection may have been somewhat
arbitrary from the very beginning. We shall see later on that it is
reproduced almost unaltered by the Tab. Peuting. But Prot. C at least
in some points is more complete than both the Tab. Peuting. and the
Itinerarium Antonini. The * Vangiones, Abrinkatuoi, Redones, Morinoi
of C are missed in both of the latter documents. And, if we are right
in assigning to C the Kamauoi and their surroundings, the prototype



§ 24- LOCAL PROTOTYPE C 12 5

would have contained a fairly copious representation of tribes in western
Germany, whereas the selection of the Tab. Peuting. is more fragmentary,
and no German tribes occur in the parts concerned of the Itin. Anton.



f. Occurrence of Duplicates.

The distribution of duplicates has been somewhat altered, owing to
the modification of our theory. We now assume the following series:
Namnetai C = Samnitai A^ Ratomagos C and A, roMorinoi C = Morinoi A
(not in all MS. atlases), Vargiones C — Vaggiones A, Askalingion C =
Askiburgion A, Kamauoi C = Chaimai A. The two Marionis can no
longer be regarded as authentic duplicates, as the one belonging to C is
rather a distortion of Matilone on the Tab. Peuting. We have withdrawn
the identification of Intouergoi C and Triberoi A (Trevagroi Strabo),
preferring the combination with the Nitiobroges of the Tab. Peuting. Also
the equation Feugaron C = Tungroi A seems too questionable.



g. Linguistic Marks.

In "The Scottish Geographical Magazine", vol. XXX, p. 71, we pointed
out Latin residuals in Prot. C, such as the nk, ng in Kondeoui^^on, I;2^ena,
Abri;2y^atuoi, Askaliw^ion. It may be added that Leufan^a: points towards
the vulgar Latin form Leuefan<7, Tab. Peuting. ; a Greek MS. would
scarcely have dropped the final nasal as early as the second century A. D.
Our new conjecture Albanianis, Tab. Peuting. = *Albis amnis, Prot. C,
suggests that the prototype would have been read and interpreted in
Latin. Also the equation F-abiranon = Foro Adriani, Tab. Peuting., seems
to point towards Latin types.

A pre-Ptolemaic trace of Greek editorial language is perhaps the
erroneous spelling XA/T0Yi2P0I < XATTOYAPOI; the Latin corre-
spondence AE = Greek AI would not so easily be derived from TT.
The CO in Vargiones, Inkriones may equally originate from a Greek pre-
liminatory stage; otherwise, Ptolemy constantly writes -ones in Gallic and
Belgian names, except in Keutrones that is placed within Italian territory.



h. Literary Milieu.

Prot. C is most closely related with the Tab. Peuting., but has also
special affinities with the Itin. Anton.

I. Common Affinities.

Towns: Kondate, Ratomagos, *Bagakon, Koinoenon (Garuone),
Nouaision.



124 PTOLEMY S MAPS OF NORTHERN EUROPE

2. Affinities with the Tabula Peutingeriana.

Tribes: Namnetai, Intouergoi, Vargiones:?, Karitnoi, Brukteroi?,

Kamauoi, Chairusikoi (Kasvaroi?).
River: Amisias (for Anatius).
Towns: Askiburgion (for cAspingium), Nabalia, Fleum, F-abiranon,

Matilone, Albis, Leufana, Askalingion.

3. Affinities with the Itinerarium Antonini.

Tribal district: Germania. Tribe: *Tenkeroi (=: Tongri).
Towns: Mediolanion, Teuderion, *Arlaunon.

The correspondence regarding the names Leufana, *Arlaunon, Teu-
derion, Mediolanion is worth noticing, because the classical records of
these four names are limited to the three authorities mentioned.

We have mentioned above that two of four Gallic towns in C have
vignettes with towers on the Tab. Feuting. — a circumstance which points
towards statistical parallelism. We have likewise mentioned the close corre-
spondence between the tribal names of Prot. C and those of Tab. Feuting.

Towards the east, both descriptions extend as far as to the Cherusci
and no further. In the part of Gaul situated north of the Loire, the
Tabula contains hardly any additions to the stock of Frot. C. We notice
only Veneti, Osismi, Franci; the last-mentioned name must be regarded
as added after Ftolemy's times, as it existed scarcely before our era and
occurs never in literature before the publication of the Tabula.

If Fabiranon is correctly interpreted as Foro Adriani, Prot. C would
originate from the times of the Emperor Hadrianus, i. e. after 117, or at
least its last edition would belong to this period.

i. Examination of Details.

On practical reasons, the details concerned have been discussed under
the heading "Ptolemaic localisation".

Artaunon confirms the present forms of the name, French Arlon
(occurring since 870, according to "La grande Encyclopedie"), Flemish
Aarlen. The form Orolauno of the Itinerarium Antonini is of similar age,
appearing both in inscriptions and documents. Perhaps the ambiguous
spelling *Arlaunon & Orolauno denotes an old contrast between Gothonic
and Celtic pronounciation, as in Masa versus Mosa (the Meuse), Wasgen-
wald versus les Vosges, etc.

j. Conclusion,

The main interest of Prot. C is merely literary, consisting in the fact
that it 4ielps to illustrate the genesis of the Tab. Feuting. and the Itin.
Anton.



§ 25- LOCAL PROTOTYPE D 125

§ 25. LOCAL PROTOTYPE D = SWABIAN TRIBES ABOUT
THE LOWER ELBE.

a. Summary of Contents.

Prot. D is only traceable as a fragment. It is a local description of
the Swabian group, containing only tribes. A duplicate name occurs in
Aa (or perhaps two). There are Greek marks. Affinity with Strabo and
Tacitus. Cf. Fig. 2.

b. Ptolemaic Localisation.

The Ptolemaic constructor has introduced Prot. D into the interior
part of the Germanic territory belonging to Prot. A. From the physical
point of view, D has left no trace, but its presence is apparent from the
large displacement of well-known names. The Semnones are fairly speaking
correctly localised, but the Angles have emigrated from the Baltic shore
to Thuringia, and the Langobards from the' Elbe to the Rhine. Prot. D
perhaps also contained the Ptolemaic Farodinoi in Mecklenburg = the
Charudes from northern Jutland. — The position of the Swabians about
the middle Rhine may be an inheritage ("apochronism") from the year
58 B. C, derived from Caesar who describes a Swabian attack against
this region. The Angles seem to have obtained their place in interior
Germany owing to erroneous identification with the *Angrivarii of Prot. C,
cf. p. 119.

c. Definiton of Limits.

The addition of "Sveboi" is the main characteristic of B. Incorrect
arrangement distinguishes D from the elements of Aa in north-western
Germany. Ptol. displacement from east to west distinguishes D from the
elements of C with the Ptol. displacement from west to east. For further
particulars cf. § 24.

d. General Topographic Scheme.

Not traceable. Prot. D seems to have been a descriptive text,
no map.

e. Statistical Features.

Only tribes are traceable. The Angles are emphasized (as sole repre-
sentatives of the Nerthus group, cf. under h.).

f. Occurrence of Duplicates.

Laggobardoi = Lakkobardoi Aa. Perhaps further Farodinoi =
Charudes Aa.



126 Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe

g. Linguistic Marks.

Latin marks are not traceable.

The combination n£- is written in corrrect Greek manner as ^-g- :
La^obardoi, A^^eiloi. Cf. the contrasts in the surrounding prototypes:
LAiTiTOBARDOI Aa (pointing to an original "^LANCOBARDl), Kngn-
varioi Aa^ Askaliw^ion C^ Asaw^a, Si;/^one Bi^ Marvi/^^oi B2^ regular
ng in Acde,

Instead of Semnones we might expect the spelling Semnones, as used
by Strabo. But even the Senonic Gauls in Italy are by Ptolemy written
Semnones, and Dio Cassius has the same spelling, LXVII, 5. Evidently,
the Semnones as an important tribe had a relatively fixed orthography,
which preferred the 0, because the Greeks knew the name through the
medium of Latin.

h. Literary Milieu.

Prot. D recalls Strabo and Tacitus, the only two authors who emphasize
the Swabian group in a similar manner. The designation of the tribes
round the Elbe as Swabians must be referred to the establishment of
King Marbod's great Swabian Empire about the beginning of our era.
The Semnones and Langobards are directly mentioned as Marbod's sub-
jects or allies, cf Tacitus, "Annals" II, 45 (17 A. D.). Also the Angles
as neighbours of the Langobards may have belonged to Marbod's vassals.
— As the Angles were no Swabians in the ethnic sense, the continued
designation ''Sveboi Aggeiloi" must be regarded as a "political apo-
chronism". This antiquated designation, together with the solitary in-
stance of the name of the Angles, constitutes a typical affinity with
Tacitus. The antiquated "Swabian nationality" re-appears in his description
of the Aestui, who were in reality no Gothonic nation, but belonged to
the Lithu-Prussian group; cf. Strabo VII, 290, who represents Marbod as
king of the "Sibinoi" i. e. the Sudines in Prussia.

The selection of tribes also betrays a marked affinity between Prot. D
and Tacitus. The Farodinoi D (?, Charudes Aa) may be re- discovered
in the Tacitean Suardones or Suarines who belong to the Anglian group.
In Prot. D the Swabians are represented by the Semnones, the Lango-
bards, and the Angles. In the "Germania" of Tacitus, the Semnones
and Langobards are named first, and emphasized as the most prominent
representatives of the group. The Angles belong to a special group of
Swabian tribes, worshipping Nerthus, and mentioned directly after the
Langobards. It is true, the Angles are not given by Tacitus special
prominence over the other six Nerthus-peoples, but we do not require
the evidence of the Roman author to realize that they were in reality
the leaders of the community. We may say that the combined evidence



§ 25- LOCAL PROTOTYPE D 127

of Prot. jD and Tacitus points towards a source that valued the Angles
according to their actual prominence which remained otherwise concealed
in historical literature till the times of Procopius, 6th century.



i; j. Examination of Details; Conclusion.

In spite of all Ptolemaic confusion, Prot. D contains one highly
valuable detail, viz. the name of the Angles. We are informed that they
are the neighbours of the Langobards towards the north or north-east,
— - a statement which is made nowhere else in classical literature. Of
course, we must remove the Langobards of D back to the place of the cor-
rectly situated alter-ego in Prot. Aa, the "Lakkobardoi" in the present
Bardengau round Liineburg. Consequently, the Angles must be placed
north or north-east of the region, i. e. fairly in their traditional home-
stead, the district of Angel in Slesvig or South Jutland. Thus Prot. D,
far from contradicting the venerable Bede, in reality proves his most
valuable supporter. The unanimous evidence of local nomenclature,
linguistic features, reHgious institutions, and genuine English, Danish and
German tradition, is thus crowned by the hithertho missing element, the
evidence of classical cartography. It is needless to discuss the matter
any more^).



§ 26. COLLECTIVE PROTOTYPES E & F = EASTERN GER-
MANIA. SARMATIA EUROP^A & ASIATICA, AND SCYTHIA.

a. Summary of Contents.

Prot. E 8l F are collective maps, describing eastern Germany, Sar-
matia Europaea, Sarmatia Asiatica, and Scythia, containing all sorts of
geographic categories; F is besides marked by a system of "ethno-topic
denomination". The prototypes are duplicates of each-other; scattered
duplicates occur in Aa, Acde, Bt, B2, E has Latin marks (Sarmatai
instead of Skythai F), but seems fo have been translated into Greek be-



*) We must here urge Chadwick's warning against rejecting the well verified native
tradition in favour of the somewhat older, but peripheral evidence of an inaccurate classical
geographer like Ptolemy, As long as the genesis of Ptolemy's work remained unexplored,
his evidence in the Anglian question was practically worth nothing. — We may add one
hitherto ignored piece of traditional evidence concerning the Angles. The Quedlinburg An-
nals, written in the nth century, say ad annum 445: "The Angles, conducted by their king
Angling, leave the country of the Danes".



128 Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe

fore the stage of Ptolemy. F has only Greek marks. — E & F are
executed after the introduction of a well established Roman amber trade
with the Baltic regions under the reign of Nero. Affinity with Pliny,
including antiquated Herodotian names. Cf. Figures 3, 17, 18, 19, 30, 31.



b. Ptolemaic Localisation.

E is totally displaced, F is correctly localised.

The Ptol. constructor has compressed Prot. E within the sections
called Sarmatia Europaea and Asiatica, partially owing to the fact, that
the Scythians were in this prototype called Sarmatai. E has been turned
round, so that west becomes south, and east becomes north. Thus the
Germanic part occupies the south-western edge of Sarmatia Europaea,
whereas the remainder of the prototype forms the most northerly peri-
phery of the Sarmatian sections.

Through this displacement^ the eastern Baltic coast was enriched with
some three or tour rivers, originally flowing into the Black Sea, viz.
Rhudon = Rhode, Turuntes = Karkinites (?), Chesinos = Acesinus. The
fourth river, Chronos, may also be a transplanted one, or it may be a
really Baltic river, originating from Prot. F. The river pAsiakes £ =
Axiakes F still keeps its place in the region of the Black Sea (together
with the towns Leinon, Erkabon, and Trabana = Leianon, Sarbakon, and
Tabana FY).

The displacement was to a great extent' due to the misinterpretation
that the Baltic coast was taken for the river Vistula. This fact appears
clearly from the Ptolemaic tribes, localised east of the Vistula: Ombrones
— Ambrones, the campanions of the Cimbri and Teutones; Auarinoi =
the Varines, a well-known tribe from Mecklenburg; Frugundiones =
Burgundians, inhabitants of Pomerania.

Prot. F meets Prot. Aa in the Baltic region, cf. the duplicates
Teutones- Auarpoi F = Teuton . . Ouirunoi Aa. Correspondingly, F meets
Ac near the Black Sea, cf. Harpioi with town Harpis F = Karpianoi Acde.
In the Baltic region, the details of F are distributed among those of Bi
& B2 so that they are not easy to discern.

We suppose that Prot. F has been enriched with the contents of Sk,
i. e. Scandia, before both of these prototypes were amalgamated with the
collective prototype A. Only through this assumption, we are able to
explain the occurrence of the name Finnoi in Prot, E. As E appears
generally as an extract of F, the description, of Scandia with the name
Finnoi seems to have been incorporated with F, before the extract was
made.



^) Most of the identifications are suggested by C. Mtiller.



§ 26. COLLECTIVE PROTOTYPES E&F 1 29

d. General Topographic Scheme.

Both E and F contained coasts of the Black Sea and of the Baltic.
The design of £ seems to have been so indistinct that the coast of the
Black Sea might be mistaken for a mountain-chain in F, — The latter
prototype was an excellent map and may be regarded as the main
foundation of the Ptol. maps of Sarmatia and northern Scythia. Here
we notice, as Miillenhoff remarks, the Caspian Sea for the first time cor-
rectly represented as an inland water and not as an inlet of the northern
ocean.

The design of mountains in F seems to contain true observations of
the low ranges of hills running through eastern Europe: Peuke = Lysa
Gora in Poland, Wendian Mountains = the hills of Suwalki east of Prussia,
Bodinian-Alanian-Ripaeean Mountains = western Russian Range, Hyper-
borean Mountains = Waldai Hills. However Sadowski maintains that the
so-called mountains are simply theoretical expressions of water-sheds,
s. "Die Handelsstrassen der Griechen und Romer durch das Flussgebiet
der Oder-Weichsel".

Finnoi = Finns in Finland or Scandinavia. — The coast of the Black
Sea in F seems to have been mistaken for the mountains of interior
Sarmatia F, whereas these same mountains, as they appeared in £^ were
in return mistaken for the Baltic coast in F. Thus a complete turning
upside down was effected.

The decoration of the utmost north of Europe with numerous anti-
quated or fabulous Herodotian tribes, such as Melanchlainoi and "Horse-
foot-men", seems to be a sort of intentional swindle, committed in order
to conceal the Ptol. constructor's ignorance about this extremity of the
world.

The Ptol. constructor has treated Prot. F quite otherwise than its
alter-ego E. He localised F correctly, and he could hardly avoid it,
owing to its evidently distinct and finished design. It has been amal-
gamated with Prot. A without any trace of inconsistency. And probably,
we owe to Prot. F a great deal of the physical framework in the eastern
parts of Ptolemy's atlas. As might be expected, Prot. F has not com-
pletely escaped deterioriation through the Ptol. constructor, — one such
case will be mentioned under e — ; still such cases are of minor im-
portance.

c. Definition of Limits.

Taking it as a whole, £ and F are easily distinguished from each-other,
partially through the series of duplicates, partially through the contrast of
wrong and correct localisation. An additional criterium is the designation
"Sarmatai" in £, replacing "Skythai" in F; further the system of "ethno-

9



130 PTOLEMY S MAPS OF NORTHERN EUROPE

topic denomination" of F, cf. under e. The occurrence of the denomin-
ation ^'Sarmatai" in E is connected with the fact that the Ptol. con-
structor has limited this prototype to the so-called Sarmatian sections of
the atlas, not only in Asia (cf. above p. 128), but also in Europe. E ge-
nerally occupies the most northerly periphery which was left blank in F.
Owing to this circumstance, the confusion of E and F is comparatively
little. However, in western Sarmatia there is a somewhat large area of
confusion. The displaced Baltic tribes of ^ — Ombrones, *Ouarinoi,
Frugundiones, Sulones, Finnoi — stand south of their correctly localised
alter-egoes in F. Likewise, the names pAsiakes, Leinon, Erkabon, Tra-
bana of E, belonging originally to the regions near the Black Sea, are
placed in the middle of elements originating from F.



The displaced Baltic detachment from E stands in an isolated posi-
tion, in sharp contrast to the correctly localised names on both sides:
those of Prot. Bi in the west, and those of Prot. Acde in the east. The
tribes Ratakensioi and Kotensioi inside the Dacian area of Acde may
originate from E. Otherwise, Prot. E collides with no prototypes except
its own alter-ego F»

e. Statistical Features.

Prot. E has a less copious selection of details than Prot. F. The
complete absence of towns in the northern parts of E contrasts with the
copious lists of towns in the neighbouring Prot. Bi, and also in the
Ptol. description of Jazygia.

Prot. F, as we have repeatedly mentioned, is marked by the system
of "ethno-topic denomination". Its western vanguards are: the Venedai
with Venedian mountain and gulf, i. e. represented as inhabitants of the
eastern Baltic coast ; the Peukinoi with the mountain Peuke ; the southern
outpost of the Peukinoi on the island of Peuke in the Danubian Delta;
the Harpioi with the town Harpis.

The presence of "ethno-topic denomination" at a Pre- Ptolemaic stage
appears from the following correspondences, noticed by C. Miiller:

A. Caucasian Region, B. Siboian Region.

la. Paniardis, district lb. Paniardoi, tribe

2a. Konapsenoi, tribe 2b. Konadipsas (Kanodipsas), district

3a. Korax, mountain. 3b. Koraxoi, tribe.

The two lists of names originally must have formed a chain of "ethno-
topic denomination", but in Ptolemy's work they have been split up,
list B being transplanted far away from its proper place, and hence it



§ 26. COLLECTIVE PROTOTYPES E&F 13 1

appears that Ptolemy did not invent the system of "ethno-topic deno-
mination", but found it ready-made in an earlier work.

In the neighbouring prototypes, the cases of "ethno-topic denomin-
ation" are so rare that they may be regarded as accidental. We notice
e. g. within the area of Prot. Aa these three cases: Kimbroi with Kim-
brike Chersonesos, Saxones with Saxon islands, Virunoi with town Virunon.

f. Occurrence of Duplicates.

The duplicate series of Prot. E and F (Fig. 24) is very long, containing
some 24 pairs of names. It could scarcely be expected that parallel
chains of such a length would agree completely in the order of links.
Yet the approximate agreement of the series — especially in the upper
lists (Auarinoi .... Hippofagoi Sarmatai £ = Auarpoi .... Hippofagoi
Skythai F) — must be called surprising and excludes any chance of
accidental coincidence. Since our first article in *'The Scottish Geogra-
phical Magazine" we have suggested a new equation: Gelonoi E =
Geiounoi F (Cod. Palat. 191, instead of the hitherto accepted reading
Geouenoi). There are also some duplicates or triplicates which serve as
means of distinguishing E and F from the other prototypes.

Auarinoi E, Auarpoi F = Ouirunoi Aa.

Teutones F = Teuton(-oaroi) Aa.

Harpioi with town Harpis F = Karpianoi Acd^.
Ratakensioi E} = Rakatriai Bi, Rakatai B2.

Kotensioi (Kontekoi) E} = *Kotnoi Bi, *Koteinoi B2.

g. Linguistic Marks.

The final editorial language of both E and F seems to have been
Greek. Cf. the following peculiarities:

Spelling au instead of the Latinising aou: S<a:^aroi E = 'Nauaroi F.
Misreading au for the Greek ou: ^^^arinoi E = ^^^arpoi A, contrasting

6^«irunoi Aa (<Z Viruni).


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 16 17

Online LibraryGudmund SchüttePtolemy's maps of northern Europe, a reconstruction of the prototypes → online text (page 14 of 17)