Generally speaking, the men who hitherto have written on the affairs of India, were a set of liars. Deimachus holds the first place in the list, Megasthenes comes next, while Onesicritus and Nearchus, with others of the same class, manage to stammer out a few words [of truth]. ... No faith whatever can be placed in Deimachus and Megasthenes. They coined the fables concerning men with ears large enough to sleep in, men without any mouths, without noses, with only one eye, with spider-legs, and with fingers bent backward. They renewed Homer’s fable concerning the battles of the Cranes and Pygmies, and asserted the latter to be three spans high. They told of ants digging for gold, of Pans with wedge-shaped heads, of serpents, swallowing down oxen and stags, horns and all; meantime, as Eratosthenes has observed, reciprocally accusing each other of falsehood. Both of these men were sent [as] ambassadors to Palimbothra ... and such are the notes of their residence abroad, which, I know not why, they thought fit to leave. Patrocles certainly does not resemble them; nor do any other of the authorities consulted by Eratosthenes contain such absurdities. 2.1.10. If the meridian [i.e. line of longitude] of Rhodes and Byzantium has been rightly determined to be the same, then that of Cilicia and Amisus has likewise been rightly determined; many observations having proved that the lines are parallel, and that they never impinge on each other.” - Ibid. Notice the difference in tone and form of argument between paragraphs 2.1.9 and 2.1.10 above. 

What does this suggest about the nature of the science of geography in the first century BC? Be sure to back up your observations with direct quotations (even if only a word or two) from the passage. Direct quotations must be in quotation marks “like this”. 

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In the first Para we can see the strong criticize of historical evidence on the base of modern scien... View the full answer