10 



PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY. 



[PART I. 



Such was the uncertainty thrown over the geography 

 of the island by erroneous and conflicting accounts, that 

 grave doubts came to be entertained of its identity, and 

 from the fourteenth century, when the attention of 

 Europe was re-directed to the nascent science of geo- 

 graphy, down to the close of the seventeenth, it remained 

 a question whether Ceylon or Sumatra was the Taprobane 

 of the Greeks. 1 



Venice in A.D. 1576, laments his 

 inability even at that time to ob- 

 tain any authentic information as 

 to the boundaries and dimensions 

 of Ceylon; and, relying on the 

 representations of the Moors, who 

 then carried on an active trade 

 around its coasts, he describes it as 

 lying under the equinoctial line, and 

 possessing a circuit of 2100 miles. 

 "Ella gira di circuito, secondo il 

 calcole fatto da Mori, che moderna- 

 mente 1'hanno nauigato d'ogn' intorno 

 due mila et cento miglia et corre 

 maestro e sirocco; et per il mezo 

 d'essa passa la linea equinottiale et e 

 el principio del primo clima al terzo 

 paralello." L' Isole piu Famose (lei 

 Monde, descritte da THOMASO POR- 

 CACCHI, lib. iii. p. 30. 



1 GIBBON states, that " Salmasius 

 and most of the ancients confound 

 the islands of Ceylon and Sumatra." 

 Led. and Fall, ch. xl. This is a 

 mistake. Saumaise was one of those 

 who maintained a correct opinion; 

 and, as regards the "ancients," they 

 had very little knowledge of Further 

 India, to which Sumatra belongs; 

 but so long as Greek and Roman 

 literature maintained their influence, 

 no question was raised as to the iden- 

 tity of Ceylon and Taprobane. Even 

 in the sixth century Cosmas Indico- 

 pleustes declares unhesitatingly that 

 the Sielediva of the Indians was the 

 Taprobane of the Greeks. 



It was only on emerging from the 

 general ignorance of the Middle Ages 

 that the doubt was first promulgated. 

 In the Catalan Map of A.D. 1375, en- 

 titled Image du Monde, Ceylon is 

 omitted, and Taprobane is represented 



by Sumatra (MALTE BRTTN, Hist, de 

 Geogr., vol. i. p. 318) ; in that of Fra 

 Mauro,t\ie Venetian monk, A.D. 1458, 

 Seylan is given, but Taprobane is 

 added over Sumatra, A similar error 

 appears in the Mappe-mande, by 

 RUYCH, in the Ptolemy of A.D. 1508, 

 and in the writings of the geogra- 

 phers of the sixteenth century, GEM- 

 MA FEisirs, SEBASTIAN MTJNSTER, 

 RAMTJSIO, JUL. SCALIGER, ORTELIUS, 

 and MERCATOR. The same view was 

 adopted by the Venetian NICOLA DI 

 CONTI, in the first half of the fifteenth 

 century, by the Florentine ANDREA 

 CORSALI, MAXIMILIANUS TRANSYL- 

 VANUS, VARTHEMA, and PIGAFETTA. 

 The chief cause of this perplexity 

 was, no doubt, the difficulty of recon- 

 ciling the actual position and size of 

 Ceylon with the dimensions and posi- 

 tion assigned to it by Strabo and 

 Ptolemv, the latter of whom, by an 

 error which is elsewhere explained, 

 extended the boundary of the island 

 far to the east of its actual site. 

 But there was a large body of men 

 who rejected the claim of Sumatra, 

 and DE BARROS, SALMASIVS, BO- 

 CHART CLTTVERITJS, CELLARITJS, ISAAC 

 VOSSITTS and others, maintained the 

 title of Ceylon. A Mappe-mondc 

 of A.D. 1417, preserved in the Pitti 

 Palace at Florence compromises the 

 dispute by designating Sumatra Ta- 

 probane 'Major. The controversy 

 came to an end at the beginning of the 

 eighteenth century, when the over- 

 powering authority of DELISLE re- 

 solved the doubt, and confirmed the 

 modern Ceylon as the Taprobane of 

 antiquity. WILFORD, in the Asiatic 

 Researches (vol. x. p. 140), still clung 



