"The Histories" by Herodotus is a wonderful read, but it really matters which translation you use. The is the one I read is translated by Robin Waterfield.
I also have a newer one translated by Tom Holland, and it seems to be a good choice too. This is how Robin Waterford translates the quoted section (Book Four, section 42):
"After all, Libya is demonstrably surrounded by water, except for the bit of it that forms the boundary with Asia. King Nech of Egypt was the first to discover this, as far as we know; after he abandoned the digging of the canal from the Nile to the Arabian Gulf, his next project was to dispatch ships with Phoenecian crews with instructions to return via the Pillars of Hercules into the northern sea and so back to Egypt. So the Phoenicians set out from the Red Sea and sailed into the sea to the south. Every autumn, they would come ashore, cultivate whatever bit of Libya that had reached in their voyage, and wait for harvest time; then, when they had gathered in their crops, they would put to sea again. Consequently it was over two years before they rounded the Pillars of Hercules and arrived back in Egypt. They made a claim which I personally do not believe, although someone else might - that as they were sailing around Libya they had the sun on their right."
Notice that the tone of this translation is informal, which is partly why it is an enjoyable read. But notice also the key difference in the final sentence: the one used in the article (de Selincourt) adds "to the North of them". This is missing from Waterfield and Holland. I suspect that de Selincourt added this as a clarification. I assume he took other liberties in his translation too.
https://www.amazon.com/Histories-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0...
I also have a newer one translated by Tom Holland, and it seems to be a good choice too. This is how Robin Waterford translates the quoted section (Book Four, section 42):
"After all, Libya is demonstrably surrounded by water, except for the bit of it that forms the boundary with Asia. King Nech of Egypt was the first to discover this, as far as we know; after he abandoned the digging of the canal from the Nile to the Arabian Gulf, his next project was to dispatch ships with Phoenecian crews with instructions to return via the Pillars of Hercules into the northern sea and so back to Egypt. So the Phoenicians set out from the Red Sea and sailed into the sea to the south. Every autumn, they would come ashore, cultivate whatever bit of Libya that had reached in their voyage, and wait for harvest time; then, when they had gathered in their crops, they would put to sea again. Consequently it was over two years before they rounded the Pillars of Hercules and arrived back in Egypt. They made a claim which I personally do not believe, although someone else might - that as they were sailing around Libya they had the sun on their right."
Notice that the tone of this translation is informal, which is partly why it is an enjoyable read. But notice also the key difference in the final sentence: the one used in the article (de Selincourt) adds "to the North of them". This is missing from Waterfield and Holland. I suspect that de Selincourt added this as a clarification. I assume he took other liberties in his translation too.