Trade Routes and Merchant Diasporas

chapter 5 Trade Routes and Merchant Diasporas

In Chapter 2, it was argued that by the late Ptolemaic period Mediterranean merchants were increasingly engaged in direct voyages to India through the use of the monsoon winds. This chapter returns to the theme by examining how these monsoon winds were utilised in Roman times. This is important for enabling an appreciation of the geographical context of the routes traversed by Mediterranean merchants, as well as the temporal context: namely, how the seasons and weather conditions impacted on travelling schedules. It is clear from the available evidence that a circuitous exchange of goods could take place between Alexandria and India within a year, while the Mediterranean world had its own annual trade circuits. However, if one imagines the hypo- thetical transport of goods from Rome to India, with a new set of Indian goods being returned to Rome, then it is clear that this commercial proposition would span more than a year. The available evidence for sailing times suggests that even in consistently favourable conditions it would take at least 13 months, while under consistently poor conditions it could take as long as 20 months. As a result, most full cycles of exchange (a complete circuit between Italy and India) would likely fall somewhere between these two estimates.1 This is not to imply that Rome did not receive Indian Ocean goods each year, or that India did not receive Mediterranean goods. However, it does highlight that the Rome-Alexandria and Alexandria-India routes formed two distinct networks of exchange. This is of consequence both for the idea that some Italian merchants practiced vertical integration and the extent to which central orWestern Mediterranean goods were exported. A second, related issue considered in this chapter is merchant “diasporas”: communities of merchants and others who resided in foreign emporia beyond short-term seasonal stopovers. There is some evidence to support the idea that Roman merchants were residing in Arabian and Indian emporia. Likewise, there is evidence for Arabian and Indian merchants residing at the Red Sea ports. However, the archaeological and written evidence on which these argu- ments are based is not without its complications. For example, it is argued here that coarse or domestic pottery is more likely to be an indicator of resi- dent foreign merchants than fine wares. Ultimately, the existence of merchant

1 Cobb (2014): 89–116.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi:10.1163/9789004376571_006 128 chapter 5 diasporas is highly plausible, but the evidence still needs to be treated with a great deal of caution. Some scholars have given too much credence to the idea that not only merchants, but also artisans and mercenaries integrated into Indian communities, even in inland areas.2These scholars primarily make such claims on the basis of references to Yavanas in Tamil literature and a few Indian inscriptions. However, as will be shown, the term Yavana is complex, and can- not always be tied to Greek-speaking peoples from the Mediterranean world. The third section of this chapter goes beyond the routes used by Roman merchants operating in the Arabian Sea (north-western Indian Ocean) and exam- ines the extent to which Roman merchants were directly trading in the Bay of Bengal (eastern Indian Ocean), even going as far as Southeast Asia. Some scholars have advocated the idea that Roman merchants were increasingly operating in these areas by the second century CE.3 Contrary to this position, it is argued here that the presence of Roman goods within these regions, limited as it is, is far more likely to be a result of Indian and Southeast Asian trade networks. It will also be shown that references to Da Qin (literally ‘Great China’), usu- ally taken to indicate the Roman Empire in early-middle Chinese sources, are potentially problematic.

Trading Routes and Schedules

The evidence for reconstructing the routes and trading schedules employed by Roman merchants in the Indian Ocean mostly comes from written sources (lit- erary texts, ostraka, papyri, and graffiti). Pliny provides the most detail in his outline of the timing and routes taken by merchants journeying from Alexan- dria to India.4 The author of the Periplus also records departure dates from the Red Sea ports to East Africa, the southern Arabian Peninsula, and India, but does not give the same kind of detail about the timing of individual seg- ments of the journey. Nevertheless, his comments do offer useful confirma- tion of statements made by Pliny. Comparisons of the Koptos to Myos Hormos and Berenike routes are also derived from Strabo and Pliny, respectively. These authors, while preferring the written accounts of well-born men, nonethe- less do employ information derived from contemporary merchants (despite Strabo’s expressed contempt for them).5 Studies by Casson, Duncan-Jones,

2 For example, H. Ray (1988): 311–325; Dhavalikar (1992): 325–327; McLaughlin (2014): 182. 3 See H. Ray (1996a): 1–10; H. Ray (1996b): 351–364; Weerakkody (1996); McLaughlin (2010). 4 Pliny NH 6.26.96–106. 5 Strabo was in Egypt in the mid-20s BCE and derived reports about travelling conditions while