It May Be Proper
To Add, That In The Extracts From Agatharcides, Given By Photius, It Is
Expressly Mentioned That Ships From India Were Met With By The Egyptian
Ships In The Ports Of Sabaea.
The particulars of this trade between India
and Egypt, by means of the Arabians, will be afterwards detailed, and
Its
great antiquity traced and proved; at present we have alluded to it merely
to bear us out in our position, that Indian ships, laden with Indian
commodities, frequenting the ports of Sabaea, and those ports being
described by Agatharcides as the limits of his knowledge of this coast of
the Red Sea, we are fully justified in concluding, that, in the reign of
Philometor, there was not only no direct trade to India, but no inducement
to such trade; and that 146 years after the death of Alexander, the Greek
sovereigns of Egypt had done little to complete what that monarch had
projected, and in part accomplished by the navigation of Nearchus - the
communication by sea between Alexandria and India.
Under the successors of Philometor, the trade in the Red Sea languished
rather than increased, and the full benefits of it were not reaped till
some time after the Roman conquest. Even in the time of Strabo, the bulk of
the trade still passed by Coptus to Myos Hormos. We are aware of a passage
in this author, which, at first, sight seems to contradict the position we
have laid down, and to prove, that at least in his time, there was a direct
and not unfrequent navigation between the Red Sea and India. He expressly
states, that in the course of six or seven years, 120 ships had sailed from
Myos Hormos to India: but on this it may be observed, in the first place,
that he begins his description of India, with requesting his readers to
peruse what he relates concerning it with indulgence, as it was a country
very remote, and few persons had visited it; and even with regard to Arabia
Felix, he says, that the knowledge of the Romans commenced with the
expedition of his friend AElius Gallus into that country; - facts not very
consistent with his statement that 120 ships had sailed in six or seven
years to India: secondly, he expressly mentions, that formerly scarcely
twenty ships dared to navigate the Red Sea, so far as to shew themselves
beyond the straits; but we can hardly suppose that skill, enterprize, and
knowledge, had increased so rapidly as to extend within a very few years
navigation, not merely beyond the straits, but even to India; we say a few
years, for certainly, at the time when the Romans conquered Egypt, the
straits were not usually passed: lastly, the name India was used so vaguely
by the ancients, even by Strabo occasionally, that it is not improbable he
meant by it, merely the coast of Arabia, beyond the straits. It is well
asked by Dr. Vincent, in reference to this account of Strabo, might not
that geographer, from knowing the ships brought home Indian commodities,
have supposed that they sailed to India, when in reality they went no
farther than Hadramant, in Arabia, or Mosullon, on the coast of Africa,
where they found the produce of India?
It is not, however, meant to be denied that a few vessels, in the time of
Ptolemies, reached some part of India from the Red Sea, by coasting all the
way. The author of the Periplus of the Red Sea, informs us that, before the
discovery of the monsoon, by Hippalus, small vessels had made a coasting
voyage from Cana, in Arabia, to the Indies. But these irregular and
trifling voyages are deserving of little consideration, and do not militate
against the position we have laid down and endeavoured to prove, that in
the time of the Ptolemies the commerce of Egypt was confined within the
limits of the Red Sea, partly from the want of skill and enterprize, and
from the dangers that were supposed to exist beyond the straits, but
principally because the commodities of India could be procured in the ports
of Sabaea.
Many instances have already been given of the patronage which the Ptolemies
bestowed on commerce, of the facilities and advantages they afforded, and
of the benefits which the science of geography derived from the library and
observatory of Alexandria: every instrument which could facilitate the
study of astronomy was purchased by the Ptolemies and placed in that
observatory, for they were fully aware of the dependency of a full and
accurate knowledge of geography, as a science, on a full and accurate
knowledge of astronomy. With respect to commerce, the advancement of which,
may fairly be supposed to have had some weight in their patronage of these
sciences, they encouraged it as much as possible to centre in Alexandria,
and with citizens of Egypt, by making it a standing law of the country,
that no goods should pass through the capital, either to India or Europe,
without the intervention of an Alexandrian factor, and that even when
foreign merchants resided there, they should employ the same agency. The
roads and canals they formed, and the care they took to keep the Red Sea
free from pirates, are further proofs of their regard for commerce.
And justly was it held by the Ptolemies in high estimation, for from it
they derived their immense wealth. We are informed by Strabo, that the
revenue of Alexandria, in the worst of times, was 12,500 talents,
equivalent to nearly two millions and a half sterling; and if this was the
revenue under the last and most indolent of the Ptolemies, what must it
have been under Ptolemy Philadelphus, or Ptolemy Euergetes? But the account
given by Appian of the treasure of the Ptolemies is still more
extraordinary: the sum he mentions is 740,000 talents, or L191,166,666,
according to Dr. Arbuthnot's computation; we should be disposed to doubt
the accuracy of this statement, did we not know that Appian was a native of
Alexandria, and did he not moreover inform us, that he had extracted his
account from the public records of that city.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 47 of 268
Words from 47124 to 48158
of 273188
